Dana Perino on Hannity "There Was No Terrorist Attack on the U.S. Under Bush"

**bailey** · November-25-09, 02:02 PM

Former Bush press secretary Dana Perino made an interesting claim on Sean Hannity's Fox News show last night . Since I was doing my self a favor and watching Fox news... I was surprised to hear the following:

On Fox News, the former press secretary suggested President Obama was playing politics by refusing to describe the massacre at Fort Hood as a terrorist attack. "We should call it what it is," she said.
"We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term," she told Sean Hannity. "I hope they're not looking at this politically. I do think that we owe it to the American people to call it what it is."

Cbats? Care to shed some light on this?

What universe do these people live in? More importantly, why was that preposterous statement not challenged or even acknowledged by Hannnity?

Retroit · November-25-09, 02:13 PM

I think a reasonable person would assume she meant: "We did not have a terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term after he began the War on Terror."

**ejames01** · November-25-09, 02:34 PM

"On Fox News, the former press secretary suggested President Obama was playing politics by refusing to describe the massacre at Fort Hood as a terrorist attack."

How is Fort Hood any different than Virginia Tech? Both guys seem to have been totally nuts.

**Gistok** · November-25-09, 02:41 PM

.... and lets not forget the D.C. snipers [[from the trunk of their car)... if those attacks weren't random terrorism, I don't know what is. Glad the mastermind is already burning in hell...

Retroit · November-25-09, 03:14 PM

I think a reasonable person would assume she meant: "We did not have a Militant Islamic terrorist attack on our country during President Bush's term after he began the War on Terror."

**Jimaz** · November-25-09, 03:21 PM

The video: Dana Perino: 'We Did Not Have a Terrorist Attack on Our Country During President Bush's Term'

**bailey** · November-25-09, 03:49 PM

redetroit... a reasonable person would have to employ some pretty tortured logic to come up with either of those interpretations of what she said.

**elganned** · November-25-09, 04:35 PM

A reasonable person would have said what she meant, rather than leaving it up to "second-handers" to interpret and/or spin it for her.

If anyone is "playing politics" with the Fort Hood massacre, it's the right wingers who are salivating over the prospect of using the "Muslim Terrorist Attack" as a crowbar to beat the Democrats over the head with during the run-up to interim elections. I think I can hear Dick Cheney licking his chops from here...

**ejames01** · November-25-09, 06:27 PM

If you want to understand terrorism, watch TERROR in MUMBAI on HBO.

TERROR IN MUMBAI features exclusive audio tapes of the intercepted phone calls between the young gunmen and their controllers in Pakistan, and testimony from the sole surviving gunman.

The Mumbai attackers' targets included the city's main railway station, a popular cafe, two major hotels and a Jewish center. Leaving the city's iconic Taj Mahal Hotel in flames, and Mumbai's woefully unprepared police and security forces paralyzed with fear, the attacks sent an ominous message to governments around the world.

"Much as the 9/11 attacks in the U.S. did in 2001, the events that unfolded last November in Mumbai served as a terrifying wake-up call, not just to India but to the rest of the world," says narrator Fareed Zakaria, who appears on camera in the opening and closing of the film. "It broadened the spectrum of our enemies and brought attention to the number of different terrorist groups that exist, who may be bigger and better organized than we ever imagined. The fact that a small group of gunmen was able to inflict so much pain, and the government of the second most populous nation on earth was unable to stop them for three days, should change our sense of the dangers out there."

In the words of one of the operation's masterminds, who remotely controlled the terrorists' every deadly move by cell phone from neighboring Pakistan, "This was just the trailer. Just wait till you see the rest of the film." The assailants belonged to the terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, or "Army of the Righteous," which aims to "liberate" Muslims living under Indian rule in Kashmir. Their mission: global jihad against the "infidels."

TERROR IN MUMBAI presents a moment-by-moment account of the horrific attacks through interviews with survivors and Indian police officials, archival news coverage, extensive video surveillance footage of the terrorists in action, and chilling audio excerpts of cell-phone conversations intercepted by security forces. The phone intercepts provide a grotesque running commentary as the controllers, watching events unfold on live TV, direct the gunmen, telling them where the security forces are, which of their hostages should be killed and how to do it. With the killers wounded and asking what to do next, the tapes reveal the controllers calmly urging them to fight to the death and not allow themselves to be taken alive.

Guests from the Taj Mahal and Oberoi hotels tell how the terrorists first staged mass executions, then worked their way through the corridors, killing whenever they managed to enter a room. An elderly couple recounts how they were spared by the terrorists when it was realized they were fellow Muslims, while all around them were mowed down in a hail of bullets. Perhaps the most unsettling testimony comes from Ajmal Amir Kasab, the sole surviving terrorist, who answers his captors' questions with startling frankness from a gurney soon after being captured.

While the Mumbai attacks differed in many ways from the Al Qaeda assault on the U.S. on September 11, 2001, the personal motives of the Laskar-e-Taiba terrorists bear some of the same hallmarks, notably the belief that there would be material wealth for their families and heavenly glory for themselves if they died for the cause of jihad.

What remains unclear is how this quest for holiness meshed with the indiscriminate nature of the killings, which mowed down Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

"One of the most disturbing facets of this story is how easily such low-tech attacks could be duplicated anywhere, including the U.S.," says director Dan Reed. "Hopefully, other governments can learn from the Mumbai experience and plan a coordinated response."

Dan Reed is a UK-born television and film writer, producer and director whose credits include HBO's "Terror in Moscow," which details the 2002 ordeal in which Chechen terrorists took more than 700 people hostage in a Moscow theater, and for which Reed shared a nomination for a BAFTA TV Award in the Best Current Affairs category. His other credits include the Peabody Award winner and BAFTA nominee "The Valley" [[1998) and the feature film "Closure" [[2007).

TERROR IN MUMBAI is produced and directed by Dan Reed; narrated and introduced by Fareed Zakaria; executive producer, Eamonn Matthews; associate producer, Hussain Zaidi; editors, Stefan Ronowicz, Tom Appleby and Sunshine Jackson. For Channel 4: executive producer, Kevin Sutcliffe. For HBO: senior producer, Nancy Abraham; executive producer, Sheila Nevins.

http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/terrorinmumbai/

Retroit · November-25-09, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by bailey

redetroit... a reasonable person would have to employ some pretty tortured logic to come up with either of those interpretations of what she said.

bailey, Dana Perino is not the first person to use this phraseology. It's been used so much that it has developed its own shorthand. There is no need to detail all the specifics. Anyone who keeps even slightly informed of the news will know that "Terrorism" is short for "Militant Islamic Terrorism" and they will realize that no one is trying to hide the fact that 9/11 occurred when Bush was president.

I appreciate the fact that both sides of the political spectrum are grasping for everything they possibly can to hold against the other side, and I'm probably just as guilty, but I don't think this was a "misspeak" on Perino's part.

**Patrick** · November-25-09, 06:51 PM

Dana Perino got her ass handed to her by the press so many times. She's an ass....she didn't even know about the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Lorax · November-25-09, 07:05 PM

What could anyone expect from Tush's spokesmodel? She's about as sharp as a dead flashlight battery.

ccbatson · November-25-09, 07:32 PM

Bailey...as usual, taken out of context, and yes, Retroit got it right in his explanation.

Is that the best you can do? Really?

**ejames01** · November-25-09, 09:35 PM

Why is the opinion of a WH Press secretary considered newsworthy? They are no more than the anchorperson for the adminstration.

**1KielsonDrive** · November-25-09, 10:22 PM

What the Neo's always forget to mention is that there WAS a terrorist attack under Bush. You know - the U.S. attack on Iraq. A pre-emptive war to remove a dictator under the guise of his possession of WMD. Here we are a decade later, thousands of U.S.Troops and tens of thousands of Iraqi's dead and a couple of trillion in debt. And then of course, corporate terrorists attacked and wrecked our economy worse than any militants could have ever done. Amazing how deluded and blatantly dishonest people, especially politicians, can be in seeking celebrity and partisanship.

**1KielsonDrive** · November-25-09, 10:23 PM

Originally Posted by ejames01

Why is the opinion of a WH Press secretary considered newsworthy? They are no more than the anchorperson for the adminstration.

Very simple and excellent question.

ccbatson · November-26-09, 12:08 AM

Kiels...you need a new and more accurate sermon.

I also agree that a FORMER press secretary may be interesting for his/her opinion, but is not a spokesperson for anyone of importance currently.

**Meddle** · November-26-09, 03:18 AM

A 'reasonable person' would not watch FAUX News.

Blarf · November-26-09, 03:58 AM

9-11 happened while Bush's was president. That's about it.

**Papasito** · November-26-09, 07:13 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28

Happy Thanksgiving

**Big Dog** · November-26-09, 08:32 AM

He admitted that he comes from a muslim family. So????

**bailey** · November-26-09, 08:52 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Bailey...as usual, taken out of context, and yes, Retroit got it right in his explanation.

Is that the best you can do? Really?

bwahahahah. Out of context? THAT is the best you can come up with for this blatant Orwellian cognitive dissonance?

bailey, Dana Perino is not the first person to use this phraseology. It's been used so much that it has developed its own shorthand. There is no need to detail all the specifics. Anyone who keeps even slightly informed of the news will know that "Terrorism" is short for "Militant Islamic Terrorism" and they will realize that no one is trying to hide the fact that 9/11 occurred when Bush was president.

I'm sorry, i don't speak 'neo con revisionism', i only speak English.. ...thanks for the translation. I'll keep in mind that anything discussed on Hannity must first be run through a translator to divine what was really meant.

Will there be video?

**Big Dog** · November-26-09, 11:07 AM

I checked this on snopes.com. and it is false.

**terryh** · November-26-09, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by Gistok

.... and lets not forget the D.C. snipers [[from the trunk of their car)... if those attacks weren't random terrorism, I don't know what is. Glad the mastermind is already burning in hell...

Wish there was a hell for the angry muslim to burn in........

**terryh** · November-26-09, 11:19 AM

Was there a nutty muslim that shot up an airport in California? why do these religious fanatics, christian jew whatever believe they know a truth other humans dont.........radical power hungry preachers and imams instill hatred in them....