South Carolina GOP Debate
UPDATED - Full Debate Wrap-Up From Bill Bradley: The moderators asked short, well-researched questions that weren't designed to draw attention to themselves. As entertaining as I find Chris Matthews to be, while he moved the Reagan Library debate along, he also obscured some of the candidates themselves.
It was a brisk debate. Here’s a brief take on its second half, with an overall view coming tomorrow.
The hoped for direct engagement between the two side by side leading candidates on the stage, Rudy Giuliani and John McCain, never occurred. There was some sniping between McCain and Mitt Romney, but the sharpest conflict turned out to be a great set-up for Giuliani, who was still struggling some with questions about his past liberalism and present support for the pro-choice position on abortion.
The second half of the debate centered on challenges to the candidates on some of their key policy positions, and then on their response to a hypothetical terrorist crisis.
Giuliani, as I mentioned, was challenged as a closet liberal, for his support of gay rights, pro-choice, and even arch-liberal Mario Cuomo for governor of New York in 1994. He countered that he was, in the view of George Will, the most conservative New York mayor in 50 years. Then he tried to turn it, saying that he is the best chance to win a general election, that he can beat Republican bete noire Hillary Clinton (who is nowhere near being the Democratic nominee yet), and that he is the one who has already shown he can lead in the war on terror.
John McCain, who has a more consistently conservative record of the two, said the key is who is best to lead against radical Islamic extremism, citing his knowledge of the military and long experience in the Senate and the Navy.
Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, wouldn’t apologize for raising taxes to build roads, noting that it was widely supported in his state.
Mitt Romney, not surprisingly, was hit for his past strong support for gay rights (he said in the ’90s that he would be a better friend of the gay rights movement than Ted Kennedy) and the pro-choice position on abortion. He countered that he had stood up in Massachusetts for life, traditional marriage, the death penalty, and abstinence.
Sam Brownback was hit for opposing the Iraq surge strategy and for backing a more liberal policy on immigration while calling himself Reaganesque. He countered that Reagan today would pull the country together on Iraq, and had supported amnesty on immigration, which he does not.
Tommy Thompson was hit for his backing of stem cell research. He said that the research shows great promise.
Giuliani said, somewhat ruefully, that he expects his position on abortion to attract attention. As it has ever since the debate on May 3rd, when he seemed quite diffident about the fate of Roe v. Wade, one way or the other. Personally, he said, he hates abortion but supports choice. When asked if that was like hating slavery but letting people own slaves, he not surprisingly disagreed. Millions of people of good conscience, he said, make a different choice. We have to keep government out of people’s personal lives, and must respect other people’s views. The key, he said, is to figure out how to reduce abortion and increase adoptions.
Asked how he would explain his hard line pro-life position to a rape victim impregnated by her rapist and forced to give birth to a resulting child, Brownback acknowledge it would be a very difficult situation. But for him, the question is this, is this child a person? If so, then it is entitled to life. Abortion is a procedure. This is a life. A beautiful child of a loving god.
Romney, it was noted, had said he was once pro-choice because of the bad experience of a relative. What would he say to to another such person if his appointee to the Supreme Court tipped the balance against abortion? Roe v. Wade, he replied, cheapened life. People must make the decision, not the court.
Listening to all this, anti-illegal immigration crusader Tom Tancredo got off a great line: I trust conversions on the road to Damascus, not the road to Des Moines.
Asked about his support for what the questioner called amnesty for illegal immigrants, McCain said he’s never supported amnesty and never would. People expect us to solve problem, he said, and we are close to bipartisan agreement to secure borders, establish a temporary worker program, and address the 12 million illegal immigrants already here. The would-be terrorist attackers of Fort Dix had expired visas, they did not come across our borders. McCain denied stepping away from issue, saying he is still heavily engaged, noting that over half the illegal crossings come through his state of Arizona.
Romney was confronted with a statement of his from last year in which he seemed to say that illegal immigrants already here can apply for legal status. He replied that McCain would give special treatment to those already here.
McCain, taking a shot at Romney, said he’s been consistent on campaign reform and abortion. I don’t change on even numbered years or for different offices I may be running for, he noted.
Giuliani was confronted with his past statement when running New York, that if you come here illegally and work hard, you’re what we want in this city.
Giuliani used humor to deflect, thanking Tancredo for saying he is soft on anything. The answer on immigration, he said, is tamper proof ID cards and fast databases, saying he has more experience with security than anyone on the stage, from running New York City to being a top official in the Department of Justice. We have to fix the problem, he said, so there is no giant underground for terrorists to hide in.
Then Ron Paul offered up the biggest set-up since the Olympic volleyball tournament, saying that 9/11 occurred because of how America conducts itself in the Middle East.
Giuliani, who was next, leaped all over that. That is a simply extraordinary statement that we invited 9/11 because we were attacking Iraq, he said. I’ve never heard it before and I have heard absurd statements. I ask him to withdraw the comment and apologize for it.
Which of course Paul would not do. I believe CIA is correct, he said, when they teach about blowback. Our blowback from the installation of the Shah of Iran in 1953 was the taking of hostages from our embassy in Tehran in 1979. We can’t do whatever we want around the world without consequence. What would we think if they did that to us?
Giuliani wanted another 30 seconds, but didn’t get them.
The subject was changed and handed off to McCain. What about the Confederate flag flying in front of South Carolina buildings, a question which drew boos from the audience? McCain said his support in 2000 was one of the worst examples of his political cowardice. After long negotiation, he noted, the flag doesn’t fly on top of the capital, it flies in front of it. Almost all parties believe a reasonable solution. I was wrong when I said it was state issue in 2000, he said, and I think it’s time we all moved on as this is a settled issue in South Carolina, drawing a big burst of applause.
Then the debate turned to a terrorist crisis in real time, with a scenario that could have been drawn from the hit series “24″, in which several successful attacks have occurred in the US and some suspects are now in hand
How aggressively should they be interrogated?
McCain said he would take responsibility for aggressive interrogation if he knew the information was available. But he said that torture does not gain more than what we lose. It’s not about the terrorists but about us. What kind of country we are. The more pain that is inflicted, the more they tell us what we want to know. If we agree to torture, we do ourselves great harm in world.
Others disagreed, as a questioner noted that some top CIA officials say that the most valuable intel can come from torture.
Giuliani said I would tell our people in Guantanamo to use every method they can think of. But they shouldn’t torture. I would tell them to do everything they can think of.
Romney said the key is prevention of terrorist attacks. I’m glad they’re at Gitmo, he said, where they have no access to the lawyers they get here. With a ticking bomb, the president must make the call. Enhanced interrogation techniques must be used. Not torture but enhanced techniques. The moderator clarified that enhanced techniques include so-called waterboarding.
Then the scenario advanced, with the president learning that a country had harbored the terrorist training camps. (Which actually was part of the plot on this season’s “24″.)
Tommy Thompson said that if there is good intel about the camps, he would invoke the Reagan policy of trust but verify. And then go in with all power necessary.
Brownback was asked if he would go to the UN first or just move on the intel? I wouldn’t go to the UN, he said. Is our primary concern American lives or our perception in the world? Everything must be done in our power to protect American lives.
Duncan Hunter said he would have a one minute conversation with the Secretary of Defense, telling him to get and verify the hard intel in an hour, then execute with special ops.
John McCain returned to the question of torture. Are enhanced techniques torture? Yes. He noted a sharp division in the debate between those who have served in the military and those who haven’t. If we do it, what happens to our people when they are captured? Veterans, he said, from top generals on down, support my position and I’m glad of it.
Tancredo said to applause, I’m looking for Jack Bauer (the hero of 24) at this time. When we go under, Western civilization goes under.
After that, there wasn’t much time left, and only a few interesting questions were posed before the debate simply ran out of time, with no closing statements.
The 10 of you, noted one of the moderators, could be members of same white male Republican country club. What does that say about the Republican Party?
That went to former national party chairman and Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore. He said he’d worked hard as party chairman to reach out to communities. There will be minorities running in the future. People have to judge those who stood up to run this time for president.
Romney was reminded of his reputation as “Flip Flop Mitt.” Told that he says he changes positions because he is “learning from experience,” he was asked to point to something that he changed his position on to a stance that wasn’t more popular with Republican base voters.
He replied that the issue was the No child left behind education program pushed through by President George W. Bush. I fought against the teachers unions, he said. I like testing in schools. The great civil rights issue of our time is what goes on in schools in the inner cities where kids don’t get education. He said he was proud he supported President Bush.
Then the debate just ran out of time.
*** [Bill's Halftime Report Below] ***
There is a fundamental problem with the format of 10 candidates and only 90 minutes. It is hard to focus. Very hard for a candidate to win, but a candidate can definitely lose.
Giuliani and McCain are side by side. Many are anticipating some direct engagement. None so far between the two leading candidates, but this debate is crisper than the Reagan Library affair on May 3rd, with the moderators grabbing less attention for themselves.
Some key questions have emerged:
Q. Why should we continue in Iraq when needed reform after reform never materializes from the Iraqi parliament?
McCain: If we don’t fight them there, they’ll follow us home. We must succeed and cannot fail. I will be the last man standing if necessary.
Q. Are there circumstances in which you would withdraw from Iraq without victory?
Romney: I won’t project failure. There is a global jihadist effort, to replace much of the world with a caliphate. Enormous impact on global struggle.
Q. You said that congressional Republicans wanting to see measurable progress by September are “fundamentally irresponsible” because that sets a deadline.
Giuliani: John McCain is correct. They do want to follow us here and have followed us here. Just last week, there was nearly a terrorist strike on Fort Dix. The enemy is planning to attack America all over world and inside this country.
Ron Paul notes that the 77% of Republicans opposing a time-line for withdrawal represent a shrinking party in the wake of Iraq problems, with over 60% of the country in favor of withdrawal. Reagan, he says, had said he would never turn tail in Lebanon, then pulled out after the death of 241 Marines, saying in his memoirs that he had underestimated the irrationality of Middle Eastern political dynamics.
Q. Would you deliver a preemptive strike on Iran if its nuclear weapons program proceeds?
Jim Gilmore: We have no choice other than to join up with other countries for serious sanctions against Iran. We have to have an honest discussion with the American people over the consequences of an Iranian nuclear weapon. A tough decision has to be made. We may have to in fact strike.
Q. Mitt Romney, called by some a flip-flopper, is asked about changes on taxes.
Romney: I won’t raise taxes. I didn’t as governor of Massachusetts. Washington is broken. The government has to be reorganized.
Q. John McCain, you opposed the 2001 tax cuts, now you support them. Are you serious?
McCain: I didn’t say I was wrong. I opposed them because we didn’t rein in spending. The tax cuts increased revenues. Now spending is out of control. We lost the 2006 elections not because of Iraq, but because we let spending get out of control. We spent money like a drunken sailor though I never knew a drunken sailor with the imagination of my colleagues.
Q. Spending in New York rose even before 9/11.
Giuliani: Actually, spending decreased in comparison to population. I lowered taxes 23 times. All in a place where it’s hard to do it. Half of all federal employees will retire in the next 10 years. I commit to not filling half of those positions.






Well, at least Fox was better than MSNBC. Otherwise there just isn’t enough time to focus.
Who impressed me as improved: Huckabee, Hunter. However I doubt the media will spend much time with either.
Ron Paul stepped in it big time… let’s see how the Paul diehards come on here and see what happens.
Huckabee had a good night. Fair tax sign me up. Congress spends more then Edwards at a beauty salon. Classic. Best funny line of the night. Ron Paul was at the wrong debate. I think he wanted the Democratic debate. The “blowback” has been going on since Mo man rode out of the desert 1400 years ago. So most improved Huckabee, loser… Paul, winner..non so far.
Will judge when Fred is on stage.
Yeh, Ron Paul lost——this coming from a neo-con site. You have no objectivity. One liners are dead and are for the automatons. Ron Paul shows the divide in the party and rest assured that if the major/neo-con media keeps shoving ‘candidates’ down the throats of Americans there will be a third party revolution or a democratic win. Then again maybe there will be a real revolution since Americans seem incapable of reform. Ron Paul won the debate because his opinions are substantive while the ‘big three’ are totally plastic.
Didn’t watch the festivities as “debates” with ten participants are a waste of time. Reading the recaps is more fun. Biggest surprise: How can it take anyone until tonight to figure out Ron Paul is a nut? Someone please initiate paired debates, rotating seeded cage matches, let’s get it on!
Hey, Thomas…. Bill Bradley’s not a neocon. He’s a Democrat. Read New West Notes…. You’re not doing your boy Paul any good with your brainless crap. Do some resaerch.
I agree with you guys. Our governments involvement in the Middle East is working out so well we should definitely expand the war to other countries. Of course Iran first…then maybe Syria and take it from there.
I mean, it’s a simple matter of hunting down and killing all the people in the world that “hate our freedom”. And if things go wrong from time to time or some people don’t like it and they end up “hating our way of life” we can kill them to. When has superior military force ever failed when invading unfriendly countries to fight against entrenched guerrila forces?
Nevermind, the fact that conservatives generally don’t believe the federal government has the competence to tie its on shoes, I’m sure this will work out. That Ron Paul is a nut!
Mr. Pierson would attempt to provoke one in engaging in tit-for-tat blogging or commentary but I would aver that what is brainless is the false dichotomy of the two party system. Mr. Pierson seems to love the status quo concerning foreign policy no matter what party holds the line but I would also aver that Mr. Pierson has done nothing for his country other than buying and selling as he was exhorted to do by the commander and chief after 9/11. I mean come on, aren’t we all a hero after all? Mr. Pierson and his ilk are the problem with America.
Fred Thompson won again.
Did you see that video?
Ron Paul’s statement that 9-11 happened because we were bombing Iraq is perhaps the single stupidest thing I have ever heard a Presidential candidate say in public debate. Just unbelievable!
Ron Paul was not at the wrong partys debate. He is a republican and is more off a conservative than the other 9 candidates. He will bring back many people that have left the party in the last 20 years as the GOP moved away from its small governments/antiwar roots.
I am watching the Fox News post debate coverage and everyone is appalled with Ron Paul’s moronic comment about 9/11. Michael Steele said Paul is “done.” Let’s hope so.
Paul’s arguments sound amazingly like Lindbergh’s before WWI.
As Giuliani so eloquently said after the debate, “they hate us because of our freedom”. You can desecrate their holy sites, rape their women, blow the limbs off their children, turn their homes over to their enemies, and starve a whole country for 10 years, and they won’t bat an eye. But mention to a Muslim that someone on the opposite side of the planet has Miranda rights, and it drives them into a holy fury.
Giuliani is the one living in a fantasy world if he really believes all this. The “they hate us for our freedom” line has been a known joke for years now.
Those who are trying to attack Ron Paul are doing unjustice to the events that preceded 9/11, such as the USS Cole bombing or Kenia embassy attacks. Really, you should rewind your debate tapes and hear what Paul was actually saying, and what the Fox News commentator interjected afterwards.
Ron Paul offered a distinct and precise prescription of America’s foreign policy ills.
While the U.S. did not directly cause 9-11, Paul argues that by provoking Muslims around the world, American opened herself to attack. This is not an unpatriotic position to assume, it is logical, well-reasoned, and quite plausible. Gulliani’s attack on Paul was un-related to the factual arguments Paul made, and were based primarily on emotion. Paul made the better claim, this being said, I lean toward Tanc.
Ron Paul reveals a split in the GOP?
Only if you call single digit percentage points a split!
The War Against Islamic Imperialism is the single greatest threat Western Civilization faces, and sadly, I don’t think any of the current GOP Candidates get it.
I hope Newt and Fred can inject some sense into this race.
After that remark I am surprised that the ferretlike Ron Paul is even allowed to walk the streets without a minder and a leash.
Man, you Paulistas have really latched onto a real winner. I mean did you go out looking for a person with zero chances or did it just happen to you.
I’d say you should be embarrased but you really should be ashamed to give a penny or a minute of your lives to this loser.
I suppose you folks think the CIA are all nuts as well when they describe “blowback” from American foreign policy decisions. Ron Paul was simply stating the obvious: interventionist foreign policy has it’s consequences. This is as immutable as the law of gravity.
What is our education system coming to? Doesn’t anyone study history any more?
The “blowback” has been coming from the Middle East for 1400 years since Islam was founded. Spanish foreign policy must have been harsh or else the Moors wouldn’t have attacked them and France? Right? Or maybe the Ottoman empire just didn’t like the foeign policy of all the surrounding christian kingdoms that it destroyed.
The western world has been at war with some of the teachings of Islam for almost 1400 years. Those teachings and our vaule systems are completely at odds with each other.
Since WW1 the Islamic world has not been strong enough to fight us . Now however because of liberal groupthink in our society and political correctness the Islamists have seen and exploited a weakness and the war rages on. Hopefully not for another 1400 years.
No, Mike Lee, Ron Paul was not stating the obvious. He was being a psychologically unsophisticated moral fool. Certainly the phenomenon of “blowback” exists, but it in no way excuses 9-11. That would be like saying a woman deserves to be raped becuase she is wearing a dress. You Ron Paul Cultists sound “true believers”. Start reading Eric Hoffer and stop wasting your time on someone so unprepared for what he is doing.
Bill, Arthur as well as the fellow oxygen-thieves,
You would style yourselves as wise discussing things concerning the history of Islam while you rally around your 9/11 flag but the sub-rosa of the entire issue, stated as such by Generals on the field as well as Senators, concerns Israel. The war is about Israel, not Islam. The surreptitious goal of this war is to secure the borders of Israel, nothing more. We are the goon on the play ground taking commands from the nerd who does the goon’s homework. If you have the temerity to use the moniker ‘anti-semite’ then know that you are also calling those Generals and Senators the same. They can’t all be ‘anti-semites’ But since I know this will fall on deaf ears as I also believe that this election will see the return of the status quo—that is the two faced coin of the dems/reps, I can only hope, along with so many others, that we have a military takeover so that this country can return to the republic.
“along with so many others” — well, yes if you are using your toes as well as your fingers to count them up.
Ron Paul did not excuse 9/11 in any way, nor did he say we deserved it. He said that our actions there over the last few decades lead to them attacking us the way they did.
All you people are basing this on emotion and the “we can do no wrong” mentality. We live with the consequences of our actions and 9/11 was the result of many of our actions over the years. Again, not sayng we deserved it, but to say we did nothing to lead to that day is foolish.
See also:
The Ron Paul Internet Dilemma
http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/12850/guest-voice-the-ron-paul-internet-dilemma/
Romney, Paul, Giuliani Won SC Debate – Fox News Viewers
http://hammer2006.blogspot.com/2007/05/romney-paul-giuliani-won-sc-debate-fox.html
VIDEO: Ron Paul vs. Rudy Giuliani
http://hammer2006.blogspot.com/2007/05/video-ron-paul-vs-rudy-giuliani.html
It’s a matter of simple logic.
What happens when you intervene between a couple fighting drunks at a bar?
You can get punched.
This is not to say you should get punched, but that you may have a reasonable expectation of the violence turning on you. This is all Congressman Paul stated, and he is correct. His conservative position is refreshing among all the liberal voices on stage. I say liberal because the interventionist policy they advocate is liberal, in its roots, application, and chances of working.
I want Death-Cage-Debates, two go in, one comes out. The ten person lineup is a total waste of time. Congressman Crackpot reminds me of Barney Fife, without the bullet. Mitt reminds me of Data. I always liked Data, even if he wasn’t human. Tommy Thompson reminds me of a recently deceased tree. If you were to ask me about Gilmore’s execution last night, I would say I’m in favor of it. Brownback has a real shot at Assistant Undersecretary of the Black Lung program, or something similar. Terrible Tommy Tancredo is a really a nice guy (he’s from my home state), and would make a good post in that fence he wants to build. The only thing missing from McCain’s outfit was several steelies to click together in his hand. Huckabee has promise as he can name a jam after himself. Rudy is a one-trick pony, but it is one hell of a trick. Duncan Hunter doesn’t remind me of anything, which is not a good sign. He is competent, thoughtful, and has a lot of good positions, but seems like the second stringer who never quite gets in the game. A good VP candidate?
Oh well, it’s early, and several of them show some promise. At the very least we can say, “Nine out of ten Republican candidates are on America’s side in the War on 7th Century Nutbags.” That’s reassuring.
Great Page! Should be required reading for all America!!
Please consider adding a link to my homepage, The Internet Radio Network. At the IRN you can listen for free to 25 of America’s top talk show via Streaming Audio…
http://netradionetwork.com
This debate was done so much better than MSNBC & Chris Matthews. I don’t think John McCain helped himself too much last night. I don’t think you should go against a fellow Republican but the Republicans need to go after the Democrats and their policies. I think Mitt Romney won the debate. He is able to think on his feet no matter what questions he is asked. Seems intelligent, honest and Presidential.
@Mike Wallace
True that. Most ‘conservatives’ today are simply Wilsonian Democrats. I think it is not too bold to state that ‘conservatives’ have picked up the conservative label in the same way FDR took up the liberal label in the 1930s.
I thought that Tancredo, Hunter, and Huckabee were the winners of the debate.
Ron Paul won every poll out there by a landslide. On ABCNEWS.com he got 20000 of 23000 votes cast. On Fox he came in 2nd but they are saying Guiliani won?
If you guys think only lefties are anti-war, the GOP is going to be the one suffering the repurcussion in the form of a mushroom cloud in ’08.
Our policy against terrorists is like doing brain surgery with a sledge hammer. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. These people have been fighting for 1300 years and they’ll be fighting 1300 more. Get our guys out. We look like fools….bogged down fools with a cowboy mentality. Bush’s policies haved played right into their hands.
Once again, Ron Paul speaks the truth and the GOP establishment fumes.
The “mainstream” Republican Party is not split on Iraq: it is committed to extending supraconstitutional neo-Wilsonian national building as it bangs the drums of war for its neighbor to the East.
No one looking at the actual historical record can seriously deny that our post-WWII history of interventionism in Iraq and Iran have helped to precipitate the current imbroglio. Intervention begets more intervention, in addition to the necessary political bromides to support such.
Too bad that more Republicans (and Democrats) don’t even pay lip service to our governing document, much less believe in its principles.
Given the naked post-debate posturing to have “top-tier only” debates in the future, I guess the political process can get back to what it does best: widespread intellectual obfuscation and rampant emotional fear-mongering in the pursuit of raw power.
I’m voting to restore our republic. I’m voting for Ron Paul, seemingly the only one of 10 repubs running that actually reads history.
Go Ron Paul GO!
Once upon a time there was a myth of sympathy between libertarians and conservatives. It was said they’re basically going in the same direction, just different degrees.
So instead sites like this endorse Socialist Democrat Giuliani and ridicule Paul.
Ron Paul spoke the truth. That is why he is considered a loser here, because honest politians are not wanted and libertarian ideas are not wanted.
So, they cheat here by taking Paul out of the poll and including non-candidates even.
I wonder if Mr. Giuliani would ever engage in genuine debate with Rep. Ron Paul. A true debate. An exchange of real ideas, rather than an exchange of cheap sound-bites. I find it hard to believe that a man who is seeking his party’s nomination for POTUS has never heard of “Blowback”. This concept has been mentioned in several different credible sources (including the 911 Commission Report, and by our “own” CIA), as a major root of Islamic hatred towards the government of this country. Some very smart people seem to accept blowback as more than theoretical possibility. Perhaps, Mr. Giuliani would do well to read the 911 report as Mr. Paul has.
Before Mr. Giuliani, or any other candidate, deserves my vote for Chief Executive- that person needs to show that he or she understands that actions taken by this government (overtly by its elected officials, or covertly executed by non-elected and non-accountable agencies like the CIA, et al.) can, and do, have dire consequences for its citizens.
Rep. Ron Paul raised excellent concerns during Tuesday’s Columbia, SC debate concerning the effects of the US Government’s failed Wilsonian foreign policy. Mr. Giuliani simply dismissed those concerns by playing dumb, responding “I don’t think I’ve heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th.”
Do we really need another vapid presidential candidate? It seems that we’ve had quite our fill over the past few election cycles. A president who refuses to consider cause and effect when making policy decisions is inherently dangerous, and will only put more innocent Americans in the crosshairs of an increasingly irrational enemy.
Why are the GOP trying to silence Ron Paul? Isnt it a democracy?
Please answer.
The 9/11 Commission report says exactly what Ron Paul stated. I guess he read it and Guilaini didnt. As well as FBI and CIA. In 1996 Bin Laden said it too. Wake up man. Guilaini and Fox tried to win a debate with an emotional response to an emotional subject. The FACTS show clearly Guilaini is not fit to be our president. Check out Part 2 of the report.
2. The Foundation of the New Terrorism
2.1 A Declaration of War
2.2 Bin Ladin’s Appeal in the Islamic World
2.3 The Rise of Bin Ladin and al Qaeda (1988-1992)
2.4 Building an Organization, Declaring War on the United States (1992-1996)
2.5 Al Qaeda’s Renewal in Afghanistan (1996-1998)
Source:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/
Have you or will you read the 9/11 report? Probably not because Fox knows you can only handle a soundbite that is catchy.
Here is a newspaper article on the PBS website from Bin Laden in 1996, five years BEFORE 9/11!
The following text is a fatwa, or declaration of war, by Osama bin Laden first published in Al Quds Al Arabi, a London-based newspaper, in August, 1996. The fatwa is entitled “Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places.” http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
Wake up man. The media is not telling the truth! If they were they would be giving Paul a fair chance and would point this out! There not! There are not reporting that Ron Paul has won a majority of the online polls, including coming in second in their text poll. If Guilaini was winning they would not shut up about it. Guilaini wants to use 9/11 in his favor and he does not even know the Facts! If he does not know why we are being attack how can he be president and lead this country? He can’t. McCain is a mere blip on the radar. The top two candidates, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. Period.
All not worthy of the office … We need someone who seeks to do what is best for America not stroke egos
Go Ron Paul!!!!
Ron Paul did great. The rest might as well have been democrats with their Wilsonian Interventionist ideas.
Ron has struck fear into the hearts of the GOP, forcing them to address issues they want to avoid. Paul is anti-abortion so they can’t criticize him on that, he’s anti-illegal immigration so they can’t criticize him on that. The only thing left is 9/11 sloganeering which is the standard refuge of a candidate out of real ideas.
It’s Fred’s to lose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L92d0ioaArU