Senators Say White House Missing Deadlines

[maddezmom]

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration has missed at least a half-dozen deadlines to shore up national security programs as required in intelligence reforms approved six months ago, according to two top Senate Homeland Security Committee members.

Among the reports and actions the senators said should have taken by now are creating national strategy for transportation security, funding a civil liberties panel to oversee counterterror investigations, adding aviation security staff and funding plans and boosting port protections.

"There are many challenges in simultaneously implementing these anti-terrorism initiatives, but the consequences of failure are unthinkable," Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., wrote in a June 14 letter to White House chief of staff Andrew Card. "And as we saw with 9/11, in the war on terrorism delay can be a form of failure. Initial stumbles in implementing new programs can be corrected, but problems often snowball if neglected."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the administration is working to fulfill all the requirements of the intelligence reform bill President Bush signed in December. "The administration has made great progress in improving security to protect the American people," Perino said.

~snip~
more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050615/ap_on_go_co/intelligence_reform_congress/nc:1278;_

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. If there is another terror incident in this country

Bushco will be toast, just because of this laxness. Of course, it was this laxness that led to 9/11 in the first place....

[SoCalDem]

2. They have no time to actually govern.. They are in a perpetual

campaign.*² has NEVER stopped campaigning since he took the office.

Can you imagine how long you would last in a job, if you did nothing but go around the company glad-handing and filling out applications for all the positions in the company..every day..all day:)

[Anus Retainus]

3. It's hard work!! n/t

[iconoclastic cat]

4. Could that be because Bushco knows the threats are fabricated?

No sense of urgency=sociopathic nonchalance.

[gratuitous]

5. Missed at least half a dozen deadlines?

Well, I guess it's politically safe to find that out now. So, let's see what happens.

By the way, as I recall from the enabling legislation that handed Chimpy his blank check to invade Iraq, the administration was supposed to be filing regular report with Congress about the continuing prosecution of the war -- that was supposed to be the trade-off for Congress ceding its constitutional role to declare war to the Executive. Are those reports coming through? Or is President C Student too busy with his other hard work to get those reports done?

[maddezmom]

8. now he's hard at work pushing CAFTA and the energy bill

no time for terrya deadlines :eyes:

[jokerman93]

6. It's almost as if

Sometimes it almost seems as if the "War on Terror" is nothing more than a smoke screen.

[brentspeak]

7. That's strange considering that the WH makes absolutely sure

that Halliburton gets its checks immediately, without any further ado.

[maddezmom]

10. not to mention bonuses

[Roland99]

9. Instead we get 3-4 months of the Propagandist pushing a losing SS plan.

[Justice]

11. That is frightening true and should be in a LTTE

[Roland99]

13. Well, I'm done for the next month. My local paper published my LTTE today.

ONE MONTH after I submitted it:

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050615/OPINION02/506150361/1018/OPINION

It's the last letter there.

[bleedingheart]

14. great letter!

[Iowa]

18. Excellent letter Roland99!!

[DeLayLandDem]

21. Give 'em hell, Roland!

:evilgrin:

Superb letter.

[Straight Shooter]

12. "delay can be a form of failure"

Such as the delay in responding appropriately to the August 6, 2001, PDB?

A colossal failure of the greatest magnitude.

[truthisfreedom]

15. you know how bush hates being late? well, it's all an act... he doesn't

want to protect America. he wants to drain the coffers asap, and he's got no time for stinking national security.

[adigal]

16. Incompetent in business, incompetent in governing, incompetent

in directing a war. A bunch of complete incompetents are running the show - I do NOT get why the dems and the media have been so cowed by this bunch.

[dansolo]

17. It's a good thing that the WH doesn't have a pre-9/11 attitude

Their vigilence is inspiring... NOT!

[Rose Siding]

19. Oh, snap on President Bozo! (currently packing for his summer vacation)

JUST last night when he was beating up CONGRESS (Dems) for not getting things done, I wondered how the repubs would take it- if they can't overcome the dem minority, they look awfully weak.

GREAT article!

[geckosfeet]

20. Planning and organization require thought and management talent.

Shrubbish only knows how to break things,, not fix them.

I really look for things to descend into a chaotic blend of fundie Xian chanting and political sloganeering over the next 3 years.

Rah rah, USA,, you can do it no matter what they say!! Ohhh no --- watch out for that crashing airplane -- duck --- incoming small arms fire --- look out --- mad police car chase with hood mounted tasers blazing !!

[applegrove]

22. They cannot find enough neocons or intelligence experts who want

to be associated with torture to fill the important positions. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm? I wonder why?

[Ilsa]

23. It's not that they can't do anything about national security, it's that

they don't want to. Since he doesn't need to win another election, Bush* doesn't give a rat's ass if he lets another terrorist attack happen. It might shore up his support for the war and sliding poll numbers since everyone will feel constrained to support the pResident during another national tragedy.

An alternate scenario: they can't get anything done in national security because they are too busy planning another attack for purposes mentioned above.
:tinfoilhat:

[wiggs]

24. Three possible scenarios

Our ports, nuclear plants, and chemical plants are basically unprotected despite the warnings of many experts. RFK's Crimes Against Nature talks about this.

There are three possible reasons that I see, none of them flattering to the administration:

1) Stunning incompetence. They know there's a risk to these facilities, they just can't seem to get their people to focus.

2) They know there's no risk. 9/11 implications. I bring up statements by Tom Ridge from a few weeks ago that he didn't always think terror alerts were warranted, but was overruled by the WH.

3) They believe there's risk of attack, but wouldn't mind it if it happened. 9/11 implications again. With another attack, Bolton gets on, Iran goes down, Patriot Act gets in, more money gets appropriated, no more DSM, etc.

Basically, our dem leaders and journalists should be asking about how prepared we are for all kinds of attacks.. There isn't a good answer.