Ron Paul: Highways claim more than 9/11 killed

Baltimore Sun ^ | 9/22/07 | Rick Pearson

[LdSentinal]

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul contends that the federal government has overreacted by limiting personal freedom in the wake of terrorist attacks six years ago, noting more people die on U.S. highways in less than a month’s time compared to the number who lost their lives on Sept. 11, 2001.

“We have been told that we have to give up our freedoms in order to be safe because terrorism is such a horrible event,” Paul said today to more than 1,000 supporters who attended a rally at a downtown Chicago hotel ballroom.

“A lot fewer lives died on 9/11 than they do in less than a month on our highways, but once again, who owns the highways? Do we own the highways? No. It’s a government institution you know. …We need to put all this in perspective.”

More than 2,970 people were reported dead in the terrorist attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. Federal highway traffic statistics show an average of 3,509 people a month were killed on the nation’s highways in 2001.

[Tears of a Clown]

Ron Paul doesn’t take terrorism seriously at all.

He probably doesn’t even believe terrorists attacked us on 9/11...

I bet Al-Qaeda’s minions are praying to allah everyday that someone like ron paul will be elected, so that we will take the heat off of them and allow them to kill and maim with no threat of us intervening.

[keat]

Twenty posts and not a peep from the Paulestinian Liberation Organization on FR.

[river rat]

Now we have Ron Paul — comparing the 9/11 attack against the United States to accidents that occur on our highways!

Hell, I’m disappointed he didn’t use the the fact that MORE U.S. deaths/murders are caused by ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS in ONE YEAR than have been killed in FIVE YEARS in the war against Islamists.

He could have made a better case to bring the troops home to defend the borders against this invasion of thieves, murderers, drugs lords and destroyers of our national education and health systems.

Can folks still not see that Ron Paul in a VERY flawed individual who is totally unsuitable for any position of public trust or responsible for national security...

[jrooney]

Heh punk arse Ron Paul, we lose 3500 citizens every month in traffic accidents on our roads, well we have only lost little over 4000 troops in 6 years fighting terrorists in two wars. These are volunteers for military that are armed trained professionals fighting those that attacked us on 9/11, not citizens in vehicles that most control their own fates. Ron Paul you are a disgrace!

[EGPWS]

“A lot fewer lives died on 9/11 than they do in less than a month on our highways, but once again, who owns the highways? Do we own the highways? No. It’s a government institution you know. …We need to put all this in perspective.”

And putting things in perspective is why Ron Paul hasn't a gnat's of a chance to pop a vein while working out of the Oval Office.

[lormand]

They have a chance of defeating him in the GOP primary this year don't they?

Who is running against him in the GOP primary, if there is someone.

If there is one, we need to counter the TehRon Paul spam here and support this guy/gal.

[rhombus]

Yeah this is a standard gripe of libertarians - the loss of civil liberties due to the WOT. However the strategy of belittling the deaths of 3000 people in an act of war by comparing it to accidental deaths is a poorly thought out political strategy worthy of common BDS sufferers.

The issue with the WOT should always be are we serious about this or not? If we are serious it will demand sacrifice. No, the WOT is not WWII but the country was committed to that war (with the help of a healthy Government propaganda campaign). Those citizens sacrificed many many of their civil liberties as well as their “blood and treasure” to win that war. They had no idea how long the war would last when they committed. Their commitment and sacrifice of civil liberties must surely have shortened that war.

If we are not serious about the WOT then why do we bother having a DoD? We might as well have Kucinich’s Department of Peace. In modern warfare there will be no more well uniformed armed forces storming our beaches. There will only be un-uniformed forces working against us world-wide. Which battlefield will you choose, Congressman Paul? Where will you make your stand?

[Clintonfatigued]

Ron Paul once did good work. Hopefullly, after he retires, his public bout of senility will be a distant memory.

[jrooney]

No solid candidate has come forward yet but they are looking for one. Comments like Paul’s here will probably expedite the search. A conservative used car salesman in south Houston will get more GOP votes than Ron Paul.

[JTN]

If you could stop pointing and shrieking long enough to pay attention to what's being said, you might learn something. You're about as likely to be killed by a lightning strike as by a terrorist attack. The government's post-9/11 legislation was an overreaction and we do need to keep it in perspective.

[RepublitarianRoger]

Uh huh. And more people die on the highways in less than a month’s time than the total deaths of US troops in Iraq since 2003.

So, even by your own twisted logic, Ron, one has no choice but to conclude that you shouldn’t be in such a big rush to “just bring the troops home.”

[VOA]

9/11 was an attempt to kill 50,000+ people.

(my best recollection...)
"Do you have any doubt that if they could, they would have
killed 70,000 people?"

That's my best recollection from a speech given by Tony Blair
during the immediate aftermath of 9-11, when estimates of losses
hovered around 7,000).

Of course, thanks to the reportage of our Mainstream Media
and ABC's decision to NOT produce a DVD of their "Path to 9-11"
docudrama...
lots of Americans don't know that the first attack on the WTC was
done with the hope of toppling the WTCs and having them fall onto
other nearby office buildings...for maximal casualties of infidels.
And even Muslims that were in the building.

[rhombus]

You're about as likely to be killed by a lightning strike as by a terrorist attack.

Source?

[null and void]

Nor can he distinguish between accidents and deliberate malicious acts.

I’m ashamed to admit that I have voted for him. That was a long time ago, and won’t happen again. Ever.

[RoadKingSE]

Twenty posts and not a peep from the Paulestinian Liberation Organization on FR.

Ron Paul? Who is this infidel with two first names? I pick the Ron Paul booger and fling it upon this reeking heap of goat dung to show Allah's hatred for this non-believer.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

More people die from old age too. That's just not the point. People choose to take the risks associated with driving; and a hefty percentage of those who suffer, suffer due to their own errors. Not so with terrorism. Ron Paul is comparing apples and oranges. He might as well say more people die from cancer than from murder so why is the government so concerned about murder?

You can compare risks of different kinds of travel, significance of any given disease (the gov't tends to pick and choose unfairly in that area) or even crime to crime. But you can't compare crime/terrorism to traffic accidents and make any legitimate point.

[RightWhale]

• who owns the highways? Do we own the highways? No. It’s a government institution you know.

  The highways are on public property. Private citizens are not the public. Gov't is the public. Gov't owns the land under the highways and might build and maintain the highways but ultimately can order everybody off the public property or lease it to an Arab hiding in Tora Bora.

[rockrr]

The harder this klown tries to prove his relevancy and viability as a public servant, the more he displays the exact opposite.

As attractive as his calls for more limited government may be, in the end he just sounds like a crackpot. The thing about crackpots and village idiots - they are usually totally oblivious to how embarrassing they are.

[BlessedBeGod]

What a freaking moron!