You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1127)

PLAYS: (2530)

(h/t Heather)
Conservatives like Rudy Giuliani can change their views in a blink of an eye and act like WATB in the process. Anytime there's some Obama bashing to be done, conservatives happily join in even when they look like fools. Rudy, who was called as a witness in the trial of Moussaoui and applauded the America legal system now says that putting KSM on trial in New York is a really, really bad idea? Why? Well, because Rudy says so.

Here's what Rudy said after he testified in the 2006 trial.

"At the same time, I was in awe of our system," the former mayor continued. "It does demonstrate that we can give people a fair trial, that we are exactly what we say we are. We are a nation of law. . . . I think he's going to be a symbol of American justice."

I guess America doesn't need anymore shining examples of our justice system, right Rudy?

Chris Wallace puts up Giuliani's statements about the other WTC bombing trial which refute him, but Rudy dismissed his own views with nonsense.

Wallace:I want to take you back to what you said after the prosecution of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers. You said this, “I think it shows you put terrorism on one side, you put our legal system on the other, and our legal system comes out ahead.”

And after the 2006 trial of the so-called 20th hijacker, Zacarias Moussaoui, you said, “It shows that we can give people a fair trial, that we are exactly what we say we are. We are a nation of war (sic).” Respectfully, Mayor, you supported civilian trials for terrorists then.

GIULIANI: And if there’s no other alternative, I support civilian trials for terrorists. The reality is there is another alternative here. And this administration has created tribunals. At least five, possibly more, terrorists are going to be tried in those tribunals.

If there was no other choice, again, Chris, I support this. If there was no other choice and they had to be tried in New York, of course they should be tried in New York. But the reality is there is another choice. It is a better choice for the government. This choice of New York is a better choice for the terrorists. Why would you seek to give the terrorists a better choice than you’re giving the -- than you’re giving the public?

His decision to be against the KSM trial is because there were other alternatives? That is idiotic at best. Jack Reed came on the show right after Rudy and denounced Rudy's talking points in their entirety.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (253)

PLAYS: (2518)

REED: Well, as you pointed out, in 2006, Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker, under the Bush administration was tried in a federal court in Alexandria, Virginia. Mayor Giuliani was one who testified in the penalty phase and he, as you indicated, claimed this was a symbol of American justice, as he said in 1993.

But this was not 1993. This was 2006. The alternative existed for a military tribunal then. The Bush administration decided to make the case in federal court. They succeeded. A hundred and ninety or so terrorists have been convicted in federal courts, only a handful -- less than 10 -- in tribunals.

There are 200 individuals serving time in federal facilities now for their terrorist crimes. So what was a statesmanlike decision by the Bush administration can’t be a political decision by this administration.

If a conservative does it, then it's awesome!

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1063)

PLAYS: (4119)

There really isn't more shameless a huckster working the snake-oil circuits of cable punditry these days than Glenn Beck. He embodies the worst of right-wing talking-head traits: obsessively wrong, compulsively stupid, reflexively mendacious, and always, always, shamelessly opportunistic.

He never misses a trick. Especially the 9/11 tragedy. He's managed to turn it into a big annual right-wing nutfest, particularly with this year's debut of the 9/12 teabaggers protest, a project Beck launched some six months ago.

On Friday, he devoted a long monologue to weeping, once again, before his national audience, and gnashing his teeth and doing that Glenn Beck schtick.

Not, mind you, in memory of the victims.

No, what ticks Glenn off is that we haven't built a new building to replace it yet.

Moreover, he manages to lay the blame for the delays -- which are in fact less than meets the eye* -- not on the usual kinds of delays that happen with massive construction projects, but on liberals in Congress and political correctness, or something like that.

Beck: I believe the only reason we haven't built it isn't because of Americans. It's because we are being held back. And who is holding us back? Politicians! Special interest groups! Political correctness! You name it. Everybody but you!

Beck doesn't bother to explain what the hell he means because, with his audience, it doesn't matter. They could care less about facts, it's the gut reaction that counts on Planet Beck. Besides, he's quickly off paranoiding out over the "1 World Trade Center" name ("One ... World. Ohhh. Isn't that great?") anyway.

Likewise, Beck's attempt to make 9/12 into a day of right-wing protest is just so much right-wing agitprop. Remember the mission statement at the project's website:

The 912 project is designed to bring us all back to the place we were on Sept. 12, 2001. The day after America was attacked we were not obsessed with red states, blue states or political parties. We were united as Americans, standing together to protect the values and principles of the greatest nation ever created.

Yep. Because cheap symbolism and fake sentimentalism are the real glue that binds hucksters like Glenn Beck to our national hindquarters.

This isn't the first time Beck has abducted 9/11 and its aftermath for his own personal use. Remember the time he tearily praised one of the 9/11 widows who had passed away in a plane crash.

Of course, all this is in stark contrast to what he said abut these same families in 2005:

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (239)

PLAYS: (2206)

Beck: You know, it took me about a year to start hating the 9/11 victims' families. It took me about a year. Um, and I had such compassion for them and I really, you know, I wanted to help them, and I was behind -- let's give them money, let's get them started, and all of this stuff. And I really didn't -- all the 3,000 victims' families, I don't hate all of them, I hate about, probably about ten of them. But when I see 9/11 victim family, you know, on television, or whatever, I'm just like, 'Oh, shut up.' I'm so sick of them. Because they're always complaining. And we did our best for them. And again, it's only about ten.

In fact, Beck likes using 9/11 as his own political prop so well, he'd apparently love to have another one.

At least, that's what we had to conclude from the time Beck had on Michael Scheuer, who announced that our only hope was to suffer another big terrorist attack:

Scheuer: The only chance we have as a country right now is for Osama bin Laden to deploy and detonate a major weapon in the United States. Because it's going to take a grass-roots, bottom-up pressure. Because these politicians prize their office, prize the praise of the media and the Europeans. It's an absurd situation again. Only Osama can execute an attack which will force Americans to demand that their government protect them effectively, consistently, and with as much violence as necessary.

Did Beck respond as any decent human being would: "What??!!! Are you out of your mind??!! How could you hope for that??!!"

Er, no. Here's what Beck actually said:

Beck: Which is why, I was thinking this weekend, if I were him, that would be the last thing I would do right now.

Oooh, that's a heavy thinker there. Not to mention disgusting manipulator.

Continue reading »

I was in my then-doctor's office in Yardley, Pennsylvania, home to several of the pilots and crew members who died in the attacks. None of us knew that at the time, of course. We were just there to see the doctor.

When I walked in for my 9 a.m. appointment, they had the radio on. "A plane crashed into the World Trade Center," the receptionist told me. Weird - that's an awfully big building to miss. I assumed it was a small plane, sat down and picked up a magazine. (I think I was there for a sinus infection.)

And as we sat there half-listening, a few minutes later the weirdness replayed itself: Another plane crashed into the other building.

At this point, dread set in and we knew something really, really bad was happening.

I remember the drive home, heading south on I-95. It was completely empty, except for one state trooper I'd passed. I'd never seen that. I remember thinking it looked like the end of the world.

On the ride home, I kept trying to call the people I cared about - not to see that they were physically safe, but as an emotional touchstone. The phone lines were busy everywhere and it was hard to get through. (I remember my then-boyfriend was not all that interested in hearing from me, so something else died that day.)

My grown son was staying with me while he looked for a job and was sleeping on the couch when I came home. I flipped on the TV and it woke him up. We watched as they showed the planes crashing into the building, again and again and again.

"Turn it off," he said after an hour or so. "This is pornography, war pornography. Turn it off."

So I did.

When we have our limbic brain punched over and over again by horrific images, and those images are then used to justify more horror, there is only one solution: Turn off your TV.

My son was right: The 9/11 images were war pornography, something watched over and over as we stroked ourselves into wargasm.

In honor of the victims of the 9/11 attacks, comments are closed to this post. We offer this opportunity for our readers to take a moment of silence in deep respect to those whose lives were lost, both here and in Iraq.