Posted on 02/12/2010 6:27:28 AM PST by IbJensen
A Republican gubernatorial candidate said Thursday she has questions about whether the U.S. government was involved in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks — a statement she swiftly backed away from and one that drew immediate criticism from her better-known rivals in the race.
Gov. Rick Perry and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison dismissed the comments made by Debra Medina on the Glenn Beck Show that there were "some very good arguments" that the U.S. was involved in bringing down the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.
"I don't have all of the evidence there, Glenn," Medina said. "I think some very good questions have been raised. In that regard there's some very good arguments and I think the American people have not seen all the evidence there."
Medina later released a statement saying she did not believe the government was involved in the attacks.
"There is no doubt in my mind that Muslim terrorists flew planes into those buildings on 9/11," Medina said in the written statement. "I have not seen any evidence nor have I ever believed that our government was involved or directed those individuals in any way."
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com ...
>> truth is never a friend to our enemies.
There is no truth in “trutherism”. Don’t mistake the title of the movement for a descriptor of its content.
Lies are often a friend to our enemies — as are the intentional purveyors of those lies, and the gullible folks that fall for them.
>> but because I am open to at least the premise that our government might do something very bad, because I have a mind that wants to check the facts in a fair setting, that sets me over there with the bad guys?
The gullible among their ranks are still among their ranks. Look at who is standing around you — Rosie O’Donnell, Alex Jones, Van Jones, Amy Goodman, etc. — and tell me if you’re among the bad guys.
>> So then, would you say that me believing my dad’s Pearl Harbor stories from his naval cryptography days, is a disqualification for public office? If so, please elaborate. Because thus far, you have not made your case.
I will admit to lack of education about Pearl Harbor and conspiracy theories surrounding it ... but I view any such theories with severe skepticism (which, by the way, would’ve been a reasonable answer by Medina if she truly was uneducated about the “truther” movement).
My comments were, and are, specifically regarding the 9-11 “truth” movement. Trying to extrapolate to “all questioning” of the government, or Pearl Harbor, or whatever does not negate the fact that Medina and some of her supporters are a part of an extremely fringe anti-American propaganda movement.
They have the right to ask whatever questions they want ... and I have the right to think that they are engaging in anti-American propaganda, defacto ineligible for any public office in this country.
SnakeDoc
You altered the transcript!
She never even came close to saying no, so keep on spinning in the breeze!
The question now becomes which of the two remaining candidates is better positioned to pick up those voters who might have supported Medina but now may drop her?
It’s not distrust of conspiracies that drive us to Tea Party rallies. We *know* the Feds are not capable of doing everything they promises, much less want, to do. We’re *mad* at the spending and taxing, at the usurping of more and more power by the Feds.
We have the traditional Texas Gubernatorial choice:
1. Liar RINO
2. Liar RINO
3. Kook
I voted for the RINO last time. I guess we way as well give the kooks a turn.
I think Perry will pick up the vast majority. Some may not vote at all. I don’t see many going to Hutchinson.
SnakeDoc
It’s the first two words she utters after the question... read it. “I don’t”. I altered nothing.
Who are these * We Are Change people *?
They are on Palin, too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPDbmQmV6O8
The Change thing makes me think Obama, and it looks like they are truthers. There’s the website connecting them to Medina and there’s the Palin and Ron Paul. Who are these people?
“LEFT-WING Libertarian” is an oxy-moron.
The leftists are certainly libertine in their politics, but libertine is not libertarian. Libertarians at least accept that there can be consequences to their actions; the leftists do not.
Well right. Read my posts carefully, and you’ll find I am not condoning the “Blame Bush” theory at all. I am only asking that the premise of “our government would never do that to us” not be used as a weapon in this debate. Debate on other grounds, yes, and the insider job theory for 9/11 does come into serious trouble on the facts.
But we cannot let ourselves fall prey to knee-jerk responses that marginalize those who question the government as automatic lunatics. Keep that separate. It’s one of our best weapons in the cause of freedom.
She never said “no,” or “I do not;” She tried to weasel around and be noncommittal, and inadvertantly spilled the beans that she is a ‘truther.’
Medina is a truther for sure, but Ron Paul is no such thing, and has never uttered a word in support of their stupidity.
Can I be honest here?
I have honestly reached a point where I consider government to be nothing but a corrupt criminal enterprise...
I know longer trust anything they do or say.
Are you saying that you disagree with the above sentiments?
I knew Medina was a truther because of her association with Paul. Just because he has not been caught yet doesn't mean he is not. Your opinion may vary as is your choice.
Go provide your own citations, you can surely search google.
>> She answered ‘I don’t. But I don’t have my hands on any evidence one way or the other. I acknowledge some questions have been raised, and I am not privy to all the evidence to allow me to render a judgement.’
You doctored the transcript! That isn’t what she said. “I don’t” was not an independent sentence ... it was the beginning of “I don’t, I don’t have all of the evidence there, Glenn.”
********************
BECK — [...]”Here’s then let me be more frank and ask you the question: Do you believe the government was any way involved with the bringing down of the World Trade Centers on 9/11?”
MEDINA — “I don’t, I don’t have all of the evidence there, Glenn. So I don’t I’m not in a place, I have not been out publicly questioning that. I think some very good questions have been raised in that regard. There are some very good arguments, and I think the American people have not seen all of the evidence there. So I’ve not taken a position on that.”
BECK — “I think the people of America might think that might be a yes.”
MEDINA — “Well [...] I’m not going to take a position.”
***********************
SnakeDoc
“LEFT-WING Libertarian” is an oxy-moron.
Example: Bill Maher
Maher is a self-described "libertarian".
Curiously, he also strives to distance himself from the left-wing 9-11 conspiracy theorists,
“I was really seriously considering voting for Medina, but now she is looking like another Ron Paul moonbat.”
I became a bit curious about her a few weeks ago but when I found out within minutes that she was a Paulinista I backed off big time. It seems that my reaction to her was correct. Moonbat.
One can successfully Google “sun is hot”.
One cannot successfully Google “lots of people on FR say the sun is hot”.
There is a difference between “I think” and “all of us have seen”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.