Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Terror response, take two

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano took to the Sunday shows yesterday to declare that the "system worked" in Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's alleged attempted bombing of Northwest Flight 253 as it descended into Detroit on Christmas Day. By this morning on the morning shows, Napolitano was back peddling faster than you can say, "non-stop."

On the "Today Show," she told Matt Lauer that her remark was taken out of context. What she meant was that all the notifications that needed to happen once the incident was reported "worked." But when Lauer asked if the system "failed miserably" before the incident happened, Napolitano agreed. She later said, "Our system did not work in this instance" and that "an extensive review is underway."

Much better -- but the damage is done.

Our editorial today slammed Napolitano. "The attack was averted because of the luck of a faulty detonator and the quick response of alert passengers," we wrote. The Wall Street Journal editorial page makes a similar observation: "Janet Napolitano says the system worked. No, we were brave and lucky."

More from me later. For now, check out the Atlantic Wire's round-up of opinion on what's next on security and terror now that disaster has been averted.

By Jonathan Capehart  | December 28, 2009; 8:21 AM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Airline terrorism and White House gate crashing
Next: A new-media Christmas

Comments

I find calls for Israeli-style psychological airline passenger screening after Abdulmutallab's terror attempt amusing. Why? Because Schipol Airport, where this Nigerian loonie boarded his U.S.-bound flight, already uses this security method. I've been subjected to it a number of times, and have always passed even though (or perhaps because) I treated it as a joke and got into arguments with the screeners until they inevitably gave up and let me on the plane.

In recent years, as airline travel got steadily more annoying, I cut down from 15+ trips per year (2004) to less than two in 2009.

Now it sounds like air travel is going to get even worse. Maybe I can make only one trip -- possibly even none -- in 2010.

Posted by: roblimo | December 28, 2009 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Secretary Napolitano can say all she wants that her remarks were taken out of context, but let's not mince words. What she said yesterday to the Homeland Security personnel was, "You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie."

Posted by: Rob_ | December 28, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

I listened to her entire interview yesterday. She said several times that "the system worked" and everytime she was challenged on it or given an opportunity to clarify her comments, she fell back into some obscure BS. She has NO credibility with this democrat who voted for Obama. She's gotta go !!!

Posted by: mitlen | December 28, 2009 10:28 AM | Report abuse

"the system worked" will go down with "the economy is fundamentally sound" in the sound bite hall of fame.

When will politicians learn to state the obvious rather than believing they can spin us into ignorance?

Obviously, never.

Posted by: bobfbell | December 28, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

After 9-11, at the end of 2001, I had an opportunity to fly twice on business. My New Year's resolution for 2002 was no more flying. I see no reason to pay for the priviledge of subjecting myself to the degredation and stupidity that is called "airline security."

I have flown one time since then and that was on a private plane out of a municipal airport with no security. It is a relief to tell family and bosses that I no longer will fly anywhere unless they want to sent a private plane. I now am able to observe news items about aviation with complete detachment.

Posted by: jeffy2345 | December 28, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

If the system had worked, Umar would have been either denied a visa or subjected to additional security checks as a result of being included in the Homeland Security database.

I'd say the system failed.

Posted by: postfan1 | December 28, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Janet was hired just like the famous Brownie not because she had actual security experience but because it was politically expedient to do so. She was hired mainly to appease the gay-lesbian element who were promised 'change.' The end result we get more terrorists and a president who is costing the taxpayer over $3 million a day while he vacations. Oh well.

Posted by: KBlit | December 28, 2009 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Ms. Napolitano is in over her head. She is one of Obama's worse cabinet picks and she should be replaced immediately. This last incident is only proof positive that she just doesn't understand the scope of her job. If the system "worked", then we've regressed 6-7 years to when the "shoe bomber" tried to light his shoes. The woman is a liability to our country in a time of grave peril.

Posted by: 1republican | December 28, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Jonathan, although I think you are intelligent, most articulate, a great dresser and pretty funny I am disagreeing with you here. How was/is Janet Napolitano responsible for an individual that boarded a plane in Amsterdam? The fact that he paid cash for a one way ticket should have raised the eyebrows there! The system, such as it is, did work. He was not on the infamous, No Fly List, as Cat Stevens was. These agencies cannot stop everyone. Come up with the so-called perfect security system and some one will find the flaw in it. This government, like the one before it, can try to make us as secure as possible but they have no insurance policy to give us. The vigilance of the passengers saved the plane and passengers. We owe them an eternal debt of gratitude. I am vigilant on planes and I suggest all my fellow countrymen should be. We need to a bit responsible here and not simply play the same old partisan politics with such a critical matter.

Posted by: Thinking4 | December 28, 2009 11:39 AM | Report abuse

TIME FOR THIS LADY TO RESIGN. GET BERNIE KERIK. IF HE CAN FIX RYKERS ISLAND, HE CAN DEAL WITH THESE BIRDS.

Posted by: DANSHANTEAL1 | December 28, 2009 11:56 AM | Report abuse

The problem is not with Napolitano alone.It is with the mindset of the entire administration.Having badmouthed Bush and Cheney for all kinds of excesses,the current administration is defensive and in denial whenever the Detroit kind of stuff happens.Also,that there are still Islamic terrorists eager to destroy America belies Obama's "engagement " stance.It is yet another inconvenient truth they are unable to swallow.

Posted by: improvista | December 28, 2009 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Nice lady but in over her head.
Time to get someone with an INTEL background. Hurry up --- this should be priority one Mr Pesident.

Posted by: FormerNewYorkerNo9 | December 28, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

That idiot Janet Napolitano and her equally stupid cohort Eric Holder have to go, as does this entire nitwit administration. They are too worried about returning veterans and 2nd Amendment advocates being terrorists instead of concentrating on REAL terrorists. 2010 and 2012 can't get here fast enough.

Posted by: OIFVet06 | December 28, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

This inept woman must be fired!!!

And Gibbs too, while Obama is at it!!!


Posted by: jjcrocket2 | December 28, 2009 12:28 PM | Report abuse

More proof of how dangerously inefficient this Obama administration is. Can the US survive 3 more years of Obama?

Posted by: mock1ngb1rd | December 28, 2009 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano needs to go and be replaced by a real security pro. Our national security is at risk as is obvious by terrorists attempting successfully the same method as Richard Reid on a flight from Europe. This should be treated as a military operation in that immediate change in operations is warranted. Personal liberties and convenience will suffer at the price for security. Overall U.S. security remains weak from airports to the Mexican border because of a lack of real pros in the Department of Homeland Security. Go beat the bushes around D.C. and hire some of the retired military and intel pros who know the business.

Posted by: CPTKILLER | December 28, 2009 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Obama adminestration new DHS rule no. 1. Fend for yourself. Napolitano is working on amnisty for illegals and don't have time for Americans. New DHS rule no. 2. Pray a lot. Perhaps the terrorists will screw up or we will get rid of Napolitano. New DHS rule no. 3. Reread rules nos. 1 and 2. It is the best we can do.

Posted by: jdonner2 | December 28, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

This is the same Napolitano who, as AZ Governor, told the country everything was being done to secure the border, as illegals were ushered in, in record numbers.

Now the border towns of AZ are owned by Latino Cartels.

Yes, "her" systems are working. Now, we need to ask her to define "working."

Posted by: asmith1 | December 28, 2009 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Janet Napolitano is not the person that should be in charge of this agency. She's nothing more than a WH Press secretary. Replace her before someone dies.

Posted by: askgees | December 28, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Obama is improving his favorite tactic.

For a while he threw people under the bus after the facts - now he sends them to do so themselves. What a spectacle the poor woman gave.

Posted by: sally62 | December 28, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

I do no understand why any governor of any state was appointed head of Homeland Security, which I wish we could call good ole Civil Defense.

Aren't there any Bob Gates or FBI or CIA career types who would have been a better choice?

Posted by: edismae | December 28, 2009 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Would it not have been reasonable to at least revoke his visa in response to the concerns communicated by his father to U.S. authorities?

Posted by: bouldercourt | December 28, 2009 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Please correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't this the same Secretary who released a report (later retracted, sound familiar?) declaring that our returning servicemen and women were potential threats to U.S. security?

My gut tells me that she really does not comprehend what her job is or even how this country works.

Posted by: kenskorupski | December 28, 2009 1:07 PM | Report abuse

If her recent comments don't 'out' her as just a butt-snorkeling political flack, then nothing else will. She's the DHS secretary for crying out loud...not the ambassador to Lichtenstein. How anybody could think this dope could actually make a tough decision is beyond me. She rationalizes away any tough stance and ultimately accomodates anybody who looks at her wif dose wittle puppy dog eyes. She's indicative of what happens during all demowit administrations. She needs to go...and the process starts next November.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | December 28, 2009 1:23 PM | Report abuse

When Napolitano said "the system worked", I reckon it depends on what the meaning of "working" is !!

No, seriously. These shameless politicans!!!

Posted by: SubbuIyer | December 28, 2009 1:38 PM | Report abuse

NAPOLITANO-- PROFILE IN SYSTEMIC INCOMPETENCE

To be truly SYSTEMICALLY incompetent, inept and incoherent like Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security

1. Disregard a personal warning expressed by the Terrorist's FATHER to the USA ambassador at Lagos Nigeria.

This is as good intel as you get--based upon personal knowledge, direct from the source, no money or other agenda.

Napolitano has set up a polically correct neverland that disregards the warning.

2. Disregard the fact the British DENIED the Terrorist a visa.

This is SYSTEMIC incompetence of Napolitano--how hard to add denied visas from other countries to our list???

3. After 1 and 2. do NOT even ask the Dutch to conduct a personal exam of
the Terrorist.

This is another example of SYSTEMIC not OPERATIONAL incompetence of Napolitano.

All the pieces were there, BUT

Napolitano has created a false reality in which Muslim's can NOT be suspected of a Terrorism--even with a warning from the Father-in her demented sacrifice of the security of the United States of America at the altar of political correctness.

Will we have to wait until we see a mushroom cloud over the United States before Napolitano is relieved of duties????

Posted by: ProCounsel | December 28, 2009 1:53 PM | Report abuse

At the moment, I am getting annoyed by those who seem to think that we are going to be 100% safe all the time because "systems" are in place.
It seems to me that part of the "system" are the passengers and the crews on these airplanes and THEY responded instantaneously when the other "systems" failed. And, they saved themselves and all the rest of us from a horrific terrorist "success".
"We" are part of the solution to terrorist attacks. "We" are the ones being targeted.
This separation between our government and ourselves is a toxic division that only provides terrorists with a "political" victory as they laugh in glee about being able to turn ourselves against ourselves, create confusion,create a division in goals and actions, and watch the American people panic out of the expectation that their "government" is supposed to keep them safe every minute of every second.
It annoys me that these passengers and crew are being singled out as simply "heroes", of course they are, but they are so much more than that: they are part of the "system" that keeps America safe and I am, frankly, tired of American citizens being treated as ineffectual, inactive dupes sitting around doing nothing until they become "heroes."
WE, are part of this whole system of keeping America safe and we are doing it every single day.

Posted by: cms1 | December 28, 2009 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Political correctness is killing us. To be fair to muslims and arabs, we subject 90 year old white haired great gandmothers named Smith from Little Rock to secondary screenings. 99.99999% of the people so screened at airports aren't terroists. Screening them is a colossal and expensive waste of effort. Instead, we should be using racial, ethnic and religious profiling to select out certain indivials for intensive screening. All arabs and muslims should be subjected to secondary screening. If it offends them, too bad.

Posted by: physicianexec | December 28, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

The lady has been out of her depth since day one. She does not seem to understand much of what we all should expect her to know...one of her first pronouncements was that the borders with Mexico and Canada should be treated exactly the same way, and tried to justify that by saying that the 9/11 hijackers arrived from Canada.

Anyone who has been even semi-concious since then knows that NONE of the hijackers came through Canada, and her comments were a spit in the face to the best friend the USA has ever had.

This is nearly as ignorant as W when he thanked the whole world - EXCEPT CANADA for taking planes on 9/11 when 90% of them had gone to Canada. Canadians actually put up travellers in their homes all accross Canada.

But of course we expected that kind of thing from W.

Posted by: pmcdowell | December 28, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

This isn't about "us" expecting to be protected all the time by the government. This is about a government official peeing on our heads and telling us it's raining. One can parse this event anyway one likes. You can spin it if you like. In the end, the DHS Secretary tried to BS us about what went on. That's why she "backtracked" today. The system didn't do crap. Yet, she tried to 'splain it to us. When will ONE politician come forward on either side and just be truthful with "us". It's pretty simple premise really.

Posted by: mitlen | December 28, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

We can't afford to treat this like a partisan issue, any more than we can afford to sit in our seats like sheep waiting for slaughter when something bad happens.

This isn't the fault of the harried folks at understaffed checkpoints, it's a managerial screw up at a level below Napolitano's level. Obviously someone was BS'ing her immediately afterward too.

TSA's policy responses have been equally stupid. More witless restrictions on passengers, when what's needed is not hardware costing millions, but just more trained dogs & handlers...

That and WAY better intergovernmental communication. The lack of that was the real problem. They were seriously warned by the guy's own father!

Posted by: Nymous | December 28, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Janet Napoleon-tano was obviously an affirmative action two-for-one minority democrat appointee (woman + homosexual) - again, quotas don't cut it especially when you're talking about national security

Posted by: ddaly7 | December 28, 2009 2:40 PM | Report abuse

The guy's Muslim father warned us. It's not all about religion, & if you make that mistake then all a terrorist has to do is shave, bleach his/her hair lighter, and wear a cross. Then all of a sudden you're blind to the threat. Simple minded bias will get you dead quicker.

Posted by: Nymous | December 28, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

"This isn't the fault of the harried folks at understaffed checkpoints, it's a managerial screw up at a level below Napolitano's level. Obviously someone was BS'ing her immediately afterward too."

--- This is even scarier. If DA's like us could tell we were being BS'd, surely she should have known. All she had to do was watch the news. If the above is true then she's an even bigger effup than we think. She may even be a "Brownie".

Posted by: mitlen | December 28, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

The post on here are a joke. Napolitano is not responsible for what ocurred. The guy boarded a flight in another country. And rather we want to admit it or not, this Country can not make other countries take terrorism as seriuosly as we do. And even if they did goes anyone here think that any government can make us 100% safe? The answer is hell no. Clearly there were signs here that the people in Nigeria ignored again whose fault is that?
Also would everyone want Napolitano to go on television and scare the hell out of everyone? If she came on and said the sky was falling the same people would be complaining about that!

Posted by: jhop1104 | December 28, 2009 3:21 PM | Report abuse

The damage was done when Napolitano was appointed as DHS Secretary.

This is the same person who on April 19, 2009, went on CNN’s “State of the Union” and proclaimed that crossing the border illegally is not a crime. Now she says "the system worked" when it so very obviously didn't. Is there anybody in the Obama administration with the guts to take responsibility and be accountable for their jobs?

Where does the Obama administration come up with people like this? With people like her in charge of our security the guys at al Qaeda can retire!

Napolitano should be forced to resign immediately

Posted by: Moderate6 | December 28, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Ahem... Doesn't anyone else realize what has happened? In the time-honored tradition, managers across the US Government used the creation of the Dept of Homeland Security as a great way to trim deadwood from the tree. What you wind up with is a huge overstaffed beastie made up of what can be most charitably referrd to as "not exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer." Private sector contractor/venders also scraped the bottom of the barrel. Next time you fly, and pass through "security" take a good look at what's staffing the poitions and close your eyes, imagine them asking you "You want fries with that?"

Posted by: carbone177 | December 28, 2009 3:33 PM | Report abuse

CMS1 said, "WE, are part of this whole system of keeping America safe and we are doing it every single day."

Amen brother or sister! Not that the guy shouldn't have been checked out sooner and his visa revoked, but is it even possible to check out every single tip quickly, especially if the person reporting the tip has no specific information? However, we are all responsible for being alert and helping protect ourselves.

Posted by: AUGirl | December 28, 2009 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Don't worry, the TSA is unending in their quest to screw up private aviation too. Sooner or later they'll be over on my side of the airport causing problems and enforcing their moronic rules.

The last couple of days ahve sure made the wife quit complaining about the gas bill for the airplane, so there is one bright side at least :)


>>>>>>>>
After 9-11, at the end of 2001, I had an opportunity to fly twice on business. My New Year's resolution for 2002 was no more flying. I see no reason to pay for the priviledge of subjecting myself to the degredation and stupidity that is called "airline security."

I have flown one time since then and that was on a private plane out of a municipal airport with no security. It is a relief to tell family and bosses that I no longer will fly anywhere unless they want to sent a private plane. I now am able to observe news items about aviation with complete detachment.

Posted by: jeffy2345 | December 28, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Island_Boy | December 28, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

President Obama and the Dimocratz have held hands and chanted mantras in hopes of going back in time to pre-9/11 America.

Nobody has done it better than Janet. Now we see that even clicking your heels and hoping to go home to Kansas doesn't work either.

Maybe the administration should ignore all this in hopes of it going away and concentrate instead on something like immigration reform and beer diplomacy with Iran.

"Islam has been an important part of making America great!" President BobbleHead on an Apology Tour.

Posted by: AlongTheWatchTowers | December 28, 2009 4:19 PM | Report abuse

i had not read that the Brits denied a visa to the Nigerian... but I assumed that all 27 countries in the EU have a visa integration system... so if the Brits denied, how did this guy get into Holland... it would seem that if one EU country denies a visa to a person, they automatically notify all other 26 EU members... am i wrong on this?

Posted by: RoguesPalace | December 28, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

When will Janet step down? Seriously, she is a drag on Obama....

Posted by: Phil6 | December 28, 2009 4:59 PM | Report abuse

After 9-11, at the end of 2001, I had an opportunity to fly twice on business. My New Year's resolution for 2002 was no more flying. I see no reason to pay for the priviledge of subjecting myself to the degredation and stupidity that is called "airline security."

I have flown one time since then and that was on a private plane out of a municipal airport with no security. It is a relief to tell family and bosses that I no longer will fly anywhere unless they want to sent a private plane. I now am able to observe news items about aviation with complete detachment.

Posted by: jeffy2345
************************

Yep, Jeffy: your fear and unwillingness to subject yourself to reasonable examination is killing the industry.

Al-Quaida couldn't have planned it better.

Posted by: abqcleve | December 28, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Here's the deal. This boob of a DHS Secty can't even protect Obama. She puts the blame on the Secret Service, and poor little Deseree for allowing the Salahi's to crash the state dinner extravaganza just b/4 Thanksgiving. Isn't she in charge of the Secret Service? She better be on the lookout for that big old bus that Obama uses to get rid of his enemies, even so called enemies, such as Re. Wright. gh

Posted by: jemvbcarmagh06 | December 28, 2009 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Napolitano's biggest offense was her Happy Talk instead of Straight Talk. This seems to be this Administration's greatest weakness: Happy Talk.

It reminds me of all the Happy Talk about the Recovery is under way ... employment is a lagging indicator. Well, maybe, but it is really a stupid thing to be putting forward when people are still losing jobs, still losing houses, still getting pay cuts ...

Come on, Obama Administration, tell it like it is. Stop with the hollow happy talk.

Posted by: freddiano | December 28, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, why exactly was Napolitano responsible for a KLM flight originating out of Amsterdam? Is this more "blame Obama for anything that happens anywhere in the world" stuff? I'm a little sick of it.

Posted by: B2O2 | December 28, 2009 6:43 PM | Report abuse

@ KBlit: your dittohead stupidity and ignorant intolerant hate is showing.

Napolitano is no one the gay community would want to claim since she's against same-sex marriage, denies being gay and is apparently just plain dumb.

Posted by: demsRwimps | December 28, 2009 6:49 PM | Report abuse

I'm proud to report that many of you posters on this page would pass this Republican Wingnut Club membership test with flying colors (desired answers are already marked in for you). Good luck!

1. When the daily intelligence briefing handed to you by your National Security Adviser says that a well-known international terrorist who is wanted for a previous strike on the US is "determined to attack the US", this is:

[ ] Actionable intelligence

[x] Intell noise that a president could be forgiven for ignoring, even after 3,000 people are dead

2. When someone deep in the bowels of the country's security apparatus gets a phone call from a nervous parent, among several thousand other similar info tidbits that day, this is:

[x] Actionable intelligence that a president should be held personally responsible for, even if no one (thank heavens and a quick Dutchman) ends up getting killed

[ ] An intell signal that we need to find better ways of sorting out from the noise

Posted by: B2O2 | December 28, 2009 7:19 PM | Report abuse

If you want to read an excellent analysis of the situation, go to this Economist blog.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2009/12/the_latest_on_flight_253

here are some of the best quotes:

"IN THE WAKE of Friday's attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Detroit, the people who run America's airport security apparatus appear to have gone insane."

"As security expert Bruce Schneier told The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg last year (and repeated on Friday), almost every increased security measure since 9/11 has been mostly for show. "Only two things have made flying safer: the reinforcement of cockpit doors, and the fact that passengers know now to resist hijackers.""

"I have long been a proponent of the idea that the true grunt work of keeping criminals away from airplanes takes place well offstage. It is the duty of law enforcement and intelligence agencies, not the duty of front-line guards at an airport. And I concede that a devoted adversary will almost always find a means of skirting whatever preventive measures are in place."

"America's airport security authorities should spend less time figuring out how to keep passengers prisoner in their seats and more time figuring out how someone like Friday's bomber—a man whose father warned the US Embassy in Nigeria to watch out for him—even ended up on an airliner in the first place. There are no-fly lists for a reason, people."

Posted by: Storis38 | December 28, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

cms1 Wrote:
"At the moment, I am getting annoyed by those who seem to think that we are going to be 100% safe all the time because "systems" are in place. "

I totally agree. There is no 100% fool proof security. What are we supposed to do? give everyone that boards a plane a full MRI and psychological profile? We might as well shut down all air travel.

If a guy has to go to that length (hihe some liquid type explosive in his underwear, and go through a lengthy process to detonate it on an airline bathroom) then the system is good enough to foul the faintest attempt. I'm not going to be nervous the next time I fly.

Posted by: Single_Payer | December 28, 2009 7:33 PM | Report abuse

I vote independent and voted for Obama and believe in his administration. Never-the-less, I was shocked--and then disgusted--after hearing Napolitano on the Sunday talk shows. The denial left me feeling hopeless. If it was spin, I don't want that from my government. The airline incident was a clear sign of failure along two or three lines security. At least today there was a retraction but the damage lingers.

Posted by: Sidd2 | December 28, 2009 7:43 PM | Report abuse

The continuing crisis of government is to reject culpability. There was a major screw up here but apparently no one is to blame.

Secretary Napolitano said the system worked. The only possible way it worked is the plane didn’t blow up. We’re grateful for that, but a catastrophe was prevented, not by government, but by the actions of a quick-acting civilian (the only hero in this story).

When a father warns an American embassy official his son poses a threat to the United States, shouldn’t someone, at whatever consular level, have taken that seriously? Obviously, no one did. Yes, we're assure protocol was observed. But this called for more than playing it by the book. Someone should have expended every effort stopping such a person from ever boarding a U.S. bound plane – and “protocol” be damned!

The people have a right to know who it was that failed their duty so miserably. And if and when that person is identified, may they have the decency to resign and seek employment in a profession where there ineptness poses no threat to the rest of us.

Posted by: gmitro35 | December 28, 2009 7:48 PM | Report abuse

News Flash to "demsRwimps":
1) just because the poster "KBlip" points out that her two main qualifications for the job, in the Bamster's eyes, were her XX chromosomal configuration and her homosexuality does not make him an intolerant bigot - it makes him insightful
2) Rock Hudson and Liberace denied being gay also

Posted by: ddaly7 | December 28, 2009 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Here's a novel idea - put anyone named Muhammed, Omar, Abdul, and/or Achmed on the NO-FLY list!

Posted by: ddaly7 | December 28, 2009 8:01 PM | Report abuse

hmmm, fire her now.

Posted by: docwhocuts | December 28, 2009 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Lets see here.
The would be bomber was, on a watch list, paid cash for his ticket, and had no luggage in his possession of any kind.

Yet not one red flagged was waved, and Napolitano wants us to believe that "The System Worked" !!!!

"Yes We Can"

Posted by: dashriprock | December 28, 2009 8:33 PM | Report abuse

More of the same from this administration:

1) A treasury secretary who doesn't pay his taxes

2) A homeland security secretary who thinks the biggest threat is returning US veterens, and then declares a nearly successful bomb attack proof of her success.

Thank heavens the president is an excellent golfer, anyway. In a few years, he and Tiger will have plenty of time to play 18 rounds all day long.

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | December 28, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Methinks it is high time to place "special emphasis" screening individuals who share certain common denominators with the assorted miscreants who have been hijacking airplanes and/or using same to create mayhem in the skies for the last 40 years.

Posted by: zephyr99 | December 28, 2009 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Hey Mr. Piece Prize Prez!

Instead of concentrating on the global warming green weinies (it's freezing numbskulls!) & the peace prize Euro snobs; get off your Hawaiian luau butt and protect this great land you love?!

Posted by: adamnescot1 | December 28, 2009 9:21 PM | Report abuse

This administration does not want to admit that the country is still involved in a war on terror. This has guided every response by this administration to this flubbed terrorist attack. From Napolitano's assertion yesterday that the system had worked, to the administration's general resistance to the notion that this event is connected to other individuals or other terrorist events betrays their preference for wishful thinking over empirical evidence.

I like Obama quite a lot, but I have minimal confidence in Janet Napolitano-- the discussion of the threat of homecoming American soldiers and that the system worked last Friday makes me wonder what on earth she's thinking about.

Posted by: fnelowet1 | December 28, 2009 10:02 PM | Report abuse

I'm an Obama supporter, but agree that Napolitano should be fired for her blunder on the Sunday talk shows.

Posted by: cpw5241 | December 28, 2009 10:06 PM | Report abuse

"Good job, Brownie!" ... er, I mean "Good job, Janet!"

Posted by: A-COL | December 28, 2009 10:14 PM | Report abuse

The Napolitano version of "I voted for it before I voted against it" - "the system worked" then "they system didn't work". Had she been to lunch with Max Baucus and had a few too many.

Posted by: profmoriarty | December 28, 2009 11:09 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Capehart can not admit Napalitano made a dumb mistake that reflects badly on the President. Obama picked Napalitano and the buck stops with him (except of course when everything is blamed on Bush).

Posted by: edgar_sousa | December 28, 2009 11:41 PM | Report abuse

Until this Democrap controlled nation admits that there is such a thing as "war on terror" and stops hiding, along with their liberal media outlets, the link of all of these attacks and attempted attacks as based in Islamic ideology, there will be more attacks and they will never stop.

In the mean time their compassion to Islam forced all the rest of us infidels to be subjected to increased harassment, invasion of privacy, and quite possibly - violations of our Constitutional rights.

Governments are too afraid to do what is really required. Personally I'd ban Muslims from even boarding a plane but if I suggested that the freaks of society would rather attack me instead of the source of the problem.

Posted by: NotADemocrap | December 29, 2009 11:17 AM | Report abuse

@adamnescot1 - Do I need to remind you that after receiving the briefing that Obama was planning an attack in the U.S., the great "W" (who was on vacation in Texas) went fishing! That is the way your hero defended this great land of ours.

Posted by: HistoryProf | December 29, 2009 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Correction: meant to say "Osama" not Obama planning an attack inside U.S. Know the wingnuts will have a great time spoofing my typo. Laugh on dudes, but your man "W" still failed miserably to protect us! Protecting us is "hard work." Fishin' is a lot more fun!

Posted by: HistoryProf | December 29, 2009 12:10 PM | Report abuse

@HistoryPimp - We're counting all the Muslim terrorists that have attacked or tried to attack Americans on our own soil. Between your blessed Savior Democrap Obamo and Liberal Bush, Obamo is loosing. The score so far:

Jobs: Obamo is a loser.
Iraq: Obamo is a loser.
Afgan: Obamo is a loser.
Security: Obamo is a loser.
Global respect: Obamo is a loser.
Economy: Obamo is a loser.

I could go on and on but I think anyone with a brain sees the trend. Obamo is a winner on:

BIGGER GOVERNMENT and kissing union bosses!

Posted by: NotADemocrap | December 29, 2009 7:16 PM | Report abuse

NotADemocrap

Is that all you have? Is this what passes for intelligent debate from conservatives? You sound like a petulant toddler.

Posted by: chuck2 | December 30, 2009 11:11 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company