This Article Sheds Light on Giuliani's Emotional Outburst in the Debate

Cliff Kincaid's article for Accuracy In Media may shed some valuable insight into Giuliani's impassioned attack on Congressman Paul during Tuesday night's debate. If the audience had known what this article reveals, then they might have restrained some of their applause. Check it out at
http://www.aim.org/aim_column/5461_0_3_0_C/ . I was certainly enlightened! Then share this information with everyone you know. It is up to each of us to inform our neighbors with "the rest of the story!" We cannot depend on the "fair and balanced" network to be all that "fair and balanced."




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Another from Cliff Kincaid

This is a good one as well:

http://www.aim.org/aim_column/5466_0_3_0_C/

Jane Aitken, 35-Year Veteran Teacher
Ron Paul 2008 Consultant
GOP Woman of the Year 2009
Founder NH Tea Party Coalition (NOT AFFILIATED WITH ANY FAKE 2009 GROUP)
Founder USPEINetwork @ Yahoo (Nat'l Edu Activism Group)
Board Coalition of NH Taxpayers

An Interesting Blog from The Nation (!)

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?bid=45&pid=19...

BLOG | Posted 05/16/2007 @ 12:29am
Rudy Giuliani v. Ron Paul, and Reality

By John Nichols

Rudy Giuliani made clear in Tuesday night's Republican presidential debate that he is not ready to let the facts get in the way of his approach to foreign policy.

The most heated moment in the debate, which aired live on the conservative Fox News network, came when the former New York mayor and current GOP front-runner angrily refused to entertain a serious discussion about the role that actions taken by the United States prior to the September 11, 2OO1, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon may have played in inspiring or encouraging those attacks.

Giuliani led the crowd of contenders on attacking Texas Congressman Ron Paul after the anti-war Republican restated facts that are outlined in the report of the The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.

Asked about his opposition to the invasion and occupation of Iraq, Paul repeated his oft-expressed concern that instead of making the U.S. safer, U.S. interventions in the Middle East over the years have stirred up anti-American sentiment. As he did in the previous Republican debate, the Texan suggested that former President Ronald Reagan's decisions to withdraw U.S. troops from the region in the 198Os were wiser than the moves by successive Republican and Democratic presidents to increase U.S. military involvement there.

Speaking of extremists who target the U.S, Paul said, "They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East [for years]. I think (Ronald) Reagan was right. We don't understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. Right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting."

Paul argued that Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda are "delighted that we're over there" in Iraq, pointing out that, "They have already... killed 3,400 of our men and I don't think it was necessary."

Giuliani, going for an applause line with a conservative South Carolina audience that was not exactly sympathetic with his support for abortion rights and other socially liberal positions, leapt on Paul's remarks. Interrupting the flow of the debate, Giuliani declared, "That's really an extraordinary statement. That's really an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of Sept. 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don't think I have ever heard that before and I have heard some pretty absurd explanations for Sept. 11. I would ask the congressman withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn't really mean that."

The mayor, who is making his response to the 9-11 attacks on New York a central feature of his presidential campaign, was joined in the assault on Paul by many of the other candidates.

But congressman did not back down, and for good reason. Unlike Giuliani, the Texan has actually read the record.

The 9-11 Commission report detailed how bin Laden had, in 1996, issued "his self-styled fatwa calling on Muslims to drive American soldiers out of Saudi Arabia" and identified that declaration and another in 1998 as part of "a long series" of statements objecting to U.S. military interventions in his native Saudi Arabia in particular and the Middle East in general. Statements from bin Laden and those associated with him prior to 9-11 consistently expressed anger with the U.S. military presence on the Arabian Peninsula, U.S. aggression against the Iraqi people and U.S. support of Israel.

The 9-11 Commission based its assessments on testimony from experts on terrorism and the Middle East. Asked about the motivations of the terrorists, FBI Special Agent James Fitzgerald told the commission: "I believe they feel a sense of outrage against the United States. They identify with the Palestinian problem, they identify with people who oppose repressive regimes, and I believe they tend to focus their anger on the United States."

Fitzgerald's was not a lonely voice in the intelligence community.

Michael Scheuer, the former Central Intelligence Agency specialist on bin Laden and al-Qaeda, has objected to simplistic suggestions by President Bush and others that terrorists are motivated by an ill-defined irrational hatred of the United States. "The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people," Scheuer said in a CNN interview. "We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people."

It is true that reasonable people might disagree about the legitimacy of Muslim and Arab objections to U.S. military policies. And, certainly, the vast majority of Americans would object to any attempt to justify the attacks on this country, its citizen and its soldiers.

But that was not what Paul was doing. He was trying to make a case, based on what we know from past experience, for bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq.

Giuliani's reaction to Paul's comments, especially the suggestion that they should be withdrawn, marked him as the candidate peddling "absurd explanations."

Viewers of the debate appear to have agreed. An unscientific survey by Fox News asked its viewers to send text messages identifying the winner. Tens of thousands were received and Paul ranked along with Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney as having made the best showing.

No wonder then that, when asked about his dust-up with Giuliani, Paul said he'd be "delighted" to debate the front-runner on foreign policy.

Aparently it was Ron Paul

Aparently it was Ron Paul day on CSPAN too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5VeaUW12pY

RNC trying to censor Dr. Paul

This was reported in the Associated Press:

The chairman of the Michigan Republican Party, Saul Anuzis, said he would circulate a petition among GOP national committee members seeking to bar Texas Rep. Ron Paul from future debates because of Paul's remarks about the Sept. 11 attacks.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/R/REPUBLICANS_STATE_CHA...

--- Tom H. ---

--- Tom H. ---

Fox Applause Track

The biggest story of last night is the one that, unfortunately, will go unreported. As an experienced audio engineer (by hobby), I have a very good set of ears. When the above poster writes, "If the audience had known what this article reveals, then they might have restrained some of their applause.", I suggest that you go back at watch the YouTube reply. It is very obvious to me that Fox inserted that roaring applause. It has no build up at all and is out of context with the rest of the program.

This is easily done either during a live feed, or during what was likely a slightly delayed live feed.

Joe Naab
http://www.citizensforronpaul.org

And Guilani turned back millions to NY in Saudi Aid

Because the Saudi prince said there was things America did that weren't kosher. So NY and the victims don't get money, but he stays on the payroll. He collected his Tammany haul.

I didn't know he was also on their payroll. Saudi prince saves millions, while looking charitable by having his poodle bark loud.

ron and rudy debate!

everyone sighn this

http://www.debateronpaul.com/

we need to put this sight on here
http://www.bostonteapartyii.org/index.html

FMNN Editorial Challenge

The article by Cliff Kincaid is very enlightening, not only in regard to Giuliani, but also in regard to the others who were on FOX in the post debate show.
______________________________________________________________

This article on Rush Limbaugh is at WorldNetDaily

Limbaugh: I have power
to choose GOP nominee

Says Ron Paul has snowball's chance,
accuses campaign of spamming polls

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55724
____________________________________________________________

Free Market News Network http://www.freemarketnews.com/
has an Editorial Challenge for a chance to win a 1 ounce American Gold Eagle. This should be posted and placed on all blogs and sites that support Ron Paul. Here is a brief description.

FMNN Editorial Challenge http://www.freemarketnews.com/contest.asp
WIN AN AMERICAN EAGLE GOLD COIN (ounce) for answering, in essay form, the question, "Is the mainstream media censoring Ron Paul?" If you believe this is taking place, then explain why, put it into a larger context, cite examples of what is going on, and whether it will be successful. Entries can range from 250 words to 2,500. Writing can be “punchy” or scholarly. Citations (at bottom of text) encouraged: both footnotes and links. Entries may appear within FMNN’s commentary section. FMNN commentators may participate, if they wish.

Ron Paul 2008 - Restoring the Founding Fathers American Dream

Ron Paul 2012 - Restoring the Founding Fathers American Dream

MI GOP wants Ron Paul OUT of debates!

Michigan GOP leader wants Paul barred from future debates
5/16/2007, 7:07 p.m. EDT
By JIM DAVENPORT
The Associated Press

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — The chairman of the Michigan Republican Party said Wednesday that he will try to bar Ron Paul from future GOP presidential debates because of remarks the Texas congressman made that suggested the Sept. 11 attacks were the fault of U.S. foreign policy.

Michigan party chairman Saul Anuzis said he will circulate a petition among Republican National Committee members to ban Paul from more debates. At a GOP candidates' debate Tuesday night, Paul drew attacks from all sides, most forcefully from former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, when he linked the terror attacks to U.S. bombings.

"Have you ever read about the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years," Paul said.

Anuzis called the comments "off the wall and out of whack."

"I think he would have felt much more comfortable on the stage with the Democrats in what he said last night. And I think that he is a distraction in the Republican primary and he does not represent the base and he does not represent the party," Anuzis said during an RNC state leadership meeting.

"Given what he said last night it was just so off the wall and out of whack that I think it was more detrimental than helpful."

Anuzis said his petition would go to debate sponsors and broadcasters to discourage inviting Paul.

Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign spokesman, said the candidate "is supporting the traditional GOP foreign policy. I think it's a shame when people try to silence the traditional conservative Republican standpoint."

After the debate Tuesday, Paul said he didn't' expect his remarks to end his campaign.

"The last time I got a message out about my position on the war it boosted us up by tens of thousands and I didn't change my position," Paul said. "I think the American people are sick and tired of this war and want it ended."

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.ssf?/base/news...

Please sign my petition to keep Ron Paul in the Michigan debates:

http://www.petitionsource.com/petition_details.php?pid=2

RE: my letter to Saul...

Dear Mr. Anuzis:
I'm writing to respond to your hasty position that you've taken against Congressman Ron Paul. For the benefit of our conservative party, and the political process in what is supposed to be a free country, I'm asking you to reconsider the position that you've taken.

Jim Davenport of the Associated Press, stated the following:
***"The chairman of the Michigan Republican Party said Wednesday he will try to bar presidential candidate Ron Paul from future GOP debates because of remarks the Texas congressman made that suggested the Sept. 11 attacks were the fault of U.S. foreign policy.***

Since when is a debate answer exercising Freedom of Speech the grounds for be barred from future debates? Congressman Paul simply restated information contained in the 9-11 Commission's Report (a report that Giuliani obviously failed to either read, or comprehend). Had he been given a fair amount of time in the debate, he would have been glad to expound on the idea that foreign policy of the past 50 years has contributed to the animosity of many Middle Eastern countries towards America.

***“Given what he said last night it was just so off the wall and out of whack that I think it was more detrimental than helpful,” Anuzis said.***
Do you disagree with the 9-11 Commission and think the report was 'off the wall'? What do you say to Giuliani's statement about Ron Paul's comment when he said, "I don't think I've ever heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for 9-11". Based on that comment, would it be fair to ask Giuliani if he's ever even read the 9-11 Report on the attack on his city?

Based on the credibility and accuracy of Dr. Paul's statement, would you now characterize Giuliani's statement as being the one, 'off the wall'?

As an American, I resent past and future suggested censoring of a viable, no-bull candidate who, given the chance, is not afraid to address the REAL issues at hand. I also resent the treatment of both a air force veteran, and a dedicated congressional represenatitive who was reelected to his seat in Congress this past year when many republicans were booted, and has served his country faithfully. Based on the voice of the American voters in the last election, I might suggest that the GOP has lost touch with their base, not Congressman Paul, as you stated. He's at least has the gumption to stand up and truly defend the Constitution of the United States so that I can write this letter to you.

***Anuzis said his petition would go to debate sponsors and broadcasters to discourage inviting Paul.***
This will be seen by most as an attempt to CENSOR a candidate who's popularity is bigger than you can manage. This is not about GOP leadership or major media picking the next President; this is about the American people picking the next President, Mr. Anuzis.

How about recent revelation that one of Giuliani's clients happens to be the News Corporation, owner of Fox News, and recent sponsor of the S.C. debates? Don't you see that as a bit of a conflict of interest? I'm sure the party base would like to knon how our state leadership feels about that? How do you think Giuliani's pro-gay and pro-abortion stance will help advance the so-called conservative agenda? This party looks and acts more like democrats than many dems do!

These are questions that I'll be raising to a number of people because I just don't understand how this party can be so behind a man that is so far out of whack with party ideals and so adamantly opposed to open dialogue, so early on in this race.

And finally, the polls vary, depending on who commissions them. How do you explain the numbers that Congressman Paul's getting considering he's not really been given a fair chance to debate squarely with any of the GOP candidates?

Ron Paul leads, has won, or placed 2nd in the following polls for the second debate. He also won, hands down, the first debate, based on the online polls.

Fox News Post -Debate Text Message Poll:
Romney 29%, Congressman Paul 25%, and Giuliani 19%.

ABCNews.com current poll results - still running:
Ron Paul 21,131; Mitt Romney 356, Giuliani 341.

MSNBC.com current poll results - still running after 33,723 votes: Ron Paul 47%; Romney 24%; Giulian 23%

I will be actively campaigning for for the inclusion of Dr. Paul in all future debates and pushing for all exposure of blatant media and/or attempts by the GOP of censorship. GOP leadership will be held accountable by the American people for the choices they make. Thank you.

Bill Kosloskey
Petoskey, MI

Restore the Foundations - "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?"