was Rudy Gulliani the Jessica Lynch of 9/11?

[Nattydread]

This is a serious question. I'm trying to figure what this guy did that was beyond the call of his duty? Can anyone explain?

Because I know of no Mayor (Democratic or Republican) who would not act in that situation in a way outside thr normal everyday routine.

Just what did this guy do to deservedly profit ($$) so much from this incident?
________
RedHairedPleasure (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/RedHairedPleasure/)

[WantaghDem]

I did not like Giuliani before 9/11 - and not because of party politics; he really isn't a Republican. And I don't like many of his policies today, ther.

But he did something that the president was unable or unwilling to do on 9/11: he was PRESENT.

His brand-new emergency communications center was destroyed in the tower, and he lost some of that staff. He then went to the backup command center, and while he was there it was damaged enough to necessitate evacuation. Once evacuated, he set up a third command post, and was continually visible to his people throughout the course of the crisis.

He went on TV tirelessly, without preparation, and was blunt, frank, and most of all, extremely helpful. He led in a moment of severe crisis, and in a vacuum that was created by the conspicuous absence of our supposed national leader.

Unlike Bush, Giuliani appeared again and again to advise, reassure, calm, direct and lead not only NY, but, it turned out, our nation. HE was the leader of this country in those 36-48 hours, not the coward who turned and ran away, appearing only briefly once or twice to give his deer-in-the-headlights, Poppy-said-this-would-be-easy, scared scared scared ignorant appearances. In that first day, Bush helped no one, he led no one, he calmed no one, he was not the president.

Giuliani could have easily repaired to NJ to direct the situation from across the river. He could have made statements about "security" and "continuity of government" - like the Coward from Crawford. Giuliani did not. He led. He stayed. He risked. He was present.

I hope this helps, nattydread.
________
Vaporite Solo Vaporizer (http://vaporizer.org)

[csense]

I'm not sure if I want our president placing himself in harms way. Wouldn't seem prudent.

[WantaghDem]

At THAT juncture, I say it WOULD have been prudent....even GOOD for AMERICA.
________
BODY SCIENCE (http://bodyscience.ws/)

[NYIndependence]

Quote:he really isn't a Republican
He's a Goldwater Republican. I wouldn't come right out and say that he isn't a Republican, but he definitely takes some liberal stances. It's good to see a politician who thinks for himself.

To build on what you said, Giuliani returned the Saudi Prince's check upon his statement that the United States should reevaluate its forgn policy as a result of 9/11. There is a perception abroad, particularly in the ern hemisphere, whether justified or not, that Americans' only concern is thr personal wealth. Giuliani giving back a donation to his economically-strapped city in the interest of national dignity was a positive image internationally.

I've noticed very pessimistic statements from natty regarding people who "just do thr job". Just because someone is getting paid to do something doesn't mean that thr career is not heroic or noteworthy. Technically, the rescue workers on September 11th were just doing thr jobs. The widows of those who perished will get donations from various charities, so why should anyone honor them or express sympathy?
________
glass bong (http://glassbongs.org/)

[WantaghDem]

....can think whatever one wants about that check. I, like a lot of people I know, think that by the time of the check incident, Rudy was back to bng the self-serving, self-promoting, self-aggrandizing 24/7 politician that he always was. And whatever else it was, that was a calculated political ploy to capitalize not only on the unbelievably strong anti-Arab sentiment coursing through America at the time, as well as a way to try to nip any international (or domestic) examination/criticism of America's atrocious international record.

The Prince was not bng anti-American, as any sane intelligent person knew at the time, and the rest of America should know by now. His timing was poor, and he (to use a Bushism) misunderestimated the sentiment of the American people - rather, the sentiment of the few people who attempt every day to wright the sentiment of the American people - and also thr capacity for rational thought and reflection at a time like that. CLEARLY the Prince was attempting to help, and at the same time doing a poor PR job.

Rudy's returning of the check can never be fairly evaluated, since so much accrued to him as a result; and since, at the time, he was bng assured by the Bushies that a great deal of financial assistance would be forthcoming from Washington; a promise now famously and coldheartedly broken from the man to whom more accrued politically - and none of it deservedly - than anyone else as a result of 9/11.
________
MOBIL ECONOMY RUN (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Mobil_Economy_Run)

[NYIndependence]

I don't think the comment was anti-American, but it was obviously inappropriate. He suggested that America should reexamine its position on the Middle . Essentially, he was telling us to stop supporting Israel and this will never happen again. That message was wrong then as it is now.
________
vapormatic vaporizer (http://www.vaporshop.com/vapormatic-vaporizer.html)

[WantaghDem]

That's not exactly how the message was interpreted at the time. What was thought at the time was that the Prince was saying that the US brought 9/11 on themselves with thr actions all over the Middle .

Your comment about "stop supporting Israel and this will never happen again" is only incorrect in that ONLY re-evaluating our policies towards Israel won't do the trick.

Now that we have two years distance, it may be easier for some of the more emotional among us to hear this: whether or not you agree that they have legitimate grievances against us, the people who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks do in fact claim specific grievances against the United States. It is rubbish to say simply that "they hate us" or "they hate our freedoms."

Agree or not, these people spent years carefully laying out the specific things that they said the US did that they had a problem with. Specifically, in bin Laden's case, his grievances were (remember, you can agree or disagree WITH them, but it is a fact that this is what his complaints were with the US prior to 9/11):

1. United States' unqualified support for Israel, no matter to what extremes they go in responding to - and in provoking - Palestinian attacks.

2. United States' occupation of the holy land of Saudia Arabia, its flouting of centuries-old traditions, and its lack of respect of certain holy places.

3. United States' unqualified support of the brutal and repressive government of Saudi Arabia.

4. United States' abandonment of Afghanistan once the US sponsored jihad succeeded in ousting the Soviets.

bin Laden, over the course of several years, made it plain that this were his grievances, and that he would attack first United States interests (later, he included troops, and finally civilians) until these issues were resolved.

bin Laden was CREATED and FUNDED by the United States. Prior to 9/11 he did not express the desire to DESTROY the US - he expressed the intention to attack us if his grievances were ignored.

Which, by the way, they were.
________
Kid paxil (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/paxil/)

[NYIndependence]

Quote:What was thought at the time was that the Prince was saying that the US brought 9/11 on themselves with thr actions all over the Middle .
Quote:1. United States' unqualified support for Israel, no matter to what extremes they go in responding to - and in provoking - Palestinian attacks.
Like I said, support of Israel

Quote:2. United States' occupation of the holy land of Saudia Arabia, its flouting of centuries-old traditions, and its lack of respect of certain holy places.
American presence at the Prince Sultan Air Base was at the pleasure of the Saudi royal family (in fact, they requested it). So, I find it hard to believe that the Saudi prince was referencing this when he mentioned American forgn policy.

Quote:3. United States' unqualified support of the brutal and repressive government of Saudi Arabia.
Again, the Prince was certainly not referencing this when he spoke of America's policy abroad. To reference this would have meant criticizing his own record.

Quote:4. United States' abandonment of Afghanistan once the US sponsored jihad succeeded in ousting the Soviets.
The Saudis were just as guilty of this. After literally meeting the United States dollar for dollar in support of the Mujahideen, they had little more to do with Afghanistan than the United States.

So, the only thing he could have been referencing was, like I said, American support of Israel.
________
Chrysler Centura (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Chrysler_Centura)

[WantaghDem]

You completely misunderstood my post. When I listed those numbered items, I wasn't referring to the Saudi Prince....in fact, it's quite clear from my post that I was listing OSAMA BIN LADEN'S grievances against the US.

YOU, however, read it incorrectly, and responded to me as if I were saying those were what the Prince complained about. Which, clearly, I wasn't saying. Which, apparently, you'll spin and say you weren't wrong, or else it was ME who was "unclear."

You further compound your mistake by "arguing" with me over the points. I made it even MORE CLEAR that I was not advancing anyone's position, but merely STATING what grievances led to bin Laden's ever-escalating attacks on US interests, and, eventually, to 9/11.

In your haste to "get" me, you have once again appeared to be a less than careful student.
________
Medical marijuana (http://medicalmarijuana.us/)

[NYIndependence]

Relax, I wasn't trying to "get" you. If I wanted to "get" you, I would have given "strikes" for each statement you made, like some other fellow I know
________
Mercedes-Benz E-Class specifications (http://www.mercedes-wiki.com/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_E-Class)

[WantaghDem]

....I don't necessarily like to be proven right....as you have done just now.

You misunderstood my post, and then you went after it (albt mildly, for you) in an attempt to show me where I was "wrong."

However, you were the one playing that role at that time. And I predicted that you would avoid owning up to this mistake, which you immediately confirmed.

A good student isn't one who gets "high grades." The good student is the one who says, "OK, I understand where I made my mistake....acknowledging this will make it harder to do the next time..."
________
WWW.VAPORIZER.NET (http://www.vaporshop.com)