From Homeland Security: The War Against..."'Man-Caused' Disasters" (Updated)

Der Spiegel did an interview with Janet Napolitano, the new Homeland Security Secretary:

SPIEGEL: Madame Secretary, in your first testimony to the US Congress as Homeland Security Secretary you never mentioned the word "terrorism." Does Islamist terrorism suddenly no longer pose a threat to your country?

Napolitano: Of course it does. I presume there is always a threat from terrorism. In my speech, although I did not use the word "terrorism," I referred to "man-caused" disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur. [emphasis added]

Of course, if Napolitano really wanted to be PC, she would make that person-caused disaster.
Kind of blurs the distinction between Homeland Protection and the Environmental Protection Agency, though.

Following the election, Empty Wheel wrote why Napolitano was perfect for Attorney General:

Terrorism experience? Janet Napolitano has that in spades too. Janet, as US Attorney for the District of Arizona, was one of the leaders on the Oklahoma City Bombing Case, and shepherded the case against Michael Fortier, who was not only convicted, but was turned and made the critical witness against Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. Napolitano is so strong in terrorism/security that she is also being considered for head of the Department of Homeland Security.

All well and good--but how can you fight something you cannot call by name?

Napolitano's approach mirrors Obama's. Back in January, I wrote about Obama's first news conference and the way he talked about what used to be "the war against terror":

Language and phraseology are now as important as ever, especially when it is meant to indicate a distinctive change in the war against terrorism. Obama's first order of business is to let us--and the world--know that there is no war.

Instead, in his news conference Obama talks about "prosecuting the ongoing struggle against violence and terrorism"--

it is not a war, it is a struggle;
it is not fought, it is prosecuted;
and if it is indeed against terrorism, it is no less against violence.

But if terrorism does not make for a suitable topic, at least it makes for a passing good metaphor. Powerline describes Obama at a 'townhall,' where Obama helpfully applied a terrorist metaphor to AIG:

The same is true with AIG. It was the right thing to do to step in. Here's the problem. It's almost like they've got -- they've got a bomb strapped to them and they've got their hand on the trigger. You don't want them to blow up. But you've got to kind of talk them, ease that finger off the trigger.

It's all a question of priorities.

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey on Obama's comparison of AIG to suicide bombers:

Well, that’s simply not true.  We sent $900 million to suicide bombers.  We gave AIG over $150 billion.

Well after all, there is no retention plan for suicide bombers.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad

[Hat tip: Mark Steyn]

Technorati Tag: Janet Napolitano and Homeland Security.