"Giuliani: No domestic terror attacks under Bush": Yahoo!

1. 59

   fishskinfreak2008posted 14 years ago

   Web-site/URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100109/ap_ … m_giuliani
   
   HOW COULD HE POSSIBLY HAVE FORGOTTEN SEPTEMBER 11, 2001????? OR DID HE DO THIS DELIBERATELY?

   replyreport
   1. 67

      AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Hehe

      replyreport
   2. 70

      Ralph Deedsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Giuliani is a moron.

      replyreport
   3. 66

      awareposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      .9 11 was clintons baby droped off on bushs door. bush did what was and is needed . took the fight to them.we must show up for the fight . i know it sucks but when people want war with you you give it to them.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         You are right that Clinton was involved in the neglect that led up to that event. It also makes sense that if there is evidence that the perpetrators are in Afghanistan, you would send troops there... BUT THE IRAQIS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT... FOR THE LAST FREAKING TIME

         replyreport
      2. 60

         TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I agree aware.
         
         The left cannot stop with their finger-pointing at Bush. Clinton should have prosecuted his efforts as a war, (he did in Bosnia when it helped him.), but he handled it as a criminal situation.
         
         Sound familiar?
         
         
         
         Obama's got the door open for Islam to strike us anytime now.

         replyreport
         1. 67

            AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            But again, Iraq was not involved, and in fact Saddam Hussein was a secularist, which is why the extremist religious fanatics hated him.

            replyreport
   4. 0

      cosetteposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      maybe he is smoking crack

      replyreport
      1. 67

         AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         A guy I lived with at the time pointed out that Osama bin Laden had the eyes of an opium addict in all of those videos he sent out. So maybe there's something to that.

         replyreport
   5. 68

      MikeNVposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      The Government never came clean on what really happened in 911.  So in his view from the inside perhaps he doesn't see it as an act of terrorism.
      
      Perhaps he has information that accidentally slipped out with his statement.
      
      In any case.  America is no better off now under Obama than it was under Bush.  Both have the same Military Agenda they are told to implement and continue.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         It's definitely difficult to figure out what happened, especially behind the scenes. I have a friend who is a magician. He is constantly doing things that don't make sense to the naked eye. I wonder if the movie Loose Change isn't a bit like that. Because it is very believable. But it is, ultimately, because it is itself part of the media, to be viewed cautiously.
         
         It seems close-to-likely that certain individuals in government could have considered orchestrating such an event. But the argument that says that no-one has leaked info about it since anywhere in government seems reasonable too... I mean surely SOMEONE would have let on by now

         replyreport
   6. 78

      starme77posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      He  forgot, give the guy a break he's a Jack-Ass

      replyreport
   7. 58

      Unkotareposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Um, don't you think he meant AFTER 9/11?

      replyreport
      1. 77

         Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Like I said before...
         
         Someone posted this on another forum I read:
         
         "what about the 2001 Anthrax attacks that killed 5 people and injuried 17 others the main suspect was an American military scientist Dr Bruce Ivins who killed himself before trial."
         
         But it's ridiculous to divide attacks depending on who the president was.

         replyreport
         1. 58

            Unkotareposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Sure, those are good points. Perhaps the question was about attacks from those outside our country attacking the US. In any case, I don't think it is reasonable to assume 'forgetfulness.'

            replyreport
2. 67

   AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years ago

   Besides, it is hardly much consolation for the people of Morocco, Madrid, London, Pakistan, Mumbai and the countless other places where there have been terrorist attacks since 2000.
   
   Just sayin'.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      TMMasonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      And are not these the same people that yell we should stay out of their bussiness?
      
      And where did I mention Iraq?
      
      Even though I had no problem with going into Iraq. I have not mentioned it.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         You didn't mention Iraq. Bush did (rather loudly). (You might have a point in regard to your first sentence, however, I have to concede)

         replyreport
3. 66

   awareposted 14 years ago

   fact is saddam was our man . we made him we used him to undermine iran . we made a mess we cleaned it up . same with bin laden. we must stop this proxy fighting bs . we arm and train our evintual enemys

   replyreport
   1. 67

      AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You're right of course that Saddam was your man (I am not in America, and am not American, but I am British, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the British government did not also back Saddam in those days).
      
      But I am not really convinced that you, together with the British armed forces "cleaned up" exactly. Yes, you cleaned up the dictatorship. But....
      
      I also agree that proxy fighting is abhorrent. Both the West and the Soviets (and the Chinese) did this for half a century. Diabolical.

      replyreport
4. 66

   awareposted 14 years ago

   our mess was saddam . iraq and many other muslim nations being in such disaray is islams mess .

   replyreport
   1. 67

      AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Islam seems to have made a mess of Iran, and I would also say Saudi Arabia. And, of course, Afghanistan. It has also contributed to the post-Saddam mess in Iraq. And it decimated Algeria. (Of course, there are different kinds of Islam, so it's not quite as simple as all that. I mean, did Christianity make a mess of Ireland.... not a simple issue...).
      
      But the truth is that there are plenty of messes that have nothing to do with religion. They have to do with CORRUPTION, GREED AND POWER-GRABBING

      replyreport
5. 66

   awareposted 14 years ago

   i agree in the end its people making the mess . a dead man has no religion or political affiliation

   replyreport
   1. 67

      AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Actually I would say that, in many countries, the suppression of people by their own government is the problem. In the case of Iran, this is done because of religious belief. "Islamists" like the Taliban do it for the same reasons (or claim to). But many "Muslim" states are simply ruled either by military juntas or kings who pretend to have democracy but don't really.
      
      Muslim people in general would LOVE to have the kind of democracy you and I take for granted in the US, Canada, Germany, Britain, etc. Who doesn't want a real say in how their own country is run, let's be honest.
      
      Perhaps the real question is whether we can use the corruption and power-grabbing going on in other places (not just Muslim) as mirrors to examine our own leaders...

      replyreport
6. 66

   awareposted 14 years ago

   i go one further . i am part to blame  for many a mess . personal accountability is a rare thing these days

   replyreport
7. 66

   awareposted 14 years ago

   every where you look millions are being killed and suppressed by  mere thousands . in africa 1000 troops assail a refugee camp where 30 000 are then slaughtered . how can this be? why dont the masses stampede .

   replyreport
   1. 67

      AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      If you mean the masses here in the West in the face of such atrocity, I completely agree with you.
      
      If you mean the masses in Africa, I am not sure how you stand up to people with machine guns and rocket launchers. I believe the reason that the millions of Germans who did not like the Nazis did not stampede is because they knew their families would be taken away in the night if they did. Even though the Nazi government was only composed of a few thousand.
      
      But we in the West have no such excuses. We are just criminally complacent... back to your personal responsibility point

      replyreport
8. 66

   awareposted 14 years ago

   our leaders are elected  power corrupts even the strongest of heart sometimes

   replyreport
9. 66

   awareposted 14 years ago

   the easy way the safe way . the human way. brings a frown to my face every time . btw ad your a good chatter . you cool by me always

   replyreport
   1. 67

      AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks. I guess it's important to see that other people often have something you agree with in their statements, even if you don't agree with the main point. You might as well point out where you agree, so they don't think you disagree with everything.
      
      I also think logic is important. The whole "God is all-compassionate and capable of intervening but chooses to respect our free-will instead" is simply illogical to me. I am not particularly religious, but I would agree with a religious point of view if it fits with what I see to be logical. God could save all of those children suffering right now but chooses not to? Not logical.
      
      On the other hand, lifting up the life of Jesus as something to emulate seems perfectly logical to me, because for the most part he embodied compassion in what he did.
      
      So, that's my take. I can't say Islam never does any harm. Clearly it does. I don't think Islam is the reason for all of the world's ills.. that just seems stupid to me. Many people are inspired BY Islam to do good works. It just never gets reported by CNN.
      
      If I just wanted a fight, I'd go learn a martial art, not hang out on Hubpages.

      replyreport
10. 66

    awareposted 14 years ago

    well said . building bridges . not burning them.

    replyreport
    1. 67

       AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Indeed. Besides, true debate that is not simply a slagging match sharpens your own wit. And God knows we could all use that. (That song "We won't get fooled again" comes to mind every time I think of the Bush-Cheney Iraq=9/11 swindle. But I am sure we will)

       replyreport
11. 60

    Mitch Rappposted 14 years ago

    The only "Domestic Terrorist" attack came under Obama!
    
    Do you not know the definition of domestic terrorism?

    replyreport
    1. 67

       AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Mmmm, you mean the Oklahoma Bombing? The Unabomber?

       replyreport
       1. 60

          Mitch Rappposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Yeah, them too

          replyreport
          1. 67

             AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             To be honest, I don't think either president in the last decade has done a very good job regarding terrorism. I do not understand the logic of spending all of this money in Afghanistan-Pakistan, when al Qaeda could EASILY just move off somewhere else. The PLO used to move around all the time. And Osama himself used to be in the Sudan (that's why Clinton bombed them).
             
             I actually am not sure it is possible to stop terrorism to be honest. But, hey, what do I know. I certainly am no terrorism expert

             replyreport
12. 60

    Mitch Rappposted 14 years ago

    domestic terrorism - terrorism practiced in your own country against your own people;
    
    
    Ft Hood shooter is a domestic terrorist!

    replyreport
    1. 67

       AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I actually completely agree. I am suspicious of all this labelling... I mean, surely it was an act of terrorism, right? Well, maybe, not 100 percent sure - but at the very least, there is an argument for this

       replyreport
13. 60

    Mitch Rappposted 14 years ago

    Both committed their acts under Clinton.

    replyreport
14. 60

    Mitch Rappposted 14 years ago

    There were no cases of domestic terrorism under Bush!
    
    End of thread!
    
    But go ahead and discuss conspiracy theories, its cute.

    replyreport
    1. 67

       AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I don't know who this is addressed to. But if you think you have the authority to end a thread.... (muffled laughter).
       
       I, for one, just SAID that the conspiracy theory probably isn't realistic. Perhaps you should learn to read.
       
       There were no cases of terrorism perpetrated by American citizens under Bush. Fine. But September 11th was the first attack on American soil by non-Americans since Pearl Harbor. Clinton set the stage for it, but Bush had been in power nearly two years when it happened... should he share NONE of the blame???
       
       Technically I guess you are right. You can define domestic terrorism as terrorism perpetrated by an American. That is true. So technically Giuliani was not wrong... technically.
       
       What I do not understand, however, is why you are not outraged at the snakey, sneaky way ALL politicians try to fool the American people with this sort of language trick.
       
       I mean, there WAS a terrorist attack in 2001. Maybe none of them were Americans, but there WAS a terrorist attack. Maybe Gore would not have stopped it either. Quite probable...
       
       But what is going on is that Giuliani is trying to FOOL you. Doesn't that bother you???

       replyreport
15. 0

    Denno66posted 14 years ago

    Okay. The forest gnomes? Yeah, the ones in the wooded areas of the Welsh countryside? Yup. Um, they're planning an horrific attack on the gardens of the U.S. Northeast. Conspiracy theory? You decide.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Mitch Rappposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Forest gnomes, I can see that happening.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          Denno66posted 14 years agoin reply to this

          You have no idea! Actually, neither do I!

          replyreport
16. 60

    Mitch Rappposted 14 years ago

    I am not "technically correct", I am correct! I can say end of thread all I want, but nobody has to abide by my statement, but to discuss Bush and domestic terrorist acts under his watch is incorrect!
    
    Venture forth

    replyreport
    1. 67

       AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I am flattered by your opinion of the length of my attention span

       replyreport
17. 77

    Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago

    Someone posted this on another forum I read:
    
    "what about the 2001 Anthrax attacks that killed 5 people and injuried 17 others the main suspect was an American military scientist Dr Bruce Ivins who killed himself before trial."
    
    But it's ridiculous to divide attacks depending on who the president was.

    replyreport
18. 77

    Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago

    TK, is that you?

    replyreport
19. 77

    Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago

    Well, you guys have to decide which because when there is proof of one, you say he meant the other and vice versa.

    replyreport
20. 58

    Unkotareposted 14 years ago

    Who are "you guys"?

    replyreport
21. 77

    Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago

    Well...Mitch
    
    People can't seem to decide what he meant, not even Giuliani can...

    replyreport
22. 60

    Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years ago

    
    
    There were no domestic terror attacks under Bush. 
    
    This is the only dress I've ever worn.
    
    I love my wife very much.

    replyreport
23. 70

    Ralph Deedsposted 14 years ago

    If memory serves there were several terrorist attacks on U.S. government and corporate facilities abroad during the Bush administration.
    
    More lies spread by Hannity on Fox News. Dana Perino, Bush press spokesman, repeats Giuliani's lie--
    
    http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.co … -watch.php

    replyreport