Time's Man of the Year in 2001

istewart · #1 03-24-2005, 05:56 PM

Shouldn't this have been Osama bin Laden, not Giuliani?

pshreck · #2 03-24-2005, 05:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't this have been Osama bin Laden, not Giuliani?

[/ QUOTE ]

It probably should have been been Osama, but uniting behind someone (Giuliani) regardless of political party was good for many people. So he got it, probably for people to feel better about the whole thing.

kenberman · #3 03-24-2005, 06:02 PM

shouldn't you be making a Nazi post soon?

Jack of Arcades · #4 03-24-2005, 06:04 PM

It definitely should have been Osama.

jason_t · #5 03-24-2005, 06:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't this have been Osama bin Laden, not Giuliani?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you trying to end up on a Terrorist Watch List?

mmbt0ne · #6 03-24-2005, 06:07 PM

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
shouldn't you be making a Nazi post soon?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hitler was a Man of the Year. Was he more more deserving because the people he killed were Europeans a couple thousand miles away?

I actually agree with OP, so long as we're still basing the title on the person who had the biggest effect on humanity that year. It would be hard to argue otherwise. I guess it just depends on how you think the title should be given out.

istewart · #7 03-24-2005, 06:08 PM

No. Hitler was Time's Man of the Year. Stalin was Time's Man of the Year.

In terms of importance, it's clearly bin Laden. Obviously 9/11 is 9/11, and Time might as well have just shut down shop rather than do this, but that doesn't mean they had to pick the wrong man.

deacsoft · #8 03-24-2005, 06:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't this have been Osama bin Laden, not Giuliani?

[/ QUOTE ]

jason_t · #9 03-24-2005, 06:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
No. Hitler was Time's Man of the Year. Stalin was Time's Man of the Year.

[/ QUOTE ]

This I did not know.

[ QUOTE ]
In terms of importance, it's clearly bin Laden. Obviously 9/11 is 9/11, and Time might as well have just shut down shop rather than do this, but that doesn't mean they had to pick the wrong man.

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree but you have to agree that there are some people that would compare your OP to blasphemy.

asofel · #10 03-24-2005, 06:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't this have been Osama bin Laden, not Giuliani?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

i do believe we have the first confirmed 'that was [censored] stupid so here's a pic' usage....nothing like the birthing of a cliche...