0
   

What the 9/11 Commission Concluded

 
 
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 08:07 am
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/22/911.report/index.html

9/11 panel report: 'We must act'

'We do not have the luxury of time,' says commission chairman


Friday, July 23, 2004 Posted: 1:05 AM EDT (0505 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The chairman of the panel investigating the attacks of September 11, 2001, said his commission found that the "United States government was simply not active enough in combating the terrorist threat before 9/11."

Thomas Kean and his fellow panelists cited a "failure of imagination" that they said kept U.S. officials from understanding the al Qaeda threat before the attacks on New York and Washington that killed nearly 3,000.

The independent National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States released its findings on Thursday in a 570-page report.

Congress established the bipartisan panel to investigate events before, during and immediately after the attacks.

"Every expert with whom we spoke told us an attack of even greater magnitude is now possible and even probable. We do not have the luxury of time," said Kean, a former Republican governor of New Jersey.

"We must prepare and we must act. The al Qaeda network and its affiliates are sophisticated, patient, disciplined and lethal."

Commission member James Thompson said the proposed reforms were urgent and said Congress and the president have a duty to act quickly.

"If these reforms are not the best that can be done for the American people, then the Congress and the president need to tell us what's better," said the former Republican governor of Illinois.

Some Republican lawmakers have said Congress is unlikely to take any action on the report until next year. But Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Democratic Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut urged their colleagues to take action quickly.

"This is a straight-talking, tough, bold, nonpartisan report," said Lieberman, who supported the creation of the panel along with McCain over initial White House objections.

"But we all know this report is only the end of the beginning," Lieberman said.

Bob Hughes, who lost his 30-year-old son, Kris, in the collapse of the twin towers at the World Trade Center in New York, said the report showed how "we just have to change the way we do business."

"Congress has to step up the pace. The FBI, the CIA -- they can't just be thinking about, 'Well this is my job and that's your job.' We have to work together nonpartisan. Everybody has to come together to do the job if we're going to keep the country safe."

Cheryl McGuinness, whose husband, Thomas, was the copilot of American Airlines Flight 11 that struck the north tower of the World Trade Center, said, "This is the time to be bold and courageous and to step up and to say what we need to do and to implement some changes."

Beverley Eckert, whose husband, Sean, died in the World Trade Center, said she had hoped the report would hold individuals accountable.

"My concern is that there are people who are not competent and irresponsible who may still be in positions of authority," she said.

"I'm not angry. It's not that I wanted heads to roll," she added. "But I worked in a large corporation. ... Sometimes I think you need to identify the people in an organization who are not functioning the way they should." (More reaction from families)

Acting CIA Director John McLaughlin said he appreciated the report and "some of its criticisms."

He said the agency had already been transformed since the attacks but that officials looked forward to examining the findings of the report.

Earlier, Kean and Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton, a former Democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, briefed President Bush on the report Thursday morning and presented a copy to him in the White House Rose Garden.

Bush told reporters the report contained "some very constructive recommendations" and that he looked "forward to working with responsible parties within my administration to move forward on those recommendations."

As expected, the report calls for a national intelligence chief and a counterterrorism center modeled on the military's unified commands.

It also proposes the creation of a joint congressional committee to oversee homeland security.

The report concluded that the emergence of al Qaeda in the late 1990s "presented challenges to U.S. governmental institutions that they were not well-designed to meet."

Among the failures:


Neither Bush nor his predecessor Bill Clinton understood the gravity of the threats posed by terrorists because the leaders could not imagine such attacks.


The CIA was limited in its effort to try to capture al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants in Afghanistan by the agency's use of proxies.


Terrorism was not the top national security concern and missed opportunities to thwart the attack indicate the government's inability to adapt to new challenges.


The failure of the CIA and FBI to communicate with each other -- sometimes because of "legal misunderstandings" -- led to missed "operational opportunities" to hinder or break the terror plot.


The CIA did not put 9/11 hijacker Khalid Almihdhar on a "watch list" or notify the FBI when he had a U.S. visa in January 2000 or when he met with a key figure in the USS Cole bombing. And the CIA failed to develop plans to track Almihdhar, or hijacker Nawaf Alhazmi when he obtained a U.S. visa and flew to Los Angeles. Both men were on American Airlines Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon.


The FBI failed to recognize the significance of Almihdhar and Alhazmi's arrival in the United States or the significance of al Qaeda member Zacarias Moussaoui's training and beliefs after his arrest in Minnesota in August 2001.

The report will be on sale in bookstores for $10. It will also be available online and through the Government Printing Office.

CNN's John King and Elaine Quijano contributed to this report.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 922 • Replies: 10
No top replies

 
Redheat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 08:09 am
You willing to tell Bush and the Republicans this because thus far they are the only ones claiming nothing will be done until after Nov.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 08:10 am
Redheat wrote:
You willing to tell Bush and the Republicans this because thus far they are the only ones claiming nothing will be done until after Nov.

I was really rather hoping that people might be interested in discussing the conclusions themselves.
0 Replies
 
drom et reve
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 08:20 am
It's interesting that they should not act on security until November. I thought that that election ploy was only used by we English Wink.

Bush was told that Bin Laden was hellbent on attacking within the United States of America. He should have heeded more; but, if he put in restrictions before something happened, he would be called 'pointlessly repressive' and 'taking his imagination too far.' I would rather defend a piece of Edam cheese than defend Bush, but the CIA must get thousands of leads, most of them false. A mixture of 'impossibility' and lack of time might have prevailed, and it probably would have done so under Nader or Gore.

0 Replies
 
Redheat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 08:22 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
Redheat wrote:
You willing to tell Bush and the Republicans this because thus far they are the only ones claiming nothing will be done until after Nov.

I was really rather hoping that people might be interested in discussing the conclusions themselves.


What did you want to discuss? I seen no questions included in the copy and pasting of the article.

Ok

Here are my thoughts.

Why did it take a commission to discover these problems and why hasn't anything been done thus far?

There are still questions that are unanswered that should be.

Why did the Bush administration not allow the commission to remain until Jan. like they ask?

Why did the commission state that Saudi Royals were not flown out on 9.13 when we know they were and it's all ready been established?

Why was the man who left that memo concerning suspected terrorist taking flying lessons given a $20,000 bonus instead of being fired?

Why won't the Republicans call a special session to address these concerns ASAP?

What about the CIA connection to OBL during the Afghan/Russia war? What impact did that have? Why wasn't that delved into more?

What about all the intel the Bush administration DID recieve? Why didn't they do anything? What exactly did they know and when did they know it?

I don't think Czar is the correct word to use.

Yes there should be a central office that will be used to gather ALL the intelligence from various sources. However that was suggested in the Homeland Security bill and was dismissed by the Bush administration.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 08:24 am
And, aside from whose fault it is or isn't, what are the implications for the future? What should we do? What shouldn't we do?
0 Replies
 
Redheat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 08:30 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
And, aside from whose fault it is or isn't, what are the implications for the future? What should we do? What shouldn't we do?


What should we do?

Besides securing ports, chemical plants, borders and/or other major targets and holes? That should have all ready been done.

Since the report only came out last night and I haven't been able to get to a book store there's much to read. Did you happen to read the report yet?

I think there are obvious steps to take, some should have all ready been taken. There should be a special session in congress to figure out what should be done next. I'm sure there will be things I agree with and things I dont.

However right now the questions lay at the feet of this administration and the Republican lead congress. It's not what I would do that is irrelevant, the question is what will they do? The ball is in their court and it's time they put up or shut up!
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 08:35 am
If faced with a real external threat, we spend most of our time pointing fingers at each other, saying, "My side is good and yours is bad," then one would think that the terrorists will win.

Are the conclusions correct? What ought we to do? What should we avoid doing? What is the magnitude of the threat? What about the specific recommendations of the commission? Anyone have any additional recommendations? Will we win or lose in the end? There is plenty to talk about.
0 Replies
 
Redheat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 08:55 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
If faced with a real external threat, we spend most of our time pointing fingers at each other, saying, "My side is good and yours is bad," then one would think that the terrorists will win.

Are the conclusions correct? What ought we to do? What should we avoid doing? What is the magnitude of the threat? What about the specific recommendations of the commission? Anyone have any additional recommendations? Will we win or lose in the end? There is plenty to talk about?


Now I've answered some questions you just keep asking them.

Why don't YOU put forth your assessments and ideas instead of putting down others.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 09:49 am
Redheat, we try that and then everyone complains about the infringment of rights and the evil of governments.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Jul, 2004 11:28 am
Redheat wrote:
Now I've answered some questions you just keep asking them.

Why don't YOU put forth your assessments and ideas instead of putting down others.

Who put down your ideas? I didn't comment on them one way or the other. I just wondered if faced with a lethal, external threat, we can stop trying to best each other long enough to discuss the what the commission concluded about the threat and how it ought to be addressed.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » What the 9/11 Commission Concluded
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.35 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 12:56:15