Was creating the Department of Homeland Security neccessary or would it have been wiser to make sure that everyone was doing their jobs as effectively as possible?
I beleive it has been proven that 9/11 occurred because multiple U.S. agencies, departments etc. fumbled the intelligence on the matter.
2007-01-21 15:30:49 · 5 answers · asked by Yahoo Sucks 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
It was necessary politically, to look like something was being done. It was unnecessary in reality. It has no useful function that wasn't already being done. A clerk could be an interagency liason and do the job of the Homeland Security Dept.
2007-01-21 15:44:10 · answer #1 · answered by John H 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It might have been wiser, but it is sort of moot, because the Department of Homeland Security is here to stay.
2007-01-21 23:38:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I saw the documentary Loose Change Edition 2 and it left, at least in my mind, a lot of questions to be answered that the Government is not answering nor will talk about.
2007-01-22 01:30:43 · answer #3 · answered by gyro-nut64 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The theory is that with DHS. agencies would cooperate more. The DNI is also supposed to help that. I'm skeptical that more bureaucracy is the answer.
2007-01-22 00:06:50 · answer #4 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the us was warned about 9/11 during clinton adm and ignored it so yes they dropped the ball
2007-01-21 23:40:59 · answer #5 · answered by todd s 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋