Giuliani flat out lying about 9/11

RolandTD20Kdrummer

LikeAnOcean wrote:

If there's one thing thats constant in politics, its the the other side is usually lying.

politics in general is a big game of lies and deceit..

Firemen are not politicians however.

surferdude

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Does it mater if a potential future president is a liar? Yes it does.

Look at what he is lying about. It's a symptom of a bigger problem.

The entire IAFF is dead set against him. They want to get their side of the story out. It would seem odd the IAFF is smearing him without just cause don't you think?

http://www.iaff.org/

It's jaded but I think it no longer matters that the next president may be a liar. We know the current one is, and the previous one was too. It's part and partial for the job. It's sad but true. I'm not looting through the trash to decide what lies are acceptable and which aren't. Politics is a disgusting mess and only getting worse and I think making some lies acceptable only makes it worse.

blackredyellow

qtegirl wrote:

Well, I personally dont' like the guy and I certainly believe that he's taking a lot more credit for the response to 9/11 that he deserves. I specially don't like all the macho talk about fighting terrorrism (mainly because I'm against wars in general). But, just like what happened to Kerry: people with their own agendas (getting Bush reelected) dragging his war record through the mud, I'm skeptical of others who are trying to do the same to Guiliani. You gotta question their motives and keep in mind that the info they provide ("The REAL Guiliani") is very, very biased.

Yes, the truth I'm sure is somewhere in the grey area... But the whole Giuliani is great against terrorism claim bothers me... (not aiming this at you qtegirl) What has he done to combat terrorism? He left office a few months after 9/11 and besides made money for himself (which isn't a bad thing), but he blew off his appointment to the Iraq Study Group and never participated and basically hasn't done anything on the subject of terrorism.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Compassionate Rudy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ub_dLr-ajKY

.

vedderelf

This information is not new but unfortunately, not enough people know about it.

Read the book "Grand Illusion." It details point by point Giuliani's failures in regard to 9/11. I think the firefighters are most angry because they hold Rudy personally responsible for not fixing the communications problem he had full knowledge of. As a result, a lot of firefighters lost their lives because they never heard the order to evacuate.

Just read the book. This guy isn't fit to president.

sweetpotato

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

A little insight into how well this guy can spin lies and not even flinch.

"A filmmaker who was behind documentaries that bashed Rupert Murdoch and Wal-Mart is now focusing on Rudy Giuliani, creating an "online viral video campaign" about the presidential candidate timed to coincide with the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attack.

Robert Greenwald on Thursday launched the first of four short videos about Sept. 11 and the Republican former mayor. The others are planned to launch throughout the month.

The videos attack Giuliani by saying he failed to prepare New York City for a major disaster, he ignored sick ground zero workers after the terrorist attack and he profited financially from his association with the tragedy after leaving office in 2001.

"We want to use this forum to reach people and show and tell and say, 'Look here are some truths that we want you to know,'" Greenwald told The Associated Press. The video blitz has an accompanying web site, therealrudy.org."

http://www.therealrudy.org/

.

that's not all he's lying about.

http://www.alternet.org/story/66986/

The Dangerous Rudy Giuliani: George Bush with Brains
By Michael Tomasky, Comment Is Free
Posted on November 6, 2007, Printed on November 6, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/66986/
People of Britain: congratulations are in order. You have now joined ferret owners, sidewalk artists, hot dog vendors, publicly funded attorneys for poor people, low-income community college students, museum curators, a couple of innocent black men shot dead by the police, the sections of the New York City charter governing rules of succession to the mayoralty and, of course, Hillary Clinton, as objects of Rudy Giuliani's demagoguery and wrath.

You may by now have heard the story. In a radio ad that his campaign prepared for New Hampshire voters, Giuliani tells listeners that he was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2000 and goes on to say: "My chance of surviving cancer - and thank God I was cured of it - in the United States: 82%. My chances of surviving prostate cancer in England: only 44% under socialized medicine."

The numbers are false. The actual five-year survival rate in Britain is 74%, which is still lower than America's, but obviously high enough for the figure not to have constituted fodder for a campaign commercial. (Even the remaining, much smaller difference, is largely explained by more widespread screening in the US, which catches many more incidents of prostate cancer that are non-lethal.)

It turned out that Giuliani's numbers were from a seven-year-old article in a conservative policy journal. The article was written by his own healthcare policy adviser, who admitted that his comparison was a "crude" interpretation of a study by a respected health policy group. The group, in turn, said the article's author had grossly misused its numbers.

That's about as red-handed as anyone in politics gets caught these days. But when asked if the campaign would continue to use the figure, a Giuliani spokeswoman said, "Yes, we will."

I know the form all too well. I covered Giuliani for a dozen years in New York (note to angry American rightwingers preparing to email me a warning to keep my foreign nose out of their business: I'm as American as a Ford F-150).

The man lies with staggering impunity. But here's the thing: he does it with such conviction and such seeming authority that people who are not inclined to study the matter will believe him -- will in fact be utterly convinced that Giuliani is speaking the gospel truth, and they will prove almost impossible to shake from this conviction.

Giuliani's hypocrisy with regard to this ad doesn't end with the fake statistics. As Joe Conason noted on http://www.Salon.com, Giuliani was at the time of his treatment the mayor of New York and enrolled in a nonprofit health maintenance organisation for government employees - that is, mini-socialized medicine. And as Ezra Klein noted on Comment is free, the treatment that saved Giuliani was developed in Denmark - which, as Klein drolly notes, "is both in Europe and has a universal healthcare system".

But none of this will stop Giuliani. He will say and do anything he feels he needs to say and do to get power.

Newspapers write that he was "liberal" on social issues in his mayoral days, as if his positions on abortion and immigration were matters of conviction. Nonsense. He took the positions he needed to take to be elected in an overwhelmingly Democratic city. (Although to grant him a speck of humanity, I'd guess that his pro-gay rights views were more or less genuine: anyone living in the city gets to know many gay people.)

And now he is saying and doing whatever he needs to say and do to get millions of rightwing Americans to support him. He recently told a meeting of social conservatives that his reliance on God "is at the core of who I am." As mayor he was known to attend mass almost never, he obviously cheated serially on the wife (wife No 2) he married in the Catholic church, and the only occasions on which I can remember him invoking God when he was mayor were the two times he was forced to say "so help me God" in taking the oath of office.

But forward he will charge, telling more lies with even more impunity. And immunity, because in a culture where a sense of history is largely limited to remembering certain stirring television images, he will for the most part get away with it, confident in the knowledge that the main thing most Americans will ever recall about him is the film clip of him running from the rubble of the World Trade Centre on September 11. A far smaller percentage will know that the reason he had run was because he had catastrophically decided to place his emergency command center in the tower complex - the only building in New York that had previously been the target of a major terrorist attack.

And by the way: shame on Gordon Brown for inviting him to No 10 in September. Yes, there's a long tradition of presidents and prime ministers welcoming party standard-bearers from across the pond. But Giuliani isn't yet that. Brown had no business giving him the kind of special benefit that an audience with a prime minister bestows.

Brown and all of Britain will be better off the sooner they figure this out: Giuliani is a dangerous man. George Bush with brains. Dick Cheney with better aim. Consider yourself warned.

Michael Tomasky is the editor of Guardian America.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/66986/

Dylan Stone

Rudy is one scary dude....

And he censors art.

This country does NOT need Rudy.

But that's ok....The right wing christians will not vote for him. Hopefully he is what will make the republicans lose as he will help to divide the party.

puremagic

Come Back in Black wrote:

ok so you are saying that any other American city would of been better prepared for 9/11 then New York? No one was prepared for that and no one else could of handled it and led people as well as Rudy did. Smear campaign websites are not going to change that.

Wasn't it in February of 1993 that the WTC was bombed? Didn't Rudy take office in 1994? He is running on a platform of protecting America, yet 6 years and he wasn't prepared for another terrorist attack in NY?

No one is saying he could have prevented it, but something is clearly wrong when we couldn't detect two planes headed off course in NY? Something is wrong if information was not heeded from or shared with the JJTF. What preparations were made during his term to justify his protection platform, seems fair.

Dylan Stone

puremagic wrote:

Wasn't it in February of 1993 that the WTC was bombed? Didn't Rudy take office in 1994? He is running on a platform of protecting America, yet 6 years and he wasn't prepared for another terrorist attack in NY?

No one is saying he could have prevented it, but something is clearly wrong when we couldn't detect two planes headed off course in NY? Something is wrong if information was not heeded from or shared with the JJTF. What preparations were made during his term to justify his protection platform, seems fair.

Yes it was February, 1993. My friend's sister and her unborn child were killed that day.

RIP, Monica Smith.

TrixieCat

puremagic wrote:

Wasn't it in February of 1993 that the WTC was bombed? Didn't Rudy take office in 1994? He is running on a platform of protecting America, yet 6 years and he wasn't prepared for another terrorist attack in NY?

No one is saying he could have prevented it, but something is clearly wrong when we couldn't detect two planes headed off course in NY? Something is wrong if information was not heeded from or shared with the JJTF. What preparations were made during his term to justify his protection platform, seems fair.

Are you seriously trying to say that Guiliani was supposed to be prepared that morning for 2 planes to run into the Towers????
Don't you think our President and his communications staff and homeland security should be held a bit more accountable than the fucking mayor????
I am not a fan of his but obviously there is going to be a smear campaign...no one wants to be a loser here.
And if people think that firefighters, especially the heads of the depts in NYC are not in the pockets of the politician of their choice, than there is some delusion here. This is not the backwoods of the old west here.

gue_barium

TrixieCat wrote:

Are you seriously trying to say that Guiliani was supposed to be prepared that morning for 2 planes to run into the Towers????
Don't you think our President and his communications staff and homeland security should be held a bit more accountable than the fucking mayor????
I am not a fan of his but obviously there is going to be a smear campaign...no one wants to be a loser here.
And if people think that firefighters, especially the heads of the depts in NYC are not in the pockets of the politician of their choice, than there is some delusion here. This is not the backwoods of the old west here.

Yet it was in the backwoods of the Old West and beyond that such palm-greasing was honed to an art form.

TrixieCat

gue_barium wrote:

Yet it was in the backwoods of the Old West and beyond that such palm-greasing was honed to an art form.

I had no idea.