Posted on 09/27/2006 5:38:21 PM PDT by Vision
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani defended Bill Clinton on Wednesday over the former president's counterterrorism efforts, saying recent criticism on preventing the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is wrong. Political bickering over which president _ Clinton or George W. Bush _ missed more opportunities to prevent the attacks has been escalating since Clinton gave a combative interview on "Fox News Sunday" in which he defended his efforts to kill Osama bin Laden.
"The idea of trying to cast blame on President Clinton is just wrong for many, many reasons, not the least of which is I don't think he deserves it," Giuliani said in response to a question after an appearance with fellow Republican Charlie Crist, who is running for governor. "I don't think President Bush deserves it. The people who deserve blame for Sept. 11, I think we should remind ourselves, are the terrorists _ the Islamic fanatics _ who came here and killed us and want to come here again and do it."
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice challenged Clinton's claim that he did more than many of his conservative critics to pursue bin Laden, and she accused the Democrat of leaving no comprehensive plan to fight al-Qaida.
Giuliani said he believed Clinton, like his successor, did everything he could with the information he was provided.
"Every American president I've known would have given his life to prevent an attack like that. That includes President Clinton, President Bush," the former mayor said. "They did the best they could with the information they had at the time."
Giuliani also said a recently declassified report that said the Iraq war had become a "cause celebre" for Islamic extremists demonstrated the need to continue the fight there.
"The jihadists very much want a victory in Iraq. They feel that if they could defeat us in Iraq they will have a great victory for terrorism," Giuliani said. "What that should do is organize us to say if they want a big victory in Iraq then we have to deprive them of that victory."
Giuliani said he was "very interested in considering" a run for president but would not make a decision until after the November election.
Not only is Rudy's statement that the blame belongs on the Islamic fanatics true; it's smart politics to express support for the current and former President. The much-despised moderates who decide most Presidential Elections eat that stuff up.
Let's be honest: Every President since at least Nixon pussyfooted around with Islamic terrorists. Everyone misunderestimated what bin Laden and his psychopathic barbarians were capable of. I frankly do not care about what Clinton did or didn't do -- he is history. I am not even concerned about President Bush -- he will not give up fighting those b*st*rds until noon on January 20, 2009.
I care about who gets sworn in as our next President. I don't see anyone out there who is electable and will stay focused on the WOT except for Rudy. Let those who claim he has no chance live in their world of delusion -- it will not change anything.
Most who have pointed out Clinton's lax attitude toward terrorism only did so in response to the Disloyal Opposition's wartime efforts to slander the current president.
Newt is so 1990's. I give him no more of a shot than J. Danforth Quayle or wittle tommy daschle. Newt is a great choice for a nominee if we want Hillary in, though.
Unlikely that Senator Allen will do this. What he won't do is utter something as ludicrous and untrue as Sir Rudy:
Giuliani said he believed Clinton, like his successor, did everything he could with the information he was provided.
"Every American president I've known would have given his life to prevent an attack like that. That includes President Clinton, President Bush," the former mayor said outside a firehouse here. "They did the best they could with the information they had at the time."
New thread, same topic. :^)
Why are you guys surprised? After all, Rudy is very much like Clinton on a whole host of issues. In fact, he was a democrat until he decided to run for mayor of NYC.
It makes it a lot easier to work the trans-fat initiatives of the nation if the home folks aren't bugging you about that darn national security thing.
The Bush Administration and the Clinton sycophants are trading accusations.
That's the point, Clinton initiated a new round of accusations. The 911 commission with all its flaws should have been an act of closure. But Old Bill, couldn't take the very mild depiction in the "Path to 911". For Old Bill, all the blame must be on Bush.
"I tried and I failed" --- Forget the first three words, Old Bill.
Guiliani is totally wrong here.
Neither did Bush
Uh, because he was only in office a mere 7 months, started late because of the Gore hijacking, and had Clinton national security holdovers?
In 2008 candidates: Killery (D). Giuliani (R)!!!
Who would you vote for???
He's wrong. Clinton is still negligent and derelict in not stopping Islamofascism, which should have been taken care of after the original WTC bombing in 1993.
This is going to sink Guliani......
with about 20 posters on FR.
Love the geniuses on this thread who claim to hate the MSM while falling for their headlines EVERY TIME. Idiots.
let's see what happens when (if) he's asked. so far, no one in the republican political leadership has tried to "tag" Clinton with blame for 9-11.
Islamofascism really came into play during the Carter era.
Reagan was busy defeating the Soviet Union so resources wasn't allocated to terrorism. Still, he scared the bejeezus out of Gadhafi and turned Yassir Arafat from a full-blown terrorist into a moderate (who still supported terrorism but not openly)
Islamofascim didn't attack us during the Bush I years, and we all know what happened during Clinton.
From my conservative perspective, Giuliani defending Clinton is nothing more one liberal defending another liberal. I think Rudy actually admires Clinton's politics.
I agree Jenny. Enough of the finger pointing. United we stand; divided we fall.
Have you heard Newt speak lately? He's dead on about where this country needs to go.
Don't understand what you mean.
It's another misleading headline
The story should not have been captioned that way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.