Why has the Bush Administration ignored the 9/11 Commission recommendations?

Question

The 9/11 Commission, in a massive, comprehensive, bipartisan effort, investigated all aspects of 9/11, and came out with a series of specific recommendations to make america safer for the future.

Bush fought the creation of the Commission, stonewalled releasing information to it, refused to testify in front of it for months, said he would quickly implement it's recommendations, and has done little or nothing since.

This question is not about conspiracies, only about the recommendations.

I specifically want answers from republicans explaining why.

-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Commission_Report

http://911.gnu-designs.com/

All of them.

Wow - somebody tried to answer it. To summarize your response;

1. Created a divisive mood in the country. Since you are the only person who even bothered to answer - I'd say most people didn't know about it. Null argument.
2. This is HIS (Bush's) job. Yes it is, but not his solely by any stretch of the imagination. You forgot congress, the pentagon, INTERPOL, and the UN.
3. Classified materials for people who were not cleared for it. By the administrations estimate only. This is a democracy remember? Not a dictatorship.
4. NO PRESIDENT has EVER testified before such a commission. So what? That does not abrogate his responsibility to tell the truth. See #3
5. They are RECOMMENDATIONS. Not orders. He said he would implement them. He didn't. Why?

Your answer reeks of partisanship in spite of your claim to be a democrat. I asked the question, you didn't have to answer.

Answer 1

The conception of how government works by the general public is utterly simplistic.
First, if someone does something you like, it is massive, comprehensive, and bipartisan if even a few of each side is in it.
Second, They did not investigate all aspects (there are several problems with the investigation, as there will be for any investigation, since NOTHING is perfect), the commission would have, and did create a divisive mood in the country (count yourself part of it), in the midst of trying to make a few recommendations and then watching their findings get turned into political poinards for poking at the President (as you are doing). This is HIS job. Of course he opposed it in the midst of a national emergency!
Third, they wanted classified materials for people who were not cleared for it. They wanted information that would have, and did, aid our enemies with it's release. Since you don't like him, he "Stonewalled". No one is impressed with negative or positive words except the people who've already made up their minds regardless of the facts.
Fourth, NO PRESIDENT has EVER testified before such a commission, and the fact that you want it, that others insisted upon it, has weakened the President's office (not just President Bush), from this time forward. You may want a weak President. I don't. I do not want a fourth branch of government and they had no right to make or even insist he testify. Your insistance shows an immense lack of understanding of the political forces our government is made of.

Lastly, they are RECOMMENDATIONS. Not orders. He does not owe you or the commission to follow them, and if he found them unworkable or dangerous for our country (since the commission did not have access to all the information he does as the highest representative in our nation), then thank goodness he didn't follow them.

Why is it that every things the President OWES them things he doesn't?

Oh, I'm a Democrat, and just as tired of the sedition and undermining of our country as most Republicans are. Some people did it to President Clinton, and now to President Bush. You havent' been seditious, but your statement that you want "republicans" to explain why shows a bias that I don't support and is one of the reasons why people are getting tired of the political fiddle playing while our country burns.


Keep speaking up, but please, though you are free to do so, you have my request that you use a few less loaded words if you want anyone to feel like answering you in the 'bipartisan' spirit which you so prized in the 9/11 Commission.

My goodness! Let's take that rebuttal apart, shall we?
You: 1. Created a divisive mood in the country. Since you are the only person who even bothered to answer - I'd say most people didn't know about it. Null argument.
My response: Lack of answers in one forum makes an argument null? This is not a reasonable response. You mean that if I ask a question about how many people like President Bush or Clinton, and no one answers but you, your argument is null? Nonsense.

You: 2. This is HIS (Bush's) job. Yes it is, but not his solely by any stretch of the imagination. You forgot congress, the pentagon, INTERPOL, and the UN.
Me: Wrong, as this disaster was not his to give up to INTERPOL or the U.N. We do not answer to them, and your confusion on this matter seems to indicate a lack of understanding of our governmental system, again. Pentagon and Congress? Yes, BUT NOT THE COMMISSION, which was my point, which you ignored and brought up everyone else.

You: 3. Classified materials for people who were not cleared for it. By the administrations estimate only. This is a democracy remember? Not a dictatorship.
Me: Excuse me? You mean that whether something is classified is now up to a vote? When did this happen? Was there a secret meeting at the U.N. building? Goodness sake! What utter nonsense!

You: 4. NO PRESIDENT has EVER testified before such a commission. So what? That does not abrogate his responsibility to tell the truth. See #3

Me: Tell the truth does not mean tell everyone our state secrets. You mean that being truthful NOW means we have to tell everything we know to everyone who wants it? What's your credit card number? Or are you a liar?

You: 5. They are RECOMMENDATIONS. Not orders. He said he would implement them. He didn't. Why?
Me: Perhaps because he hasn't yet? Why does he answer to your time table? Every President I can think of has had to go back on promises once they understand the depth of the problem. The problem with the public is that they are like little children; "YOU PROMISED!" I think a little reality check is in order. His goal is to keep our country intact, not do things that people misquote and misrepresent. Do I have to post what he ACTUALLY said that you keep saying he "promised"? Do you really want everyone to see how badly you are misrepresenting our elected President? I'd look up his actual statement before you do that.

You: Your answer reeks of partisanship in spite of your claim to be a democrat. I asked the question, you didn't have to answer.

Goodness sake, where do you think you are? Of course I'm partisan! I never said I wasn't! It's not a bad word! My complaint was that you don't really want an answer. Your response to me is proof of that! I only suggested that if you want reasonable people of a side different from you own, you might try less loaded words that insult their President. And for some of us who understand what Democracy is about, ANY elected President is our President.

And some of us are tired of people undermining our President, whether we personally voted for them or not.

And who do you think you are questioning my stated political stance? Because I don't side with name-calling, rumor spreading, and undermining our country, I'm not a Democrat?

I'm a Democrat and a Patriot. Are you? Do you call our President names just because you didn't "win"? Or do you support the will of the people? Are you going to undermine everything you disagree with?

Some of us are tired of the sedition that was used against President Clinton AND President Bush. When people like that are finally pushed out of MY party, we'll be cheering. Oh, we'll still protest, and dissent, but not at the expense of our country's image or deeper goals.

Some of us know the difference. Who do you think most Americans will side with; the name callers and rumor spreaders, or the people who support what the majority wants, whether they get what they want or not because they believe in Democracy?

Answer 2

If anyone out there, even Republicans are thinking about our future and the threat of terror, they should vote DEMOCRATS for congress and senate, because they will then be supporting the true WAR ON TERROR, because DEMS have said they WILL as a priority implement the recommendations of the 9/11 commission as a priority.

Its shameful that this congress, et al, have done nothing about the commissions recommendations; instead have diverted all our resources to supposedly rid the Iraqis of Saddam, or was it WMDs or oh whatever it was , it was still a waste.

Why? Because it did not suite them; firstly iy would mean they woukld have to face their inadequacies, 2ndly they would have to spend money defending liberal strongholds like NY, LA, SF CHicago, instead of fattening the pockets of their chronies...oh I could go on.

I am so angry after seeing 60 mins tonight.

Answer 3

Because he is having to deal with so much right now. But I'm not going to give you a better answer. Your answer on the "Where were you on 9/11" question makes me sick. I don't care if I get a violation for this. I lost 10 points for exposing a person who obviously hates America and its citizens. How dare you ask questions about 9/11 and then write such a cold response. I don't even care what political affiliation you are. Its sick, how dare you

Answer 4

Firstly, the Commission were a bunch of light weights put up as a smoke screen, and that's me putting it nicely. Allowing those who know the most to testify, but not under oath (if it walks like a duck.......). The USG mantra of "throw $ at it, and it'll go away" was the choice made. Rob, rape and pillage....by the rich, elite folks we voted for, though most of us are neither rich or elite....Welcome to Americanized Democracy...

Answer 5

Because our fearless leader never wanted the commision to exist. However the recommentations do fit into the Bush agenta . Good Luck trying to get any response from this administration.

Answer 6

um, yeah, i would answer you if I knew what these recomendations were, or if i were in Bush's shoes to know what he was thinking.

Maybe he even quesitoned the experts. My elementary school teachers were the experts for me while i was growing up, now I realize all they really taught me was math and how controlled the public school system is by liberals. Oh, and they taught me the Civil War was fought over Slaves. (That's not true just in case anyone was wondering)

EDIT: I will try to read those tomorrow, but right now, I am tired, good nite

Answer 7

Great question but what recommendations are you referring to?


From what I saw in the links, every single recommendation listed would be criticized by liberals/democrats as civil rights violations Just like the left does with the Patriot Act and the Torture Bill!! Sorry but you can't have it both ways!!!!!

Answer 8

Suddenly the Republicans are very quiet. Bush made a mistake not uncommon with poor leaders, he thought he was above accountability. The result from this is seldom positive, history has taught us this and Bush has reinforced it's lesson.

Answer 9

Because he had an agenda of his own and doesn't care one bit for what anyone else has to say about it. He doesn't care one bit about the boy's over there fighting, he doesn't care that there were no "weapons of mass destruction"....and as long as he can side track the news media and no one will ask him pointed questions and get answers...he will. You can bet your bottom dollar he isn't loosing any sleep or any money....

Answer 10

Who cares. The 9/11 commision was a horseSH**. insult to the victims.