Ex-9/11 Commission Gives Bush an F

[Mephisto]

It's no big secret to anyone who occasionally looks away from whatever issue is being used to (attempt) misdirect our attention, but members of the once pertinent 9/11 Commission have given the Bush administration an "F" in it's promise to begin implementing changes outlined in the Commission's report.

Agencies still aren't cooperating with each other regarding intelligence.

Ports and waterways are still left unprotected.

Nuclear power plants are virtually unprotected.

Chemical plants are virtually unprotected.

and so on and so forth. However, there IS good news - little old ladies can now take fingernail clippers on board an airplane (but they still have to take off their shoes).

[Dr Adequate]

On the plus side, you are safe from Saddam's WMDs.

That's how much the administration cares about protecting you from terror.

[billydkid]

On the plus side, you are safe from Saddam's WMDs.

That's how much the administration cares about protecting you from terror.

You damn traitor!!! My God (the real one) has special place in hell for treasonous commies like you!!!

[demon]

You forgot to mention that Jocko`s buildings are safe :)

[Tmy]

"homeland security" has now become the favorite pork barrel troth of our leaders. If anyone complains about the spending they must be evil commie terrorist lovers!

[Tmy]

You forgot to mention that Jocko`s buildings are safe :)

Oh no it isnt. Ive been planning Jockos death for months now!:)

[Mephisto]

Oh no it isnt. Ive been planning Jockos death for months now!:)

Be careful, planning Jocko's death or making fun of his car is a violation of warning rule #173.2

[DavidJames]

Be careful, planning Jocko's death or making fun of his car is a violation of warning rule #173.2What! You can't threaten to kill people anymore??? ***** nanny state :D

[Tmy]

What! You can't threaten to kill people anymore??? ***** nanny state :D

Dont worry. Jocko doesnt qualify as "people."

Say, how much do we spend on homeland security anyway?

[Melendwyr]

Dont worry. Jocko doesnt qualify as "people." Oh, my God. You owe me a new keyboard.

[Mephisto]

Dont worry. Jocko doesnt qualify as "people."

Say, how much do we spend on homeland security anyway?

Does it really matter if we're getting quality experts like Michael Brown working on the problem of protecting us all from terrorist acts?

[Hutch]

Um, Tmy, you may want to watch it here. Membership rules?

Advocacy of suicide or of violence to others: If you tell someone to kill themselves, or to harm someone else, you will be suspended without prior warning. Example: "Go kill yourself."

Sexual harassment: Defined as unwelcome sexual advances, sexual suggestions, or sexual content directed at another user, when reported. Generalized misogyny or misanthropy not directed at a specific user will not be considered "sexual harassment".

Extremely cruel or hateful content directed toward another user: This includes content in private messages.

I haven't reported this-but I really suggest you engage editor-mode before hitting submit.

IMHO as always.

[Mephisto]

Um, Tmy, you may want to watch it here. Membership rules?



I haven't reported this-but I really suggest you engage editor-mode before hitting submit.

IMHO as always.

I agree with Hutch, Tmy. Although I was a bit sarcastic in my warning above (I've been racking up the warnings today), I was serious. The worst thing is, it's never permissible for a leftist to say, "Ah, we're just a bunch of good ole boys justa funnin." At least that excuse has never worked for me.

I've made the mistake before, and if I remember correctly it involved ***** as well, but JREF is a little more serious lately about banning people.

[Mark]

You forgot to mention that Jocko`s buildings are safe :)

Yeah, but he has steadfastly refused to explain why...

[Tmy]

I agree with Hutch, Tmy. Although I was a bit sarcastic in my warning above (I've been racking up the warnings today), I was serious. The worst thing is, it's never permissible for a leftist to say, "Ah, we're just a bunch of good ole boys justa funnin." At least that excuse has never worked for me.

I've made the mistake before, and if I remember correctly it involved ***** as well, but JREF is a little more serious lately about banning people.


Settle down Bevis.

Jocko and I go way back. Why Im sure he'll get a good laugh at this....then proceed to cut my break cables.

[Mephisto]

Settle down Bevis.

Jocko and I go way back. Why Im sure he'll get a good laugh at this....then proceed to cut my break cables.

Heh, heh, heh, cool. Heh, heh, heh, but if you mess with his car, don't mention my name, heh, heh, heh. I'll be in Anderson's shed if you need me.

[Regnad Kcin]

Bush gets an F?

But, but...he's a really good cheerleader! There should be extra credit for extracurriculars, at least!

[Blue Monk]

I know this is only antidotal but terrorists hardly ever attack me anymore.

Nowadays I sometimes go for weeks without getting blown up.

Of course moving and not telling my exes where may be skewing the data.

[peptoabysmal]

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on the former 9/11 Commission's report card giving the Bush Administration and Congress a failing grade on implementing the security recommendations in the 9/11 Commission Report:
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=57599


And the actual overall grade? C minus (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-12-05-panel-report-card_x.htm).

I thought the panel's final report was in 2004 and the website frozen. Is this their final-final report or do we have to wait for the final-final-final report? :cool:

[fishbob]

I thought the panel's final report was in 2004 and the website frozen. Is this their final-final report or do we have to wait for the final-final-final report? :cool:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/05/911.commission/

This is a report card evaluting the administration on their implementation of the recommendations published in the final report. There is nothing new here except a commentary on the ability of congress and the administration to get up off their ineffectual butts.

More than a year after the report's release, response to the panel's recommendations has been inadequate, Kean and other members said.

"On 9/11 [Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda] killed nearly 3,000 of our citizens. Many of the steps we recommen0d would help prevent a disaster from happening again. We should not need another wake-up call."

The panel's report card gave the government 12 B's, 12 D's, nine C's, five F's, one A- and two incompletes. The A- was for tackling terrorism financing; the incompletes were for reforms under way for the CIA director and the terrorist travel strategy, due in two weeks.

[clk]

And the actual overall grade? C minus (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-12-05-panel-report-card_x.htm).


Just like Bush's grades at Yale, huh?

[Mephisto]

Bush gets an F?

But, but...he's a really good cheerleader!

Yes, and he continues to rely on Cheerleaderdom to inspire our soliders rather than a solid, viable plan in Iraq as well as American citizens at home concerned about future domestic terrorist actions. So far the best solutions out of Washington are:

2, 4, 6, 8 . . . who do we appreciate . . . our soldiers, our soldiers, YAY!

or

2, 4, 6, 8 . . . who do we appreciate . . . duct tape and plastic wrap . . . YAY!

[WildCat]

Wait for those criticizing the gov't in this thread for not implementing the 9/11 panels recommendations to also criticize the gov't when they do implement the recommendations. Probably in a "US no longer land of the free" type of thread. We've already seen a glimpse of it in this thread. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=38995)

[fishbob]

Wait for those criticizing the gov't in this thread for not implementing the 9/11 panels recommendations to also criticize the gov't when they do implement the recommendations. Probably in a "US no longer land of the free" type of thread. We've already seen a glimpse of it in this thread. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=38995)
I am not a big fan of some of the 9/11 commission recommendations, however I did not assemble the commission or make campaign pledges to implement the recommendations. Those who said they would, didn't. What they did do though was to use bazillons of dollars of homeland security funds for business-as-usual pork-barreling.

[WildCat]

What they did do though was to use bazillons of dollars of homeland security funds for business-as-usual pork-barreling.
I can't disagree there, but can't say I'm surprised either. We're talking about Congress here.

[fishbob]

I can't disagree there, but can't say I'm surprised either. We're talking about Congress here.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/05/911.commission/
9/11 panel: Recommendations on U.S. security not being heeded

Looking at the list of recommendations, I see responsibilities assigned to lots of bureaus and agencies in addition to the congress and the executive branch. Either somebody decided that the implementation of the recommendations are not priorities, or much more of government is incompetent than I would have believed.