Flight 253: "The system worked"?

[Sqrl]

Just saw these two articles when catching up on this story and at first I got a laugh...but then after I thought about it a bit it kinda pissed me off a little.....

 

First from Politico:

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said that the thwarting of the attempt to blow up the Amsterdam-Detroit flight this week demonstrated that "the system worked."

Asked by CNN's Candy Crowley on "State of the Union" how that could be possible when the young Nigerian who sought to set off the bomb was able to smuggle explosive liquid onto the flight, Napolitano responded: "We're asking the same questions."

Napolitano added that there was "no suggestion that [the bomber] was improperly screened."

Just this statement is bizarre....a man gets an explosive device on a plane and somehow this is part of the planned system?  Properly screened or not if someone gets a bomb on a plane the system is most definitely not working.

Next an article from ABC:

 

Officials now say tragedy was only averted on Northwest flight 253 because a makeshift detonator failed to work properly.

Bomb experts say there was more than enough explosive to bring down the Northwest jet, which had nearly 300 people aboard, had the detonator not failed, and the nation's outdated airport screening machines may need to be upgraded.

"We've known for a long time that this is possible," said Richard Clarke, former counterterrorism czar and ABC News consultant, "and that we really have to replace our scanning devices with more modern systems."

Clarke said full body scans were needed, "but they're expensive and they're intrusive. They invade people's privacy."

Al Qaeda, said Clarke, is aware of this vulnerability in the U.S. airport security system. "They know that this is a weakness and an Achilles' heel in our airport security system and this is the second time they've tried it."

... (follow link above for full article)

It is obviously troubling that someone can get a bomb onto a plane in the first place, but do we really need the DHS secretary out there trying to pretend like everything is perfectly fine as if this whole thing went down just like it was supposed to? With this source now saying we got lucky it makes Napolitano look like a fool for even suggesting things worked as intended.

It's pretty obvious that if we want to catch these things security measures need to be tighter and as always there is a price to pay for that extra security, which means its not as easy as "yes or no".  But that doesn't mean we should run around after narrowly averting a tragedy thanks to lots of luck and essentially say "we meant to do that".

I don't think I'm nitpicking to expect a DHS secretary to give a plain and simple assessment of what went wrong rather than trying to assuage fears with some fairy tale version of the story. 

Anyone else find it a little unsettling that she couldn't just give a honest assessment of the failures of the system?