posted on October 12, 2001 08:45:47 AM new
Understand that this Saudi prince is one of the richest people in the world - most of it coming from his financial investments in the US. The $10 million he offered means nothing to him and is at best a cheap shot - like buying TV time for peanuts to make a statement. Rudy G. is not stupid enough to fall for it. That would be bad politics.
buyhigh
posted on October 12, 2001 09:01:43 AM new
Well, if that was the Saudi guy's plan, to buy tv time with 10 million peanuts, Giuliani has done him a big favor. If Giuliani had not made a big show out of refusing the check, no one would probably have paid much notice to the Saudi guy's statements. As it is, the statements have gotten tons of airtime, at a cost of 0 peanuts.
Giuliani basically said - "Don't agree with me? Screw you!" And that's classic Giuliani. It's the same way of dealing with people that made him unpopular with other New York politicians, the media, the citizens, and probably his wife.
posted on October 12, 2001 09:07:43 AM new
I don't see it that way Giuliani basically said - "Don't agree with me? Screw you!" I don't see it as being personal, but rather..."If you don't agree with our country's stance...screw you.
posted on October 12, 2001 09:09:29 AM new
Yet at the same time Giuliani could probably have had the position of mayor for life had the law permitted it. Before 9/11.
posted on October 12, 2001 09:09:41 AM newthat made him unpopular with other New York politicians, the media, the citizens, and probably his wife.
Cheap shot, even for you, Donny. Can't say it surprises me though.
posted on October 12, 2001 09:19:30 AM newGiuliani basically said - "Don't agree with me? Screw you!" And that's classic Giuliani. It's the same way of dealing with people that made him unpopular with other New York politicians, the media, the citizens, and probably his wife.
I saw a donation and press release where a Saudi prince tried to justify the actions of the terrorist. Guiliani (and a lot of other people) found that offensive. I'm proud of Guiliani, diplomacy be damned! The Saudi prince deserved the insult returned to him in a public manner.
posted on October 12, 2001 09:34:58 AM new
The gesture itself was very nice...However, because of the "conditions" attached to the donation check, it looks more like a bribe, to me, at least. Love, Friendship, offers of Help, should be "unconditional"...To bring up this political bit at the same time as handing out this check was in poor taste, whether planned or accidental. I am hoping the Prince did not realize this was a faux pas...
And bunnicula, you are right: no one has yet flooded our country with monetary assistance...
It looks as if America has set itself up so high that the rest of the world believes we do not ever need help
But even a small gesture, even just one extended hand (with no conditions attached) would be nice... I hope there have been some, that we just are not aware of. When one considers the fact that Bush wants our children to each send a dollar to the White House, to help the children of Afganistan makes the fact that we receive no help from anywhere a little hard to digest...
JMHO
posted on October 12, 2001 09:39:14 AM new
"I entirely reject [the prince's] statement," he told reporters. "It's totally contrary to what I said at the United Nations."
That's why it looks personal. And that's the way Giuliani is. He's always been this way. Remember? There was a reason Giuliani generated such antipathy among people. It wasn't just because Giuliani held contary views to more liberal New Yorkers, the more liberal media, and other New York politicians.
"Yet at the same time Giuliani could probably have had the position of mayor for life had the law permitted it. Before 9/11."
Yeah. But when the idea of re-writing the law to allow Giuliani another term was floated at the state capital, it was shot down. In spite of the Sept 11th thing, he's still Giuliani, and the state-level guys hadn't forgotten that. Giuliani was so popular among the New York citizens post Sept 11 that any guys at the capital who had reworked the law probably would have been heralded by their constituents, party affiliations notwithstanding. But no-one wanted to jump on the most popular bandwagon that will probably ever come around.
Giuliani did great when the moment came that fit his manner. But when that moment passes, and the time comes to act as a diplomat, Giuliani can't. He's never been a diplomat, and after the dust settled post Sept 11th, the New York mayorship turned into a high-diplomacy job, he's had to shake hands with about as many foreign dignitaries as Bush has in that period.
posted on October 12, 2001 09:42:39 AM new
"And bunnicula, you are right: no one has yet flooded our country with monetary assistance..."
That reminds me, I meant to say this earlier. I read in one of yesterday's articles that the fund that this money would have gone into has about $42 million in it now, with another $80 million promised from various sources. The newspaper said that that money had come from various foreign governments (or entities, can't remember) as well as U.S. companies, but the article didn't name any specific donors.
posted on October 12, 2001 09:53:20 AM new
Thanx donny...I hope you are right. It is very likely that England, being such a close ally at the moment, would have contributed.
As you say though, no list of donnors has yet been released, which makes one wonders as to the veracity of the whole thing... Gosh Shosh
posted on October 12, 2001 09:56:08 AM new
A bit more complicated than that, Donny.
Do you live in New York City. I don't think you do, but correct me if I am wrong.
The term limits law was passed in a referendum. Highly unusual, since most laws are not passed directly by the people. But this one was. It wasn't passed with Giuliani or anyone in particular in mind. It was passed with "fatcat politicians" in mind.
The city council being made up almost entirely of "fatcat politicians" who had cushy jobs for life didn't like this bill one bit. So, another referendum was floated before us asking us if we still wanted term limits.
We did.
So that's twice that the citizens of New York City directly approved of the term limits law.
I agree. Rudy's trying to get around that was not one of his finer moments. However, he didn't get around it not because there's no public sentiment that "we want Rudy". New Yorkers certainly do.
But we also want term limits for politicians and we can't have it both ways.
the time comes to act as a diplomat, Giuliani can't
That wasn't the time to go "La, Sheikh! And bow before that disgusting Saudi for filthy lucre and he didn't. He acted very appropriately in my view.
[ edited by jamesoblivion on Oct 12, 2001 10:00 AM ]
posted on October 12, 2001 09:58:18 AM newI am hoping the Prince did not realize this was a faux pas
I doubt the Prince (something about 'prince' that grates me) understood why the money was being returned. I can see him saying that Guiliani was nuts, and all his lowly serfs will agree with him, either out of fear or a lack of understanding.
posted on October 12, 2001 11:27:18 AM new
Nope, James, I don't live in NYC anymore, haven't for awhile.
"I agree. Rudy's trying to get around that was not one of his finer moments. However, he didn't get around it not because there's no public sentiment that "we want Rudy". New Yorkers certainly do."
I'm confused, what part about Rudy's non-third-term are we disagreeing about? I know there was public sentiment from New Yorkers that they wanted Rudy. Even citizens who hated Rudy before this loved Rudy after this, and people who loved him before this loved him even more.
Re-reading what I wrote, perhaps I wasn't clear. When I said that "no-one wanted to jump on the most popular bandwagon that will probably ever come around," I didn't mean the citizens didn't want to jump on it, sure they wanted to, it was their bandwagon. I meant Giuliani's fellow policians who could have amended the law to allow him a third term didn't want to jump on it.
There was a huge groundswell of popular support for Giuliani. But even that couldn't overcome the animosity he had built up over the years among his fellow New York politicians.
posted on October 12, 2001 11:52:56 AM new
I think the Palestinians are used as a tool to unite the Muslim world by fundamentalist organizations who have other agendas and who don't really give a damm about them. Remember Saddam lobbed missiles into Israel during the Gulf War when the rest of the Arab World was alligned against him hoping Israel retaliate and bring the Arab nations to his side. The WTC attack was planned well over a year ago when there was real hope of establishing a peace in the mideast and Arafat and the Israelis were at the barginning table.
buyhigh
posted on October 12, 2001 07:49:48 PM new
BTW, I heard on the DW World News (channel 32), that supposedly Germany has contributed $5 millions to the NY fund.
posted on October 12, 2001 08:01:02 PM new
If Rudy wants to take it personal - And I mean both the attack and the snub by the prince he has my royal permission.
I would rather a politician that takes it personal when someone kills his people than one who really doesn't really give a damn about them as individuals but just a mass he has to manipulate to keep office.
posted on October 13, 2001 11:29:54 AM newSaudi Prince Blames 'Jewish Pressure'
.c The Associated Press
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) - A Saudi prince has blamed ``Jewish pressure'' for the rejection of his $10 million donation to a New York relief fund.
New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who accepted the donation from billionaire Saudi investor Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal on Thursday, ordered the money returned when he learned about a statement Alwaleed had made on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
``The whole issue is that I spoke about their position (on the Middle East conflict) and they didn't like it because there are Jewish pressures and they were afraid of them,'' Alwaleed said in remarks published in the daily Okaz.
He said Giuliani ``can say what he wants. My comments were welcomed in Palestinian circles, and (Palestinian Authority) President Yasser Arafat sent me a thank you letter.''
During his visit to the wreckage of the World Trade Center on Thursday, Alwaleed called the Sept. 11 terrorist attack ``a tremendous crime'' and said Osama bin Laden, a Saudi dissident who is the prime suspect, ``does not belong to Islam.''
But in a written statement handed out by his publicist during the visit, the prince added: ``At times like this one, we must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack. I believe the government of the United States of America should re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance toward the Palestinian cause.''
Alwaleed told The Associated Press on Friday that Israeli attacks on Palestinians were ``an important factor destabilizing the region,'' a view widely held by Arabs throughout the region.
Despite Giuliani's rejection of his donation, Alwaleed said he respected the mayor for the ``spectacular job'' he has done in the month since the attack.
``My policies and actions are an indisputable part of those of my country and I cannot contradict them,'' Okaz quoted him as saying.
Many Arabs are angry with the United States, accusing it of unfairly siding with Israel in the conflict with the Palestinians.
posted on October 13, 2001 01:50:01 PM newwe must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack.
Yet, you feel that Giuliani should have "overlooked" the Prince's "justification" of the September 11th mass murder and accepted the money. Blood money. We don't need it. We can take care of our own.
US foreign policies, whether right or wrong, are NOT "justification" or "validation" of mass murder.
posted on October 13, 2001 02:11:21 PM new
Amen.
Failed diplomacy does NOT license wholesale acts of terror against private citizens -- in ANY country.
posted on October 13, 2001 02:33:56 PM new
The Prince made a very basic mistake. He thought American society was as venal as the society ruled by the House of Saud. As you can see (with a few unfortunate exceptions), that is not the case.
We're always hearing how little we understand the ME and it's culture. Here's proof...they don't "get" us either.
posted on October 13, 2001 02:59:17 PM new
Oh? You don't like Giuliani's use of the word "justification" for the prince's comments, Donny? How about the term, "moral relativism"? I seem to recall that you are fond of that term. That'll work just as well. heh.
posted on October 13, 2001 03:45:25 PM new
Well, no, I don't think that Giuliani classifying the Saudi guy's remarks as "justifications" was correct. To me, the Saudi guy was giving what, in his opinion, were "reasons." There is a difference. And the Saudi guy, in the same press release, said, more than once, that what had happened was a heinous crime.
Giuliani chose to take it in a way that would give him a chance be cocky. Giuliani likes to score points at others' expense. Here was a great opportunity, and he's never one to pass that up.
Even if Giuliani was right in his opinion of the Saudi guy's statements, and it's a fair enough way to take it (not that way I take it, but fair enough), Giuliani didn't have to go insult the guy back. Every insult doesn't have to be answered with an insult. The high road is to not answer in kind. It's not personally more self-satisfying, but it's worthier, or so I've heard.
I insult somebody, they insult me back, we go around for awhile, that's one thing. But Giuliani is in a different realm, a different position, he should be a statesman, even if the people he's dealing with aren't.
posted on October 13, 2001 03:55:33 PM new
Staying out of the Guiliani arguement for now but I did want to say that on the Tonight Show Cuba Gooding Jr. said that they received ten million dollars in donations from China during the telethon. I for one was glad to hear that.
posted on October 13, 2001 04:00:14 PM new
You can come in, I'm getting out. I only got in because there was no contrary opinion, and I think there should always be one, so if I have one, I give it.
posted on October 13, 2001 04:05:12 PM newBut Giuliani is in a different realm, a different position, he should be a statesman, even if the people he's dealing with aren't.
Oh, I get it. Giuliani shouldn't take the prince's gauche comments personal. He should turn the other cheek, so to speak. Well, it's obvious that he DOES take the murder of 6000 fellow New Yorkers personally. Heck, I take it personal. And you're saying he should be above it all, and take the money. Sheesh. Now it's Giuliani who insulted the prince. Not the other way around. The prince should have considered himself lucky that Giuliani only "insulted" him by his refusal. Most everybody else would have punched him in the nose. So yes, I would say that Giuliani demonstrated great diplomacy.
