Republicans: Janet Napolitano Didn't Sound Like "Weaker"-Sex!!

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
Amazing....the Party O' Chickenhawks are astounded that Janet Napolitano wasn't screaming "THE TERRORISTS ARE COMING!! THE TERRORISTS ARE COMING!!"

:rolleyes:

"In the wake of the attempted bombing of a plane bound for Detroit, Rep. Peter King (NY-R) criticized Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano for appearing "bored."

"What I was critical of here was that first of all we went almost 48 hours before anyone from the administration came out and even spoke about what happened," explained King Monday.

"Finally, Janet Napolitano comes out and the first thing she said was everything worked well. And she seemed almost like she was bored to be there. There was no intensity. There was no show of emotion," he said.

Hey, Pete....get back to your soap-operas, huh?​
 
Werbung:
Big Sis is a big fool. She is completely incompetent like most of BO's cabinet.

Peter King has history with her and attacks her all the time - usually he is right.
 
No, she sounded like an idiot.

The system worked ? Is "the system" to have passengers foil terrorists ?

now boys and girls, I am going to shock you with this....

sometimes you can do all the things your suppose to....and they can still get past! The point is, that he got threw , but the system did do what it was suppose to..in that he was not on the do not fly list, and was not suppose to be screened more, ext...the reason is while they knew of him, they did not have any credible intel that rose to the level that more should have been done...That may mean that we need to address how things are suppose to be done in that regard...but it means that there was no failing to follow what was suppose to happen. IE he did not sneak threw a bomb detecting sensor that failed to notice it...or that he was on the no fly list, but still was able to fly, ext....

its amazing how you guys can fail to grasp such things...or maybe you do, but you can't scream enough and hate some Obama person for it, so you ignore it.
 
No, she sounded like an idiot.

The system worked ? Is "the system" to have passengers foil terrorists ?
Gee.....did it end-up looking anything like this?

9:11%20image.jpg


:rolleyes:
 
Amazing....the Party O' Chickenhawks are astounded that Janet Napolitano wasn't screaming "THE TERRORISTS ARE COMING!! THE TERRORISTS ARE COMING!!"


:rolleyes:


Hey, Pete....get back to your soap-operas, huh?​

Quite RIGHT...the majority of the 'SCREECHING MONKEYS' are so conditionally trained to respond to those 'COLOR CODED SCAR THE PANTS OFF OF YOU' color codes {of WARNING/WARNING WILL ROBINSON...bend over and kiss your a$$ good bye} that Herr Chaney & Little Georgie used to manipulate the masses...they NEED TO SEE SOMEONE GASPING/FLUSHED WITH FEAR/AND SHAKING LIKE A LEAF, in order to kick those mental juices into gear so that they can comprehend the FACTS/DETAILS/FINITE EVENTS that really did take place.

Much like adrenaline junkies waiting for their next 'HIGH'...they just can't think through the day-to-day procedures...{{heavy sigh}} pass out the Prozac patches for those 'SCREECHING MONKEYS' and it'll keep them busy for a little while:cool:
 
Big Sis is a big fool. She is completely incompetent like most of BO's cabinet.

Peter King has history with her and attacks her all the time - usually he is right.
We Libs figure....what need do we have, for a woman who wastes her time cryin'/screamin'/slobberin'....when there are "conservative"-males (like you & Pete King) gettin' the job done?

:rolleyes:
 
now boys and girls, I am going to shock you with this....

sometimes you can do all the things your suppose to....and they can still get past! The point is, that he got threw , but the system did do what it was suppose to..in that he was not on the do not fly list, and was not suppose to be screened more, ext...the reason is while they knew of him, they did not have any credible intel that rose to the level that more should have been done...That may mean that we need to address how things are suppose to be done in that regard...but it means that there was no failing to follow what was suppose to happen. IE he did not sneak threw a bomb detecting sensor that failed to notice it...or that he was on the no fly list, but still was able to fly, ext....

its amazing how you guys can fail to grasp such things...or maybe you do, but you can't scream enough and hate some Obama person for it, so you ignore it.



Considering JN had to retract her statement I'd say you have no real point. Its a common thing in this administration unfortunately.

But thanks for validating the bush Administration's situation regarding no actionable intel re Al-Q.
 
Considering JN had to retract her statement I'd say you have no real point. Its a common thing in this administration unfortunately.

But thanks for validating the bush Administration's situation regarding no actionable intel re Al-Q.

Did she retract it to shut idiots up who where twisting the words? Or did she said that some part of the system actuly did not do what it was suppose to? Not the same reasons.

also Bush took no actions, none at all about terrorism and al-Quida .And there was good intel on some of those hijackers, while we have very little if anything on this guy. Bush did nothing, Clinton did something, but not enough ( though he had plans for more, but did not feel right doing it and right as power was to be turned over to Bush..so he turned over the intel and ideas to him...to sit on)
 
...they NEED TO SEE SOMEONE GASPING/FLUSHED WITH FEAR/AND SHAKING LIKE A LEAF, in order to kick those mental juices into gear so that they can comprehend the FACTS/DETAILS/FINITE EVENTS that really did take place.
....Just one o' the many tricks ("conservative" need) to get their adrenaline flowing....without (actually) raising-a-finger.

They've (either) got heart-problems (for lack o' physical-exercise), or Alzheimers (for lack o' mental-exercise).....and, it's probably (all) Bill Clinton's fault.

:rolleyes:
 
Did she retract it to shut idiots up who where twisting the words? Or did she said that some part of the system actuly did not do what it was suppose to? Not the same reasons.

also Bush took no actions, none at all about terrorism and al-Quida .And there was good intel on some of those hijackers, while we have very little if anything on this guy. Bush did nothing, Clinton did something, but not enough ( though he had plans for more, but did not feel right doing it and right as power was to be turned over to Bush..so he turned over the intel and ideas to him...to sit on)

If you missed '60 Minutes' last night there was an excellent interview with CIA agent {now retired} that spent a goodly amount of time in Afghanistan prior to 9/11 and then during the hunt for Osama Ben Laden and the information was out there and passed up the chain of command...G.W.B. & Inc. ignored the reports and when this mans team had Obama in their cross hairs they were NOT GIVEN THE GO AHEAD TO TAKE HIM OUT...so who's to blame exactly for 9/11 :confused: Who's to blame for not getting Osama Ben Laden :confused:

Dogtowner; Close that mouth and allow your hearing to get better acquainted with the TRUTH that is out there and you might, just maybe become an enlightened adult ;) Or not...it's your choice!
 
Considering JN had to retract her statement I'd say you have no real point. Its a common thing in this administration unfortunately.

But thanks for validating the bush Administration's situation regarding no actionable intel re Al-Q.
Yeah.....that's what happened......

:rolleyes:
"For other observers, however, the real point was not that the new Administration dismissed the terrorist theat. On the contrary, Rice, Hadley and Cheney, says an official, "all got that it was important." The question is, How high a priority did terrorism get? Clarke says that dealing with al-Qaeda "was in the top tier of issues reviewed by the Bush Administration." But other topics got far more attention. The whole Bush national-security team was obsessed with setting up a national system of missile defense. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was absorbed by a long review of the military's force structure. Attorney General John Ashcroft had come into office as a dedicated crime buster. Rice was desperately trying to keep in line a national-security team—including Rumsfeld, Cheney and Secretary of State Colin Powell—whose members had wildly different agendas and styles. "Terrorism," says a former Clinton White House official, speaking of the new Administration, "wasn't on their plate of key issues."
 
If you missed '60 Minutes' last night there was an excellent interview with CIA agent {now retired} that spent a goodly amount of time in Afghanistan prior to 9/11 and then during the hunt for Osama Ben Laden and the information was out there and passed up the chain of command...G.W.B. & Inc. ignored the reports and when this mans team had Obama in their cross hairs they were NOT GIVEN THE GO AHEAD TO TAKE HIM OUT...so who's to blame exactly for 9/11 :confused: Who's to blame for not getting Osama Ben Laden :confused:

Dogtowner; Close that mouth and allow your hearing to get better acquainted with the TRUTH that is out there and you might, just maybe become an enlightened adult ;) Or not...it's your choice!



And Clinton could have had OBL on a platter.

60 minutes huh... after Gunga Dan's shenannigans I think I'll pass on them.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top