digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

CNN: Paul's 9/11 explanation deserves to be debated

cnn.com — CNN contributor Roland S. Martin agrees with Ron Paul: "At some point we have to accept the reality that playing big brother to the world ... means that Americans alive at the time may not feel the effects of our foreign policy, but their innocent children will."

Who dugg this? Made popular May 18, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

243 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • feelgoodinc, on 11/05/2007, -4/+161Huh? I thought that Martin gave a good, written piece on the whole debate over Dr. Paul's words at the SC Debate. To me, the most sentences in the whole article were these:

    "As Americans, we believe in forgiving and forgetting, and are terrible at understanding how history affects us today. We are arrogant in not recognizing that when we benefit, someone else may suffer. That will lead to resentment and anger, and if suppressed, will boil over one day.

    Does that provide a moral justification for what the terrorists did on September 11?

    Of course not. But we should at least attempt to understand why."

    Because he wrote this article and it was on CNN should not detract from the honest assessment of the issue at hand.
  • painted82, on 10/11/2007, -7/+142So this guy is saying debating Paul's opinion is fine? It's not an opinion. It's a ***** fact, established by both the CIA and 9/11 Commission.

    He also claims that "Mayor Rudy Giuliani was declared the winner of Tuesday's Republican presidential debate in South Carolina." According to CNN, maybe. But people who saw the debate didn't think so.

    Hmm... but lookie here. Perhaps this is the most honest sentence ever written about Giuliani by any MSM journalist... "First, Giuliani must be an idiot to not have heard Paul's rationale before."

    Okay, I'll be happy with the article if he retracts that Giuliani won the debate. :P
  • pezguy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+103I am encouraged to see commentary about Ron Paul that neither gushes over him nor dismisses him.
  • AzDraon, on 10/11/2007, -4/+102"Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani was declared the winner of Tuesday's Republican presidential debate in South Carolina"

    Who the hell said Giuliani won? Fox News own poll said Paul did.
  • R34C7, on 10/11/2007, -5/+91Note to Trolls:

    No one makes you read Ron Paul articles and no one forces you to post in the threads.
    I hope I speak for all Ron Paul supporters when I say that if you have a problem with Ron Paul; that is fine, but rather than spouting groundless claims and hateful messages, please give us some rational explanations of what it is that is wrong with Ron Paul. It has come to be my assumption that all of you have little reason at all to be against him other than what someone else told you to believe (thus the lack of argument).

    If you can't say something intelligent, please don't speak.
  • clownguyx, on 10/11/2007, -6/+82I'm just happy to see Ron Paul coverage on the front page of cnn.com
  • SouthsideIrish, on 10/11/2007, -3/+75The problem is, is that you cannot explain it. Whenever I come out and mention a Fatwa from Osama where he explains what he is doing, I get screamed at just like Ron Paul did. I'm not patriotic, I'm a sell out to my country, I should just move some place else. People do not want to hear why the foreign policy of the West in the Middle East for the last 90 years caused Muslims to lash out at us. They see us as hypocrites, a country that overthrough a king, yet supports one in Saudi Arabia, they see us as a country that has stolen their oil revenue. Need I go further.

    The only way out of this is an apology, and bringing all of our troops home from the Middle East, but that is not going to happen.
  • Orionshallrise, on 10/11/2007, -2/+71Finally, an article on CNN! It's just a shame that such common sense...is so uncommon that it needs explaining.

    I guess it's easier to believe that genetically inclined "other-colored" people are hard set to kill us all for no reason other then their blind unfounded hatreds for our freedom to pay taxes and vote in a 2 party system.
  • zephc, on 10/11/2007, -3/+68Giuliani: "Nine..."
    Audience: *gasps in anticipation*
    Giuliani: "Eleven"
    Audience: *bursts into applause*
  • graystar, on 10/11/2007, -2/+58Yep. I am living in the UK at the moment and it encourages me to see the US begin to debate issues which have for too long been locked in the cupboard. It is ok to criticise yourself. It is what makes you stronger - learning from mistakes.
  • thefaithful, on 10/11/2007, -2/+55"Who the hell said Giuliani won? Fox News own poll said Paul did."

    Actually, somehow Romney won.
    Paul was a close second though.
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272493,00.html
  • Waterispoison, on 10/11/2007, -4/+56The problem is that most Americans are just shoving their fingers in their ears and yelling "LALALALALALALLALaLA" when anyone tries to explain it.
  • libertao, on 10/11/2007, -1/+50Everytime I read Giuliani's quote it just infuriates me.

    "That's really an extraordinary statement,"

    No. Even if you don't believe it's a correct statement, it is certainly not an unusual one. I have been hearing this suggestion since almost day 1 of the attacks.

    "As someone who lived through the attack of September 11,"

    WTF? Were you in the WTC? Were you injured in rescue attempts? No, you just happened to be in the same enormous city just like we were all in the same enormous country. What an absolutely shameless jingoistic appeal to emotion. Despicable.

    "that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq; I don't think I've ever heard that before"

    Giuliani, you are either: (1) lying or (2) willfully ignorant beyond belief (leading me to believe answer #1).

    "and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11."

    'Absurd' like contained in the freaking 9/11 commission report? And way to subtly connect Ron Paul to the truth movement. This was such a shameless and calculated pounce on Paul--you could tell his response was rehearsed and he was just waiting to say it and pause for applause. He used crowd emotion instead of any semblance of logic or reason. His 'response' was comprised of nothing while Ron cited Reagan memoirs, historical events, and CIA reports. I cannot believe I used to think I might be okay with a Giuliani presidency.
  • CannedMango, on 10/11/2007, -1/+49"After watching all the network pundits laud Giuliani, it struck me that they must be the most clueless folks in the world."

    I like this guy. Way to lay the smackdown on the industry!
  • UnFriendlyFire, on 10/11/2007, -1/+49The debate format did not give Mr. Paul an adequate opportunity to make the statement and neither did Sean Hannity in the post debate interview. I believe he explains it better on his website.


    Too often we give foreign aid and intervene on behalf of governments that are despised. Then, we become despised. Too often we have supported those who turn on us, like the Kosovars who aid Islamic terrorists, or the Afghan jihads themselves, and their friend Osama bin Laden. We armed and trained them, and now we’re paying the price.
  • CannedMango, on 10/11/2007, -4/+51Nice family guy reference there. It's funny how that one aired last week just before the debate and that's basically what Guilliani did... he invoked 9/11 way more than anyone at the debate. He's just another fear monger.
  • vann, on 10/11/2007, -2/+47When Ron Paul mentioned the 1953 Iranian coup I couldn't help but wonder how many watching knew what he was talking about. Maybe 1-2%? And yet, that single event is one of the primary causes of the situation between the US and Iran today.

    You can say "nuke 'em" 'till the cows come home, but to find solutions you need to understand the problem.
  • Toshibi, on 10/11/2007, -2/+39What amazes me is that Paul knows his history and is a smart guy to begin with. Rare with politicians these days.
  • trer, on 10/11/2007, -3/+39Your post is one of the few rational and thought out posts I've ever seen on Digg (or on the Internet for that matter).

    This is why it is so important for people to learn history. And not just manufactured history from your high school textbook. People need to learn how to critically analyze history. Take documents, books, interviews, stories, etc. from the past and synthesize into a coherent idea. The problem is that that takes work, and just like our fast food and tv, we prefer our history manufactured and simplified with as little understanding as possible. For shame.
  • icanoop, on 10/11/2007, -2/+38Ron Paul is not an isolationist.

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

    See Wikipedia to learn what isolationism means. Ron Paul is a non-interventionist, he is not a protectionist. In other words, he wants to trade freely with foreign countries, but not blow them up.
  • kaelyiesta, on 10/11/2007, -3/+37Agreed. While I support RP, I didn't enjoy digging articles just saying how great he was. I already know/believe that.
  • gt4431b, on 10/11/2007, -3/+31
    I saw this on cnn.com and immediately dismissed it. I thought, "naw, there's no way that Ron Paul's name would appear on the top of cnn.com".

    Took me three takes for it to sink in. Go, Ron, Go!
  • crazydiode, on 10/11/2007, -3/+31as someone on Digg mentioned Rudy should officially change his name to Rudy NineEleven.

    Ron Paul's getting support from so many varied places. I just hope he wins the nomination and the Presidency!
  • AhmedF, on 10/11/2007, -3/+29It is about time people start waking up that the entire idea that people wake up one day and think "Hrmm .... I hate those Westerners with their awesome freedom and free women ... let me go blow myself up" is beyond absurd, and well in the realm of 'crazy'

    Butterfly effect ... or even Newton's laws fully apply in the world of politics (and oppression and pillaging lands and growing richer while screwing over the natives, etc).
  • veritas22, on 10/11/2007, -3/+29Does anyone else feel a sense of guilt that this sounds to good to be true?

    Dr. Paul is the exact politician we need at this exact moment. What are the odds of actually picking a leader and not the lesser of two evils?

  • trer, on 10/11/2007, -3/+28@wargalas

    We steal their oil by overthrowing their democratically elected rulers and installing a ruler of our choice that will give us the price we want (not necessarily the market demand) while at the same time treating their people poorly.

    Examples: Iran in 1953, Saudi family in Saudi Arabia. Now in Iraq. Us common folk will never see the savings. But the corporations (and their associates) reap monster profits. They in turn pour tons of money into the campaigns of politicians (i.e. Bush, Cheney, etc) who can manipulate foriegn policy to the advantage of the corporations. Really, it's pretty simple.
  • guckenfroovin, on 10/11/2007, -2/+26Hoorayyy Roland Martin and CNN for this display of journalistic (editorial) integrity! It's great to see Ron Paul inspiring some intelligent discussion!
  • jeffiek, on 10/11/2007, -1/+24" Paul's isolationist solution"

    Paul is NOT an isolationist. He is against intervention. There's a BIG difference. An isolationist puts up barriers against other countries. Like what the current administration is doing politically. A non-interventionist stays out of the affairs of other countries, believing a country should behave as a good neighbor, keeping communications open and trading freely.
  • Gnasche, on 10/11/2007, -2/+24"Okay, I'll be happy with the article if he retracts that Giuliani won the debate"

    Actually the article just says "Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani was declared the winner of Tuesday's Republican presidential debate in South Carolina"

    See what I mean? Watch: I declare myself the winner of Tuesday's Republican presidential debate in South Carolina

    "Tech geek, Gnasche, was declared winner of Tuesday's Republican presidential debate in South Carolina". See...and it's true.
  • rdean1970, on 10/11/2007, -4/+25Ron Paul should have been better prepared to make his statement about the 9/11 subject. The Republicans have been jumping everyone since 9/11 who remotely makes this same point. To be honest when I have heard this argument comming out of other people mouths in the past it is usually by someone who appears to just be wanting to get attention for themselves. This guy in the CNN article makes a great point about how we should discuss the reasons these terrorist had for doing what they did and how the discussion does not disrespect those who died in the awful event. It just allows us to better understand our enemy.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+22Ive been reading all these Digg articles on Ron Paul as of late and I am glad that my American friends are starting to smell the coffee.
  • superfusion, on 10/11/2007, -7/+28Holy crap -- it's almost possible to speak freely in the United States again!
  • iTorrey, on 10/11/2007, -2/+22Today on Hannity a caller said that he agreed with Paul and that Osama did indeed issue a Fatwa against the USA for the very reasons Paul stated. Hannity said "you really believe that?" the caller said "umm yes. It's his own words.." and he was cut off by Hannity who said he was having too good of a Friday to listen to any more of this.
  • zeebusboy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+19Ron Paul telling the truth about why we were targeted on 9/11 is ethically admirable and politically suicidal. The political discourse in America is so corrupt and dishonest that he will be hounded and hounded and demagogued to hell and back for this.

    The United States is sunk. That said, vote Ron Paul and at least you'll maintain your dignity as the HMS Titanic formerly known as America drops beneath the waves.
  • bbardlbradd, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16 Maybe the debate is won by how many idiots will clap at what someone says... It does seem to me to be some sort of game show... especially when you think about it this way:

    The debates are for what? Why do they get together and talk as they do? Well, I would assume it's to bring attention to the people running for office in the United States of America. Is this not correct?

    The president of the United States is, oh... how influential? If the US is considered to be the worlds most powerful nation, then I'd imagine the president of it would be pretty god damn important.

    So why then do they ask big questions to be summed up in under a minute? What airs after the debates? What airs before the debates? How important is it REALLY that the majority of American's that vote actually know what they are voting for?

    Well, for a minute an answer, you'd think it's not too important. If they are declaring who is winner and who is a loser? If the same person that made people clap the most is declared the winner, even when what he said had nothing to do with a question, or at least not his own? Doesn't this sound like a game show?

    If you're like me, you'd think, if the US really cared, they'd cut out more time for the debates and they wouldn't declare who is a winner and who wasn't. They would act as a leading world power would, responsibly and respectably.

    Rudy shouldn't have interrupted, That wasn't his question. It was disrespectful and childish of him to take the spotlight from Senator Ron Paul to shout his ignorant, yet entertaining and heart touching commentary.

    Does anyone else here disagree? If so what are your *legitimate* reasons?
  • BESTenemy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+18 We're also stealing their oil through OPEC - though sanction that allows it to be traded only in USD. There are plenty of oil consumers on the continent, yet they're all forced keep dollar reserve if they are to trade with Iraq. So, we get to decide who the consumer is and we practically control the value of oil through value of the dollar and visa versa.

    What happened to Iraq prior to the second oil war is he said: "Screw OPEC! I don't fear the states, I'll trade with whomever I want in any currency I want." Started getting rid of dollar in 2001 and that's when Euro spiked. Bankers got worried. Other countries such as Venezuela, Korea, Iran and China said they'd also potentially consider another currency for the oil trade. US had to interfere to keep OPEC from falling apart.

    If China came here and said we were allowed to trade only in Yen, even with our immediate neighbors, but only those that had the currency, we'd also feel robbed of our freedom.

    Inhibiting sales can be same as stealing. We're the mafia that goes into a store, demands money for "protection" and smashes all the window displays if the owner does not comply.
  • nosecohn, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16This story single-handedly convinced me that CNN does, somewhere in a distant corner of its psyche, retain a bit of objectivity. The article is well-written, narrow in scope, and really lays out the issue. I hope Martin gets/got some air time with it.

    I don't know if Americans will truly take up the call to debate this point, but from posts I've seen today ranging from Pat Buchanan to The View, it would seem like it's starting. I would point out to everyone that such a discussion over the crucial issue of our time -- why we were attacked and what we can do to prevent ourselves from being attacked again -- would NEVER have happened if this lone Republican candidate were excluded from the debates. Having Ron Paul in there is shaping the dialog and causing the other candidates to discuss the issues, rather than just trying to out neo-con each other. Attempts to stifle the free exchange of ideas by eliminating him from the future debates have already begun. If they succeed, the whole country will be worse off. It doesn't matter whether you think he can win, or even if you agree with all his positions. Having him there to contribute to the national dialog is worthwhile. Please sign the petition at: http://www.petitiononline.com/RPRNC08/petition.html
  • Toshibi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16If a person chooses to do business in another country perhaps they should consider the security of doing business in that country. Why must we baby sit companies and hold their hands all over the world when they do stupid stuff? Sure, companies have foreign interests...but why should my tax money pay for their defense? When you choose sides, you create enemies.Trade partners, that's great. Big brother to the world, just not worth it.
  • vann, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19A nice fantasy, but not really true. Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar. George HW Bush was director of the CIA. Barack Obama was editor of the Harvard Law Review.

    These people are not idiots. Evil, maybe. Willfully ignorant, maybe. Reckless, maybe. But not idiots.

  • powlol, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15I don't understand why it is so "absurd" in Giuliani's terms, that America's arrogant, i guess, foreign policy actually could make people angry. IMO, Dr. Paul seems like the perfect man for the job at the perfect time to finally rid the republican party of corrupted, religion fueled mayhem in is in right now, but no one wants to listen to this man. Shame.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15It just pissed me off when this ass says Giuliani laid the smack down on Ron Paul. That's what made me so mad. That's *****. As far as I'm concerned Ron Paul laid the smack down on Giuliani.

    Well at least it's good to see something positive about Ron Paul on corporate media.
  • nosecohn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15"Rudy should officially change his name to Rudy NineEleven"

    He can't. He hasn't read the 9/11 commission report!
  • gt4431b, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14
    Only if we keep fighting.... This ain't the end-game, not by a long shot. In truth, there is no end-game. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance!
  • DreKor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14I think the idea here is that we shouldn't give other countries reason to threaten us. First, we need to get our own house in order, something along the lines of truth, justice, and the American way. Once that happens, we won't be viewed as hypocrites. From there, we must make foreign policy decisions that are responsible in both the long and short runs for both our country, and those around the world.
  • veritas22, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14and so it begins

    Just a matter of time before the truth takes over and we gain control of this country....
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14Guiliani is as bought off as pro boxing.
  • badjoke, on 10/11/2007, -4/+16That last sentence was very well placed. Sticking it back to hardcore christian republicans and making them question themselves. Good article. :)
  • fknc, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13It has nothing to do with what we deserved. It has nothing to do with justification for or judging of either side's actions throughout history. The simple fact remains, regardless of who is right and who is wrong, that there are consequences to all actions. Even if the U.S. and 90% of the world believed that all our interventions in Arab and Islamic countries were 100% morally justified, we still must understand there will be repercussions. We are still oppressing, meddling, and coercing people.. people who do not want to be meddled with and do not want to be coerced. They are going to retaliate. So again, this argument has absolutely nothing to do with who is right.. nothing to with justifying actions.. simply that actions will have consequences. We are seeing the consequences of our actions.
  • BESTenemy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13 People want to hear things that are pleasing. Once lies start to cascade it is difficult to get back onto solid ground and say: "We were wrong". We aren't willing to fix the problem, cause it would imply accepting it. It's like trying to get a druggie into rehab while he's kicking, screaming and spitting vomit: "I'm perfectly fine".
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12Everybody knows you cant be president if you tell the truth......jeez
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 247 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.