Digg

Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!

See the original image at thinkprogress.org —

Giuliani Supported Prosecuting Terrorists Using Legal System

thinkprogress.org — Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani blasted Obama yesterday for wanting to take a criminal justice approach to dealing with international terrorists. Giuliani, however, also once praised the prosecution of the 1993 bombers, agreeing with Obama that terrorists should have to face the U.S. legal system.

Bury

MakiMaki 155 days ago, made popular 154 days ago

793 diggs
digg it

98 Comments
Who Dugg It?

jbdobd, on 06/18/2008, -9/+25Rudy, Like McCain, was before it before he was against it.
- RobN, on 06/19/2008, -11/+4Have you heard the phrase "September 10th mindset" before? That's what this is.
  
  Smart people can change their minds when they see something didn't work -- like how imprisoning those who tried to bomb the trade center in the 90s did NOT stop another attack. When you think Republicans are jerks for talking about a "September 10th mindset," think of issues like this.
  
  Look, we're talking about people willing to kill themselves to hurt us. Threatening them with jail time isn't a serious deterrent, is it? Honestly? Having a trial that involves public disclosure of covert activities that let us find out what they were up to is not in the public interest, either.
  
  It's not a violation of the constitution -- plain and simple. They're not US citizens, they're not on US soil, their fate is constitutionally in the hands of the military and their Commander in Chief. The court has no jurisdiction. It should actually be illegal to try many of these folks in US courts, because they're not subject to US laws where they were detained.
  - sodade, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5I am beginning to understand the post 9/11 mindset now - people like you and Rudy are sleeper agents who were activated to destroy what little good remains in our failing nation.
    
    "Look, we're talking about people willing to kill themselves to hurt us. Threatening them with jail time isn't a serious deterrent, is it?"
    And threatening them with torture, humiliation and death is? The "bad guys" have probably known about AG and GB much longer than the US media - think it affected their recruitment drives?
  - publiclurker, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3Man, it's amazing how the morally bankrupt feel that they can justify anything as long as they are scared ***** or feel they can profit.
- NoStoppingUs, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1so let me get this straight. this is an article bashing rudy giuliani for sharing the same beliefs as barack hussein obama?
  
  so we can all admit that barack hussein obama is a ***** idiot, just like rudy giuliani, right?
- hmunkey, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1for it*
  But we all know what you meant.
hawkeye17, on 06/18/2008, -5/+60The only thing Rudy stands for is Rudy. Even his own children won't speak to the man, which speaks volumes about his character(or lack thereof).
- OC73, on 06/19/2008, -16/+4You're an idiot. Giuliani attended hundreds of funerals after 9/11. He had to deal with the murder of friends, colleagues and residents of his city. If he didn't care about anyone other than himself, he would've left NYC the cesspool that it was before he took office.
  - bgrah449, on 06/19/2008, -5/+2As defense of his character, you cite that he knew people who have died? How does that make someone a good person?
    - masterm1nd, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2He went to hundreds of funerals. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't go to hundreds of funerals.
    - bgrah449, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4But how many of those funerals only had bodies because the firefighters had to force him to let him find their bodies? If he'd had his way, those bodies would have been in the Staten Island dump, unidentified.
    - masterm1nd, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1I'm not sure what you mean, but body or no body, they still hold funerals.
- didiman, on 06/19/2008, -9/+1You should probably look for other sources of news besides digg and try a different drink other than kool-aid
twiztidsinz, on 06/19/2008, -7/+419/11!!!!!

This guy seriously makes me sick.. nothing but a fear-mongering self-serving bastard
loggia, on 06/19/2008, -4/+18I don't that believe that Giuliani, a former prosecutor, can actually believe that criminal prosecution is the wrong way to go. And his past comments belie that.

Like McCain, he appears to have changed his statements to appease a certain faction of voters. I don't believe that McCain or Giuliani, both very smart men, believe half of what they're saying anymore.
mattearle, on 06/19/2008, -4/+12How is anything he says relevant?
- OC73, on 06/19/2008, -14/+3In case you missed it, he was Mayor of NYC on 9/11.
  - unicronband, on 06/19/2008, -1/+8At first I dugg you up assuming your comment was meant to be sarcastic until I read your comment below and realized you are being serious. Thank god the new comment system lets me change my vote.
    - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -8/+1I'll leave the sarcasm to those who think 9/11 is somehow funny.
    - unicronband, on 06/19/2008, -1/+7And I'll leave the fearmongering/pandering to those who think 9/11 is somehow an excuse to advance their own sick agenda.
  - pintomp3, on 06/19/2008, -2/+5i was a resident of NYC on 9/11. so?
    - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -5/+2So, how would you feel if you lost friends and colleagues and people tried to ridicule you for mentioning it?
      
      What if people suddenly started saying "9/11! 9/11! HAHA! That's all you talk about! HAHA 9/11! 9/11!"
      
      Think that's funny?
    - tidu, on 06/19/2008, -2/+7It's not funny. It's actually sick that Guiliani uses 9/11 to push his agenda. I respect that he lost friends on that day, but he loses all respect when every answer to any question is "x, y, or z because of 9/11" He didn't even read the commission's report that had the 3 points about why they attacked us, remember? All he remembers is that his friends died, he probably had to go though a ton of ***** as mayor, and now he wants revenge.
    - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -5/+2I'll ask you what I asked the others, is it sick that virtually every Democrat uses the Iraq war to push their agenda?
    - Thuktun, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1The Iraq war is going on right now and has continued to do so for years, in case you missed it. People bring it up constantly because it continues to happen.
      
      Democrats keep using it in their platform because they want to do something different, and Republicans who follow Bush want to "stay the course", though they're careful to avoid that phrase now.
      
      You must be a troll.
dinobot, on 06/19/2008, -7/+26Rudy = verb + noun + 9/11
highlymodified, on 06/19/2008, -4/+8The criminal justice system is the system America uses to fairly administer JUSTICE. Duh.

What other system should we use? Lynch mobs? Torture? Clandestine prisons? Gitmo? GTFO.

Besides, Rudy is just as irrelevant today as he was yesterday.
Revolutionista, on 06/19/2008, -16/+3Use American justice on non-Americans? Mmm, no.
warlokaz2004, on 06/19/2008, -13/+9What he's not allowed to change his opinion? I'm sure as the South Tower was collapsing, he was wondering if we should handle Terrorism as a Military rather than a criminal issue.

I'll remind folk that on Sept 11th, folk were in shock, then angry...if you could point to a single foriegn country whose government was directly responsible, we'd have nuked that country. As it was, we burned down Afghanistan for harboring Al Queda

And Truthers -- spare us. 3000 people died at the hands of 19 maniacs with boxcutters that day. Your posturing is rubbing salt in a wound.
- Locnar, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5And how many of those people in those camps are directly linked to 9/11?? You'd be lucky to find a dozen out of the hundreds that were imprisoned.
  Look, I don't think we should roll over and ignore what happened, but the moment we start holding people without due process or torturing people is the day we sink to there level. This is the USA... our way is justice for ALL.. not all but the people we capture or think might have done something wrong..
  Slippery slope sir, one day you to could be incarcerated without a trial for something you might not have done.. But without due process who's there to protect you?
- Visual77, on 06/19/2008, -0/+7Yeah, and the fact that we would've launched a strike at the first target that seemed responsible is exactly what went wrong.
  
  There's a reason a judge is not allowed to hear a case that directly involves him or anyone he personally knows. You can't be impartial right after being attacked, and when the stakes are as high as they were (innocent people killed or imprisoned because they vaguely resembled the guilty party and we were blinded by rage and a desire for vengeance), being impartial is the most important thing.
  
  If any country should stand up for thorough justice at the cost of a feelgood, bloodlust rampage, it should be America.
- operatorc, on 06/19/2008, -5/+1So, like religion, questioning what happened that day is off limits, huh?
  
  Because 3000+ people died that day I should think the search for truth would take priority rather than sitting down and taking what you're spoon fed by the media... but that's just me, I guess. I figured being critical of my government was the right thing to do... but apparently that's not true, is it?
  - WillSunrider, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1..how do you bring religion into this argument? Do you know how pompous and asinine you sound right now??
    
    For one, most religions don't mind if you question them (you're probably already foaming at the mouth with several cases of radicalism aren't you?). Second, you're probably one of those people who hate the mix of religion and politics, huh? Good one.
OC73, on 06/19/2008, -21/+6Obviously, 9/11 changed the manner in which he feels terrorists should be dealt with.

Btw, the constant attacks on Digg against Giuliani for mentioning 9/11--often using it as a punchline--are disgusting.
- alex7575, on 06/19/2008, -4/+11what's really disgusting is your so beloved Giuliani, taking credit for all the effort made by others.
  Using it as a pillar for his presidential campaign was just a new low.
  
  Of all people you are trying to defend Giuliani?!?!? McCain, I may understand...
  - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -11/+2Right, and I'm sure you feel the same way about Obama and other left wingers making Iraq the pillar of their campaigns.
    
    Asshat.
    - AvidPreatorian, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2i like how some republicans, liek you, are trying to get Iraq off the table when it's the second biggest issue facing our State today. Trying to make us forget about it? Really? You got us into it, don't play dumb or say you didn't and that 9/11 did. Iraq doesn't spell Al Quida.
    - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1Get Iraq off the table? Just the opposite. I want to know why the media is ignoring all the progress. Let's talk about Iraq from now through November--revisit every gay argument left wingers used to sanitize Saddam while demonizing President Bush. Fine with me.
      
      However, the point here isn't whether Iraq was the right war at the right time against the right enemy--it clearly was. The issue is whether Giuliani has as much a right to discuss 9/11 as Democrats like Barack Obama discuss Iraq? The answer is obviously yes, if not more so.
    - herbertstrasse, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1"However, the point here isn't whether Iraq was the right war at the right time against the right enemy--it clearly was."
      
      don't feed the trolls guys
- iamnotcreative, on 06/19/2008, -3/+11Rudy bringing it up every other sentence to try to scare enough people into giving him the presidential nomination was disgusting.
  - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -7/+2He can bring it up all he wants. He lived through it.
    
    Would you ever have the guts to walk up to a mother whose son was murdered and tell her to stop talking about his death?
    
    As far as I'm concerned, 9/11 isn't mentioned enough--and if Giuliani, a man who lived through it and witnessed the death of hundreds of his city's residents, wants to be a walking 9/11 public service announcement, so ***** be it.
    - DuggDowner, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3And when the city needs him most Rudy retires to run for the senate. Bloomberg should be the hero of New York. Guiliani is just a hack politician and an opportunist.
    - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -4/+2Oh please. The only reason Bloomberg has the time to propose all kinds of feel-good "green" bs is because Giuliani did all the heavy lifting.
      
      Before Giuliani, NYC was a ***** hole. It looked like a cross between Detroit and NewOrleans. When his second term was over it was one of the safest, most prosperous cities in the world.
- DuggDowner, on 06/19/2008, -2/+5Giuliani has no foreign policy experience whatsoever. He has no standing to be making statements one way or the other. He was just a mayor, nothing more.
  - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -6/+2Riiiight... as Mayor of one of the most diverse and internationalist cities in the world--home to thousands of global businesses, the host of The United Nation, etc.--being NYC's mayor is no different than being the mayor of Brainerd, Minnesota.
    
    Putz.
- alex7575, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4OC73,
  
  You are obviously a blind apologist, and for a 37 year old you sure sound like a 15yr kid.
  
  "asshat", "putz"? Give me a break, grow up first, before you barge in in an adult's conversation.
  
  Kids now a days, I swear...
  - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1Funny how you start off trying to insult me as a "blind apologist" then go on a rant about the lack of civility in 'adult conversations'.
    - alex7575, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1You are comparing "blind apologist" to "asshat" and "putz"?
      
      And as far as I remember I was civilized on my first response to you, the same cannot be said of you. Funny how you call one a asshat, but in return expect civility.
      
      If I offended anyone, it was Giuliani, not you.
      
      Once again, grow up kid.
    - OC73, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1Give it a rest. You're a condescending douche bag who got called on his hypocrisy.
      
      Quit your bitching and move on.
edwartica, on 06/19/2008, -2/+10And we care about what Rudy Giuliani believes why? His opinion matters just as much as the crazy person who yells obscenities while peeing himself on the bus.
- scififan9009, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5Hey, don't knock it till you've tried it. ;)
  
  *goes to find a bus*
- DuggDowner, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5Well Rudy got a lot of foreign policy experience eating lunch in Chinatown.
scififan9009, on 06/19/2008, -3/+7Well the answer is simple - in 1993 Giuliani was Giuliani. In 2008, he's a reptilian replacement of Giuliani.

(braces to see how many people take me seriously)
billbugger, on 06/19/2008, -1/+16this country was (well, now is) founded on the basis that all (wo)men are created equal, even non-US people. This country was founded by immigrants, and foreign peoples.
This country has forgotten that!

See: Immigration debate, Enemy Combatant, D.C. Voting rights, Telecom wiretapping, etc.

We are completely backwards from what this country was founded on.

Anyone That Is Willing To Sacrifice Freedom For Safety Deserves Neither... Ben Franklin
loggia, on 06/19/2008, -1/+8Have the military handle it? Actually, the military objected to almost every facet of the way it's been handled. Approve or disapprove, it's been handled by about 20 people in the upper echelons of the Bush administration, who "believe" so strongly in their plan that they say "I don't recall" every time they're called in front of Congress. Or they blame "rogue" soldiers and agents for their own plans.

Whatever you believe, let's have some people willing to stand up and say "This is what we should do. I authorized it."
CosmosCR, on 06/19/2008, -1/+14I hate the phrasing "prosecuting terrorists". The whole point of the legal system is to determine if people are guilty, they are suspected terrorists until they have gone through the legal system and been found guilty.. then they are terrorists. Then we can take away their rights.
jacekw, on 06/19/2008, -2/+5The way I understand it is a little different. Obama supports the appealability of the decision. Rudy and McCain are both opposed to the ability to appeal the decision of the Judicial system, which is predetermined. Note: Im not saying I support Rudy at all. He is a prick that helped defend a company that killed hundreds of people and completely got them off the hook (all they got was community service). However, I think that these idiots (all of them equally so) are talking about different things. Giving terrorists the possibility to appeal, Habeas Corpus if you will, could technically set half of the terrorists that we capture completely free based on technicalities. He was detained by an officer operating outside of his jurisdiction, the warrant for arrest was not proper, rights were not read, etc, would all be valid Habeas Corpus loop-holes. For this reason, I agree that they should not be allowed the appeal.
- archiesteel, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4"He was detained by an officer operating outside of his jurisdiction, the warrant for arrest was not proper, rights were not read, etc, would all be valid Habeas Corpus loop-holes."
  
  That is actually false, as detailed in the Supreme Court majority decision brief. Granting terrorist suspects the write of Habeas Corpus does not mean they need to be read their Miranda rights when captured, or any such nonsense propagated by the warmongers.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2Most of these "ter'rists" were gathered up based upon Rewards fees paid to a rival faction. So, they were probably not read any rights, just tied up with a bag over their heads.
  
  I'm sure that there could be provisions to deal with the "method" of acquisition -- the MAIN sticking point here; is that there is probably NO evidence, and that these people were TORTURED. So it is really about the Bush administration CYA and really, not even a tiny bit about guilt or law.
TinternAbbot, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4Terrorists caught on US soil should be tried in US criminal courts, yes. But it's not so easy when they're caught abroad.
- Waiting2awake, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4What are American soldiers doing abroad? Bring them home.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4Afghanistan offered the US OBL before we invaded, if we wanted to try him in the courts of some neutral country.
  It may not be easy -- but it's better than uselessly bombing everyone who had no gripe with the US in an effort to send money to crony contractors.
nimbleprune, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3good thing he didn't win the nomination then
Treoinmypocket, on 06/19/2008, -6/+4I don't care who is saying it - here is the problem with using the US legal system to deal with enemy combatants:

Discovery. You have to give the other side access to all your evidence. AND you have to tell them how you got it.

That's fine within our criminal justice system because it is used to deal with people committing crimes, not trying to destroy our country. We were forced to reveal we had been listening in on cell phone conversations between Osama and his associates. Guess what happened after that revelation? They changed the way they communicate.

Come on people. This is a stupid and fallacious argument. Not one German or Italian soldier during WWII was treated as a criminal. No habeaus corpus, no discovery. NO. They were treated properly and with the distinction they deserved - ENEMIES.
- pintomp3, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5someone seems to forget the nuremburg trials. your idea of a trial seems to be "i say you are guilty, therefor you are".
  - Treoinmypocket, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Actually, I am not.
    
    The nuremberg trials were the name for the IMT (International Military Tribunals). Emphasis here on Military.
    
    These were not handled under judicial law as prescribed under the constitutions of Germany, France, Italy, Poland, the United States or any other country - they were set up and architected specifically by the Allied Powers military council. They dealt only with war crimes and the entire process was predicated upon military justice.
  - 140Suffolk, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1The Nuremberg trials were after the war was over.
- troub, on 06/19/2008, -0/+9"Not one German or Italian soldier during WWII was treated as a criminal. No habeaus corpus, no discovery. NO. They were treated properly and with the distinction they deserved - ENEMIES."
  
  That is also a stupid and fallacious argument with respect to the current conflict. German and Italian soldiers were uniformed soldiers fighting for an organized sovereign government on which our country had officially declared war. German soldiers were the guys walking around in German soldier uniforms and driving German military vehicles, etc. When the "enemy" is a few random guys off the street, are you allowed to treat all random guys off the street as enemies to be shot on sight, or scooped up like POWs? Oh, sorry, POWs actually have rights, and since we're not officially at war, all the random guys we scoop up are "enemy combatants," which means we can just pick them up and dump them in a hole somewhere for eternity without even telling them why. That is not right.
  - Treoinmypocket, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2Random guys off the street?
    
    Not at war?
    
    Not telling them why?
    
    If you have any friends - they're idiots.
- Ouze, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3the only thing that's stupid is that line of BS you're tossing about. The 9-11 attackers assumed their phones were tapped and spoke in code, as documented in many places (here's one http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/22/madrid. ... )
  
  I never understood the argument that to preserve democracy, we have to destroy it.
tman84, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3Didn't Rudy finish dead last in Republican primaries? I don't think anyone cares for what this guy has to say, whether you are on the left or right, I think everyone agreed that this guy was completely irrelevant and out of touch with America. The man used 9-11 to make hundreds of millions of dollars in speaking and consulting fees.
unklesam666, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3yes, if a person is unilaterally deemed threatening by a governing body, they should immediately be killed. that's how you git 'r dun!
thatguy331, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1Thank God, More Anti-Everybody, Pro-Obama stories! I hear Obama will grant us each 3 wishes!
- pentalive, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0Thank God, More Anti-Everybody, Pro-Obama stories! I hear Obama will grant us each 3 wishes!
  
  in exchange for your vote
DuggDowner, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Why would anyone listen to Giuliani? The man has no foreign policy experience whatsoever.
- jspegele, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1No foreign policy experience? 9/11!!
  
  /s
techweenie, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3Rudy is a corrupt idiot, but there's no story here. It was perfectly reasonable for him to have a "September 10th mindset" in 1993.
SabrinaHeaven, on 06/19/2008, -3/+2In 1993, Moonbats. 1993. 9/11 CHANGED EVERYTHING. Or have you forgotten?
BohicaTwentyTwo, on 06/19/2008, -6/+3Yes, and using the legal system to combat terrorists failed to prevent future attacks. Repeating something that obviously did not work in the past makes no sense. Listen, do I need to break out a Winnie the Pooh analogy for you to understand this?

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Winnie_The_Pooh_ ...
- Waiting2awake, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Worked pretty well in England...
  
  Stop being so frightened... Yes people may want to kill you, but let them work for it. Let them step to you so you can deal with them(Unless you are saying you can't?), because all you have managed to do is create a hundred enemies where one existed before - and justified all the inane reasoning of extremists because you are proving them right by being controlled by fear and bombing the crap out of places because someone, might, possibly, some time in the future, do something to us - so we better invade...
  
  All an extremist has to do then to anyone sitting on the fence is say "See I told you the imperialist bastards will come for you", and clearly there are imperial bastards right in front of the kid who is now no longer sitting on the fence...
  
  Reap - Sow.
noahavrum, on 06/19/2008, -3/+3Lets see if I get this.
15 years ago, before 9/11, the USS Cole, the embasy bombings, Madrid, London etc. Guliani held one position. Now that the world has changed, he holds another. How is that flip flopping? If the facts change, your opinions should change. Infact, it would be crazy and worse if the opposite were true (and expected). If someone held fast to their beliefs even when the world around them changes, they are delusional.
Egoist, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Why is it that you petty little children rant and rave at any politician who changes their minds over time? That's human. We all do it!

All of you are just as idiotic as those who chose not to vote for Kerry in '04 because he was labeled as a "flip-flopper."

I care about what the candidates believe NOW, not 20 years ago. Seriously, for the sake of our country, grow UP!
banderwocky, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2Flip flop McNutter III.
tman84, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Oh I get it, thinkprogress is so smart and we are so stupid. Because there is an article about how Rudy disagrees with Obama and Rudy is a hypocrite, and there is a picture of Rudy and McCain shaking hands and we're supposed to deduce that somehow McCain feeds on the brains of small children because of this. Don't insult my intelligence thinkprogress.
RabidAngel, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1More douchebaggery from politicians? Who would have thought it.
stanleyford, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2Submitter misunderstands. I would hope that anyone--Republican or Democrat--would want captured terrorists to be prosecuted using the legal system, instead of punished through extra-legal means. How we combat terrorists "in the field" is a different matter: do we treat them as criminals and assign law enforcement agencies to deal with them; or do we treat them as enemies and assign the military to deal with them? There is no inconsistency in believing that law enforcement is incapable of containing terrorism, while at the same time believing that captured terrorists should be subject to due process of law (although reasonable people may differ as to the effectiveness of that approach).

That is what I believe Guiliani meant: he did not mean that it was wrong to give the 1993 WTC bombers due process of law, but that it was wrong to treat it as a purely law enforcement matter which was finished after the trials were over. Look at his actual words: "that was a terrible mistake in not recognizing the full dimension of what we were involved with." He didn't say prosecuting them was a terrible mistake; he said the mistake was not understanding the "full dimension" of the situation.
mike17032, on 06/19/2008, -3/+3Good to see thinkprogress spam making it back to the homepage, digg just isnt the same without the libtard propaganda.
hiriumi, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0He is full of *****.
seomike, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1The only problem with using the justice system is someone has to commit a crime before you can do anything... It does nothing to prevent them from doing it. After 9/11 I for one was sick of re-acting vs acting to stop it in the first place.

Using the justice system if they're caught on US soil, I'm cool with that. But using it to be the left hook on foreign combatants and terrorists abroad is fail.
Strangiato, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Ask a New York firefighter who was on the scene during 9/11 what he thinks of Ghouliani.

'nuff said.
jspegele, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Use the legal system? What are we, terrorists?
mcballz, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1The same legal system that lets R. Kelly go?
veersite, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2I guess Rudy (and about 48% of the voting public) figured out that putting them in jail doesn't get rid of them (get ready for the plot point, my dim-witted lib friends...)

But killing them does!

********If the prosecutions of the '93 bombers were so wonderful, why did we have 911?******

Oops!

Rudy is just fine with his assessment. A wise man may change his mind many times... but a fool never does.
140Suffolk, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1When there's a few yellow jackets at a picnic you can just brush 'em away. But when there's a lot of them you've got to follow them back to the nest. And kill them all.

Back in 1994 it seemed that legal prosecution made sense. Then came another six years of bin Laden attacks, on the USS Cole, the African embassies and other sites. Which likely would have been stopped if President Clinton had treated the first WTC attack as an act of war.

After the other attacks, and finally after Sept 11 it became clear to everyone that prosecuting the individual killers and leaving the organization was not enough. Clear, that is, to everyone except Obama and the other lefties.

What Guiliani said in 1994 made some sense back then. But after 3,000 people were murdered a new decision had to be made.
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Giuliani Supported Prosecuting Terrorists Using Legal System

Login or register to add a comment