1.08.2010

rudy "9/11" giuliani forgets how he got his middle name

From the How Quickly They Forget Department, Rudolph L. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City who tried to build an entire national political career based on his lies about September 11, 2001, seems to have forgotten some basic facts.

Either Rudy doesn't remember 9/11, or he has forgotten who was the Resident of the White House on that fateful Tuesday. First this from ABC News:
What he [Obama] should be doing is following the right things that Bush did -- one of the right things he did was treat this as a war on terror. We had no domestic attacks under Bush. We've had one under Obama. Number two, he should correct the things that Bush didn't do right. Sending people to Yemen was wrong, not getting this whole intelligence thing corrected."

It's good to know at least a few people in the US mainstream media do remember 9/11, because they called Rudy on it, at which point he was forced to go on CNN and announce, yes, I do remember 9/11. From TPM:
Rudy Giuliani appeared on CNN this afternoon in an attempt to explain what he meant when he claimed that no domestic terrorist attacks happened under President George W. Bush.

"I usually say, 'We had no major domestic attacks under President Bush since September 11,'" he told Wolf Blitzer.

"I did omit the words, 'since September 11,' and I apologize for that," he went on. "I do remember September 11. In fact, Wolf, I remember it every single day and usually, frequently during the day."

. . .

Giuliani told Blitzer that he meant the Fort Hood shootings as that one attack that happened under Obama.

"Fort Hood was clearly an Islamic terrorist attack," he said. "He was clearly under the influence of Islamic terrorism."

He also said the anthrax attacks of 2001 don't count, because they never proven to be done in the name of "Islamic terrorism."

Video at TPM.

When Allan told me about this, my first thought was that Rudy would not be called out on this. It was quite commonplace in the US, at least when I still lived there, to hear that Bush had made the country so much safer than it was under Clinton. I distinctly recall reminding people who was in the White House when 9/11 happened, and hearing the reply, "Hmm, you're right, that's a good point," as if they had never thought of it.

6 comments:

redsock said...

Right-wingers also said that GWB had been president only 8-9 months when 9/11 happened and so he was barely in office, getting settled -- so 9/11 was Clinton's fault.

The first attack on the WTC (February 26, 1993) was also Clinton's fault, they say. Clinton had taken over the White House from GHWB 5 weeks earlier, so how could it be Bush's fault? Blame the guy sitting in the Oval Office. Duh.

redsock said...

Giuliani, March 16, 1994:

"Freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."

***

deang said...

I distinctly recall reminding people who was in the White House when 9/11 happened, and hearing the reply, "Hmm, you're right, that's a good point," as if they had never thought of it.

And it's only endless misrepresentation in the US media that causes USians to overlook something so obvious. Large numbers of USians not remembering that the 9/11 attacks happened under Bush and blaming it on Clinton is one of the most disturbing cases of mass brainwashing I can think of. I honestly think that right-wing politicians have advertising-like meetings in their think tanks where they hammer home their public relations strategy on things like this: "Okay, rule #1 is we have to keep driving home the idea that there were no terror attacks under Bush. And if people point out 9/11, we blame it on Clinton. After enough time passes, people won't remember who was in office."

redsock said...

I honestly think that right-wing politicians have advertising-like meetings in their think tanks where they hammer home their public relations strategy on things like this

Oh, it's been proven as fact -- with the actual instructions/talking points before media appearances, like on the Sunday gasbag shows, being leaked to progressive sites or mis-emailed.

They know what phrases to use, how to spin and twist -- and they all do it the exact same way. It's amazing effective.

L-girl said...

Instructions and talking points per se are not evil. They are necessary for good organization - from any POV.

Just to use one small example, in our WRSC meetings, we review our message all the time. When we have a big event coming up, or we know we'll be in the media spotlight because of a deportation order, we review our message and remind ourselves and each other of it.

There are many ways to tell any story. The government wants to shape the resisters story one way, and we want the media/public to hear the story another way (i.e. the truth). It's hard enough to do this - the government has a bit more resources and access to media than we do! - but if we're not organized and don't stay on message, it won't happen. So we coach ourselves and each other and remind ourselves what we want to focus on, what points we want to hammer home.

So I don't think it's the preparation of group messaging that's the problem. It's that the message is a lie and by repeating it often enough, and enough people allowing the lie to go unchallenged, it becomes accepted truth.

As Dean said, mass brainwashing. It's very, very disturbing.

redsock said...

More from Think Progress.