From “From One Commission to Another: Shut Up,” in today’s New York Times:
“In August 1999, we were appointed to the independent National Commission on Terrorism…
“From that moment until the commission released its report in June 2000, we did not speak to the news media. Following a voluntary gag order, we and the eight other commissioners revealed not a single inkling of our assessments… It seemed to us that we were only relevant, and would only be effective, if we spoke in a unified voice once our work was complete…
“The time has come for the 9/11 commission to impose the same voluntary gag order on itself…”
________________________________________
Bravo! It’s time the 9/11 Commission took this sterling call for discretion to heart! Parading themselves on the airwaves, confusing the issues, opening themselves up to charges of partisanship, and noising their preliminary opinions about… it’s distasteful to say the least. I commend former commissioners Kayyem and Downing for this long overdue and authoritative call for etiquette and restraint.
And the previous Terrorism Commission are in a position to know. Why, their eventual report in June of 2000 was a sobering clarion call that was heard by literally dozens of people and acted upon by nearly a handful.
You can see it there in the report, in black and white, unsullied by political grandstanding or undue media attention! Here are some tidbits from the Commission’s summary itself:
“Today’s terrorists seek to inflict mass casualties, and they are attempting to do so both overseas and on American soil. They are less dependent on state sponsorship and are, instead, forming loose, transnational affiliations based on religious or ideological affinity and a common hatred of the United States… Countering the growing danger of the terrorist threat requires significantly stepping up U.S. efforts. The government must immediately take steps to reinvigorate the collection of intelligence about terrorists’ plans, use of all available legal avenues to disrupt and prosecute terrorist activities and private sources of support, convince other nations to cease all support for terrorists, and ensure that federal, state, and local officials are prepared for attacks that may result in mass casualties.”
“Funding for counterterrorism efforts by the CIA, NSA (National Security Agency), and FBI must be given higher priority to ensure continuation of important operational activity and to close the technology gap that threatens their ability to collect and exploit terrorist communications.”
“The FBI should establish a cadre of reports officers to distill and disseminate terrorism-related information once it is collected.”
“Senior officials of all government agencies involved in responding to a catastrophic terrorism threat or crisis should be required to participate in national exercises every year to test capabilities and coordination.”
“The President and Congress should reform the system for reviewing and funding departmental counterterrorism programs to ensure that the activities and programs of various agencies are part of a comprehensive plan.
“The executive branch official responsible for coordinating counterterrorism efforts across the government should be given a stronger hand in the budget process.”
Now, can you imagine what might have happened if these comprehensive and prophetic findings had been previewed on the news networks, talked about across the country, and became a vital part of the national dialog? For one, there’d have been many charges of partisanship leveled at committee members! There would have been charges of waffling, spit-balling, and third degree hand-tipping. There would have been a serious risk of the commission being seen as somewhat less “credible and dignified” (as the editorial puts it).
And, of course, there’s a chance that the 9/11 Commission would never have had to be convened. Okay, that’s possible. But at what price?
No, decorum, protocol, and dignity are what holds us Americans together, and must never be violated for such earthly concerns as skin, bones, and blood. It’s time for the 9/11 Commission to shut up and stop raising awareness about their work. Follow the lead of the previous Commission, which proved beyond reproach that good work that gets filed away in a White House sub-basement is still good work.





13 comments
lovable liberal
April 16, 2004 at 4:42 pm
1The thing that’s funny (meaning, not funny) is that Condi never read this - or, at least, won’t admit it.
Murray
April 16, 2004 at 5:51 pm
2Adam, I thought the same thing this morning when I read the article. Decorum is all well and good but it’s fighting and grandstanding that gets noticed and acted on.
Some of the commissioners in the 9/11 inquiry are complaining that the public hearings are not producing nearly as much information as the closed hearings are.
Yea, but unless the average, willfully ignorant, American takes notice, it means nothing.
Skerlnik
April 16, 2004 at 6:39 pm
3The whole thing devolves into a disturbing game of “Not it!” or Musical Chairs of Blame. I think it is very good that we get to witness this, kind of like an orchestrated train wreck for our voyeuristic amusement…
“Democracy is the theory that the people think they know what they want, and they deserve to get it, good and hard.”
..and we do deserve this circus.
Johnboy
April 16, 2004 at 9:49 pm
4Thanks for adding perspective. Now I know what I missed in the Op-Ed this morning,
tim
April 16, 2004 at 9:49 pm
5For all the 9/11 Commission’s “grandstanding”, the only way 98% of America could pick Richard Ben-Veniste out of a lineup was if he had been going against Bill and Kwame on “The Apprentice”.
Sara
April 17, 2004 at 9:18 pm
6HA! You’re so smart.
Bryan
April 18, 2004 at 11:26 pm
7It’s so unfair that networks other than CSPAN are covering the open sessions. Everyone knows that the purposes of commissions are to justify the Government Printing Office, provide grad students in PoliSci their dissertation topics, and Oliver Stone his next movie.
If people start paying attention to government investigations how can members of Congress and the Administration hide their mistakes while being responsible? This simply won’t do.
Murray
April 19, 2004 at 8:43 am
8Maybe everyone reading this comment column should let Cialis and Levitra know what we think of their spam. I will.
Murray
April 19, 2004 at 8:46 am
9Opps, I guess you can’t, it’s just pure spam.
tess
April 19, 2004 at 5:03 pm
10i’m still not sure that the new meaning of spam is all that bad — i couldn’t stand the canned ham.
Murray
April 19, 2004 at 8:55 pm
11Tess,
A friend of mine, big on irony, was traveling through WI and wanted to stop at the Hormel plant to get a Spam T-shirt. When he realized that he would arrive too late for the gift shop, he gave them a call. They said to go across the street to a dinner which was open all night and he could pick it up there. Sure enough the women at the diner had it waiting for him. He said that they were so nice and they were so thrilled that a young man would want to wear a shirt promoting a product that the whole town was so proud of. He said he took the shirt and just felt bad the rest of the night. I’m not sure if he allows himself to wear it to this day.
Bryan
April 19, 2004 at 11:54 pm
12As long as he was in Wisconsin he should have stopped next door in Minnisota to pick-up a plastic Viking helmet so he could do it properly.
tess
April 20, 2004 at 12:32 am
13i know the hawaiians are huge on spam, though i think it has something to do with being sick of fresh seafood and the fact that shipping it there would make it relatively expensive.
but i can’t even want to imagine the sort of embarassment and awkwardness your friend went through.