Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Okay, so why did Bush oppose the 9/11 commission? Why did he delay it? Why hasn't he implemented their recommendations? Blah, blah, why, why, whah?

My guess is Bush opposed the 9/11 commission because he knew it would be fruitless. Bush knew that putting together a committee of politicians to jabber on about the 9/11 attack would waste a lot of time and a lot of taxpayer dollars and nothing would come from it. Guess what. He was right. After months of investigation and interviewing "witnesses", the genuises on the commission decided that everyone was to blame. Yes, they felt that Bush's 8 months in office contributed as much to the attacks as Clinton's 8 years. Wonderful. What insight! If only we had them before the attack. No wonder the Dems are so quick to cite them everytime the issue of terrorism comes up.

Basically, the 9/11 commission became exactly what Bush didn't want, a blame commission. It was used by politicians in political races to point fingers and hurl accusations on both sides of the aisle. And nothing good has come from it. And no, Bush didn't implement their recommendations. And no, we haven't been attacked for 6 years. That says a lot in itself.

And regarding the charge that Bush tried to "stack" the commission with his cronies...Well, this is laughable to say the least. Does the name Jamie Gorelick ring a bell? It should. She was Clinton's deputy attorney general who "specifically prohibited intelligence agents from telling law enforcement agents about suspected terrorists in the country". It was this policy that many gov't officials demanded be changed after the attacks. And guess who was on the 9/11 Commission....Yes, Jamie Gorelick, hand picked by the Democrats to sit on the Commission that was put together to evaluate her very own policy. And who was stacking the commission with cronies? That's like having Bill Clinton presiding as the judge at his own impeachment hearings. Her very presence on the commission was enough to invalidate their findings.

But what bugs me the most is all this blame. We point fingers at everyone from NORAD to Cheney to Rice to Bush to Clinton, but no one seems to blame those who are truly responsible. Did the 9/11 Commission assign blame for the attacks on Al Qaeda and Bin Laden? Did the Jersey Girls? Does anyone think that Bin Laden is more to blame than Bush or Clinton? The fact that we have to think about that question makes it clear that we, as a nation, have our heads stuck so far up our asses that it's a wonder we even know who attacked us on 9/11. If we don't get over it and stop assigning blame and, for once, focus on those who actually carried out these attacks, then more attacks are sure to come. And something tells me that 3,000 dead will pale in comparison to what they have in mind for us in the future. So, my guess, is Bush knew what the 9/11 Commission would become, and it would eat away at our resolve to face the true enemy. It appears that he was right.


Anonymous said...

Yeah, well that didn't stop FDR from appointing an investigative commission after Pearl Harbor. And at that point we were at war with the Empire of Japan, with it's enormous Navy, it's Army that had already killed two million Chinese; oh, and did I forget to mention? Nazi Germany, then military master of all Europe, had also declared war on the US.

Lazy, frat boy G.W. Bush didn't want a 9/11 commission because he was afraid that they might discover just how asleep at the wheel he was during his first 9 months as President.

Allisoni Balloni said...

I second that, anonymous. Clinton began an anti-Terrorism initiative during his presidency, and the Bush administration, during that first 9 months, never got around to dealing with it. Only the week of September 11th did they finally plan to sit down and take a look at terrorism. Yes, it is the enemy's fault. But when it could have been prevented, there is just no excuse for not investigating it.