RSS
Credit, Where Credit is Due
A devoted reader writes in to chastise us and to demand that we give Joe Sestak his due for correctly predicting the safe release of Capt. Phillips.
We'd be happy to do so, only Sestak didn't correctly predict the "safe resolution" of the kidnapping.
From the story:
It wasn't FBI negotiators who brought this event to an end. It was U.S. Navy Seal sharp shooters. The kidnappers/terrorists didn't release the man and give up their arms for incarceration. They were shot to death.
We have already given President Obama credit for authorizing force.
If the "Safe and Deliberate" Sestak had been in charge of the operation, Phillips might still be in the hands of his captors.
We'd be happy to do so, only Sestak didn't correctly predict the "safe resolution" of the kidnapping.
From the story:
Sestak was confident special FBI negotiators brought in to deal with the kidnapping of Capt. Richard Phillips earlier this week would bring the situation to a safe conclusion.
“At the end of the day, we want the … outcome where they see they have no alternative and they give up the man and their arms for incarceration,” he said. “This is one (situation) where a safe, deliberate approach is going to be needed. The important thing is the life of that individual.”
It wasn't FBI negotiators who brought this event to an end. It was U.S. Navy Seal sharp shooters. The kidnappers/terrorists didn't release the man and give up their arms for incarceration. They were shot to death.
We have already given President Obama credit for authorizing force.
If the "Safe and Deliberate" Sestak had been in charge of the operation, Phillips might still be in the hands of his captors.
posted by Spencerblog at
7:56 AM
1 Comments:
THIS COMMENT COMES ON THE 15TH BECAUSE I JUST READ AN ARTICLE THAT DISPLAYS THE CONGRESSMANS IGNORANCE ON FUNDING ISSUES ALSO. (MY COMMENTS)
" This illistrates just how much Mr. Sestak does not understand about the Assistance to Firefighters Grants Program. The grant applications are "peer" reviewed by a panel of volunteers who come from all the nations fire service. The comment that "professionals are brought in" to review the grant applications is misleading and incorrect. During the review process the names of the applicants is redactded so the process can be based on the merit of the application. Also the AFG is specific to one group for one specific purpose. Any grant process that was open to all scocio-economic groups would be a bureaucratic nightmare. "
Post a Comment
<< Home