Dana Perino: No terrorist attacks during Bush era

why is it nobody takes a moment to correct what is a glaring and stupid error, so blinded are they by their self-righteous pomposity. At least if they did you could legitimately put it down to a slip of the tongue - correct the mistake and move on, it's easily done. Yet these anchors and guests don't even acknowledge it, they just sail right on through the soulless soundbites and meaningless talking points like nothing happened, which is far more damning than the mistake itself.

At worst this means that they are willfully trying to cover up and deny that these mistakes took place, which is cowardly and deceitful, and at best it means that no one involved is really listening to what they're saying and are all grossly incompetent. I'm sure the truth will be a dirty blend of the two.

*delete*

[edit on 29-11-2009 by _BoneZ_]

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
She said "we had a terrorist attack on our country and we should call it what it is" referring to 9/11.

She was referring to the Fort Hood attack. The Obama administration isn't going to call Fort Hood a terrorist attack unless the investigations prove it so.

Either way it's false.

Just ONE example, for those who forget easily:
link

In September, federal investigators determined that the shooting at the El Al ticket counter at Los Angeles International Airport on July 4, 2002, was a terrorist act carried out by a lone gunman bent on becoming a martyr.

As I recall this was denied as being a terrorist attack until "investigations proved it so". It took about nine months to conclude it.

There was also something about an attack on a bus (not that more recent beheading story BTW).

reply to post by Tartarspoon


Oops. You're correct. That just shows how tired I am. I went back and watched it again a few times. I'm surprised Hannity of all people didn't correct her and immediately say that yes we did have a terrorist attack during Bush's term called "9/11".

Wait what? (911 doesn't count, it wasn't a foreign or non-government assisted attack)

Anthrax Mailings
Ohio Sniper
DC sniper

There are probably more


[edit on 29-11-2009 by TheOneElectric]

Originally posted by TheOneElectric
Wait what? (911 doesn't count, it wasn't a foreign or non-government assisted attack)

Anthrax Mailings
Ohio Sniper
DC sniper

There are probably more


[edit on 29-11-2009 by TheOneElectric]

We're these officially concluded to be act of terrorism? The mailings and ohio sniper don't seem to be Islamic. The DC Sniper seems to be controversial in that assessment.

The bus attack I mentioned which came shortly after 9/11:
2001 Greyhound bus attack

On October 3, 2001, a Greyhound Lines bus was commandeered while traveling in Tennessee, USA by Damir Igric (1972–October 3, 2001), who used a utility knife. Igric slashed the throat of the driver, causing the bus to crash into oncoming traffic, killing seven people, including himself.

Apparently NOT terrorism

The nation's largest bus company said it was assured by the FBI that the attack was an isolated incident, not an act of terrorism.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Oops. You're correct. That just shows how tired I am. I went back and watched it again a few times. I'm surprised Hannity of all people didn't correct her and immediately say that yes we did have a terrorist attack during Bush's term called "9/11".

And BushCo were the $%$^% &^& terrorists.

Originally posted by praxis
And BushCo were the $%$^% &^& terrorists.

That is neither here nor there in addressing the particular question. We're even giving quite a bit of leeway on what she meant since the statement itself is patently false. Whether she meant "the whole Bush term" or "after 9/11", I cited at least one official statement to the contrary. If you say "All zebras are striped" and I find just one that isn't, the generalization is falsified.

It's clear Obama bashing and meant to cater to a "good 'ol Bush days" kind of sentiment, which is something I cannot fathom anyone taking seriously.

reply to post by Tartarspoon


It looks like she misspoke.
Too bad she's not running for president.
----------------------------------------------
The libs would jump with glee if Sarah Palin said that.

There have been over 14000 Islamic terrorism attacks in the world since 911. And a few on US soil. The reason there hasn't been another 911 is because there isn't one planned until 2010-2013. Islamic rule is to give the opponent 10 years to prepare, 911 was just the Awakening (by their own words).

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by Tartarspoon

 

It looks like she misspoke.

No, she effectively lied through her teeth. It's not like I haven't heard that statement. It's pretty much a mindless "conservative" talking point to say "No terror attacks since 9/11 under Bush." No purple tigers attacked me either during Bush after 9/11.

reply to post by Tartarspoon


The Bush-Cheney, skull and bones, faction of the NWO are running scared.....

This faction owns FOX news and are making a pitiful attempt at trying to keep the fake 'war on terror' in the forefront of peoples minds...

It is almost laughable to watch that faux news channel..

PEACE and LOVE....

Originally posted by JJay55
There have been over 14000 Islamic terrorism attacks in the world since 911. And a few on US soil. The reason there hasn't been another 911 is because there isn't one planned until 2010-2013. Islamic rule is to give the opponent 10 years to prepare, 911 was just the Awakening (by their own words).

Of couse that assumed that it was "them". In any case, it was about eight years between WTC attacks and not ten. I guess that means 9/11 couldn't have been Islamic since it broke the Islamic rules and came about two years too soon.

reply to post by JJay55


If we get hit again we will survive just fine.
We are not going anywhere.
Obama would take the blame for being so very weak.

Perino is just trying to cover her and her former boss's asses nothing new here if it's not Cheney using his usual scare tactics it's some other former Bush Administration official using the neo-con talking points as a reminder to the disillusioned republicans out there that in the GOP it's still very much the neo-con way or the highway it's part of the illusion we call government.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by JJay55

 

If we get hit again we will survive just fine.
We are not going anywhere.
Obama would take the blame for being so very weak.

The plan is for 911x12 so survival is relative. Alot of people will be dead or inconvenience. But this will allow us to finish the job we started in Iraq.

So Dana P is still sticking to the party line, like the rest of the Bush cronies. It has always amazed me that they can keep a straight face when they say there hasn't been a terrorist attack since 9/11.

I guess, to them at least, as long as you don't believe your working with AQ, then your terrorist attacks are only "attacks".

You would think that the Amerithrax attacks would be a no brain'er as terrorism.

I can tell you personally the DC sniper attacks were absolutely terrorizing the metro area. Ask anyone who was in the metro area(dc, md, nova) they will tell you the same thing. They did everything possible to spin it as a "shooting spree" though.

It's all politics.