You’d think Rudy Giuliani would have 9/11/2001 seared into his brain, since he shrieks about it so much. But here’s Giuliani, stumping for Trump:
Under those eight years, before Obama came along, we didn’t have any successful radical Islamic terrorist attack in the United States. They all started when Clinton and Obama got into office.
He must also trust that the Trump fans are friggin’ idiots, too.
You don’t believe Giuliani could possibly have said that? Here it is, at 57 seconds into this clip. Most remarkably, before he made that claim, he listed specific attacks by radical islamic terrorists, in 2001 and 1993.
Maybe he thinks Obama has been in office for 23 years?
He did mention ground zero right before so it’s probably a repeat of 2010 where he awkwardly phrased* a lie that there were no more attacks after 9/11 until Obama.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/08/rudy-giuliani/giuliani-says-there-were-no-domestic-attacks-durin/
*Giving him the benefit of the doubt in both cases.
What makes that truly remarkable is that Giuliani attended the World Trade Center site every year on 11 September for the memorial for a decade or more, with the firefighters and so forth. What the fuck.
Now, you libruls just jump to conCLUshuns. He says there were no ISLAMIC attack; 9/11 was an inside job by the GUMMINT! ‘Course, that gummint was under either Obama or Clinton, not sure which.
You don’t believe Giuliani could possibly have said that?
I don’t.
No fucking WAY anyone could be that stupid.
Wow.
He’s that stupid.
I wrote:
He’s that stupid.
Today, scientists discovered a whole new kind of stupid. “The Standard Model needs to be updated,” said Stephen Hawking, “this may be the answer to what happens to information going into and out of a black hole.” Brian Cox was unavailable for comment.
I doubt he has forgotten, I suspect rather that these lies are highly convenient to him and are thus deemed acceptable. A malaise not unique to conservatives by any means, but seemingly embraced by them with unusual gusto.
I forgot who first observed this one, but while George Pataki was the governor up there and actually governing, Rudy was running around making sentences. (Yes, I said and meant “sentences”.)
Noun; verb; 9/11.
Good ol’ Rudy.
By the way, if they had nominated Pataki with Kasich, said ticket would be up MORE than Hillary is up right now. They would win the Presidency on a $10 budget.
It is literal, real world example of cognitive dissonance.
Wow. Just. Wow.
It’s not lying when facts have become irrelevant. The base doesn’t care about truth. The base only cares about how the politicians make them feel.
From my observations, this is an accurate statement. Trump fans are the same people who think Ancient Aliens is a documentary, and also a government conspiracy because dudes with lab coats said so right there on TV. Trump having a reality TV show and being wealthy somehow makes him a legitimate candidate in their eyes. AFAICT, they also don’t understand how the electoral process works, or the difference between a caucus, primary, and general election. He doesn’t seem to be a popular subject of conversation since his remarks about Putin and 2nd amendment solutions. I hope the trend continues and they all stay home come November.
Not to rain on everybody’s parade but it’s clear from the large context in the speech that the claim is post dated to after the passage of the PATRIOT Act. He’s not claiming we didn’t suffer “Islamic terrorism” before Obama. He’s claiming we didn’t suffer “Islamic terrorism” between the passage of the PATRIOT act and Obama, which is about 8 years.
It’s a stupid and disingenuous claim; it’s highly selective and self-serving. But no it’s no where near as dumb as forgetting 9/11 happened.
There is plenty of actually objectionable material from that speech. let’s not make this into a thing, because it’s totally not one.
This is the 2016 version of Romney’s perfectly reasonable line of ‘I like being able to fire people” line that the left basically pissed themselves over for no freaken’ reason.
Jesus fucking Christ, Smith. I included the video with the lead up to the statement precisely because I know some idiot would come along and claim the quote was taken out of context.
No, it wasn’t. Giuliani was lying to make it seem that terrorism only occurred under Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, and that we were terrorism-free under Republican presidents. It’s a big fat fucking lie.
And no, Romney’s “I like being able to fire people” line was not somehow excusable. It was the expression of a Republican asshole who liked the degree of control over his business that allowed him to ruin people’s lives.
Are you planning to be an apologist for Republicans all the time? If so, you can just fuck off now.
Back in 2009, Dana Perino, Bush’s press secretary, also made the claim that there were no terrorist attacks on the US during Bush W’s tenure.
https://thinkprogress.org/perino-we-did-not-have-a-terrorist-attack-on-our-country-during-president-bushs-term-863b398df90b#.6hwwiwz54
Also, a few years ago mediamatters counted up a number of Fox hosts who claimed there were no terrorist attacks after 9/11:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/09/17/fox-has-no-memory-of-any-successful-terror-atta/189931
Since 2002, the right-wing fringe has killed more USAians than the Jihadists. Why the Jihadists are feared, and not the RWA wingnuts, is a mystery to anybody with a working mind….
Link
While terrorism against Americans and their allies never stopped after 9/11, there is indeed an 8 year gap in Al Qaeda-affiliated successful terrorist attacks on US soil between 2001 and 2009. I don’t much like Giuliani or any other of your Republican politicians, nor do I see any causation behind the correlation of that lull in attacks with Republicans (and the first year of Obama) in office, but it sounds pretty clear to me from the video that he’s referring to that time period; especially since he repeatedly mentioned 9/11 and then the Patriot Act. His phrasing may be skewed towards painting the Republicans in a certain light, but it certainly doesn’t sound like he’s neglecting 9/11.
^ And don’t forget that Jeb made essentially the same claim during his own campaign, i.e. that George ‘kept America safe from attack.’ This is just the latest iteration of the same old lie, and we know from experience that Republicans fucking love repeating their lies to the point that they become accepted truths amongst their base.
Oops, that was referencing #13 jaybee, in reply to #11 Mike Smith.
Speaking of Mittens, at least we don’t have to suffer through all those saccharine “And I’m a Mormon” propaganda ads this election season. I don’t recall the “I like to be able to fire people” comment, much less pissing myself over it. Only an arrogant ass would say those words publicly. “Binders full of Women” is the one that confirmed he was a prime example of entitled sexist rich white dude.
Well, Giuliani was right, because he said these were “radical” Islamicist attacks under Obama. The attacks on 9?11 were by “moderate” Islamicists. They did not become radicals until their secret Kenyan Muslim sympathizer became president and encouraged them to become radicals. Which was the whole reason Obama invaded Afghanistan and Iraq back in 2001-2003, when he was the secret president. Of course, once that devout Christian Trump becomes president, he will destroy the radicals with nuclear bombs. Those will kill not only the radicals, but all future generations of radicals-to-be in the Mideast. And peace will come on the Earth, and the lion shall lie down with the lamb, and they shall all glow in the dark.
It’s strange, the qualifiers he used “radical” and “Islamic” when talking about terror attacks. Clearly he’s trying to give the impression that Bush didn’t allow attacks on his watch. Obviously 9/11, but, what about the anthrax attacks soon after? I guess when you’re trying to build a narrative based in fiction you have to make qualifiers. Is that simply lying by omission or is he delusional? Or both.
Let’s not forget that W Bush was specifically warned that 9/11 was possible, and he ignored the warnings. His defense later was “we just couldn’t imagine it”, despite the warning and despite the scenario being in popular culture (Tom Clancy had a plane crash into the Capitol Building, The Lone Gunmen had terrorists trying to fly a plane into the World Trade Center, and Microsoft Flight let anybody try flying between the towers).
Also, if 9/11 was a government conspiracy, W Bush was in the best position to arrange it to happen (just as it appeared to happen, no holograms and demolition charges) as he was friends with the Bin Ladens. The after-effects of 9/11 are almost all favorable to the conservative agendas.
W Bush never got Bin Laden, nor made any progress on the 9/11Memorial. Obama and Clinton got Bin Laden, and the memorial done.
Huh? Suppose the word “Islamic” is somehow relevant. I don’t know how, but assume it is, even though that’s an incredibly stupid assumption. from wiki:
I have no idea what possible excuse anybody could up with, for not caring about (or not even recognizing) terrorist attacks that are not “Islamic” in nature. Besides that, I have no reason to think it should matter whether any such thing happens here, on our super-special magic soil, or whether it happens elsewhere in the world.
But it looks to me like the claim, as pointless as it is, is just plain false.
Of course, the quote above is only what wikipedia happens to say about the subject, and it certainly shouldn’t be taken as a comprehensive or definitive source. Who know what else has happened, which has fallen under the radar for one reason or another, incidents when we can’t determine the person’s motivations (perhaps because they’re dead), etc.? Giuliani sure as shit doesn’t know what the fuck he’s talking about, yet he acts as if he does. The lying fucker just can’t help himself. But even after all of this gerrymandering sophistry, he still can’t find a way to use this bullshit he constructed to put together a coherent point (about Obama, Bush, Trump, Giuliani or anybody or anything). I definitely will object to garbage like that.
PZ, it’s pretty clear he’s talking about Hillary Clintoon, not Bill. He’s saying that there were no terrorist attacks in the US between the passage of the Pattiot Act and the Obama administration (when Hillary became Secretary of State). He’s an asshole and an apologist for Trump, but he’s not forgetting 9/11.
Which isn’t to say he isn’t lying.
Thousands of US soldiers were killed by IEDs and suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan on Bush’s watch. They don’t count, obvs.
shakeb @1:
He’s done little to deserve the benefit of the doubt though.
****
jaybee @13:
I keep forgetting that conservatives don’t count right-wing extremists as terrorists.
@Tony #26, conservatives don’t count anyone with white skin as terrorists, regardless of what they do. They’re misunderstood people, mentally ill people, just boys being boys, etc. The excuses are interminable in number.
Darker skin, automatic “Islamic terrorism”, even if the fucker is/was a Roman Catholic.
How can you tell when a republican is lying?
His/her lips move.
The worst part of this all is, most of the current roundup of conspiracy theories have, over the past handful of years, require Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to have possession and incessant usage of a time machine in order to accomplish 1/10 of what is claimed.
Once one bullshit claim is dispatched and truly dead, they immediately move onto another “point”, ignoring that the previous “point” ever existed.
I’m on the side that blaring ‘Giuliani forgets 9/11’ detracts from the correct eviceration of the actual claim that consciousness razor set out. It was the standard no post 9/11 attacks in America under Bush tripe (because we fought them over there so we didn’t have to fight them here.)
Another interesting point. NRA types like to dismiss school shootings as representing a very small percent of gun deaths, and that even if they were completely prevented, it would save just a few dozen lives a year.
Yet when it comes to radical Islamic terrorist bogeymen, apparently it is worth upending civil rights, spending hundreds of billions to prevent ten-ish such deaths on US soil per year.
@jaybee, NRA types drone on what the NRA’s masters want to sell. As the NRA was taken over by the industry groups, that means more firearms and more ammunition.
What I’m actually the most worried about and I’m typically not one to worry about that which I cannot control is what Nerd had mentioned in #14.
Add in, until relatively recently (around Bush II’s administration onward), the GOP would ratchet up tension and fear, then back off when firearm and ammunition sales increased. Under Bush II onward, that hasn’t been the case, they escalate tension and fear.
This is an Acme dynamite kit, inside of the Acme rocket factory, an inevitable explosion, beyond what safety valves that popped in the incidents outlined in #14 (there were far more incidents than that, those are the ones that our media caught onto and was able to sell).
Worse, those who fully buy into the bullshit of “under siege” fail to comprehend how they’re being used, what an actual siege is like or what the combined power of the US Armed Forces, plus federal, county, state and local police forces can bring to bear to actually explain to them precisely what a siege and war actually look like.
These people are convinced that a combined force sufficient to effect a 10000 mile perimeter, in multiple layers and capable of bombarding every square yard of that area, should that become necessary. Yet, these people honestly think that they can win against a force of millions, artillery, bombers, fast attack aircraft, gunships, guided munitions, dumb (iron) bombs, MLRS, grenade launchers, machineguns by the millions and more assault rifles per man, in fully automatic, than Carter has had little liver pills.
Two words come to mind, “Fucking delusional”.
Yet, these “power brokers” want to keep goading them!
How bad is it? Remember the night club shooting in Florida? That’s when the last few boxes of match grade 5.56×45 mm ammunition dried up, being difficult to find after the San Bernadino shootings. Match grade ammunition is precision ammunition for long range competition, it’s not the most effective ammunition for anything else.
I can find plenty of M855 clone ammunition, but I’m disinterested in a round landing within six inches of a target – after shooting through Kevlar or a car door, I do paper at a distance for prize money. That that is available is worrisome in and of itself, as that ammunition is a specialized tool of warfare.
Oh well, when the panic buying finally stops, I’ll pick up extra, to account for the next panic drive. Instead of two boxes of twenty rounds, I’ll pick up four. That’ll hold me over for a year or so.*
*Hyperthyroid has my hand shaking a bit too much to compete, so I try to keep in practice. One doesn’t need that many rounds to keep in practice, albeit nowhere as accurate as when the thyroid wasn’t causing tremors.
Until sanity returns, remember, “I have a gun and know how to grease my car with it. Now, whereinhell are all of the grease fittings?!” (Entirely giving away my age with that one, as I well predate lifetime greased fittings (when the grease is gone, the lifetime of the part in question has ended).
Proof being a cross-dressing once-upon-a-time pro-choice New Yorker doesn’t make a Republican any less Republican. Clearly his Victoria’s Secret undergarments have been fucking up circulation to his Thinking Organs.
The fact is, Republicans are not capable of doing wrong, while anybody else is incapable of doing right, or do we not remember the rally cry of Silent Gen Americans in 2001, “I’m so glad when this happened, that Giuliani was mayor, he really tightened things up / I’m so glad Bush was president, can you imagine if it were Gore?” I guarantee everybody here has an aging fascist relative who they heard say something to that effect.
If it happens under a Liberal, it’s their fault. If it happens under a Conservative, you’re lucky they’re there for damage control. This is how they think.
Most liberals aren’t guilty of thinking the reverse, because they possess some awareness a president’s powers are largely reaction-oriented, not preventative, and throwing words like “fault” around betray an immaturity many left behind on the playground.
Hell, I ever heard liberals say that line about Bush. It’s like advertising. It’s in how they present themselves, and sooner or later the majority will go along with the associations they make for themselves, like Coke and bears.
I’d kind of like to know just what is this wall to wall successful radical Islamic terrorism we supposedly have been facing ever since Obama came to term is supposed to be.
And how does he get *eight* years post Patriot to Obama. That’s only 7 years. Or has he granted Obama one year of success.
In this case I’m back to PZ’s original interpretation. “eight” clearly resonates as “two presidential terms” imply “not terrorist attack during Bush’s presidency”.
Obama.
We all know that 9/11 was a mulligan, so it does not count.
The GOP has always said that it was Bill’s fault that the US got attacked nine months into Bush’s term — he should have given the transition team the date and time of the attack, or else how would Bush know anything was up?
After that, there are no major Islamic-inspired terrorist attacks on US soil for a long time, it’s true!
That said, the social media concept, and online videos, and smartphones, were brought to the market under Bush’s watch, and that’s what has allowed ISIS to harness the power of lone wolves.
Ah, but Rudy said successful. Sure, they mussed our hair a little bit but did the nation fall? It did not!
@pz. I am no fan of Trump nor of the republican politicians who have sold their imaginary souls in order to lie for him but I think your post does distort the message Giuliani was intending to convey: he was lying (the ‘of course’ is unnecessary), but I, for one, have no trouble seeing that he was, inelegantly and inaccurately, referring to a notional 8 years post 9/11.
Failing to acknowledge that, even if only as a possibility, risks impairing your credibility, and telling those of us who disagree with some few of your posts to fuck off suggests that you prefer an echo chamber to a real discussion…which is something that you quite properly criticize in others.
I am not a defender of republicans. My personal politics are left of centre in Canada, and I agree with your of Obama as right of centre, so if you tell me to fuck off, it can’t be because I am a defender of Giuliani or other Trump apologists.
Btw, as an employer for more than 30 years, I ike having the power to fire people and it is frankly idiotic to suggest that this is immoral. I truly hate exercising that power and have done so precisely twice, and won’t ever forget how difficult that was. However, there was proper cause both times, and firing was the final step. The problem is not with having the power to fire….the problem is when one enjoys exercising it. After all, you frequently castigate organizations for not firing sexual predators…..how can you do that and yet deplore an organization having the power to do it?
The election was in November 2008, but Obama wasn’t in office until January 2009. If you neglect the fact that September/October is near the end of the year and round up, that’s eight years: 2009-2001=8. Eight years when terrorist attacks did happen, but perhaps not of the very specific type you’re weirdly interested in.
Or you (Giuliani) could claim that Obama didn’t manage to bungle it up too badly in the first nine months or so, whatever it may be that the president bungles when terrorism occurs. You might say those months were just a lucky coincidence, and the attacks during Bush’s presidency were likewise unfortunate and totally unpredictable/uncontrollable. But otherwise, some people (besides the terrorists) must be responsible, and they are obviously Obama and Clinton (Hillary, but let’s toss in Bill too just for fun).
The attacks of 9/11 were horrible, but similar to what we are now reading over in another thread, most of us didn’t really feel it. Three thousand people died, two buildings and three airplanes – that’s a bad week by our standards, but we’ve done worse than that to countries we pretend had something to with it. Thirty thousand Afghanis only took us a year or so, and we’d lost three thousand of or soldiers by then.
9/11 was only horrible to us because it was happening to us, instead of to brown people in some country where they deserve it. We were being done, instead of doing.
And if we’d just clenched up and stayed with our previous levels of security, what would we have got? Well, the previous attack on the WTC had been about eight years before, so maybe we’d have had nothing for another eight years. Which is what we got, Rudy and the Patriot Act or not.
Everything the conservatives did after 9/11 was horrible. They destroyed our freedom, restricted our lives, scared the beJesus out of us, stomped all over democracy, and got a lot of us killed, killed a lot of other people, and pretty much took a shit on civilization.
So when Rudy and the others are claiming they prevented anything, they are really saying that they were right, that we deserved to be subjugated, and that we ought to be grateful to them for running our country and our lives.
If something sounds too stupid to be true, maybe it is. check with Snopes before posting.