Giuliani: No 'Successful Radical Islamic' US Terror Attacks Before Obama

[ogibillm]

Stop lying, Giuliani was dead on,

he was unequivocally wrong. in the eight years before obama became president there were multiple islamic terror attacks in the united states. that is historical fact.

you understand this isn't a matter of opinion, right? Giuliani claimed there were no - as in zero - islamic terror attacks in the united states for the eight years of the bush presidency. if we give him the benefit of the doubt and believe his comments actually meant 'after 9/11' HE IS STILL WRONG

so why are you lying pretending he was not incorrect?

Look, Giuliani is unlike you an expert in this. He knows what he was saying.

then why did he choose to lie, and why do you support the lie?

He was talking to people smarter than you are, girlfriend. Let me explain women to you.

how smart or dumb the audience is does not change that what he said was a lie - and smart people recognize a lie for what it is.

however he seemed to have struck gold with you - someone that will defend a lie after it has been proven false.

 

[kaz]

Giuliani would have been such a great president and the world wouldn't have to suffer from Obama, the Muslim gay... How come Republicans dumped him in Iowa and traded for a crazy loser McCain?...

I guess you've forgotten. Guiliani was pretty much driven out of New York for his crazy antics, especially his wife and his mistress and all that public personal crap, and had long been discredited within the Republican Party, long before he disgraced himself at this year's Republican Convention.

Um ... sure, Mrs. Mao ... sure ...

 

[Seawytch]

Stop lying, Giuliani was dead on,

he was unequivocally wrong. in the eight years before obama became president there were multiple islamic terror attacks in the united states. that is historical fact.

you understand this isn't a matter of opinion, right? Giuliani claimed there were no - as in zero - islamic terror attacks in the united states for the eight years of the bush presidency. if we give him the benefit of the doubt and believe his comments actually meant 'after 9/11' HE IS STILL WRONG

so why are you lying pretending he was not incorrect?

Look, Giuliani is unlike you an expert in this. He knows what he was saying. After 9/11, there were no significant terrorist organization attacks until Obama. He wasn't talking to chicks like you who want to word parse what he said, you'll never be satisfied with anything he said because you're a liar.

Yet you endlessly whore for the party who classified San Bernardino "workplace violence" and wouldn't classify Dallas as a hate crime and change "allah" to "god" in 9/11 calls in Orlando.

You are a l-i-a-r. Argue his point, stop bull shitting and chick word parsing how he phrased it

What are Guliani's "expert" credentials? And no, he doesn't know what he's "saying".

2002 Los Angeles Airport shooting

On July 4, 2002, Hesham Mohamed Hadayet opened fire at Los Angeles International Airport, killing two and injuring four. Hadayet, a 41-year-old Egyptian national, died after being shot by an airport security guard.

Prior to his immigration to the United States, Egyptian authorities accused him of belonging to the terrorist organization, Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (though he denied this charge). The FBI concluded that Hadayet’s killing spree was a terrorist act, but he acted alone and hoped to influence U.S. government policy toward Palestine.

2002 Beltway snipers

In October 2002, John Allen Muhammad and his accomplice, 17-year-old Lee Boyd Malvo, randomly gunned down 10 people in Washington. They were arrested by police and SWAT officers on Oct. 24.

The snipers’ motives were myriad. Malvo drew sketches depicting his acts as jihad and testified that Muhammad, a member of the Nation of Islam, lectured him on the religion. He also said Muhammad wanted to start a revolution over "the continued oppression of black people."

A Virginia court found Muhammad guilty of engaging in an act of terrorism, and the incident is listed as a major terrorism case on the FBI’s website. Muhammad was executed in 2009 and Malvo is currently serving a life sentence.

2006 Seattle Jewish Federation shooting

On July 28, 2006, Naveed Afzal Haq killed one woman and injured five others at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle.

A witness told the Associated Press that Haq declared himself "a Muslim American, angry at Israel" before opening fire. FBI officials said he was not acting part of a terrorist group, but "acting out some kind of antagonism toward this particular organization." The attack was ultimately classified as a hate crime by the county prosecutor.

In 2014, however, the City of Seattle included the shooting as an example of an incident that fits "into the terrorist mold" while the New America Foundation lists it as a "violent jihadist attack," because Haq claimed to be motivated by opposition to U.S. actions.

2006 University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill attack

In March 2006, UNC graduate Mohammad Reza Taheri-azar drove an SUV onto campus, injuring nine pedestrians.

He turned himself in following the attack and sent several letters to UNC’s student newspaper from jail declaring his intentions to exact revenge for Muslims. "I was aiming to follow in the footsteps of one of my role models, Mohammad Atta, one of the 9/11/01 hijackers, who obtained a doctorate degree," he wrote in one letter.

UNC students were divided over whether Taheri-azar’s actions constituted an act of terror. The FBI declined to comment on whether it was investigating links to terrorism, the New York Times reported in 2006.

{Kaz pretends to ignore me so someone will have to bump}

 

[kaz]

Stop lying, Giuliani was dead on,

he was unequivocally wrong. in the eight years before obama became president there were multiple islamic terror attacks in the united states. that is historical fact.

you understand this isn't a matter of opinion, right? Giuliani claimed there were no - as in zero - islamic terror attacks in the united states for the eight years of the bush presidency. if we give him the benefit of the doubt and believe his comments actually meant 'after 9/11' HE IS STILL WRONG

so why are you lying pretending he was not incorrect?

Look, Giuliani is unlike you an expert in this. He knows what he was saying.

then why did he choose to lie, and why do you support the lie?

He was talking to people smarter than you are, girlfriend. Let me explain women to you.

how smart or dumb the audience is does not change that what he said was a lie - and smart people recognize a lie for what it is.

however he seemed to have struck gold with you - someone that will defend a lie after it has been proven false.

Word parsing what he said and attacking him for what he didn't mean is you lying, not him.

So seriously, if he had said "From seven and a half years, actually just under seven and a half years for chicks like ogibillm who are going to word parse this, until Obama took office, there were a few scattered random individuals, but actual terrorist organizations did not successfully execute attacks in the United States."

Then you'd have been OK with what he said? First of all, sure you would, actually you'd word parse that because you're a chick. And second of all, he did say that. He just didn't cater to lairs, he assumed we were intelligent enough to grasp it and for those of you not intelligent or honest enough to grasp it, he didn't care.

Word

 

[OKTexas]

You purposefully posted a link with a lying assed title and an out of context quote.

You never fucking learn, cowboy...shooting from the LIP with blanks is downright STUPID! Both the title and the quote were directly from the article. If you have an issue with that take it up with ABC, dummy!

Because you want it to be so does not make it so, fool! Your judgment is clouded and prejudiced. Even your quote in my signature line displays the depth of your perception of the world around you! Your measure has been taken and found wanting, Tex!

The in context quote I provided was also from the article shit head, it matched the video in the article, you and ABC are just hacks trying to spin reality into propaganda. At least ABC chose to provide the real quote in the article, you chose to ignore it and get all pissy when you're called on it. So little boy, feel free to keep lying and spinning and I'll keep pointing it out and providing the truth.

 

[ogibillm]

he was unequivocally wrong. in the eight years before obama became president there were multiple islamic terror attacks in the united states. that is historical fact.

you understand this isn't a matter of opinion, right? Giuliani claimed there were no - as in zero - islamic terror attacks in the united states for the eight years of the bush presidency. if we give him the benefit of the doubt and believe his comments actually meant 'after 9/11' HE IS STILL WRONG

so why are you lying pretending he was not incorrect?

Look, Giuliani is unlike you an expert in this. He knows what he was saying.

then why did he choose to lie, and why do you support the lie?

He was talking to people smarter than you are, girlfriend. Let me explain women to you.

how smart or dumb the audience is does not change that what he said was a lie - and smart people recognize a lie for what it is.

however he seemed to have struck gold with you - someone that will defend a lie after it has been proven false.

Word parsing what he said and attacking him for what he didn't mean is you lying, not him.

what he said was not true. should we not take mr. Giuliani at his word, or should we just assume that what he says is false and that he is incapable of expressing his intended meaning himself and must rely on dishonest people like yourself that have no scruples about defending a lie to tell is what he 'actually' meant?

 

[ogibillm]

You purposefully posted a link with a lying assed title and an out of context quote.

You never fucking learn, cowboy...shooting from the LIP with blanks is downright STUPID! Both the title and the quote were directly from the article. If you have an issue with that take it up with ABC, dummy!

Because you want it to be so does not make it so, fool! Your judgment is clouded and prejudiced. Even your quote in my signature line displays the depth of your perception of the world around you! Your measure has been taken and found wanting, Tex!

The in context quote I provided was also from the article shit head, it matched the video in the article, you and ABC are just hacks trying to spin reality into propaganda. At least ABC chose to provide the real quote in the article, you chose to ignore it and get all pissy when you're called on it. So little boy, feel free to keep lying and spinning and I'll keep pointing it out and providing the truth.

the truth is there is no context that makes guiliani's statement true.

 

[OKTexas]

You purposefully posted a link with a lying assed title and an out of context quote.

You never fucking learn, cowboy...shooting from the LIP with blanks is downright STUPID! Both the title and the quote were directly from the article. If you have an issue with that take it up with ABC, dummy!

Because you want it to be so does not make it so, fool! Your judgment is clouded and prejudiced. Even your quote in my signature line displays the depth of your perception of the world around you! Your measure has been taken and found wanting, Tex!

The in context quote I provided was also from the article shit head, it matched the video in the article, you and ABC are just hacks trying to spin reality into propaganda. At least ABC chose to provide the real quote in the article, you chose to ignore it and get all pissy when you're called on it. So little boy, feel free to keep lying and spinning and I'll keep pointing it out and providing the truth.

the truth is there is no context that makes guiliani's statement true.

Context proves the op and the ABC headline a lie, of course you're good with their lies, aren't you?

 

[mudwhistle]

According to Rudi "the Pride of New York" Giuliani there were no attacks carried out in the US by Islamic terrorists until President Obama was elected. Off the top of my head, I came up with two (2); 1993 world Trade Center bombing and the calamitous Twin towers attack on 9/11/2001 when that IDIOT Giuliani was Mayor of New York! He even ran for president waving his credentials of leadership reminding everyone of his mayoral prowess by repeating 9/11 several hundred times daily!

Here is what he claimed while on the stump for trump:

"“Before Obama came along, we didn’t have any successful radical Islamic terrorist attack inside the United States,” Giuliani said at an event for Donald Trump in Ohio."
Giuliani Claims No Successful 'Radical Islamic' Attacks in US Before Obama

Such are the type of people Trump and his campaign obtain to endorse their "efforts".

Republicans like Gulliani are trying very hard to erase 9/11......they will remove it from history books if they are ever in a position to, just like the Republican leaders in Texas have tried to erase slavery from school textbooks.

Texan mom wins fight against textbook that 'erased' slavery

Trump and his Putin loving family should never be allowed in the White House, not even for a tour.

Rudin mentioned the at least 8 years prior to Obama’s first attack was what he was focusing on. Measures by Homeland Security under Bush eliminated the threat. Obama has removed most of those measures and thus we are being attacked regularly now. Rudy didn't ignore 911. But it seems Obama is. He's practically begging for another 911.

 

[ogibillm]

You purposefully posted a link with a lying assed title and an out of context quote.

You never fucking learn, cowboy...shooting from the LIP with blanks is downright STUPID! Both the title and the quote were directly from the article. If you have an issue with that take it up with ABC, dummy!

Because you want it to be so does not make it so, fool! Your judgment is clouded and prejudiced. Even your quote in my signature line displays the depth of your perception of the world around you! Your measure has been taken and found wanting, Tex!

The in context quote I provided was also from the article shit head, it matched the video in the article, you and ABC are just hacks trying to spin reality into propaganda. At least ABC chose to provide the real quote in the article, you chose to ignore it and get all pissy when you're called on it. So little boy, feel free to keep lying and spinning and I'll keep pointing it out and providing the truth.

the truth is there is no context that makes guiliani's statement true.

Context proves the op and the ABC headline a lie, of course you're good with their lies, aren't you?

they could have been more precise

but then saying "they all started when clinton and obama got into office" supports the headline

 

[ogibillm]

Obama has removed most of those measures and thus we are being attacked regularly now.

example?

 

[mudwhistle]

Obama has removed most of those measures and thus we are being attacked regularly now.

example?

Easy. During the Bush Administration data mining and good investigation by agents identified hundreds of potential terrorists to watch, and Obama removed them from the database. One of them was responsible for the Orlando mass-murders. A former agent named him as one of the guys he had identified years ago as a threat.

Omar Saddiqui Mateen: 6 Facts About Orlando Terrorist - Breitbart

Hillary's staff apparently invited him to one of her events and seated him in the VIP seating behind her.

 

[kaz]

Look, Giuliani is unlike you an expert in this. He knows what he was saying.

then why did he choose to lie, and why do you support the lie?

He was talking to people smarter than you are, girlfriend. Let me explain women to you.

how smart or dumb the audience is does not change that what he said was a lie - and smart people recognize a lie for what it is.

however he seemed to have struck gold with you - someone that will defend a lie after it has been proven false.

Word parsing what he said and attacking him for what he didn't mean is you lying, not him.

what he said was not true. should we not take mr. Giuliani at his word, or should we just assume that what he says is false and that he is incapable of expressing his intended meaning himself and must rely on dishonest people like yourself that have no scruples about defending a lie to tell is what he 'actually' meant?

We don't need to assume anything. What he said was clear except to liars, chicks and in your case ... both

 

[AceRothstein]

Did Giuliani inhale a lot of the dust at the Ground Zero site?

 

[guno]

According to Rudi "the Pride of New York" Giuliani there were no attacks carried out in the US by Islamic terrorists until President Obama was elected. Off the top of my head, I came up with two (2); 1993 world Trade Center bombing and the calamitous Twin towers attack on 9/11/2001 when that IDIOT Giuliani was Mayor of New York! He even ran for president waving his credentials of leadership reminding everyone of his mayoral prowess by repeating 9/11 several hundred times daily!

Here is what he claimed while on the stump for trump:

"“Before Obama came along, we didn’t have any successful radical Islamic terrorist attack inside the United States,” Giuliani said at an event for Donald Trump in Ohio."
Giuliani Claims No Successful 'Radical Islamic' Attacks in US Before Obama

Such are the type of people Trump and his ca,mpaign obtain to endorse their "efforts".

Thanks for selectively quoting Rudy...he said the 8 years prior to Obama, and he's correct.
We had 2 attacks under Clinton and non under GW.

9-11 was under bush the lesser's watch in fact 9 month into it

 

[ogibillm]

Obama has removed most of those measures and thus we are being attacked regularly now.

example?

Easy. During the Bush Administration data mining and good investigation by agents identified hundreds of potential terrorists to watch, and Obama removed them from the database. One of them was responsible for the Orlando mass-murderer. A former agent named him as one of the guys he had identified years ago as a threat.

Omar Saddiqui Mateen: 6 Facts About Orlando Terrorist - Breitbart

Hillary's staff apparently invited him to one of her events and seated him in the VIP seating behind her.

It's easy when you post lies. there is no reason to believe that story is true

 

[ogibillm]

then why did he choose to lie, and why do you support the lie?

He was talking to people smarter than you are, girlfriend. Let me explain women to you.

how smart or dumb the audience is does not change that what he said was a lie - and smart people recognize a lie for what it is.

however he seemed to have struck gold with you - someone that will defend a lie after it has been proven false.

Word parsing what he said and attacking him for what he didn't mean is you lying, not him.

what he said was not true. should we not take mr. Giuliani at his word, or should we just assume that what he says is false and that he is incapable of expressing his intended meaning himself and must rely on dishonest people like yourself that have no scruples about defending a lie to tell is what he 'actually' meant?

We don't need to assume anything. What he said was clear except to liars, chicks and in your case ... both

what he said was historically incorrect. it was wrong. it was a lie.

you are assigning meaning and caveats to his words that he did not use himself in order to pretend that what he said was true. tbat makes you a liar as well.

now, can you show me any incorrect statement that i have made?

 

[g5000]

You purposefully posted a link with a lying assed title and an out of context quote.

You never fucking learn, cowboy...shooting from the LIP with blanks is downright STUPID! Both the title and the quote were directly from the article. If you have an issue with that take it up with ABC, dummy!

Because you want it to be so does not make it so, fool! Your judgment is clouded and prejudiced. Even your quote in my signature line displays the depth of your perception of the world around you! Your measure has been taken and found wanting, Tex!

The in context quote I provided was also from the article shit head, it matched the video in the article, you and ABC are just hacks trying to spin reality into propaganda. At least ABC chose to provide the real quote in the article, you chose to ignore it and get all pissy when you're called on it. So little boy, feel free to keep lying and spinning and I'll keep pointing it out and providing the truth.

the truth is there is no context that makes guiliani's statement true.

Context proves the op and the ABC headline a lie, of course you're good with their lies, aren't you?

I have provided hard evidence Giuliani lied. Read the topic before making more of a fool of yourself.

ogibillm is absolutely correct. There is no context whatsoever which makes idiot Rudy's statement true.

 

[kaz]

Did Giuliani inhale a lot of the dust at the Ground Zero site?

Democrats didn't inhale enough dust. Your leaders can't even say "Muslim extremists"

 

[kaz]

He was talking to people smarter than you are, girlfriend. Let me explain women to you.

how smart or dumb the audience is does not change that what he said was a lie - and smart people recognize a lie for what it is.

however he seemed to have struck gold with you - someone that will defend a lie after it has been proven false.

Word parsing what he said and attacking him for what he didn't mean is you lying, not him.

what he said was not true. should we not take mr. Giuliani at his word, or should we just assume that what he says is false and that he is incapable of expressing his intended meaning himself and must rely on dishonest people like yourself that have no scruples about defending a lie to tell is what he 'actually' meant?

We don't need to assume anything. What he said was clear except to liars, chicks and in your case ... both

what he said was historically incorrect. it was wrong. it was a lie.

you are assigning meaning and caveats to his words that he did not use himself in order to pretend that what he said was true. tbat makes you a liar as well.

now, can you show me any incorrect statement that i have made?

When you ignore what he was obviously saying and word parse it, you are the one who is lying