What is Digg?212 Comments
- inactive, on 10/18/2007, -16/+74Ghouliani is a scary sumbitch. An Authoritarian Socialist trying to sell himself as a conservative.
He even had the gall to say he's a "strict constructionist" pertaining to the Constitution. What a laugh! - DeskFlyer, on 10/17/2007, -5/+58If this ***** gets elected we're all *****.
- chupavacas, on 10/15/2007, -4/+44Most of the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia so would he have attacked that country?
- BobOrleans, on 10/14/2007, -1/+33For now on every Giuliani story should be dugg 911 times, not a digg more.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+36They should have bombed Huffman Aviation; the al Qaeda training camp in Venice, Florida.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?enti ... - Tangaroa, on 10/12/2007, -4/+34Nobody knew al Qaeda existed after the 1993 WTC bombing. The individuals most directly responsible were rounded up and jailed. It was only later that French intelligence tipped the US off to the fact that there was a larger conspiracy brewing.
After the 1998 bombings, Clinton sent a wave of cruise missiles into Afghanistan . If they had hit 30 minutes earlier, they would have caught a Qaeda command staff meeting and al-Qaeda would have been annihilated, or at least shattered into smaller and less effective groups. Clinton was roundly condemned for wasting expensive ordinance on a non-theat and it didn't look good for him that he had also hit a medicine factory in Sudan because his neocon advisors had told him it was manufacturing WMD for Iraq, and that one of the missiles broke down and landed a few yards inside the Pakistani border and that pissed off the entire country.
After the USS Cole bombing in 2000, Clinton had Richard Clarke draft plans for an invasion of Afghanistan to begin in spring of 2001 because the weather would be more favourable. When Clarke handed it off to the new administration, they thought he was nuts. For one, the Republicans never considered Islamic terrorism to be a major threat. They thought Clinton had invented the issue as a political matter and was wasting taxpayer money by fighting it. More importantly, the new administration was friendly with the Taliban. They both had a similar religious perspective, both voted the same way on human rights issues in the general assembly, the Taliban were friends of Bush's Saudi friends, and the Taliban were willing to make deals for oil and natural gas. when September 11 happened, Bush must have seen it as a betrayal. - CannedMango, on 10/15/2007, -2/+31GIULIANI: And the point — I think it was Congressman Paul — made before, that we’ve never had an imminent attack — I don’t know where he was on September 11th. (Laughter.)
Would that be laughter at *yet another* 9/11 reference there Rudy? - inactive, on 10/18/2007, -4/+32Sure!
If you attack someone BEFORE they do it to you, you win.
And if they weren't going to attack you, or are incapable of doing so? Who cares! Whooooo, America! - EntropyMan, on 10/18/2007, -6/+30Kizilbash is right. Rudy is no Socialist. Authoritarian, yes. I think the word you're looking for is Fascist. A certain "party" called themselves "national socialists..." last century but were really nationalist fascists. Perhaps that's your confusion.
Socialism is essentially when The People own the means of production (factories, etc..) and they also get to decide how that is applied, usually through direct voting, ala collectivism. Just because the government owns some bit of property or runs some obnoxious program doesn't make it Socialist. Lots of things in a Monarchy are owned by "the state" and we don't call that Socialist. - EntropyMan, on 10/18/2007, -3/+26See my above comment. You're describing fascism and/or totalitarianism. Socialism is more about economics. In practice, some so-called Socialist states have been totalitarian or worse. But that's because they _imposed_ their views on an unwilling population. In theory Socialism can work, but only if everyone subject to it agrees to collectively "make it work" (like anything else, I suppose), which is why it generally doesn't work.
Rudy is the very definition of crypto-fascist, without so much crypto. - knightboat, on 10/13/2007, -4/+26So who do we have to hit to prevent him from talking about 9/11?
- RollFizzlebeef, on 10/11/2007, -2/+22I think what Rudy meant to say was:
"I think 9/11 was kind of 9/11'd in 9/11 and 9/11. And if 9/11 had known about 9/11, maybe hitting a 9/11 there 9/11'ly might have helped prevent 9/11." - merdiesel, on 10/13/2007, -3/+23Rudy Giuliani is a ***** blood sucking scumbag...
- jynweythek, on 09/17/2008, -1/+21but Rudy, if we'd prevented 9/11, you wouldn't have anything to fuel your campaign!
- inactive, on 10/18/2007, -18/+35You wouldn't know a socialist if he kicked you in the balls. Giuliani is very far to the right.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18Hindsight and all, Paul's response should have been: "If you or anyone else knew the attack was imminent, then why didn't you warn anyone? The point is, an imminent attack is one we know is coming but we have a chance of stopping. Iran is not about to attack us. Not even close."
- BlakeEM, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18He is corporatist. They are ruled by special interests and a big part of the war is about the profit of corporations.
- ruley, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17Paul should send Giuliani some more required reading, mainly the wiki page for the word "imminent"
- TsuruchiBrian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15It scares the ***** out of me that this guy is #1 in the republican polls.
- relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -2/+16This guy takes the politics of fear to a whole new level, its really gross.
- thewump, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14Could this all be explained by the fact that Rudy is a prick?
- ajwinder, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15if your post is still dugg in the negatives by the time you read this, im so sorry. Only on digg can a relevant, factual summary of the events leading up to 9/11 be dugg down.
1993 was kinda the introduction for this country to fighting foreign terror groups, and I'm actually pretty damn impressed by how far we got from a rude awakening in 1993 to our capabilities in intelligence gathering in 2000. But then it kinda all went to ***** after that, and we fired Richard Clarke, and yeah, not so impressed anymore. - Alex2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I guess Rudy forgot that Clinton already attacked Bin Ladin in Afghanistan by shooting cruise missiles at one of his bases.
- doctorfungi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11Al Qaeda should have been hit hard after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Even if that wasn't an option, they should have been annihilated after the 1998 embassy bombings. I have no idea why it took 9/11 for us to do something about them.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12Not just FROM saudi arabia, but FUNDED by saudi arabia!
- Dylson, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13I'm not liking this *if* *****. If we did this...if we did that....Ya know what? ITS OVER, DONE, 9/11 HAPPENED AND WE ALL NEED TO MOVE THE HELL ON! If we are smart and elect a new leader that isn't like GW we will all be fine.
- ZenMojo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Man, when John Kerry said fighting terrorism was a law and order matter, people laughed. Except the most effective terrorist fighting force the United States has isn't the US military or the CIA...it's the FBI.
- ruley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Its just a troll, leave him alone.
- doctorfungi, on 10/11/2007, -10/+19You would attack a country based on where the terrorists were born? Excuse me for thinking that's ***** retarded.
- pyrotix, on 10/13/2007, -5/+13The only way to prevent 9/11 would have been to quickly bomb PNAC and the machinery of the military industrial complex at home.
- ZenMojo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12A lot of people call themselves socialists because the name sounds nice. In fact, Stalin preached about it in order to keep the masses subdued and supportive. How does this sound familiar? Well, our government preaches the evils socialized medicine, preaches about how great our democracy is and how awesome capitalism is and then convinces people to support corporate interests at their own expense.
In other words, the Americans have created a thing called Italian fascism and call it an "American capitalist democracy." Quote me on that. - NightVortez, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9National security might have also prevented 9/11.
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10What the *****? There's no real communist powers in the Middle East.
And you still think it's USA good, Middle East bad? - LuaPron, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Maybe I should rethink my vote against him...
We need a president that can retroactively kill every would-be terrorist! - card51short, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7they weren't just "born" there. They spent most of their lives there and some still had residences there.
- hiphoc, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11About 50% of the insurgetns we kill are from Saudi Arabia. What he is say is that something in Saudi Arabia is funneling a steady flow of terrorists for us to fight.
- iamr00t, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8No attack since 9/11 is evidence Bush is doing a good job?!?! Are you ***** serious???
1993-2001-->8 years
2001-2007-->6 years
By your reasoning, as of now, Clinton has done just as good a job as Bush. Also, on Clinton's watch, the attack was far smaller, those responsible were quickly caught and punished (within the bounds of our Constitution...wait, imagine that, the bad guys were caught AND our Constitutional rights weren't violated!!), the country didn't needlessly sacrifice thousands of its soldiers, the list goes on....
I don't necessarily think Clinton did such a stellar job addressing terrorism, but compared to Bush...*****.
If you want to believe we haven't had another attack since 9/11 "because of Bush," go right ahead, in fact, maybe you should join the Army and spent over 1/2 of your life over there carrying out Bush's aggressive policies that supposedly keep us safe "from the terrorism." - reaganluver, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8If a dictator is practicing genocide then the REPONSIBILITY to overthrow him falls on the people living in that country. That is if it is his own people.
- ruley, on 10/18/2007, -1/+8Someone in america is funneling a steady flow of soldiers into Iraq, but no one's bombing us. (its more complicated than that, i know)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Bin Laden is *not* a member of the Saudi royal family. He is a member of the Bin Laden family (duh), which is powerful, owns massive engineering, telecommunications & merchant corporations, but is not in any way royal. If he was a member of the Saudi royal family, his name would be Bin Saud.
- masterm1nd, on 10/18/2007, -0/+7He is the furthest right on the only MAJOR issue right now, is he not?
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9It's pretty ironic that Clinton's administration had plans to strike at al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, but the Bush administration ignored it, saying the Clinton admin was "obsessed" with terrorism.
Of course after 9/11 those inconvenient facts were never brought up again in the mass media and now we have Rudy hilariously telling us how Clinton might have had it right if the Bush administration had listened. What a laugh. - XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAH
- masterm1nd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I know you said enough said, but would it have been that hard to add a space, and maybe a few capital letters.
- annienyc4, on 10/18/2007, -2/+8He only gives a ***** about the constitution when it works for his agenda. And yet he acts like it doesn't exist when he feels like being a fascist. Trying to shut down a museum because he's offended by the art?. What an *****.
- relaxeder, on 04/17/2009, -1/+7Holy *****, you're ***** crazy!
- Gtitian, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8none of those topics have anything to do with socialism or capitalism. More to the point, they aren't included in the "Left vs. Right" analogies, as Left and Right only refer to your preference in an economic system and not your social conservatism or liberalism.
- humanerror, on 04/03/2008, -2/+8buried for "explicity implied" and also for being an ignorant *****
- edzz, on 10/17/2007, -1/+7blowing up america might have prevented giuliani, doesnt mean *****
- nygrissplz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7i'm seriously considering moving elsewhere if he does.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 211 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is