Did Perino have a Freudian Slip when she said no terrorists attacked us during Bush's Term?

[Uncle Joe]

If Perino is correct and terrorists didn't attack us on 9/11 while pRresident Bush was in power, then why are we waging war against terrorists?

If terrorists didn't attack us on 9/11 it must have been a criminal act, the only question being were the criminals foreign or domestic?

If criminals committed the act, then 9/11 should accordingly be treated as a massive criminal investigation, not an eternal war on the other side of the planet. You don't use a meat cleaver to take out a tumor.

Furthermore Perino said the attack on Fort Hood by a Major in the U.S. Army was a terrorist act, is she proposing we attack the entire Army or just the commissioned officers?:shrug:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x406950

[babylonsister]

1. Perino's now walking it back...

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200911250035

Perino: "I obviously meant no terror attack on U.S. post 9/11 during Bush 2nd term"
November 25, 2009 4:10 pm ET by MMFA Staff


From Dana Perino's twitter feed:



Previously:

Perino: "We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term"

[Uncle Joe]

6. Thanks for the update babylonsister, but

the first may still have been a Freudian Slip.

[malaise]

14. The first comment was revisionist history

It's Cheney speak.

Happy Thanksgiving Uncle Joe :hi:

[Uncle Joe]

15. Happy Thanksgiving to you as well, malaise.

:hi:

[chollybocker]

"I obviously meant..."

Oh, I see it now! She was just being SARCASTIC!

I hate these professional liars, with every fiber of my being.

[CTyankee]

12. Ya know, I think these people are so used to lying they don't even know it while they're doing it.

They do it so often there's got to be a reason. The reason I believe is that they make the "fact" that they want and know that some people will pick it up as correct. But this one was a real lollapalooza!

[Warpy]

19. She mouthed the party line and was shocked,

shocked I tell you, when people objected and brought up 9/11.

There were no attacks beyond 9/11 because he did what he should have done beginning in January, 2001: cleaned out those training camps in Afghanistan and started to hunt down terrorist cells around the globe.

Stupid is responsible for allowing 9/11 to happen because of his denigration of terror as a threat while he and the PNAC crowd planned for glory in Iraq while giving their buddies tax breaks.

[rhett o rick]

33. Sad poor Dana aint got the tools to use. nt

[Canuckistanian]

38. That's all right. Thank God she's not in government any more

Oh, wait....

[DainBramaged]

2. Good catch, I thought the same, the Booshies are all liars.....

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. No; she's just stupid.

Always has been; always will be.

[sarge43]

8. Indeed. This airhead never heard of or didn't remember the

Cubian Missile Crisis -- you know, the one where the world was a twitch and giggle from nuclear destruction? Palin is a freakin' Madame Currie compared to her.

Plus, she's a Repub. If they're breathing, they're lying or making it as they go along.

[peace frog]

10. It was no mistake

she meant it when she said it. Walking it back now that she's been informed she fucked up.

[rhett o rick]

35. In her right wing authoritarian mind, no terrorists struck during the bush* admin.

If you tell her otherwise it might injure her pea brain.

[peace frog]

37. Cue the crying baby again

:popcorn:

[CJCRANE]

4. How could she forget 9/11?

I know Glenn Beck has moved on to 9/12 as the big propaganda day but still...

[zbdent]

30. Gee, and I thought some semi-relatives were talking about us lefties

when they were going on Beckkk's 9/12 jaunt ... they were saying they were going because "apparently, people have forgotten what happened on 9/11" ...

I didn't realize that they were talking about REPUBLICANS forgetting what happened on 9/11 ...

[Echo In Light]

5. PNAC

[lpbk2713]

7. Trudeau was right.

:eyes:

[librechik]

9. I think the intent with their constant squawk about "No attacks since 9/11 is to minimize 9/11

she just forgot to say "since," which is natural because they mean to disappear that actual date somehow, as if not having any attacks after that is the same as not having any attacks at all. It's some sort of delusional thinking they try to pass on to others in order to expunge their own guilt.

[Uncle Joe]

13. I would like to think you're correct, librechik.

To me that would actually be a much more comforting scenario, but as the PNAC, neocon, Cheney/Bush crowd gave and give me no confidence whatsoever in their ethics, morals, conscious, integrity or even basic regard for humanity, I hate to say it but I can't entirely eliminate any possibility as to how low they would've and still would stoop to achieve their power hungry agenda.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

17. Cheney had his fingers crossed on 9/11 so it didn't count

Chimp had his eyes crossed while reading My Pet Goat.

[dysfunctional press]

11. they weren't terrorists...

theyr were criminal mercenaries fulfilling a contract.

[spanone]

16. i think dana is just vacant between the ears

[bobbolink]

21. Who hired her?

[spanone]

24. for what?

[bobbolink]

31. .

:rofl:

It's a very easy question.

[ljm2002]

18. She's a professional liar...

...who floated the lie in her continuing attempt to mold reality to her own convenience. The lie came out as easily as can be, and that is because she, like the other professional neocon liars, lies as easily as she breathes.

She did not get away with it this time because too many people noticed. However, that will not stop her and the rest of them from continuing to pollute the discourse, continuing to plant lies and half truths and made-up stuff until it is hard to discern what the truth is anymore. They do it because they can, and because they know that if the population finds it too hard to discern the truth, they can be manipulated into believing whoever has the strongest, most consistent narrative. And that is what Bush's statement about "catapulting the propaganda" was all about: they just keep pounding it and pounding it until it becomes the accepted truth. To them there is no such thing as objective truth, with its pesky adherence to known facts. Accepted truth is just as good as the real thing, better even, because it can be manipulated without regard to the facts.

[Uncle Joe]

23. If that's the case ljm,

then I believe we would be wise to turn their "narrative" against them as I'm doing with this thread.

As for me they can't have it both ways either they will acknowledge without equivocation that 9/11 was a terrorist attack which happened on Cheney/Bush's watch due to their ineptitude and/or corruption and stop casting every murder in the U.S. as direct reflection of the current administration, or I'll turn every negative aspect of their bullshit "narrative" on it's head, just by using logic.

To take your post one more step down the logical path, if they're professional liars with no regard for the truth, how can we trust what they said about 9/11?

[ljm2002]

27. "how can we trust what they said about 9/11?"

We can't. Not at all. There was so much that got swept under the rug, and I know this is not the forum to discuss it so I won't elaborate. But I've said it before and I'll say it again: this lot read Orwell's book "1984" not as a warning, but as a how-to-manual, and they have used the methods therein to great advantage for many years now.

Their close relationship with the owners of media has given them a lot of control over the larger narrative that Americans buy into. It means that many of us have to buck a lot of peer pressure merely to state our own version of events, even when we can back it up with known facts. There is a lot of resistance when going against the perceived truth. Just one example of how it works: the perceived truth is still that America is a "center right" country, even when polls show that a majority of citizens would like to see universal health care, and healthy numbers who would like to consider a single payer system. But those facts are lost in the media filters, and no pundit would be caught dead saying we are really a "center left" country.

[bobbolink]

20. "You don't use a meat cleaver to take out a tumor."

That depends on your health insurance plan.

[immoderate]

22. A different reality. A different world view.

For Bushies, the 9-11 attack is masked off, blinders, invisible. It was a bit of bad luck, an outlier. But every day that there was no attack is a tribute to the security genius of the Bush administration.

I correct them. "Wouldn't you more rightly say that Bush kept us safe for 8 months?" I ask. That flusters them.

--imm

[arcadian]

25. According to the MSM terrorists attack us everyday in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Could it be that those attackers are really just people fighting for their homes?

[Uncle Joe]

28. I believe that's the case for the vast majority of combatants, arcadian.

It would be no different if the U.S. was invaded by some foreign nation because a select group of Americans had harbored what another nation considered to be criminals.

If my memory serves me correctly at one time the Taliban offered to turn Bin Laden over to the Cheney/Bush Clan, but they were rebuffed, I don't know whether that's true or not.

But the upshot is the same dynamic would drive many Americans to fight in order to repel the "invaders" and those numbers would increase as more Americans; were killed being part of "collateral" damage if not outright targeted, increasing numbers of family and friends would take up arms.

[Vickers]

26. DC sniper, anthrax, doctor killers, Luke Helder, Seattle Jewish Center,

etc. etc. etc.

[Uncle Joe]

29. Thanks to everyone that posted, I'm out for the evening, Happy Thanksgiving or Happy Thursday

if you prefer.:hi: :grouphug:

[peace frog]

39. Happy Thanksgiving

:hi:

[malaise]

32. Ed Shultz about to discuss this n/t

[rhett o rick]

34. It wasnt a slip, it wasnt a lie, it was life as defined by right wing authoritarians.

In their world there were no terrorist attacks during the bush* admin, because that's how they think. They truly believe that if they ignore something, then it didnt happen. In their world, it cant happen so it didnt happen.

[TexasObserver]

36. From the mouth of babes ... (talking about Perino's unintended insight)

Although I never thought of her as such, contrary to the fanboys of the right, who think she's attractive. It's difficult for a stupid person to be attractive, once they've opened their mouth and started talking.