March 12, 2009 4:06 PM

Napolitano Avoids Terror Terminology

(AP)  Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano avoids the terms "terrorism" or "9/11" in remarks prepared for her first congressional testimony since taking office, signaling a sharp change in tone from her predecessors.

Napolitano is the first homeland security secretary to drop the term "terror" and "vulnerability" from remarks prepared for delivery to the House Homeland Security Committee, according to a copy obtained by The Associated Press.

Tom Ridge, who headed the agency when it was launched in 2003, mentioned terrorism 11 times in his prepared statement at his debut before the oversight committee in 2003. And in 2005 Michael Chertoff, the second secretary, mentioned terrorism seven times, according to an AP analysis of the prepared testimonies.

Napolitano, a former Arizona governor, instead charts a course in very different terms than Chertoff, who used law enforcement and military jargon - "intelligence," "analysis," "mission" - to describe the agency's objectives.

The department's top priorities are spelled out in legislation that created it after 9/11: preventing a terrorist attack in the United States; reducing the vulnerability for such an attack; and helping with the recovery if the U.S. is attacked.

Napolitano's prepared remarks also show her using the word "attacks" less than her predecessors, although she makes clear that the department's responsibility is protecting the nation against terrorism. She is the first secretary to use a Capitol Hill debut to talk about hurricanes and disasters, a sign of the department's evolving mission following Hurricane Katrina.

Homeland Security spokesman Sean Smith said the absence of the actual word, "terrorism" from her prepared testimony is not deliberate.

"Next time we'll send Cliffs Notes over with the testimony," Smith said. "Anyone who doesn't understand that she's talking about terrorism when she says her mission is to protect the American people from threats both foreign and domestic clearly needs a study guide."

Napolitano is not alone in her departure from terror talk.

President Barack Obama has largely avoided using the term "war on terror," although it has not been scrubbed from the White House lexicon.

The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee doesn't mention terrorism or 9/11 in his prepared remarks for Wednesday's hearing either. Securing the borders, responding to natural disasters, ensuring transportation safety, protecting critical infrastructure and administering grants are the priorities, Mississippi Democrat Bennie Thompson says.

The United States hasn't been attacked since 2001, and the color-coded threat alert system hasn't changed since 2006 when a U.S.-bound terrorist plot was thwarted in the United Kingdom. But intelligence officials still consider the potential for terrorist attack on the U.S. a serious concern and send messages of "not if, but when."

The committee's top Republican said he was struck that Napolitano's prepared remarks did not include terrorism, Sept. 11, new threats or a formula for distributing counterterrorism grants to states and cities - a topic near and dear to the New Yorker.

"This can't be the evil we don't speak about," Peter King said. "Any testimony on homeland security should be centered around the threat of terrorism and what we're doing to combat it."

Napolitano has talked about unifying a 218,000-strong department that includes agencies charged with protecting the country's borders, enforcing immigration laws, protecting the president, responding to disasters, keeping terrorists off of airplanes and preventing computer attacks.

Because the department is so large and has many missions that overlap other agencies', Napolitano wants to make the Homeland Security Department's role unique. She wants to focus on transportation security, guarding chemical plants and detecting weapons of mass destruction.

Security expert James Carafano calls this "a debate without a difference." All the department's missions deal with terrorism in one way or another, said Carafano, a fellow with the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

The department is six years old, and the secretary does not need to tell her employees to look for terrorists, he said. Employees know that and have been doing it.

When reporters asked last month why she doesn't talk about terrorism specifically, Napolitano said terrorism fits into what she calls "action directives" that she's issued over the past month.

In those directives, she mentions terrorism only once, and that is about a law that contains the word in its title. Her directives include reviewing the Gulf Coast recovery from Hurricane Katrina, information sharing, and immigration and border security programs.

Pressed further on the absence of terror vernacular, she said she has been working with members of President Barack Obama's national security team since the November election, and she's regularly briefed on "incidents around the world." She doesn't single out terrorism "because it's almost become part and parcel of what we do everyday."

The department's mission is straightforward, she says in her prepared testimony: "To protect the American people from threats both foreign and domestic, both natural and manmade - to do all that we can to prevent threats from materializing, respond to them if they do and recover with resiliency."

© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 32 Comments
by tamericanpie March 6, 2009 2:18 PM EST
She's seems a little naieve and may be more qualified to be a high school student teacher.
Reply to this comment
by GODSnLIBERALS February 26, 2009 4:32 PM EST
it is NOT s question of "if" but 'WHEN' we get attacked..

and liberals...politicians and ther zombie masses wil answer for it..
Reply to this comment
by GODSnLIBERALS February 26, 2009 3:50 PM EST
from now on..the liberals declared that 'terrorists' will now be refered to as "people with grievances" and the 9/11 attacks will now be called a 'unfortunate incident and misundertanding"

with the liberals in power..ITS A GOOD TIME TO BE IN THE TERRORISM BUSINESS
Reply to this comment
by gunnerv1 February 26, 2009 12:24 PM EST
Flangesqueal: That's what you think, of course you may have your own opinion, but opinions are like A$$holes, everybody has one and they all stink!
Reply to this comment
by hatesthecolt February 26, 2009 9:34 AM EST
can some one tell me how she is qualified? Just someone answer me just this one question.
Posted by dwilson59

Chertoff was a lawyer. How was HE qualified?

This is a ministerial position not an operational position. She has to manage and direct resources. And keep a staff that can do the operational work. If she's good at that, she'll be successful.
Reply to this comment
by GODSnLIBERALS February 25, 2009 10:45 PM EST
here comes the politicial correctness..AND THE TERRORISTS LOVES IT.
Reply to this comment
by quen45mp February 25, 2009 6:40 PM EST
I just want to say why is it always the mexicans that are single out...? Where are raides with Irans, russians, chinese, and others......With the wars we are having, we shoud be looking for the ones who started it......not the ones who need just a job and are willing to work for nothing>>>>>>>>We need to get real here you are making this a big issue.
Reply to this comment
by dmhphils February 25, 2009 6:27 PM EST
Homeland Security spokesman Sean Smith said the absence of the actual word, "terrorism" from her prepared testimony is not deliberate.

Oooooh......what a cool strategy......we just won't talk about it......maybe it will just go away. "Politically correct" has just become "Politically insane."
Reply to this comment
by mav547166 February 25, 2009 5:02 PM EST
Im glad I do not live in a target oops I mean city.
Reply to this comment
by mljohns00 February 25, 2009 3:51 PM EST
At last. A Government official who understands that constant talk of terrorism, while great as an excuse to spend money and violate people's civil rights, is causing more damage and ruin than all of the actual "terrorism" ever has caused in this country.
Reply to this comment
See all 32 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook