Y'know, that priority we were supposed to be taking seriously now that we've actually been struck on the mainland? Turns out it's not going so well.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/05/911.commission.ap/index.html

Quote :

"U.S. given 'more F's than A's' on terror preparation Leaders called distracted by wars, competing priorities WASHINGTON (AP) -- The former September 11 commission gave dismal grades Monday to the federal government's efforts to shore up national security and prevent another terror attack on the United States. Meeting for the last time since being appointed by Congress in 2002, commission members gave the government "more F's than A's" among the 41 grades measuring progress on security recommendations they issued last year. "We're frustrated, all of us -- frustrated at the lack of urgency in addressing these various problems," said former commission chairman Thomas Kean, a Republican and former New Jersey governor. Specifically, the panel gave the government an "F" on homeland security spending for cities most at risk, on improving radio communication for emergency agencies and on airline passenger prescreening. They awarded only one A -- actually an A-minus -- for the administration's efforts to curb terrorist financing. (Read the commission's report card [PDF]) "We shouldn't need another wake-up call," Kean said. "We believe that the terrorists will strike again, so does every responsible expert that we have talked to. And if they do, and these reforms that might have prevented such an attack have not been implemented, what will our excuse be?" The official commission, tasked with investigating government missteps that led to the September 11, 2001, attacks, disbanded after issuing its recommendations in July 2004. It has since been operating with private funds at the 9-11 Public Discourse Project to monitor government progress. It's awfully hard to keep people focused Since the commission's final report in July 2004, the government has enacted the centerpiece proposal to create a national intelligence director. But it 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. (Read a CNN security analyst's views on the report) "There are so many competing priorities," said vice chairman Lee Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana. 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." White House counselor Dan Bartlett said the Bush administration wants to base funding on threat but is frustrated by the way Congress spends homeland security funding. "They are funding things based on old models, pre-9/11 models. We think it's important that homeland security dollars go to where the threats are," Bartlett said Monday on ABC's "Good Morning America." He said the Bush administration had acted on some 70 of the commission's recommendations and that others were awaiting congressional action. "It's important that Congress act on those recommendations," he said on CBS' "The Early Show." Bartlett told NBC's "Today" show that while the United States has not been attacked since September 11, "we're not resting on our laurels" and will "continue to press to make the type of changes to make the country safer." 'Another attack will occur' Hamilton, in a joint appearance with Kean on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday, said, "We believe that another attack will occur. It's not a question of if. We are not as well-prepared as we should be." National security adviser Stephen Hadley said President Bush is committed to putting in place most of the recommendations. "We are safer, but not yet safe. There is more to do," Hadley said on "Fox News Sunday." Some members of the commission, whose recommendations now are promoted through a privately funded group known as the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, contended the government has been remiss by failing to act more quickly. 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. Congress established the commission in 2002 to investigate government missteps that led to the attacks of September 11, 2001. Nearly 3,000 people were killed when 19 Arab hijackers organized by al Qaeda flew airliners into New York City's World Trade Center and the Pentagon and caused a crash in the Pennsylvania countryside. The panel's 567-page final report, which became a national best seller, did 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."

I don't even know who to blame anymore.

12/5/2005 3:42:50 PM

i would say

blame the terrorists


but thats me

12/5/2005 3:52:37 PM

Minor anecdotal bit here: My brother-in-law heads a SWAT and NARC unit in a major NC city. He says they have loads of funding (and have had it for awhile) but have trouble finding areas to spend it on. They just don't want to waste it on anything. A lot of focus on training with the military and buying the obvious but basically departments are running into trouble simply deciding what to do with their money. They can buy all the gear they want but if they don't have the time or method for training then its pointless (every other department is vying for the same limited slots). Everyone knows thar while there is urgency that doing things quickly but wrong serves no purpose, false sense of secuirty. Probably the biggest shortage is in man-power. We simply need a much larger "police" force to be able to give things the attention that is wanted.

12/5/2005 4:30:43 PM

Incompatible radio bands or absence of detectors in major cargo terminals isn't a problem of manpower. Plus if they have money and don't have people, why don't they... (attention! example of novel thinking!!1)... hire someone?

12/5/2005 5:39:00 PM

12/5/2005 6:29:48 PM

this just in -- the administration is all talk and mostly fucking up.

12/5/2005 7:48:32 PM

They are just letting security stay lax so another terrorist attack can occur, and they will have another reason to start another war and pass more fascist legislation like the Patriot and Real ID acts.

12/5/2005 8:19:14 PM

Quote :

"i would say blame the terrorists but thats me"

i get it. we can just blame the terrorists and do nothing to protect ourselves.

12/5/2005 8:32:25 PM

they hate our freedoms

12/5/2005 8:56:56 PM

Quote :

"ncompatible radio bands or absence of detectors in major cargo terminals isn't a problem of manpower. Plus if they have money and don't have people, why don't they... (attention! example of novel thinking!!1)... hire someone?"

If security is an issue then you can't just do blanket hires simply to supply manpower. The whole point is that qualified and trained individuals are needed, not to mention specific training for the new incoming equipment (like how to work chemical/bomb sniffers and so forth). The whole point is to make the system more competent, not just to make it appear more prepared by adding bloat. These are problems that local departments face and not something that is managed by federal oversight. The problem is that Sheriffs in Wake County can do things differently than Sheriffs (or PD for that matter) in Orange County and that creates things like communication problems as simple as radio bands. You have thousands of independently operated insitutions trying to cram a whole bunch of new technology and operations into an organized unit and it just doesn't happen smoothly. Federal government can't take away the independent operations of state and local authorities full tilt. Not onlyis not not right Constitutionally but its not feasible from a practicality standpoint.

12/5/2005 11:21:51 PM

Quote :

"The former September 11 commission gave dismal grades Monday to the federal government's efforts to shore up national security and prevent another terror attack on the United States"

This whole "war on terror" is a massive scam. In order to see that all you have to think about is this one thing. If this al-Qaeda terrorist threat is real, why is the border still WIDE OPEN, and yet the government is asking us to give up our liberties and allow the country to be turned into a police/surveillance state?. It doesn't make any sense if you accept their premises.

Preventing terrorism is not the goal. Remember, *they* are the terrorists. They orchestrated 9/11...and Oklahoma City, etc. They're the ones covering up the truth about what really happened. They put out the phony bin laden tapes and told us it was 19 guys masterminded by a guy in a cave to get us to invade Afghanistan. They then lied about Iraq's WMDs...and then they lied about torture...and on and on.

We are asked to give billions of dollars to the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc. to "protect us from terrorism." And what? Are we to believe they are just complete idiots who are totally incompetent? It's like with 9/11. The government just says of all the intelligence failures and "screw ups", "whoops. we just messed up." And then after they "mess up", no one gets fired or demoted, and they ask for MORE money. The people at the head of these agencies actually got promoted and got medals after 9/11, even though they admit that they oversaw collasal failures in intelligence, etc. "Yes, we're incompetent and no one's going to get fired or demoted. Now give us more money." Does that make ANY sense?

All this money earmarked for "terrorism" is being spent on beefing up the CIA, NSA, and FBI's ability to spy on, track, and monitor American citizens. It's not being spent on "fighting terrorism." It's being used to empower these agencies that are implementing a police state here in America.


[Edited on December 9, 2005 at 4:07 PM. Reason : `]

12/9/2005 3:56:26 PM

Everyone already knows exactly how you feel. As soon as I saw that you had posted in this thread I knew what you had written. There is no need for you to continually post this nonsense, especially since you claim that your time is so valuable.

12/9/2005 4:17:41 PM