• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Secret Service Director Julia Pierson Resigns After Breaches

apdst said:
Considering that a nutjob made it all the way to the East Room, before he was tackled by an off duty agent and an armed, convicted criminal was allowed into the same elevator car as the president, and no one was hurt, or killed...yes...it was luck.
Click to expand...

So what's your complaint. Is the SS a constant agency that has assets to protect regardless of party affiliation, or are you somehow blaming the Democratic Party for these incidents?
 
If she was my employee, with that record of near misses...she'd be fired.

There were obvious gaps.
 
apdst said:
Considering that a nutjob made it all the way to the East Room, before he was tackled by an off duty agent and an armed, convicted criminal was allowed into the same elevator car as the president, and no one was hurt, or killed...yes...it was luck.
Click to expand...

So those 2 incidents plus the dozens of other incidents of intrusions that occurred in the last 6 years that were not reported in the mainstream media were all dealt with to keep O safe because of luck?

You do realize that there were more intrusions that just those 2, right?
 
Lursa said:
If she was my employee, with that record of near misses...she'd be fired.

There were obvious gaps.
Click to expand...

She should only have been fired because she lied. As for her security abilities, she wasn't on the job long enough to arrive at an accurate assessment.
 
USViking said:
I am not sure I would go that far.

Under NK RE a trespasser would be dead before he got to the top of the WH fence.
I might let him get as far as the WH front door. I might not, either. If he was wearing
bulky clothing which might conceal an explosive device I would give the green light
to take him out on the lawn.

One thing we need more of are K9 assets- no trespasser would get anywhere near
the WH with a few K9 unleashed against him.
Click to expand...

You're entitled to your opinion,

but the security measures of an agency w/a 30 year track record of success are far more credible than the beliefs of an armchair Rambo.
 
Questioning the competence of a security team w/a 30 yr. record of keeping their main man safe because of what appears to laymen as indifference based on 2 isolated incidents picked out by the media (among the 100s of others) is absurd, to say the least.

But then again, it's not--as everyone knows, whenever some pathetic GOP pol exploits an event like this--one of many the media just chooses to expose--to score some cheap political points against his opponents, there's always an equally pathetic right winger around to jump and down like a trained monkey to regurgitate that pol's politically motivated rants, i. e.

"Dey let an armed man near the President. HELL NO, fire the whole SS! Arm those guys w/RPGs and tanks! We gotta get out the marines!!"

It's almost as stupid and pathetic as the cafe liberals who jump up and down wanting to ban all guns because of one or two incidents where some maniac guns down a school, neglecting the millions of other cases not reported by the major networks where guns were successfully used for self-defense.

Only a fool judges a book by two of its pages.
 
Montecresto said:
So what's your complaint. Is the SS a constant agency that has assets to protect regardless of party affiliation, or are you somehow blaming the Democratic Party for these incidents?
Click to expand...

The blame obviously lies with the people who are charged with running the Secret Service.
 
solletica said:
She should only have been fired because she lied. As for her security abilities, she wasn't on the job long enough to arrive at an accurate assessment.
Click to expand...

She shoulda been fired because she's incompetant.
 
We finally found a security matter that Obama will respond to swiftly: Himself.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Secret Service Director Julia Pierson Resigns After Breaches

She was probably offered, "you can either resign or we are gonna fire you".[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

This was one of the few recent times there seemed to be complete bipartisan agreement on an issue. I saw bits and pieces of her grilling by Congressional reps, and both sides were equally shocked and horrified. Her stepping down (or being asked to resign, more likely) seemed inevitable after that.
 
Congress is always happy when they get someone pushed under the bus. I wish they would be dissatisfied with the overall incompetence and corruption of the federal government.
 
solletica said:
If there was no evidence he had any intention of hurting anyone, what difference does it make if he had a knife or gun? Explain.
Click to expand...

I thought you were an Obama supporter.

Why are you so intent on allowing crazy people to get close to the President?

Yes it is true he didn't get hurt this tiem. Maybe he won't be so lucky next time, and by he I mean his wife and kids too.
 
solletica said:
They did not; if they did, O would either be dead or in a hospital now. The results speak for themselves.



WRONG. The results are the only relevant performance metric when they're exemplary.

And the results are exemplary, since the SS has kept all Presidents perfectly safe in the last 30 years.

No sensible employer questions the actions of an employee that delivers perfect results consistently. To do otherwise amounts to unnecessary micromanagement.
Click to expand...

Interesting how the 30 year mark leaves out the Reagan shooting.
 
solletica said:
They did not; if they did, O would either be dead or in a hospital now. The results speak for themselves.



WRONG. The results are the only relevant performance metric when they're exemplary.

And the results are exemplary, since the SS has kept all Presidents perfectly safe in the last 30 years.

No sensible employer questions the actions of an employee that delivers perfect results consistently. To do otherwise amounts to unnecessary micromanagement.
Click to expand...

Also, have you seen any changes to the world in the last, say, 30 years?

Are there more threats to the President now than there were before?

Should an unknown person be allowed to enter the White House, attack and overpower a SS agent, and get farther into the White House thereby putting the lives of everybody inside in danger?

Yes I agree with you, the SS did their job, nothing to see here, move on.
 
solletica said:
Wonder if it's occurred to anyone yet that if the intruder actually had malicious intent, he would've used his knife to hurt someone since had clearly had the opportunity to do so.
Click to expand...

Who would he have used the knife on?
 
solletica said:
O's press secretary said that "new leadership is needed", which clearly means that O did not have confidence in his agency.

So he already screwed up by giving the public the wrong idea.

I'm not defending O. He's just a stupid, cowardly pol like those before him. I'm only defending the SS's recent actions--since O is still alive and well, they did their job.
Click to expand...

You must be very close to the President to be able to call him "O"
 
solletica said:
Oh, and who would that be ? ?

The intruder clearly had no intention of harming anyone, because if he did, he would've done so since he had ample opportunity to do it. Hello, logic :rolleyes:

But please entertain us as to when/where someone who "might kill the President" ever got close to him.
Click to expand...

Does the female SS agent qualify as nobody to you?
 
solletica said:
The SS's job, among other tasks, is to protect the President without endangering anyone else's rights.

And the SS has succeeded because O is alive and well, as are the other Presidents before him for over 30 years.

Results are the only thing that matters in job performance. If people in the WH were being shot and/or harrassed by outsiders every day, then there would be an issue.

But since that hasn't happened, it doesn't matter. If someone succeeds at a job by fulfilling the desired objectives, no one should care how that job is done. I don't believe in micromanagement.
Click to expand...

Where did you get this part of their job description?

If somebody threatens the President on Facebook, the SS is at their house endangering their rights.

It is their job.
 
solletica said:
The procedures apparently kept all presidents safe for 30 years. In other words, it worked, which is all that matters.

No freedom-loving individual would ever desire more security for the regime than the bare minimum necessary.
Click to expand...

It worked this time.

If it doesn't work next time will you excuse it by saying that only one President was killed in the past 30 years so the SS was doing their job?
 
What if all were home and he killed Obama, his wife and daughters which he definitely had the time to do?
 
solletica said:
NOPE.

FAILURE is defined as not achieving the desired results, which, in this case, is keeping O alive and well without violating anyone else's civil rights/freedoms.

The SS succeeded at that, and therefore, it did not fail.
Click to expand...


You do not determine the terms and reference of the secret service.

The goal, it would appear without contrary evidence, was to prevent anyone from gaining access.

Mission fail.
 
What a relief this comically (but thankfully not tragically) bad idiot resigned.
In the spring, Pierson was irate at what she considered the excessive security measures her team had planned for the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit, which Obama hosted this summer, demanding that it dismantle extra layers of fencing and reopen closed streets, according to two agency supervisors. Supervisors who had mapped out the security plan said they were taken aback when Pierson, who worked during high school at Walt Disney World as a costumed character and park attendant, said: “We need to be more like Disney World. We need to be more friendly, inviting.”
Click to expand...

Ex-Secret Service Director: Agency Needs To Be 'More Like Disney World'

No, you dimwit. Those are the last two things the Secret Service should be, like Disney World or friendly, inviting. I can't remember what she said the other day about showing restraint, either, but she seems to have gotten her mission completely bassackwards.
 
Gina said:
What a relief this comically (but thankfully not tragically) bad idiot resigned.


Ex-Secret Service Director: Agency Needs To Be 'More Like Disney World'

No, you dimwit. Those are the last two things the Secret Service should be, like Disney World or friendly, inviting. I can't remember what she said the other day about showing restraint, either, but she seems to have gotten her mission completely bassackwards.
Click to expand...




What's wrong with Mickie and Pluto running alongside the presidential limo? Tinkerbell would be an instant vote getter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom