Replies

The time and money -- not to mention the news-media overkill -- spent on historical hindsight by the 9-11 commission is worthwhile because it is aimed at understanding why the system in place was unable to prevent the tragedy. Yet it is just as important to think about the present and what the lack of a repeat incident says about the future.
Obviously, a similar public investigation into why nothing has happened would be impractical, given the hypothetical nature of the whole exercise.

A fine article, but IMHO the first paragraph above is negated by the last two. In fact, "the news-media overkill spent on historical hindsight by the 9-11 commission" is NOT worthwhile because it is aimed, NOT at "understanding why the system in place was unable to prevent the tragedy," but at second guessing the Bush Administration.

This is obvious in the composition of the Coverup Commission:

members such as Bob Kerry are institutionally disposed to protect Democrats in Congress
members such as Slade Gordon who are institutionally disposed to protect Republicans in Congress
members such as Gorelick and ben Veniste who are institutionally disposed toe protect the Clinton Administration
no members who are institutionally disposed to protect the Bush Administration.
And that expresses itself in demands for public testimony by Bush Administration officials such as Rice and (though even more so than Rice, he extracted a price) Ashcroft, which turn into shouting matches because ben Veniste in particular and Democrats in general patently have the knives out.
And that expresses itself in the fatuous defense by Kean of the indefensible composition of "his" committee. The Gorelick Commission contains the "Number 2" ("Number 1" having been a figurehead) in the Clinton Justice Department. A person who, as Ashcroft's testimony makes clear, would be the single best witness for the committee to grill under oath.
The Gorelick Commission is constructed not to produce a reliable history but to perpetrate objective journalism^TM. To produce, that is, fodder for reports which are wise ("objective") in their authors' own conceit but in fact are heavily slanted against the middle class which the Republican Party represents. No less obviously than the questions of the "objective" reporters in the recent press conference were intended to produce a sound bite for the Kerry campaign.
No attacks in U.S. since 9-11: Why?
Orlando Sentinel ^ | 4/16/04 | Peter Brown