Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

9/11 Panel Gives White House Mixed Review (Dubya hasn't stopped al-Qaida attempts to get WMD)
Yahoo News ^ | 11/14/05 | BARRY SCHWEID

Posted on 11/14/2005 3:45:09 PM PST by Libloather

9/11 Panel Gives White House Mixed Review
By BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer
1 hour, 10 minutes ago


Fred Fielding, a member of the Sept. 11 commission, prepares to join other panelists in a progress report on the 2004 recommendations aimed at guarding against future terrorist attacks, at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, Monday, Nov. 14, 2005. Fielding, a former Nixon White House counsel, praised U.S. attempts to integrate the Arab and Muslim world into the global trading system and in fighting terrorism financing. The Bush administration was given a mixed review and was criticized for not adopting standards for treatment of captured terror suspects. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

WASHINGTON - Reviewing action on recommendations it made last year, the Sept. 11 commission on Monday criticized the Bush administration for not adopting standards for treatment of captured terror suspects.

The administration was given a mixed review in a report on the commission's key recommendations that were designed to help the United States better prepare for and respond to a terror attack.

There was high praise for U.S. attempts to integrate the Arab and Muslim world into the global trading system and in fighting terrorism financing.

But former commission chairman Thomas Kean, former vice chairman Lee Hamilton and the eight other members who formed the 9-11 Public Disclosure Project found much to criticize.

Their review gave the administration the grade "unfulfilled" on the commission's recommendation that the United States develop a common approach with friendly nations on the treatment of captured terror suspects. The commission also had suggested the Geneva Conventions on the law of armed conflict should be applied to military prisons and secret detention centers.

What the Bush administration still needs to do, the review said, is to adopt standards for terror suspects that are in accord with international law.

"These standards should cover the treatment of detainees held by all elements of the U.S. government," the former commission members said.

And, they said, "the United States should work with its allies to develop mutually acceptable standards for terrorist detention."

President Bush last week defended U.S. interrogation practices and called the treatment of terrorist suspects lawful. "We do not torture," Bush declared.

Congress, meanwhile, is engaged in a high-profile debate over the handling of detainees. The Senate twice has signed off on legislation to ban the cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of prisoners in U.S. custody.

The provision is included in two defense bills. The House versions of the bills do not include the language, which the White House opposes.

At Monday's presentation, commission member Richard Ben-Veniste said Iraq is on track to succeed Afghanistan as a terrorist training ground. "How much this trend has been fueled by the highly publicized reports of brutalization, humiliation and desecration cannot be measured accurately," he said.

"But the flames of extremism undoubtedly burn more brightly when we are the ones who deliver the gasoline," Ben-Veniste said.

On another front, the former commission members found insufficient progress on thwarting attempts by the al-Qaida network to acquire or make weapons of mass destruction.

On the positive side, the review cited an agreement reached last February by Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin to secure nuclear warheads and material.

Russia, for instance, has made several dozen additional nuclear warhead storage sites available for inspection and improvement, the review said.

But more than 100 research facilities worldwide — in some 40 countries — contain enough highly enriched uranium to fashion a nuclear device, and this is troubling, the report said.

"Preventing terrorists from gaining access to weapons of mass destruction must be elevated above all other problems of national security," the former commission members said. "It represents the greatest threat to the American people" and President Bush should publicly make this goal his top priority, the review said.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 911; 911commission; acquire; alqaida; attempts; commission; destruction; found; gives; house; insufficient; ll; mass; members; mixed; network; panel; progress; review; thwarting; weapons; white
On another front, the former commission members found insufficient progress on thwarting attempts by the al-Qaida network to acquire or make weapons of mass destruction.

Like airplanes? So far, so good...


A man flips through copies of the 9/11 Commission Report at a news conference in Washington, November 14, 2005. The U.S. government is still failing to adequately protect nuclear weapons from terrorists and its handling of terrorism suspects is undermining attempts to improve America's image in the Muslim world, members of a commission that investigated the September 11 attacks said on Monday. (Jim Young/Reuters)

1 posted on 11/14/2005 3:45:12 PM PST by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Libloather

this commision has as much credibility with me as the ny slimes.
JMHO


2 posted on 11/14/2005 3:48:48 PM PST by JohnLongIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
You mean they still cover the 9-11 Circus Clowns. The same Committee that categorically refused to dismiss a Commissioner Jamie Gorlic who had a CLEAR conflict of interest?? What next, just turn editorial decisions over to Hillary Clinton? What a bunch of losers.
3 posted on 11/14/2005 3:50:03 PM PST by MNJohnnie (100% of Islamic Terrorists disapprove of the job President Bush is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

And what of Able Danger, Mr. 9/11 Commission Man?


4 posted on 11/14/2005 3:50:36 PM PST by oolatec
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
The commission that protected Gorelicks backside and has taken no interest in the revelations of Able Danger.
How much of Able Dangers work was thwarted because of her wall?
I have no use for any of their posturing.
5 posted on 11/14/2005 3:51:25 PM PST by carlr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

I didn't realize the commission was still in existence.


6 posted on 11/14/2005 3:52:37 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

It's just a book-selling sham now.


7 posted on 11/14/2005 4:01:02 PM PST by TBarnett34 (Hillary Clinton IS the Great Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

Commissions are like special prosecutors, they shall inherit the Earth.


8 posted on 11/14/2005 4:02:32 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

But, but, I thought there weren't any WMD's out there to be had.


9 posted on 11/14/2005 4:13:41 PM PST by Arm_Bears (Rust never sleeps!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Why haven't the Ommission Commission comissars been jailed* yet?

*After a fair trial of course


10 posted on 11/14/2005 4:15:13 PM PST by NeoCaveman (ANWR is national security, RINO's keep us dependent on foreign oil, aiding our enemies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
I give the 9/11 commission a 0-0 review. They were negligent in doing a totally non-partisan report and kept Jamie Gorelick on the panel when it was obvious the woman was much to blame for the 9/11 day of horror. They deemed Able Danger not worthy of investigating; IMHO, they knew it might lead to more Clinton failures being recognized. Al Qaida could have been stopped years before - this isn't the Bush administrations fault, they have been cleaning up the Clinton administration mess left to them.

Stopping Al Qaida will take the MSM and useful idiots who champion the terrorists to stop playing politics and start winning this WOT. Until then the 9/11 commission can stuff it.

President Bush is doing a marvelous job in spite of the thankless “damned if you do or damned if you don’t” unpatriotic, anti-Americans and the MSM using Iraq and the WOT as a political football each and every day!

11 posted on 11/14/2005 4:17:29 PM PST by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnLongIsland

I agree. Especially since they specifically ignored the Mohammad Ata (Able Danger) information even afterit was offered to them on a silver platter.


12 posted on 11/14/2005 4:19:26 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn

The 911 Commission is about as credible as Fitzgerald.


13 posted on 11/14/2005 4:22:29 PM PST by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
You mean they still cover the 9-11 Circus Clowns.

As long as there is 'anything' negative, however minute or nebulous, the MSM will report it from this sham commission as though it were from allah himself.

According to the commission we haven't done all we SHOULD to prevent WMD from getting into the hands of the TERRORISTS!!! ........Hmmmmmm.........So if we did NOT invade IRAQ.....this report would undoubtedly be "SCATHING" in it's attack on this administration for allowing WMD to proliferate in IRAQ and we would all BELIEVE whole heartedly that the PRESIDENT was too weak and too afraid to protect and defend our nation!!!

Am I correct in deducing from this report that GW would be considered a failure in both cases.....INVADE IRAQ or NOT!!

14 posted on 11/14/2005 4:24:25 PM PST by PISANO (We will not tire......We will not falter.......We will NOT FAIL!!! .........GW Bush [Oct 2001])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

How are the Dems doing on all this?


15 posted on 11/14/2005 4:28:04 PM PST by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: woofie; Arm_Bears; Liz; Howlin; ALOHA RONNIE; RonDog; MurryMom
How are the Dems doing on all this?

But, but, I thought there weren't any WMD's out there to be had.

My guess - not good...

16 posted on 11/14/2005 4:33:53 PM PST by Libloather (Geena Davis isn't man enough to play Hillary on TV. Heck, BILL isn't man enough to play Hillary...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

A world in which charlatans such as Richard Ben Veniste, Jamie Gorelicker, Slade Gorton (and fellow RINOs), et al are now the great experts on counter-terrorism and international affairs is a world so laughable and Orwellian as to enter the realm of farce. How did these clowns ever get appointed to the 9/11 Commission and why do they now think they can preach to us when they made a total botch of their job? The idea that the MAIN ISSUE post-9/11 is the gentle treatment of Al Qaeda and other terrorist prisoners shows that these clowns are merely spouting 'Rat talking points and do not know squat about securing the USA and the world from terrorists.


17 posted on 11/14/2005 4:35:18 PM PST by Enchante (Joe Wilson: "I don't know anything about uranium, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

This commission has no credibility with me. It was meant to cover up for certain democrats, and indict the administration. Crapola.


18 posted on 11/14/2005 4:36:43 PM PST by ladyinred ("Progressive" = code word for Communist/Nazi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
"Like airplanes? So far, so good..."

You could have said the same thing on September 11th, 2001 up until about 8:45am. My experience with airport security - rather, the lack thereof - since September 11th has left me with the notion that the only thing standing between us and more plane hijackings are unarmed passengers with a will to live. The TSA needs to quit acting like a typical government do-nothing agency and put some decent security in place. For starters, try hiring competent people; not 80 year old women who couldn't read the name on my ticket and didn't bother even glancing at my ID but let me go anyway despite the fact that my ticket had gotten mixed up with a friend's.
19 posted on 11/14/2005 4:39:09 PM PST by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent
My experience with airport security - rather, the lack thereof - since September 11th has left me with the notion that the only thing standing between us and more plane hijackings are unarmed passengers with a will to live. The TSA needs to quit acting like a typical government do-nothing agency and put some decent security in place.

I'm a frequent flyer and I understand your concern because I have seen exactly what you describe. I think that it is an unreal expectation to believe that we could ever find these perfect people that would be alert and follow procedure 100% of the time, though. I think you could have all high paid college graduates working the lines and you would still have an equal number of screw-ups.

20 posted on 11/14/2005 5:08:43 PM PST by Elyse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Elyse
"I think that it is an unreal expectation to believe that we could ever find these perfect people that would be alert and follow procedure 100% of the time, though."

I agree that there always be the element of human mistakes, but certainly there must be ways we can reduce the impact of those mistakes. Another major problem I have is the fact that I've never once been asked to power on my laptop. Lord knows what I could assemble within the space of my laptop, and a bunch of printed circuit boards inside a laptop chasis looks perfectly normal through a machine. It wouldn't be bad if it were just some healthy paranoia, but when I board an airplane, I can't help but think that I can't rely on airport security in the slightest to ensure there's no one armed and dangerous on this aircraft.
21 posted on 11/14/2005 5:14:46 PM PST by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent
Another major problem I have is the fact that I've never once been asked to power on my laptop. Lord knows what I could assemble within the space of my laptop, and a bunch of printed circuit boards inside a laptop chasis looks perfectly normal through a machine

I've had that concern, too. Add in all the DVD players, MP-3 players and cell phones, to that, too. Hey, even children's toys make me nervous. This is why I say, it's impossible. I think the only feasible thing they could do to avoid the possiblity that one of these could be rigged is to totally BAN them from the flights. Yeah, that would go over like a lead balloon. Sooooo, do you want to come 2 hours earlier or so for your flight and stand in line while they test out every electronic gizmo in everyone's luggage and carry on bags?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass and I don't think you are being paranoid. I just really don't see how it can be feasible to protect ourselves as well as we want to be protected and I'm not going to throw sticks and stones at the airline industry. I think they are in an impossible position.

22 posted on 11/14/2005 5:52:12 PM PST by Elyse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent
For starters, try hiring competent people; not 80 year old women who couldn't read the name on my ticket and didn't bother even glancing at my ID...

The TSA:
Making jobs for easily bored people since 9/11/01.

23 posted on 11/14/2005 5:57:12 PM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Elyse
"Sooooo, do you want to come 2 hours earlier or so for your flight and stand in line while they test out every electronic gizmo in everyone's luggage and carry on bags?"

I don't see why this would be an issue. Let the laptop/MP3 player/DVD player, etc go through the machine like it normally would, then ask the person to power it on. So long as you get music playing or a display of some sort on the screen, you can be reasonably sure that it's what it appears to be. Lord knows you could probably design some nasty stuff to fit inside of a laptop that looks good when it goes through the machine, but could you do that and have the laptop/DVD player/etc still function? I work on laptops for a living, and I can't begin to think of how to manage that. I'm not saying you have to wait for it to boot all the way up or watch the entirity of Sleepless in Seattle; just make sure it's a functional device and not a plastic shell with bomb parts inside.
24 posted on 11/14/2005 6:09:38 PM PST by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent
I don't see why this would be an issue

It doesn't take long for one person to fire up their laptop, turn on their DVD or MP-3 player, etc., but multiply that short time by the hundreds of people in line and it's gonna bog things down considerably, especially on long distance/overseas flights where practically everyone in line has several electronic gadgets and gizmos.

I already get ticked off to no end by the morons that wait until they get right up to the conveyor belt to lean down and take off their shoes and get their change out of their pockets. I can just imagine what it will be like when you expect even more out of them. "I didn't know I had to take my DVD player out of it's case. I have to turn it on for you, too?!? I can't find where I put my DVDs. Now...where is that on/off switch."

25 posted on 11/14/2005 8:25:51 PM PST by Elyse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
""Preventing terrorists from gaining access to weapons of mass destruction must be elevated above all other problems of national security," the former commission members said. "It represents the greatest threat to the American people" and President Bush should publicly make this goal his top priority, the review said."

Did I read this right?

Gorelick and Ben-Viniste want us to "prevent terrorists from gaining access to WMD's", and that this "should be Bush's top priority?

Why in the hell do they think we are in Iraq?

Morons.

26 posted on 11/15/2005 7:08:37 PM PST by Senator Goldwater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson