I watched a bunch of the Rice testimony at the gym this morning; sadly I didn’t hear much of it, since 3 grown adults couldn’t figure out how to turn on the closed-captioning on the TV sets there; we obviously needed a kid to show us how.
I’ve read a bunch of it, and found it sadly predictable. Both that the partisan ‘blame game’ was really the context of the discussion, and that neither side was willing to take the blame for the true causes of the failure.
I’ll skip over the whole issue of historicity; that the infallibility of prediction only works in one way – backward.Conservatives are strongly lined up behind the “we never knew!!” and were shocked, just shocked, to find that the reports that terrorists planned something in the US were true. Of course, Rumsfeld had stopped flying commercial by that point, so someone in the security apparat took it seriously.
The reality is that Bush and his team weren’t looking for this, and so as the pattern emerged, they didn’t see it. It is human nature to look for patterns, and particularly to look for patterns we have already observed. While sitting at the side of the track, I read a wonderful book called ‘Complications,’ by surgeon Atul Gawande. In it, he tells the harrowing story of suspecting and then diagnosing flesh-eating streptococcus in a young woman’s leg, and then saving her leg through heroic surgery and treatment.
He suspected it only because he had just participated in another, failed surgery, in which a man infected with this disease died, so he was obsessed by this disease.
But let’s share the blame.
The left and the Democrats are also to blame for 9/11, and not because it was the culmination of eight years of events under Clinton’s administration (although in the histories, that has to be considered as well).
The reality is that had Bush responded to the warnings, the logical responses – to preclude Arab men from flying, from taking flight schools, or to have disarmed them (note that pre-9/11 it was perfectly legal to fly with a 3-1/2″ Spyderco Delicia, as I did on every flight. I pretty much have one around all the time; they are quite useful).
So, imagine of you would, the response from Senator Kennedy, from the academic Left, from the ACLU.
On vague, unspecified intelligence, we would have detained, inconvenienced, embarrassed, and enraged any number of men – mostly innocent.
And the odds are that most of the 9/11 hijackers would have been able to fly – and act – unchecked.
If not that day, than someday soon when the intense pressure from the Democratic side had forced this ‘profiling’ program to stand down.
So while we’re apportioning blame for 9/11 – and, personally, I’d like to see the entire national leadership stand up and take some – let’s do it correctly.
While we’re apportioning blame let’s not forget the airlines. It was the airlines who lobbied for and received responsibility–from which they’ve since been absolved and indemnified–for pre-boarding security.
Quite right. Everyone is to blame. Sadly, the politicians will continue to play games and not focus on the more imporant task: winning the war.
The American Public is to blame equally.
For some reason after 9/11 EVERY Time
I got on a domestic flight I endured
a FULL search all luggage all carryons,
take off your coat, hat, shoes, belt,
turn over the front of the top of your
pants “assume the position” (spread arms
and legs) ;-).
Maybe trips to the Fomer Soviet Union,
including Bashkortarstan had something
to do with it? LOL
I asked once who they determined who
to search and was told random computer
pick.
rotflamo!
The point is I continuously encountered
pathetic whiners who were shocked
let me tell you shocked and outraged
that anyone dared to seach THEM!
A good portion of the American public
acts like a baby who wants its bottle
and needs its diapers changed.
We want what we want and if something
bad happens we want ANYTHING but
responsibily, we want someone to blame.
Ever Bitched and whined because you
had to wait at an airport for Security
screening?
Want to know who is to blame for 9/11?
Look in the mirror.
Of [Rice|Clarke] I believe at least one accepted responsibility. Although I agree there is plenty of blame to go around, Clinton, Bush, and also the non-partisan INS, FBI, and CIA (who’ve been getting a pretty easy ride so far), some officials are much more adamant in refusing their share of the blame than others. From a political standpoint, incidentally, that’s backwards.
I actually don’t think Clarke accepted responsibility either. He said sorry, we failed you, but then went on to blame everyone else. I’ve read the book, and it’s the same way. Which is not to say that he’s wrong–I think he tried hard–but I don’t remember him ever citing anything specific that he mishandled.
I can sympathize (somewhat) with the Left’s desire to get back at the Republicans for impeachment, Starr and Florida. They seem so utterly focused on beating Bush that they will sink the ship they are on if they think Bush will go down with them (IMO).
However, they may be missing a point. While the Republicans did impeach/attack Clinton for sex and lying, the Left’s excuse was “its only sex” (paraphrased). There was some merit to this argument, and the nation was evenly divided, but there was little danger to the country due to the (R)s going after Clinton.
OK, but the Left is trying to get payback while we fight a war, one which I believe is just as dangerous in the long run as it was during the Cold War, when we and the USSR aimed thousands of megatons of firepower at each other. While a USSR/US nuclear exchange probably would have wiped out the human race, or at least badly damaged it, the rise and victory of radical Islam over the West will slowly cause the race to sink back into savagery and eventual death- the choice between a long, lingering death or short and quick. Which is worse?
Andrew: I find I mostly agree with you. Of course, no one wants to accept blame, and it has turned into a game of chicken between (D) and (R), to see who will blink first. However, wasn’t the sharing of info between FBI and CIA forbidden by law before 9/11 and the Patriot Act? There were certainly failures from the ground up in both orgs, as well as priorities at the top. At the least, both of the directors of the CIA and FBI should fall on their swords.
Joe & AL: Another Thank You for your patience.
Semper Fidelis!!
Speaking of blame, I thought 9/11 was the result of 19 terrorists with the desire to die for their religion? What we should be doing is:
first, find out what happened so we can prevent it in the future-
and second, try to guess what the bad guys will do next, and try and stop that.
phil, i think freeh deserves a lot of blame. mueller had just gotten the job.
as for tenet, he knows too much.
Dan,
You sure won,t ever get a politician to accept blame. Professional liars evertone of them. Look at them, squirming like worms on hooks or trying to tap dance around the issue.
Pity the American public can’t elect somebody with smarts to the top office. But no, you always see the emergence of the best looking guy. Look at G.W.B not all that bright but quite personable,
you know a good ole boy from the South. How about Clinton? I can still capture Bubba in my mind smiling like he has just had a blow job. Captivating! Regan, another good looking B Grade actor, always looked like he was playing in a movie. Jimmy Carter, another Southerner with a million dollar smile. Boy, what real talent must have been passed up in electing these guys. Girls, call me sexist but I believe you sweet things have to cop the blame for this.
Ed.
Ed: Who would that “real talent” we passed up be? Dole? Mondale? Are you kidding me? And how do you explain Nixon…one of the ugliest bastards I’ve laid eyes upon?
Get your head out of your ass before you open your fuckin piehole nextime eh.
Nutjob,
OOOH. Touchy aren’t we.
Yeah, just kidding! Put out a bit of bait and wow,
a bite!
Sorry if I offended your sensibilities. Agree 100% with your assessmant of Nixon’s good looks.
Ed.
Look, but the only one to blame is Usama bin Ladan and his Al Qaeda group. As has been pointed out elsewhere, and even here, this was something new, and unexpected. There was no definitive or actionable intelligence that these assholes were going to hijack aircrafts and depart from their standard proceedures and fly them into buildings.
Clinton did not do enough to stop it. And neither did Bush. Obviously as it happened. But what would “enough” have been? Things the US would not have accepted, things the country would reject and probably impeach any president who proposed them prior to 9-11.
We trained the hijackers how to fly airplanes. We gave them visas and essentially said “Sure come on over, join the party.” Just like we do and have done to foreigners the world over. We had no idea that they would turn our good nature, our tolerant society and our friendly attitude against us.
Ben,
Let’s sheet home the blame to where it really lies.
Henry Hindsight, the smartest guy in town points out the very close ties that existed between the following…
Osama Bin Laden
Saddam Hussein
Idi Amen
Augusto Pinochet
Face it. This Agency has an uncanny act in choosing villains which it cultivates, grooms, arms and turns a blind eye to their excesses then
watch them turn against the United States. To whom is this Agency accountable and has disciplinry action ever been taken against those in charge for incompetency. Or does the CIA like Edgar Hoover know too many Washington secrets to ever be disciplined?
Ed.
There is no “blame” to be apportioned to anyone in the US Government, or the US citizenry.
We were attacked in an act of war. The only blame goes to those who attacked us and those who supported them.
As for today, the people I would attach blame to are all those using this for political purposes and trying to attach “blame”. It’s disgusting, and it’s counter-productive.
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
Nutjob Alaskan: I suspect he means David Duke. What a wierd troll to have wandered in.
I agree with the other commenters that the longer this whole farce goes on, the more ridiculous it seems to be to throw the word “blame” around on anyone but Osama and friends.
The bottom line is that we are ALL to blame—the whole of humanity. The West for security and intelligence failures as well as bad policies toward the underdeveloped world. The Arabs/Muslim/underdeveloped world for not getting off their derrieres and moving into the 21st century. Islam for being backward and stuck in the 7th century.
Blame can do no good and will get us nowhere. But, looking at what we did wrong and changing it can. Let us all move forward!
Lili
No one seems to remember that the FBI had Raed Hijazi in Boston who was willing to spill a lot of the beans on Al Q and they weren’t interested.
You see the FBI was into headlines and pre 9/11 drugs got headlines. They had Raed Hijazi on drugs. He was willing to give them the terrorist info if they would lighten their drug prosecution of him.
The FBI was not interested. No headlines in terrorism.
Dr. Rice made short-hand comments that probably deserve expanding if we’re going to talk about who’s blaming whom.
The wall between FBI & CIA is only one of several structural impediments to dealing with terror attacks inside the US. To some degree the Patriot Act has already opened the door to fixing this particular issue.
A much deeper problem is that our intelligence gathering and analysis process has some deep structural problems. Read the new book by Wm. Odom, retired head of the NSA, or Amy Zegart’s Flawed by Design for a sense of how and why this is true. The entire national security apparatus that was created after WWII – including DOD, NSA, CIA etc. – was the product of a certain time and certain technologies. They no longer serve us well, but reworking them will be difficult and contentious. The highly partisan grandstanding of the 9/11 committee on camera won’t help that process along.
Finally, in the widest sense, intelligence and law-enforcement communities operate on very different cultures and incentives. That will take time to change even if we had no concerns about privacy or civil liberties getting in the way.
All of this is well known to Washington insiders. It has been discussed in commissions and reports over the last decade. So when Condi Rice stated that these structural issues would have made it every unlikely that we would have prevented 9/11, she wasn’t just ducking responsibility. She was reminding Congress that the ball has been in their court for a long time to authorize changes to the system. And she was reminding them that the consequences of their having ducked this challenge when Odom chaired the commission during the Clinton administration was precisely that 9/11 was a lot harder to prevent.
And THAT is why she opened her statement – and closed it – by saying the current Administration would welcome their recommendations for changes. Because Congress has had commissions before but couldn’t get up the guts to tackle actual changes. Now, after 9/11, if they don’t there really will be some blame to be laid at their door, even granted that authorized changes take a lot of time to put into practice.
The fact is that prior to 9/11 nobody in a position of responsibility (or in the general population, for that matter) really believed an attack like this would occur. There is no such thing as perfect security: all that you can do is enact reasonable security measeures against likely threats. If the government would have attempted to invoke post 9/11 procedures before 9/11, it would have seemed crazy to spend that much money to protect us from something nobody believed would ever happen. In this situation, the best defense is a good offense: we must show would-be terrorists that the cost to them and their respective causes is higher than what they are likely to gain from their attacks.
The 9/11 Commission is nothing but a political sideshow, so why be surprised when all of the players act political? We can and should look at what went wrong and try to correct it, but don’t look for that kind of an analysis from a “nonpartisan commission” composed of politicians which is holding public hearings during an election year. You might as well ask fish to stop swimming as ask politicians not to be political.
It’s one thing to know an attack is coming. I could tell you with 100% certainty that a huge attack is coming in America tomorrow… and the information is still nearly useless.
I’m wondering if anyone these days actually remembers 9/11 and its aftermath, or whether they’ve just built a fantasyland version. Consensus right across the board after the attacks: there’s no way we could have imagined this. Even Tom Clancy, who wrote a novel with some similarities a while back, said that.
If Dole had beaten Clinton in 1996, who here thinks things would have gone very differently? Not me.
Intelligent discussion of 9/11 starts with the note that the attack was outside of America’s imagination. Not just Democrats, or Republicans – Americans. This despite screaming clues like the known plan for the 1993 WTC attacks which were designed to kill 50,000 people. Until something like 9/11 actually happened, America wasn’t going to take the possibility all that seriously.
That said…
Eight years of events under Clinton’s administration are of more than just historical interest, just as the extensive Saudi ties in America’s government (which go way beyond Bush) are worth more than passing mention. Clinton didn’t cause the American mindset that facilitated 9/11, but he did exemplify it as al-Qaeda’s attacks increased in scale and lethality. Special forces were never used to counter and plans to take action were dithered over again and again until chances were lost. Mogadishu, meanwhile, fed al-Qaeda’s belief that the U.S. would not act – and we have that from AQ members.
I don’t think Clinton could have solved this problem, given the political environment pre-9/11 – but I think it’s incontestable that he could – and SHOULD – have done much, much more. And that should not be swept under the rug in some kind of faux-evenhandedness.
Spotlights should also be shone on the Left’s consistent efforts to create an envirponment that was hostile to serious defense. This can be seen in its consistent efforts to de-fund America’s military and intelligence apparatus, and to put strictures on it (incl. the infamous rule preventing the CIA from associating with certain unsavory characters) that made it nearly impossible to take proactive measures. The Left in the Academy has spent the better part of the last 2 decades working to justify Arab-Islamic terrorism rather than explain or address it, while Political Correctness worked to confer immunity to hostile Muslim groups in the USA, as Emerson ably documented. Why did critical information get stopped part way through the FBI’s bureaucracy, for instance? These policies have costs, and A.L. has acknowledged some of them here. But it goes deeper than just “PC”, and into a mindset that is still for the most part hostile to serious, proactive self defense.
Congressional investigations are disinclined to go after these aspects, however… because if they did, they’d have to acknowledge Congress’ own role over the years.
Saw Keane (former R Gov. NJ) and Hamilton (former D-IN) the other day on Tim Russert, and they impressed me. If their hearings have become circus, it’s not by their design or inclination. Both are serious, thoughful, and realistic. So maybe there’s hope for this exercise after all.
Maybe.