About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Hannity asks: "If we go back ... to a pre-9/11 mindset, why would we expect any other result than what happened on 9/11?"

November 10, 2009 5:51 pm ET

From the November 10 edition of ABC Radio Networks' The Sean Hannity Show:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (November 10, 2009 5:56 pm ET)
      2  
      Oh boy, we can invade Iraq again!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by marco21 (November 10, 2009 6:03 pm ET)
      3  
      Sean, it's not our mindset that allowed 9/11 to happen. That attack ws aided and abetted by an administration who coouldn't be bothered to heed multiple warnings of an attack and a President who couldn't be bothered to critically read a PDB.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bintx (November 10, 2009 6:04 pm ET)
      2  
      Well, you know, the D.C. sniper, a self-proclaimed Muslim jihadist, killed 10 people in 2002 . . . I guess the "pre-911" thinking was around then, too. Did you go after Bush for that horrible "pre-911" thinking, Sean?

      The D.C. sniper is being executed tonight.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (November 10, 2009 6:05 pm ET)
      2  
      What the hell more can we do, Sean...short of tossing the Constitution in the ocean and behaving like the brutal regimes we've always denounced?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Snowbank (November 10, 2009 6:06 pm ET)
         
      That "shout-out" was during Medal of Honor ceremony, and he actually spoke about the incident a few moments later.

      But I guess for Conservatives it could have been more outrageous. He could have kept reading "My Pet Goat" to schoolchildren.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by bintx (November 10, 2009 6:07 pm ET)
      6  
      9/11 happened on Bush's watch . . . 7 months into Bush's watch. Comparing the crazed actions of a single gunman to the mass murders of thousands is bizarre.

      Oh, and there was another workplace gun rampage today in Tualatin, Oregon. D'ya think that guy's religion is going to be made an issue. Three workplace murders in less than a week and only one is being called a "terrorist" attack. It would seem to me that they are ALL inflictions of terror on the people involved.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (November 10, 2009 6:10 pm ET)
        4  
        The word terrorism has been over used so much in the last 8 years that's it's lost it's meaning. Apparently now it means anything bad done by a Muslim no matter the motivation.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Jollymon (November 10, 2009 7:17 pm ET)
          2  
          Terrorism: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

          Spree killer: A serial killer whose murders occur in a very short span of time and follow no discernible pattern.

          Hmmmm, which definition is more applicable to Maj. Hasan?

          Some people labeled the Columbine shootings as terrorism too. Or is it more fitting to say they were acts of terror? Or a spree killing? They also killed 13 people.

          But since Hasan is Muslim, I guess its easier to just say he was a terrorist than a spree killer? How is what he did any different than Columbine? Or any other school or work shooting where mentally unstable people decided to just kill for the sake of killing one day. Hasan's motivation was different than Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold's motivations at Columbine, but I don't see how either fits the definition of "Terrorism."
          Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (November 10, 2009 6:08 pm ET)
      4  
      Pre 9/11 mindset? Like when the Reps called Clinton's every attempt to fight terrorism and hunt down Osama bin Laden an attempt to distract attention away from his affairs?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Don Quixote (November 10, 2009 6:08 pm ET)
      10  
      Hmmmm.... let's see: 12 dead, no property damage, about 30 injured.

      9/11? 2,995 dead, three humungous building demolished, two airliners demolished, major damage at Pentagon, major stock market crash, Afghanistan invasion, Iraq invasion, Patriot Act, torture, Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, etc., etc.

      Good Lord Hannity! That's a heckuva false equivalency you're making there! You must think your listeners are really stoooopid to not notice that!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Jollymon (November 10, 2009 6:52 pm ET)
        4  
        His listeners ARE that stooopid. After all, they are listening to him in the first place.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by magnolialover (November 10, 2009 6:29 pm ET)
      2  
      You mean when republican administrations ignored getting briefings on potential terrorist threats inside the United States? You mean THAT pre 9/11 mindset (whatever that really means is anyone's guess really).

      There were plenty of people, pre 9/11, who thought that a terrorist strike within the United States was possible, and more than likely, inevitable. There were people who were trying to avoid it. And then, there were the people who wanted to go on vacation, clear brush, and ignore the briefings.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by New Frontier (November 10, 2009 6:31 pm ET)
      3  
      If we go back ... to a pre-9/11 mindset, why would we expect any other result than what happened on 9/11?

      You are right, Mr. Sean "Great American" Hannity. But fear not: George, Condoleeza and Dick are gone. They're not coming back.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Jollymon (November 10, 2009 6:56 pm ET)
        3  
        And don't forget, their "mindest" of ignoring intelligence reports about an imminent attack on the U.S. by Bin Laden was ignored pre-911. So afterwards they had the "mindset" to MAKE UP intelligence reports about WMDs in Iraq and yellow cake uranium and ties to Al Qaeda. Frankly I don't care for either "mindset." And how can mindless people have a mindset to begin with?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by antihannity2009 (November 10, 2009 7:01 pm ET)
      3  
      And who's fault was it for 9/11 Sean?? I'm pretty sure that Bush's post 9/11 mentality allowed it to happen. But of course you would never blame him for it. You're perfectly happy blaming Clinton for it with your lies.

      Why is the right so determined to blame this on Obama and paint it as a failure to prevent a "terrorist attack"? This is based solely on the rights hatred for muslims and fearmongering. There is no proof to support their claims about what happened and the guy only started talking today.

      The only thing the right knows how to do is cover up their own lies and mistakes, fearmonger, and race-bait.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Sharpe (November 10, 2009 7:10 pm ET)
      2  
      I dont know hannity, maybe you should ask that same question to Beck???
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jjamele2880 (November 10, 2009 7:27 pm ET)
      5  
      Ok Sean. When Obama buys a phony ranch in Texas and starts to spend his summers ignoring daily briefings which read "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US," I'll get worried.
      Report Abuse