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

[Coyote]

* * * *

I said this already but I'll say it again. One commonly accepted definition of terrorism is "those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants." That would (loosely) catergorize the Beltway Snipers (Malvo wrote a number of erratic diatribes about what he termed "jihad" against the United States), the Anthrax attacks (according to Wikipedia, "The FBI concludes that Ivins was solely responsible for the attacks and suggested that Ivins wanted to bolster support for a vaccine he helped create and that he targeted two lawmakers because they were Catholics who held pro choice views") and probably Hasan as terrorist attacks. If you want to insist on arguing that Hasan was a terrorist attack while the Anthrax attacks and the Beltway Sniper were not - you will have a tough case to make.

Wrong. The loose daffynition you attempt to foist off on us ignores that the ideological goal is to somehow compel a government to do or refrain from some governmental action. Where some wackadoo does it (regardless of his internal motivation for "reasons" that do not include asking the gubmint to do something or to refrain from doing something) it cannot be a true "terrorist" attack. Nice try. But next time, try harder and try to employ honesty instead.

You, of course, face the exact same problem with the Anthrax attacks. The SUBSEQUENT FBI "suggestion" as to what Ivins may have wanted clearly falls FAR short of his shit being a "terrorist" attack for the exact reason. One cannot ask the gubmint to do or refrain from jack-shit if one is acting without making any simultaneous demands.

I don't know that Hassan's attacks qualify as terrorist attacks since I am unaware of HIS ever having demanded shit of the gubmint, either. His MOTIVATION is another matter, of course (as arguably was the DC Sniper's).

You lack the ability to make a persuasive argument, Coyote. But I'd love to see you try again. Really.

I don't know how you expect the other contributors to USMB to take you seriously when you willfully miss spell. And you use capitals randomly and to my way of thinking..incorrectly. And you make unreasonable demands on a varmint. Other than tthose forementioned foupauxs you managed to write a coherant piece.

Oh Huggie, sweetheart...you played right into his hands....I am "Coyote"....and it's fauxpas (I think)...or in my case fourpaws....

 

[Liability]

* * * *

I said this already but I'll say it again. One commonly accepted definition of terrorism is "those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants." That would (loosely) catergorize the Beltway Snipers (Malvo wrote a number of erratic diatribes about what he termed "jihad" against the United States), the Anthrax attacks (according to Wikipedia, "The FBI concludes that Ivins was solely responsible for the attacks and suggested that Ivins wanted to bolster support for a vaccine he helped create and that he targeted two lawmakers because they were Catholics who held pro choice views") and probably Hasan as terrorist attacks. If you want to insist on arguing that Hasan was a terrorist attack while the Anthrax attacks and the Beltway Sniper were not - you will have a tough case to make.

Wrong. The loose daffynition you attempt to foist off on us ignores that the ideological goal is to somehow compel a government to do or refrain from some governmental action. Where some wackadoo does it (regardless of his internal motivation for "reasons" that do not include asking the gubmint to do something or to refrain from doing something) it cannot be a true "terrorist" attack. Nice try. But next time, try harder and try to employ honesty instead.

You, of course, face the exact same problem with the Anthrax attacks. The SUBSEQUENT FBI "suggestion" as to what Ivins may have wanted clearly falls FAR short of his shit being a "terrorist" attack for the exact reason. One cannot ask the gubmint to do or refrain from jack-shit if one is acting without making any simultaneous demands.

I don't know that Hassan's attacks qualify as terrorist attacks since I am unaware of HIS ever having demanded shit of the gubmint, either. His MOTIVATION is another matter, of course (as arguably was the DC Sniper's).

You lack the ability to make a persuasive argument, Coyote. But I'd love to see you try again. Really.

I don't know how you expect the other contributors to USMB to take you seriously when you willfully miss spell. And you use capitals randomly and to my way of thinking..incorrectly. And you make unreasonable demands on a varmint. Other than tthose forementioned foupauxs you managed to write a coherant piece.

Uhm .. a fouspaux? Miss Spell? When she got married, wasn't it Mrs. Spell? Or, perhaps, Ms. Spell? What WAS her maiden name, anyway?

I would love to cite some of tthose other misspellings of yours, etc., but it would serve no useful purpose.

In fact, addressing anything you've posted serves no useful purpose, as a rule.

 

[HUGGY]

Wrong. The loose daffynition you attempt to foist off on us ignores that the ideological goal is to somehow compel a government to do or refrain from some governmental action. Where some wackadoo does it (regardless of his internal motivation for "reasons" that do not include asking the gubmint to do something or to refrain from doing something) it cannot be a true "terrorist" attack. Nice try. But next time, try harder and try to employ honesty instead.

You, of course, face the exact same problem with the Anthrax attacks. The SUBSEQUENT FBI "suggestion" as to what Ivins may have wanted clearly falls FAR short of his shit being a "terrorist" attack for the exact reason. One cannot ask the gubmint to do or refrain from jack-shit if one is acting without making any simultaneous demands.

I don't know that Hassan's attacks qualify as terrorist attacks since I am unaware of HIS ever having demanded shit of the gubmint, either. His MOTIVATION is another matter, of course (as arguably was the DC Sniper's).

You lack the ability to make a persuasive argument, Coyote. But I'd love to see you try again. Really.

I don't know how you expect the other contributors to USMB to take you seriously when you willfully miss spell. And you use capitals randomly and to my way of thinking..incorrectly. And you make unreasonable demands on a varmint. Other than tthose forementioned foupauxs you managed to write a coherant piece.

Oh Huggie, sweetheart...you played right into his hands....I am "Coyote"....and it's fauxpas (I think)...or in my case fourpaws....

I am a "******* imbicile" and therefore not subject to the normal spelling rules. I'll be damned if I am gonna sign up for a stupid spellcheck on this MB.

 

[JenyEliza]

Wrong. The loose daffynition you attempt to foist off on us ignores that the ideological goal is to somehow compel a government to do or refrain from some governmental action.

While the wording is cute, the logic is flawed Mr. Bility. For example, in Mr. Ivins case: "he targeted two lawmakers because they were Catholics who held pro choice views" indeed sounds like he is wanting the "gubmint" to do something about women's "choice" when it comes to abortion.



Hmmm....looks like that excludes Hasan then doesn't it? That is, if you are being honest.



Again....if we use your logic, that excludes Hasan.

I don't know that Hassan's attacks qualify as terrorist attacks since I am unaware of HIS ever having demanded shit of the gubmint, either. His MOTIVATION is another matter, of course (as arguably was the DC Sniper's).

You lack the ability to make a persuasive argument, Coyote. But I'd love to see you try again. Really.

My argument is aimed at those who want to insist that there have been no terrorist attacks on U.S. soil under Bush's administration post-9/11 but there has been one on Obama's watch.

Since you appear, from this post - not fall in that category....touche!

The fort hood shooting was not by definition a terrorist attack.
Were civilians or military people targeted?

For a terrorist attack civilians have to be targeted. this is part of the definition of terrorism.

Point in fact: ONE (1) civilian was killed during the Ft. Hood terrorist attack.

Hasan killed him.

I challenge you to figure out who he was and which people who loved him were left behind to mourn his untimely death.

 

[JenyEliza]

Here's the thread I opened to discuss his PP presentation:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...it-relates-to-moslems-in-the-us-military.html

Here is the actual PP presentation itself:

Hasan on Islam - washingtonpost.com

Reposting for those who missed it.

 

[bodecea]

Hey stupid, she was referring to the years after 9/11.

And let the spinning begin.. Despite the fact that she never made the distinction of after 9/11.. I am curious as to how you know this?? You both wear the same designer tin foil hats?

I know this because I'm smarter than you are and I'm not an ideologue.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, we were attacked during the Bush years. Let's not pretend the 9-11 attack did not occur under his watch.

 

[JenyEliza]

Yes, we were attacked during the Bush years. Let's not pretend the 9-11 attack did not occur under his watch.

Uhm.....I'm pretty sure we established that way back on page 1.

Get caught up with the class---or get left behind.

 

[Silfy]

Yes, we were attacked during the Bush years. Let's not pretend the 9-11 attack did not occur under his watch.

Uhm.....I'm pretty sure we established that way back on page 1.

Get caught up with the class---or get left behind.

Only in the eyes of a dumb **** like you

 

[The T]

Yes, we were attacked during the Bush years. Let's not pretend the 9-11 attack did not occur under his watch.

Uhm.....I'm pretty sure we established that way back on page 1.

Get caught up with the class---or get left behind.

Only in the eyes of a dumb **** like you

Then what was wrong with what Jeny posted. Highlight it...or is it just a cheapshot?

GO-!

 

[Silfy]

Uhm.....I'm pretty sure we established that way back on page 1.

Get caught up with the class---or get left behind.

Only in the eyes of a dumb **** like you

Then what was wrong with what Jeny posted. Highlight it...or is it just a cheapshot?

GO-!

The only source of her claim is the guy who started the thread

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1750138-post5.html
He provided no proof whatsoever that Perino meant post 9/11

 

[Meister]

Yes, we were attacked during the Bush years. Let's not pretend the 9-11 attack did not occur under his watch.

Uhm.....I'm pretty sure we established that way back on page 1.

Get caught up with the class---or get left behind.

Only in the eyes of a dumb **** like you

I see we have a bona fide troll amongst us. If your going to troll, please try not to be an ignorant **** at the same time.

 

[Silfy]

Uhm.....I'm pretty sure we established that way back on page 1.

Get caught up with the class---or get left behind.

Only in the eyes of a dumb **** like you

I see we have a bona fide troll amongst us. If your going to troll, please try not to be an ignorant **** at the same time.

I know stupid dumb **** when I see one

 

[The T]

Only in the eyes of a dumb **** like you

Then what was wrong with what Jeny posted. Highlight it...or is it just a cheapshot?

GO-!

The only source of her claim is the guy who started the thread
He provided no proof whatsoever that Perino meant post 9/11

Now THAT wasn't so hard, was it? Perino SAID what she did. Ever heard of a Freudian slip?

 

[The T]

Only in the eyes of a dumb **** like you

I see we have a bona fide troll amongst us. If your going to troll, please try not to be an ignorant **** at the same time.

I know stupid dumb **** when I see one

I just came OUT of the bathroom. The Mirror wants have a CHAT with you...

 

[Silfy]

I see we have a bona fide troll amongst us. If your going to troll, please try not to be an ignorant **** at the same time.

I know stupid dumb **** when I see one

I just came OUT of the bathroom. The Mirror wants have a CHAT with you...

Thanks for sharing but I wasnt talking about you

 

[The T]

I know stupid dumb **** when I see one

I just came OUT of the bathroom. The Mirror wants have a CHAT with you...

Thanks for sharing but I wasnt talking about you

That's fine.

 

[Silfy]

Then what was wrong with what Jeny posted. Highlight it...or is it just a cheapshot?

GO-!

The only source of her claim is the guy who started the thread
He provided no proof whatsoever that Perino meant post 9/11

Now THAT wasn't so hard, was it? Perino SAID what she did. Ever heard of a Freudian slip?

I think my girlfriend got one of those at Victoria Secret's Black Friday Sale today

 

[JenyEliza]

Yes, we were attacked during the Bush years. Let's not pretend the 9-11 attack did not occur under his watch.

Uhm.....I'm pretty sure we established that way back on page 1.

Get caught up with the class---or get left behind.

Only in the eyes of a dumb **** like you

Oh, I'm *so* wounded! (not)

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, we were attacked during the Bush years. Let's not pretend the 9-11 attack did not occur under his watch.

Uhm.....I'm pretty sure we established that way back on page 1.

Get caught up with the class---or get left behind.

Just reminding that the far rightoid side of the class started behind.