What Dr. Paul said was just downright STOOPID! Sorry to say, but it was also 100% WRONG....and Giuliani saw the opening, took advantage of it, and SCORED! Then, Giuliani afforded Paul the chance to reiterate his statement, but Paul stumbled with his response. Sorry to say, but I think that Paul DESERVED to be smacked, for what he said was 100% WRONG!
Way to go superstar...
Careful whom you call STOOPID. That exchange caused an uproar amongst all candidates for a reason: It was the equivalent of the hellfire-Preacher walking into the brothel and giving a sermon, while everybody else was scrambling to pull their pants up. Personally, I wish FOX would have let them all debate that issue with the rest of the time allotted. Seems like, for a few seconds, it was actually a "debate", before they sqashed it.
If you actually think and double-check the facts, Ron Paul was/is correct. Further, by having no clue about blowback or CIA admonitions, "9/11-Rudy" made himself look like a piker on "security" issues; his supposed strong-suit. Rudy also misquoted Dr. Paul about America having "invited" 9/11 (he never said that), and Dr. Paul thankfully ignored that bait and delivered a couple good examples of what he was talking about.
BinLaden 1996 :
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
It should not be hidden from you that the people of Islam had suffered from aggression, iniquity and injustice imposed on them by the Zionist-Crusaders alliance and their collaborators; to the extent that the Muslims blood became the cheapest and their wealth as loot in the hands of the enemies. Their blood was spilled in Palestine and Iraq.
It is out of date and no longer acceptable to claim that the presence of the crusaders is necessity and only a temporary measures to protect the land of the two Holy Places. Especially when the civil and the military infrastructures of Iraq were savagely destroyed showing the depth of the Zionist-Crusaders hatred to the Muslims and their children,
More than 600,000 Iraqi children have died due to lack of food and medicine and as a result of the unjustifiable aggression (sanction) imposed on Iraq and its nation. The children of Iraq are our children. You, the USA, together with the Saudi regime are responsible for the shedding of the blood of these innocent children. Due to all of that, what ever treaty you have with our country is now null and void.
Al Zawahiri reiterates in 2002, says 2 million American children should die, in
http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=SP38802
"According to the numbers I noted in the previous section of the lives lost from among the Muslims because of the Americans, directly or indirectly, we still are at the beginning of the way. The Americans have still not tasted from our hands what we have tasted from theirs. The [number of] killed in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were no more than fair exchange for the ones killed in the Al-'Amiriya shelter in Iraq, and are but a tiny part of the exchange for those killed in Palestine, Somalia, Sudan, the Philippines, Bosnia, Kashmir, Chechnya, and Afghanistan."
We Have the Right to Kill 4 Million Americans
"We have not reached parity with them. We have the right to kill 4 million Americans - 2 million of them children - and to exile twice as many and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands. Furthermore, it is our right to fight them with chemical and biological weapons, so as to afflict them with the fatal maladies that have afflicted the Muslims because of the [Americans'] chemical and biological weapons."
"America knows only the language of force. This is the only way to stop it and make it take its hands off the Muslims and their affairs. America does not know the language of dialogue!! Or the language of peaceful coexistence!! America is kept at bay by blood alone…"
What I find interesting too is the neoCON spin as seen below at NR, where the author agrees 100% with Dr. Paul. The author (and neoCON thinking) use those very statements in describing the need for us to be in Iraq... can't have it both ways, can they?
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWMyMTBjOTMzOWY5NmIyYTRjNjAzNWYwY2NiYTVmNTg=
Ron Paul made a point about the underlying causes for 9/11 that inadvertently made the case that we had no alternative but to invade Iraq. Rudy Giuliani's response was superficially strong but wrongheaded. Watch the exchange:
Paul was correct to point out that U.S. pre-invasion policies toward Iraq — the no-fly zones, the military bases protecting Saudi Arabia, the economic sanctions — were front and center in Osama bin Laden's 1996 declaration of war against America.
The brouhaha on stage, and later shouting-down by Hannity shows that Dr. Paul, in actually knowing what he is talking about and embracing Constitutional restraints, is an unacceptable candidate to the Republican party. They expect lip service to those principles, but are aghast when somebody actually is serious about them.
Ask yourself this:
If our foreign policy is never wrong, or
never an excuse for anger against us, why do the Republicans constantly bash the Democrats (Carter/Clinton) foreign policy decisions? Why call them "disastrous" or anything else if "we" can do no wrong and nobody will ever resent us just because of our foreign policy and meddling in the state affairs of others?
