[GoblinGaga]

He was indicted today.

Obama is said to be furious because this boy was allowed to slip through the cracks and be allowed to get on the plane, even though his dad had tried to give the gov't a heads-up that his son was an extremist and that he might be plotting something deadly.

Also, this boy never cracked a smile at all! In his pitures that I posted on Page 1, he had a chilling cold stare like the lead hijacker, Mohammad Atta always did before the 09-11 terror attacks.

[DenisMoor]

Rudy Giuliani proves himself to be a shameless liar of the first order on Larry King, where when discussing Obama's initial response to the Nigerian Panty Bomber claims that the prior similar situation involving Richard Reid Shoe Bomber was different because it took place prior to September 11, 2001 -- when in truth Reid attempted to blow up the plane on December 22, 2001:

Transcript from The Larry King Show:


GIULIANI: The president of the United States, when there is a potential massive attack on this country, which is what this guy was going to do, should have been on top of this immediately, not 10 days later, 11 days later, 12 days later.

We should have had our response ready. After all, this is not an unexpected act. We are in the age of terrorism. We don't need 10 days to respond or figure out our response. All that does, I believe, is convince our enemies that we are not ready, that we are pondering too much and thinking too much. So, you know, there is -- you want to take some time. But this has been an extraordinarily long time given the magnitude of this kind of attack.

KING: President Bush took six days once in a similar incident.

GIULIANI: Well, six days is less than 10. And the reality is that President Bush was criticized for taking -- what was it, like 20 or 30 minutes in delaying his response to September 11th. And I believe that six days was before the September 11th attack.

[LOVEBoy]

The Panty Bpmber.

What a world.

[Vomekayafboke]

How about Junk Bomber?

[TNOULbr2]

Rudy Lies Again:

Rudy Giuliani: "We Had No Domestic Attacks Under Bush; We've Had One Under Obama."

ABC News January 8, 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If0PVzsZMqg

And George Stephanopoulos didn't even challenge him on the false assertion until after the broadcast, and then only in print.

[career-builder]

George Stephanopoulos is one of the worst excuses for a "journalist" I have ever seen. I can't even watch him anymore.

[Sapremolz]

Rudy Lies Again:

Rudy Giuliani: "We Had No Domestic Attacks Under Bush; We've Had One Under Obama."

ABC News January 8, 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If0PVzsZMqg

And George Stephanopoulos didn't even challenge him on the false assertion until after the broadcast, and then only in print.

Yeah, and according to that imbacile Cheney, he's going around saying that Obama is soft on terrorism!

And besides, what in the hell is Giuliani smoking? No attacks under Bush but one under Obama? These two jerks both need their heads examined or something!!

[Emedgella]

It's the new narrative (no terrorist attacks under Bush) and I've been hearing it on Fox as well as the networks ( Mary Matlin as just one crazy-ass example).

Funny too how the anthrax attacks have been completely forgotten ...but at the time it was considered terrorism too, wasn't it?.

And what about the Beltway Sniper? 10 dead, 3 wounded:

"A series of trial exhibits indicated that Malvo and Muhammad were motivated by an affinity for Islamic Jihad."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beltway_sniper_attacks

But of course you are not hearing this on the US media... no one is being reminded.... why is that?

[Nifoziyfar]

Gives new meaning to the Grand Old Party ...

Senile

[strollerssfsfs]

Giuliani's Point

The Daily Dish
08 Jan 2010 02:05 pm

There is something in what Rudy said this morning that makes some sense to me:

"If you put someone in a civilian court, within a short period of time a lawyer is appointed and the person shuts up. If you have a person in the military system you can question him endlessly for as long as you have to make sure you have gotten the full scope of information."
And this is the tragedy of what the Bush administration did. By adding torture and abuse to what can be done during interrogation to terror suspects, by having no regard for future convictions and no real care in determining who might have been captured by mistake, and by rigging military tribunals to ensure guilty verdicts in advance, the Cheney goons destroyed their own argument. But even on those grounds, the fact that Cheney and Bush tried Richard Reid in a civilian court as Obama has the undie-bomber renders Giuliani's otherwise fair point moot in this case.

Let me also point out that Stephanopoulos did not challenge the untruth that Guantanamo Bay is a more humane detention center than domestic criminal ones (and thereby Giuliani's view that closing it was "totally absurd"); he did not challenge the untruth that Bush's military tribunals were generally deemed fair (they absolutely weren't); he didn't point out that the Red Cross deemed prisoner treatment at Gitmo as unequivocally torture; he did not insist that Giuliani explain why he has switched his position on civilian trials from Reid to the undie-bomber (merely referring to Bush's own position); and ended the interview summarizing the GOP talking points.

He also, of course, did not challenge the most absurd claim by Giuliani in the whole interview: that there were no terror incidents on Bush's watch. He wasn't a total push-over, and did not simply cave on everything. But as an act of journalism, it was not his finest hour. Perhaps realizing his biggest howler, he hurriedly wrote a blog-post with the fighting words:

Giuliani seems to have forgotten about the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and shoe bomber Richard Reid.
How do you sit in front of someone who says 9/11 didn't happen under Bush and say nothing?

In all this, Stephanopoulos was much more a handmaiden to Giuliani's p.r. than a journalist. And the chit-chatty bonhomie between the two, the cozy friendliness, the constant laughs and grins and cheeriness is what the MSM has become so good at. It's all too often about rich, powerful celebrities using other rich, powerful celebrities for a synergy of media and political self-advancement. And in the morning, the last thing you want for ratings is a tough or uncomfortable challenge of a leading politician. You can hear the producers now: keep it light, keep it warm, don't make them switch channels with some kind of conflict.

The result? Giuliani ate Stephanopoulos for breakfast.