"Terrorism by definition is only successful if it produces "terror" — the kind of hysterical over-reaction we are once again seeing — yet this fact does not seem to have resulted in very many critics toning down their hysteria or shrillness. (The Republican Party has the collective cool on these matters of Prissy helping to birth Melanie's baby in Gone With the Wind.)" – David Rothkopf.
Am I guilty as well – after my hyper-ventilating about the errors made in the system and demanding firings?
I hope not, although I can see how some could say that. I don't think subjecting the government to brutal criticism if it has allowed a terror attack to slip through when they had the info to prevent it, is helping the terrorists attain their goal. Maybe my tone was off. The smugness of Napolitano really rubbed me the wrong way.
The balance is between rigorous vigilance toward the government's indispensable role in preventing terror attacks from happening and/or succeeding – and not losing our shit every time some repressed trust-fund Islamist singes his bollocks. We have to both accept that some terror attacks will occur in a free society and that the government should nonetheless do all it legally can to prevent it. That's a tough brand of stoicism.
The Dish 