Dana Perino: "We Did Not Have a Terrorist Attack on Our Country During President Bush

[Zoom-boing]

FBI was told to blame Anthrax scare on Al Qaeda by White House officials

WASHINGTON - In the immediate aftermath of the 2001 anthrax attacks, White House officials repeatedly pressed FBI Director Robert Mueller to prove it was a second-wave assault by Al Qaeda, but investigators ruled that out, the Daily News has learned.

Slow on the uptake there Jeny. I baited about the Anthrax attacks so somebody could say that it was never proven who did it. That way I could post that the Bush Administration really wanted it linked to Al Qaeda or at least someone from "The Middle East."

Really wanted to link it to AQ? They wanted to prove it. Did you read the article you posted? Nice spin in the title and your use of the word 'link'. In that article I didn't see where it said that the FBI was 'told to blame it on AQ'. Bush: '"There may be some possible link" to Bin Laden, adding, "I wouldn't put it past him." Vice President Cheney also said Bin Laden's henchmen were trained "how to deploy and use these kinds of substances, so you start to piece it all together."

Let's see this happened what, a month after 9/11? Mueller was "beaten up" during President Bush's morning intelligence briefings for not producing proof the killer spores were the handiwork of terrorist mastermind Osama Bin Laden, according to a former aide. "They really wanted to blame somebody in the Middle East," the retired senior FBI official told The News. And you think it was nutso for the admin to jump to the conclusion that it may have been an act carried out by AQ or someone in the ME and for being angry that the proof wasn't there, you know in light of the fact that they just killed 3,000 innocent Americans by smashing planes into our buildings? My how quickly we forget what it was like back then.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Either the Bush Administration made EVERYTHING about 9/11 to justify their unconstitutional repression of our rights and liberties

- yes, they did that. Used it to start an unnecessary war for $$$ too.

-- OR -- they denied that 9/11 even happened

- well, this just came out today, so yes.

Looks like they did do both. Next.

 

[JenyEliza]

For my lib amigos and amigas.

What Dana said (as she said it) is wrong.

Of course there was a terrorist attack on America by Islamic terrorists during President Bush's tenure as President.

Are you guys REALLY of the opinion that she was denying that, though?

Oh brother.

Not ONE of you is willing to acknowledge that she merely misspoke and instead INTENDED to be making the claim for what hapened here AFTER 9/11/2001?

That's pathetic . . .

of you libs.

Exactly!

Stoopid desperate libs. They'll glom onto anything to further their views.

Even bullshit like this.

*yawn*

 

[Liability]

Either the Bush Administration made EVERYTHING about 9/11 to justify their unconstitutional repression of our rights and liberties

- yes, they did that. Used it to start an unnecessary war for $$$ too.

-- OR -- they denied that 9/11 even happened

- well, this just came out today, so yes.

Looks like they did do both. Next.

They both Affirmed "X" and Denied "X."

Check.

Got yer logic.

Libs: Too simple for words.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

[/QUOTE]They both Affirmed "X" and Denied "X."[/QUOTE]

Um, this was the Bush administration. There wasn't much "logic" applied. Or brains. Or integrity. Or common sense. Or fiscal responsibility. You can see where I'm going w/this.

 

[Liability]

They both Affirmed "X" and Denied "X."[/QUOTE]

Um, this was the Bush administration. There wasn't much "logic" used. Or brains. Or integrity. Or common sense. Or fiscal responsibility. You can see where I'm going w/this.[/QUOTE]

Yes. You are babbling, lying and demonstrating your own inability to use the quote function.

Everyone sees where you are going.

 

[HUGGY]

is she really that stupid?

rhetorical question....

Or maybe just willfully ignorant?

Or maybe an admission that it was not terrorists.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Everyone sees where you are going.

Good! Usually you righys don't jive well with reading comprehension and abstract thought. There may be hope for you yet!

 

[JenyEliza]

What's your point?

You're ready to concede that Ft. Hood was a terrorist attack and Hassan a Moslem Terrorist?

Thanks! Damned good of you to admit it.

I'm not conceding anything. Just pointing out more incompetence from the prior Administration in a thread about the incompetence of someone from that Administration.

Bullshit.

I've got you in an uncomfortable corner.

You know it!

 

[Liability]

Everyone sees where you are going.

Good! Usually you righys don't jive well with reading comprehension and abstract thought. There may be hope for you yet!

Jibe well. Not jive. Jive is the stuff you leftards spew.

And it's righties. Not righys, you dopey libtard.

And reading comprehension is a hallmark of conservatives, not of libbies

So you are either deliberately lying or just too stupid to know the difference.

There is now, as always, no hope for libtarded liberoidals.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Yes. You are babbling, lying

Bet you I can find more evidence that I am right than you can find that I am wrong. Dare to try me?

 

[Mr. Peepers]

And cherry picking / taking things out of context is a hallmark of conservatives

Fixed

 

[Liability]

is she really that stupid?

rhetorical question....

Or maybe just willfully ignorant?

Or maybe an admission that it was not terrorists.

An "admission?"

Holy shit. I KNEW you were a fucking imbecile, but I didn't realize you were one of THOSE idiots!

Yes. It wasn't terrorists who flew jet aircraft into the Twin Towers or the Pentagon or down into the ground in that field in PA.

Good point.

Fucking scumbag imbecility WILL always reveal itself. In YOUR case, it is impossible to conceal.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Even those who are correct can mistype, assclown. I meant to hit B - they're next to each other on the keyboard. Is that all you can find to whine about.

 

[JenyEliza]

Everyone sees where you are going.

Good! Usually you righys don't jive well with reading comprehension and abstract thought. There may be hope for you yet!

Jibe well. Not jive. Jive is the stuff you leftards spew.

And it's righties. Not righys, you dopey libtard.

And reading comprehension is a hallmark of conservatives, not of libbies

So you are either deliberately lying or just too stupid to know the difference.

There is now, as always, no hope for libtarded liberoidals.

Damn! I already repped you, so I can't rep you for this one!

 

[Liability]

Even those who are correct can mistype, assclown. I meant to hit B - they're next to each other on the keyboard. Is that all you can find to whine about.

You are now just lying. You didn't know the difference between "jibe" and "jive" and are afraid, for some stupid reason, to just admit as much.

Well, that's ok. Relax. Unbind your patnies. It's of no moment.

You are too stupid to discuss anything of substance with.

Your stupidity has nothing to do with "jibe" or "jive," however.

 

[The T]

Everyone sees where you are going.

Good! Usually you righys don't jive well with reading comprehension and abstract thought. There may be hope for you yet!

Jibe well. Not jive. Jive is the stuff you leftards spew.

And it's righties. Not righys, you dopey libtard.

And reading comprehension is a hallmark of conservatives, not of libbies

So you are either deliberately lying or just too stupid to know the difference.

There is now, as always, no hope for libtarded liberoidals.

"You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Liability again"

How many times must this lesson be given to the same suspects?

"Peepers On The Attack"

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Your stupidity has nothing to do with "jibe" or "jive," however.

I am not stupid in the least, and yes. I know the difference between the two. You are the one shutting down the debate with insults. You want a true debate? Let's go for it! Right now, you are just attacking , tossing off insults and offering no particular position that can be defended. I have seen not one thing of "substance" on any of your posts here.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Clever...

However, I'm not the one on the attack. See - reading comprehension issues again.

 

[NYcarbineer]

According to whose standards?

According to the standards of those on the right who confidently proclaimed Hasan's attack an act of terrorism before most of the facts were out.

Do you consider Hasan's action an act of terrorism?

I lean that way, yes.