Sounds like 9/11 commission believes Congress and President are not jumping on security issues as they should be. Many things are just not being done stated the commission chairman. Should be interesting what they have to say. Sounds like they think the threat of more terrorist attacks is just not being taken very serious. First reply from W H in response was. It's number one priority. I wonder what happen to Iraq and S S.
9/11 comm follow up tomorrow?
- Thread starter djv
- Start date
Their push on SS was given up for dead, as they could not put that one over. I'd imagine the 9/11 issues are probably in the same "g" file as stage two of the study on war intelligence manipulation. The conservative "garbage" file...hopefully not to be mentioned again.
Make no mistake, though, djv. The real #1 prioritiy of this administration is cutting taxes for the upper 1%. They certainly will never let that one go, no matter how bad the deficit becomes or the expenses of the war pile up.
Make no mistake, though, djv. The real #1 prioritiy of this administration is cutting taxes for the upper 1%. They certainly will never let that one go, no matter how bad the deficit becomes or the expenses of the war pile up.
WASHINGTON - The United States is at great risk for more terrorist attacks because Congress and the White House have failed to enact several strong security measures, members of the former Sept. 11 commission said Sunday.
?It?s not a priority for the government right now,? said the former chairman, Thomas Kean, ahead of the group?s release of a report Monday assessing how well its recommendations have been followed.
?More than four years after 9/11 ... people are not paying attention,? the former Republican governor of New Jersey said. ?God help us if we have another attack.?
Added Lee Hamilton, the former Democratic vice chairman of the commission: ?We believe that another attack will occur. It?s not a question of if. We are not as well-prepared as we should be.?
The five Republicans and five Democrats on the commission, whose recommendations are now promoted through a privately funded group known as the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, conclude that the government deserves ?more Fs than As? in responding to their 41 suggested changes.
?Lack of a sense of urgency?
Since the commission?s final report in July 2004, the government has enacted the centerpiece proposal to create a national intelligence director. But the government has stalled on other ideas, including improving communication among emergency responders and shifting federal terrorism-fighting money so it goes to states based on risk level.
?There is a lack of a sense of urgency,? Hamilton said. ?There are so many competing priorities. We?ve got three wars going on: one in Afghanistan, one in Iraq and the war against terror. And it?s awfully hard to keep people focused on something like this.?
National security adviser Stephen Hadley said Sunday that President Bush is committed to putting in place most of the commission?s recommendations.
?Obviously, as we?ve said all along, we are safer, but not yet safe. There is more to do,? Hadley said on ?Fox News Sunday.?
Ex-commissioners contended the government has been remiss by failing to act more quickly.
Kean said the Transportation Security Administration was wrong to announce changes last week that will allow airline passengers to carry small scissors and some sharp tools. He also said the agency, by now, should have consolidated databases of passenger information into a single ?terror watch list? to aid screening.
?I don?t think we have to go backward here,? said Kean, who appeared with Hamilton on NBC?s ?Meet the Press.?
?They?re talking about using more money for random checks. Terrorists coming through the airport may still not be spotted,? Kean said.
Spending priorities
Kean and Hamilton urged Congress to pass spending bills that would allow police and fire to communicate across radio spectrums and to reallocate money so that Washington and New York, which have more people and symbolic landmarks, could receive more for terrorism defense.
Both bills have stalled in Congress, in part over the level of spending and turf fights over which states should get the most dollars.
?This is a no-brainer,? said Hamilton, a former Indiana congressman.
?From the standpoint of responding to a disaster, the key responders must be able to talk with one another. They could not do it on 9/11, and as a result of that, lives were lost. They could not do it at (Hurricane) Katrina. They still cannot do it.?
As for the dollar dispute, Hamilton said, ?We know what terrorists want to do: they want to kill as many Americans as possible. That means you protect the Washington monument and United States Capitol, and not other places.?
Congress established the commission in 2002 to investigate government missteps that led to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Its 567-page final report, which became a national best seller, does not blame Bush or former President Clinton for missteps contributing to the attacks but did say they failed to make anti-terrorism a higher priority.
The commission also concluded that the Sept. 11 attack would not be the nation?s last, noting that al-Qaida had tried for at least 10 years to acquire weapons of mass destruction.
Calling the country ?less safe than we were 18 months ago,? former Democratic commissioner Jamie Gorelick said Sunday the government?s failure to move forward on the recommendations makes the U.S. more vulnerable.
?The interest has faded?
She cited the failure to ensure that foreign nations are upgrading security measures to stop proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical materials, as well as the FBI?s resistance to overhauling its anti-terror programs.
?You remember the sense of urgency that we all felt in the summer of 2004. The interest has faded,? the Washington lawyer said on ABC?s ?Good Morning America.? ?You could see that in the aftermath of Katrina. We assumed that our government would be able to do what it needed to do and it didn?t do it.?
?It?s not a priority for the government right now,? said the former chairman, Thomas Kean, ahead of the group?s release of a report Monday assessing how well its recommendations have been followed.
?More than four years after 9/11 ... people are not paying attention,? the former Republican governor of New Jersey said. ?God help us if we have another attack.?
Added Lee Hamilton, the former Democratic vice chairman of the commission: ?We believe that another attack will occur. It?s not a question of if. We are not as well-prepared as we should be.?
The five Republicans and five Democrats on the commission, whose recommendations are now promoted through a privately funded group known as the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, conclude that the government deserves ?more Fs than As? in responding to their 41 suggested changes.
?Lack of a sense of urgency?
Since the commission?s final report in July 2004, the government has enacted the centerpiece proposal to create a national intelligence director. But the government has stalled on other ideas, including improving communication among emergency responders and shifting federal terrorism-fighting money so it goes to states based on risk level.
?There is a lack of a sense of urgency,? Hamilton said. ?There are so many competing priorities. We?ve got three wars going on: one in Afghanistan, one in Iraq and the war against terror. And it?s awfully hard to keep people focused on something like this.?
National security adviser Stephen Hadley said Sunday that President Bush is committed to putting in place most of the commission?s recommendations.
?Obviously, as we?ve said all along, we are safer, but not yet safe. There is more to do,? Hadley said on ?Fox News Sunday.?
Ex-commissioners contended the government has been remiss by failing to act more quickly.
Kean said the Transportation Security Administration was wrong to announce changes last week that will allow airline passengers to carry small scissors and some sharp tools. He also said the agency, by now, should have consolidated databases of passenger information into a single ?terror watch list? to aid screening.
?I don?t think we have to go backward here,? said Kean, who appeared with Hamilton on NBC?s ?Meet the Press.?
?They?re talking about using more money for random checks. Terrorists coming through the airport may still not be spotted,? Kean said.
Spending priorities
Kean and Hamilton urged Congress to pass spending bills that would allow police and fire to communicate across radio spectrums and to reallocate money so that Washington and New York, which have more people and symbolic landmarks, could receive more for terrorism defense.
Both bills have stalled in Congress, in part over the level of spending and turf fights over which states should get the most dollars.
?This is a no-brainer,? said Hamilton, a former Indiana congressman.
?From the standpoint of responding to a disaster, the key responders must be able to talk with one another. They could not do it on 9/11, and as a result of that, lives were lost. They could not do it at (Hurricane) Katrina. They still cannot do it.?
As for the dollar dispute, Hamilton said, ?We know what terrorists want to do: they want to kill as many Americans as possible. That means you protect the Washington monument and United States Capitol, and not other places.?
Congress established the commission in 2002 to investigate government missteps that led to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Its 567-page final report, which became a national best seller, does not blame Bush or former President Clinton for missteps contributing to the attacks but did say they failed to make anti-terrorism a higher priority.
The commission also concluded that the Sept. 11 attack would not be the nation?s last, noting that al-Qaida had tried for at least 10 years to acquire weapons of mass destruction.
Calling the country ?less safe than we were 18 months ago,? former Democratic commissioner Jamie Gorelick said Sunday the government?s failure to move forward on the recommendations makes the U.S. more vulnerable.
?The interest has faded?
She cited the failure to ensure that foreign nations are upgrading security measures to stop proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical materials, as well as the FBI?s resistance to overhauling its anti-terror programs.
?You remember the sense of urgency that we all felt in the summer of 2004. The interest has faded,? the Washington lawyer said on ABC?s ?Good Morning America.? ?You could see that in the aftermath of Katrina. We assumed that our government would be able to do what it needed to do and it didn?t do it.?
Just listen to there report. Were past 4 year since 9/11 and the grades handed out were D & F's. I am surprised how little has been done to protect the home land and American People.
Restricted vehicular access, increased physical barriers, more guards and patrols, improved communications and lighting, increased training and new procedures are among the many steps that have been taken
but i dont expect you to give a crap about that because it doesnt fit your agenda
but i dont expect you to give a crap about that because it doesnt fit your agenda
spibble spab said:Restricted vehicular access, increased physical barriers, more guards and patrols, improved communications and lighting, increased training and new procedures are among the many steps that have been taken
but i dont expect you to give a crap about that because it doesnt fit your agenda
Try to be more vague. 'Restricted vehicular access?' 'Increased physical barriers?' What do those things even mean?
As far as agenda, well, if wishing that the security measures suggested by the bi-partisan commission were not ignored is an agenda, then yes, you got me.
I guess you could care less, which is typical.
At what finacial cost would the liberals go to try and block every access before they started whining about fiscal budget?
Nice when they can bitch at either alternative.
Personally don't think any prevention would be adaquate if they wanted to hit us again--and feel its only matter of time.Maybe they didn't like trading 2 countries for 2 towers--and as I said before--if I was terrorist I would like the way things are going now-with the liberals and media doing their bidding, Why hit us again and get the country united once more. Let the media diss our troops on every occasion--let them pound any negatives but fail to acknowledge any good reports-supply terrorist with attorneys-keep the Iraq'i guessing if we'll be there with them by constantly bleating withdrawal--and just in case they are iraq'is and troops that don't get the message maybe a former liberal attorney general can show up to defend Saddam. Probably haven't seen the worse yet with elections coming up in about 10- days you can look for the terrorist and liberals to pull out all stops.we'll see what next few days has in store.
As far as what this administration has done since 911 maybe we could compare to what was done after trade was hit in last administration-- after all the only diff was they didn't use enough explosives. Anyone care to do last admins preventive measures after attack--
I didn't think so.
Much easier to the take Clintons approach and diss this admin world wide with post event quaterbacking then acknowledge his own pathetic failures.
Nice when they can bitch at either alternative.
Personally don't think any prevention would be adaquate if they wanted to hit us again--and feel its only matter of time.Maybe they didn't like trading 2 countries for 2 towers--and as I said before--if I was terrorist I would like the way things are going now-with the liberals and media doing their bidding, Why hit us again and get the country united once more. Let the media diss our troops on every occasion--let them pound any negatives but fail to acknowledge any good reports-supply terrorist with attorneys-keep the Iraq'i guessing if we'll be there with them by constantly bleating withdrawal--and just in case they are iraq'is and troops that don't get the message maybe a former liberal attorney general can show up to defend Saddam. Probably haven't seen the worse yet with elections coming up in about 10- days you can look for the terrorist and liberals to pull out all stops.we'll see what next few days has in store.
As far as what this administration has done since 911 maybe we could compare to what was done after trade was hit in last administration-- after all the only diff was they didn't use enough explosives. Anyone care to do last admins preventive measures after attack--
I didn't think so.
Much easier to the take Clintons approach and diss this admin world wide with post event quaterbacking then acknowledge his own pathetic failures.
supposedly, it is political taboo for a president to publicly chastise a current or past president.
thats exactly what clinton did to bush whilst trying to raise money for katrina fund with W's own father. nice class. stick to cigar implantations. but then again. im off topic. so i'll stop
thats exactly what clinton did to bush whilst trying to raise money for katrina fund with W's own father. nice class. stick to cigar implantations. but then again. im off topic. so i'll stop
Why should the terrorists even bother attacking the United States homeland. The Democrats in Washington do the dirty work for them everyday.
-Howard Dean today...."The U.S. will not win in Iraq."
-John Kerry...."Our troops are terrorizing women and children."
-Ted Kennedy...."Our troops are the problem in Iraq"
Al Qaida must LOVE the Democrats. Utterly Disgusting. This is fuccking treason.
-Howard Dean today...."The U.S. will not win in Iraq."
-John Kerry...."Our troops are terrorizing women and children."
-Ted Kennedy...."Our troops are the problem in Iraq"
Al Qaida must LOVE the Democrats. Utterly Disgusting. This is fuccking treason.
Last edited:
