Rudy Giuliani is a lying piece of _____

yg17

macrumors G5
Original poster
Aug 1, 2004
14,888
2,480
St. Louis, MO
I'll let you fill in the blank.

Giuliani: "We had no domestic attacks under Bush; we've had one under Obama."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/08/rudy-giuliani-we-had-no-d_n_416033.html

Even if he meant to say "after 9/11" he'd still be dead wrong because there's still the anthrax attacks, shoe bomber and DC sniper.

I had some respect for him after 9/11, but no more. He is a lying, opportunistic little weasel who will say anything, even if it's complete bullcrap, to get in front of a camera for 2 minutes.

And Rudy 911iani isn't the only republican to be rewriting history. Dana Perino and Mary Matalin also have forgotten that 9/11 happened under Bush. Do republicans really think that Americans are that stupid? No one except them believes their BS.
 

nbs2

macrumors 68030
Mar 31, 2004
2,713
485
A geographical oddity
Don't forget the Yemen Embassy bombing in 2008.

link
While I'm sure that some folks would argue otherwise, we haven't conquered Yemen for the US. That wouldn't be domestic (unless you wanted to argue that the embassy was American soil and thus domestic - too tenuous a link for my comfort).

Now, I am going to disagree with the rest of the posters here. There were no attacks under the Bush administration. Those attacks were under the Cheney administration; the Bush administration was in place for a 100 days at the beginning (before he got squeezed out) and a couple months at the end (when he put Dick back in his place).
 

mcrain

macrumors 68000
Feb 8, 2002
1,768
11
Illinois
WTF??!!! Is he on crack?
No, he's a Republican. At least if you're on Crack there are support groups to help you make something of yourself other than the low-life, useless piece of **(t that the drugs have turned you into.
 

atszyman

macrumors 68020
Sep 16, 2003
2,442
1
The Dallas 'burbs
While I'm sure that some folks would argue otherwise, we haven't conquered Yemen for the US. That wouldn't be domestic (unless you wanted to argue that the embassy was American soil and thus domestic - too tenuous a link for my comfort).
I am aware that while it was not necessarily a domestic attack it was still an attack on U.S. interests overseas, much like the attack on the U.S.S. Cole late in Clinton's presidency that is sometimes used as evidence that Clinton didn't keep us safe.
 

nbs2

macrumors 68030
Mar 31, 2004
2,713
485
A geographical oddity
I am aware that while it was not necessarily a domestic attack it was still an attack on U.S. interests overseas, much like the attack on the U.S.S. Cole late in Clinton's presidency that is sometimes used as evidence that Clinton didn't keep us safe.
I knew where you were going with that, but don't think US interests would qualify as domestic attacks. However, it certainly would meet the same standard at the Cole in determining if Cheney kept us safe.
 

abijnk

macrumors 68040
Oct 15, 2007
3,286
4
Los Angeles, CA
Also see Dana Perino and Mary Matalin on the issue...

To be honest the part that pisses me off the most is that all three time that I know of NO ONE sitting at the desk with these people corrected them. Not CNN with Matalin, not Fox with Perino, and not stephanopoulos on ABC. WTF people, seriously?
 

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,550
7,802
CT
So what are we labeling the Fort Hood shooting? Was that terrorism or not?
 

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,387
UK
Also see Dana Perino and Mary Matalin on the issue...

To be honest the part that pisses me off the most is that all three time that I know of NO ONE sitting at the desk with these people corrected them. Not CNN with Matalin, not Fox with Perino, and not stephanopoulos on ABC. WTF people, seriously?
That's because the media is really Liberal and very competent ;).
 

yg17

macrumors G5
Original poster
Aug 1, 2004
14,888
2,480
St. Louis, MO
If we're not going to call every other school and workplace shooting terrorism, then I see no reason to consider Ft. Hood terrorism, since basically, that's what it was, a workplace shooting. The workplace just happened to be a military base.

The only reason the right considers it to be a terrorist act is because the shooter was brown. If it was a white Christian, they wouldn't be calling it terrorism, just like they didn't call the Holocaust Museum shooting terrorism.
 

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,550
7,802
CT
If we're not going to call every other school and workplace shooting terrorism, then I see no reason to consider Ft. Hood terrorism, since basically, that's what it was, a workplace shooting. The workplace just happened to be a military base.

The only reason the right considers it to be a terrorist act is because the shooter was brown. If it was a white Christian, they wouldn't be calling it terrorism, just like they didn't call the Holocaust Museum shooting terrorism.
The problem with that is he was a confirmed extremist. I think it was a terrorist act against the country.
 

yg17

macrumors G5
Original poster
Aug 1, 2004
14,888
2,480
St. Louis, MO
The problem with that is he was a confirmed extremist. I think it was a terrorist act against the country.
The people behind the Pittsburgh police shooting and the Holocaust Museum shooting were both white supremacists, which I would consider pretty extreme, yet no one considers those acts of terrorism.
 

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,550
7,802
CT
The people behind the Pittsburgh police shooting and the Holocaust Museum shooting were both white supremacists, which I would consider pretty extreme, yet no one considers those acts of terrorism.
I think white supremacists are the lowest denominator of person. They should be charged with terrorism. The problem is the Supreme court says a lot of what they do is free speech.
 

leekohler

macrumors G5
Dec 22, 2004
14,162
19
Chicago, Illinois
I think white supremacists are the lowest denominator of person. They should be charged with terrorism. The problem is the Supreme court says a lot of what they do is free speech.
The vast majority of what they do is free speech. That's not a problem, that's the way our country is. That's part of living in a free country.
 

MacNut

macrumors Core
Jan 4, 2002
21,550
7,802
CT
The vast majority of what they do is free speech. That's not a problem, that's the way our country is. That's part of living in a free country.
The majority of what they do is incite and promote terror, much like a extremist. So why don't we track these people.
 

gibbz

macrumors 68030
May 31, 2007
2,691
91
Also see Dana Perino and Mary Matalin on the issue...

To be honest the part that pisses me off the most is that all three time that I know of NO ONE sitting at the desk with these people corrected them. Not CNN with Matalin, not Fox with Perino, and not stephanopoulos on ABC. WTF people, seriously?
I guess George corrected him after the fact.
 

leekohler

macrumors G5
Dec 22, 2004
14,162
19
Chicago, Illinois
The majority of what they do is incite and promote terror, much like a extremist. So why don't we track these people.
There is no law saying that people cannot express opinions, how ever unpopular they may be. It is actions that may be illegal. And I believe the FBI does indeed keep tabs on them.