Tom Kean, the Republican chairman of the [9/11] committee, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that enacting the changes is “not a priority for the government right now.
“A lot of the things we need to do really to prevent another 9/11 just simply aren’t being done by the president or by the Congress.
“What we’re concerned about now is that these recommendations — four years, more than four years after 9/11, are still not being done. People are not paying attention to them.”
“It really approaches scandal to think that, four years after 9/11, the police and the fire cannot talk to one another at the scene of the disaster,” said Hamilton.
“They could not do it on 9/11, and as a result of that, lives were lost. They could not do it at Katrina. They still cannot do it.”
They shouldn’t be so tough on the government. After all, they did spend money on air-conditioning garbage trucks and body armor — for dogs.
I understand that they don’t have a terrorist list, but we have a do not fly list.
…and that do not fly list is worthless — more cosmetic, as is typical airport security, than anything.
We knew this was coming, it’s nice to hear it official — now, do we get a formal apology for lambasting Senator Kerry during the Presidential debates for questioning the governments sincerity in improving our terrorist security?
Can we get a refund for Iraq now?
Wow, you’d rather spend money to respond to a calamity, than trying to prevent one? As near as I can see, there has been no more than one terrorist attack here since 9/11.
A neocon republican has just accused our neocon president of ignoring public safety, and AB CD, you’re still a Bush Head?
BTW, there was only one during the entire Clinton’s pres, (in 93 – less than one year after he was elected, not the 18 mo. like the Duhbya after 9/11.), yet neocons still blame him for 9/11.
Wow you must be a FOX news wet dream!
Ima,
>>Here’s another one where agents get involved in a copyright dispute!
The article explains it… that the “Customs” was rolled up into the Department of Homesland security.
The “why” is fairly clear. It’s also clear that this does not make sense.
I remember when Bush was forming this massive branch of government, some of the department employess were saying “But why us? What does our job have to do with terrorism?”
As usual, the Bush administration ignored common-sense advice and did what they wanted.
As for me… I’m finally glad I can take my nail clippers on the airplane. I’ve said all along that confiscating countless non-weapons makes it more likely that real weapons will slip through. It’s just like racial profiling, that way.
>BTW, there was only one during the entire Clinton’s pres, (in 93 – less than one year after he was elected, not the 18 mo. like the Duhbya after 9/11.), yet neocons still blame him for 9/11.
Wow. 18 months after Dubya was elected? Let’s see that means he was elected in March 2000. I guess losing to John McCain in the California or Michigan primary makes you President.
Perhaps the reason Clinton gets blamed for 9/11 is not just the short passage of time, but because the attack was done by the same group that was responsible for the attack in his presidency. All he did was issue indictments and run some people through the courts, even turning down a Sudanese offer to collect Bin Laden. The same group then attacked embassies, and a navy ship. According to the FBI chief, instead of pushing for FBI interviews of Saudi suspects, the President hit him up for a donation to the Presidential Library. As for just one attack happening here, I suppose you don’t want ot count Oklahoma City, and presumably not TWA 800(the same basis for which I am giving Bush one).