Monday, December 28, 2009

Guy Gets On a Plane With Explosive Underpants....

Watching DHS Director Janet Napolitano being interviewed by CNN's Candy Crowley about this attempted terrorist attack on a Detroit-bound plane the other day should make you cringe whether you hail from the left or the right. Why? Several reasons:


1) Napolitano doesn't seem at all disturbed by this total breakdown in airport security, and even goes so far as to say that "the system worked." Really?? In what way? In fact the system did NOT work and Napolitano should have said so. The only reason that plane didn't blow up is because some other passengers tackled the guy, much like with Richard Reid a few years ago.


2) Napolitano goes on to defend the fact that the terrorist had not been placed on a narrow "watch list" that would have prevented him from boarding the plane, despite the fact that the man's own father called DHS a month ago and warned them about him. So again, agency not competent, she should have the guts to say so and vow to make it better, rather than to sit there and crow about how everything worked. NOTHING WORKED.


3) Napolitano also revisits the familiar liberal mantra of, "well there's nothing to suggest that he was working with anyone" in order to avoid having to state (another) obvious point that this was an attempted terrorist act. Liberals always come back to whether or not a terrorist had connections to Al Qaeda; whether he consulted with other people, or conspired with them to do the act, before it "qualifies" as an act of terrorism. WHY?? What possible difference does it make? It is the ACT and its PURPOSE that determine whether it was terrorism. Not whether a bunch of bad people were involved or just one. The purpose of this act was to destroy an American plane; kill American civilians; and strike fear into the hearts of travelers. That is terrorism, by definition. It matters not one iota whether this idiot consulted with a single other person. The exact same was true of Major Hassan, the lone terrorist in last month's Army base shooting.


4) Candy Crowley could not have been more accomodating. Her questioning was not adversarial in any way. Despite Napolitano's non-sensical answers, Crowley's follow-up questions were asked in a very respectful tone, almost as though she were trying to coach Napolitano through the interview. This was not an interrogation, this was a Good Morning America-type interview where all parties were on the same side. Napolitano should have been grilled, both for DHS's poor performance in this case, AND for her moronic answers to questions. CNN failed, displaying its liberal bias yet again. Would Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday have let her off the hook this easily? NO! And no interviewer should have, whatever their political persuasion.


Liberals get into power and people get killed. It's pretty much that simple. They appear to have no ability to accurately self-assess, and the mainstream media accomodates them. The whole thing is disgusting.