Curious & Curiouser - Down the rabit hole with the 9/11 Commission

It's all Clinton's fault. Or maybe it's all Bush's fault.

It could be Reagan's fault - or Wilson's. FDR certainly isn't clear of any blame in this. I guess it all depends on whom you ask and what you are looking for. Hindsight is famously clear and we are feeling the weight of the cliché as the September 11 Commission looks into what is seen as this generation's Pearl Harbor.

It is possible that the blame is fairly well spread across the administrations. I assume that it really is, but when looking for where that proverbial buck stops, it is only reasonable to look to the guy in charge at the time of the mistake. I don't know about you, but if I screw up at my job I get very little leeway by blaming it on my predecessor even when I'm right. So George W. Bush has to take the heat - most of it at least, since it all went down on his watch.

So what has been found so far? Again, it depends on whom you ask. According to Richard Clarke, there was a clear and present danger but John Ashcroft was too busy covering a statue's boobs to care and Bush was, well, probably high.

The Bush administration has said time and time again that they had no idea that such a thing could ever happen in a million, bazillion years, but an August Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB) entitled "Osama bin Laden determined to strike in US" suggests otherwise.

To quote the document: "FBI information...indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."

Okay, not a smoking gun. But the fact that nothing was done about this really irritates me. It was apparently okay with our leaders that there would be hijackings. What's a plane full of people, right? If, however, they had known that an airplane could be used as a weapon - even theoretically - then they would have done something about it. Or that is Condoleezza Rice's basic mantra.

Japanese fighter pilots in World War II had a funny habit of running into stuff with their planes that, in turn, made the plane into a weapon. Surely Condi took one or two history classes on the way to getting her doctorate. True, she might have focused entirely on earlier history so she gets a pass there. But then there is the tricky bit about all those intelligence reports (roughly 12) about a plane being used as a weapon - by a hijacker. Go figure.

John Ashcroft has said that the attacks are Clinton's fault since he weakened the military so much. It's funny that he should say that since it was Bush who weakened counter-terrorism. In November 2001 he passed a law that made it illegal for airline pilots to carry guns. Even more bitterly ironic is the fact that Ashcroft has a history of cutting funding for counter-terrorism; one such move was made on September 10, 2001.

There is a common theme in the commission though: nobody is responsible for anything. No one is in charge and no mistakes are made. In a recent press conference, G. Dubs said that he has thought a lot about what could have been done. Five minutes later he was asked what his biggest regret was. This resulted in minute after jaw-dropping minute of hilarity as Dubs tried desperately to make something up.

The question is becoming less about who messed up and more about who forgot to say the magic word. They saw it coming but the CIA forgot to say "tap tap" first.

Condi thought everything was "someone else's job" which makes me wonder just what she thought the National Security Advisor's job consists of. I would think that the title would give a hint. Maybe she didn't read her employee handbook. I know I never do. Regardless, not knowing that something is your job doesn't let you off the hook it just means that you're really bad at what you do.

Ultimately, the question is this: what could we have done to prevent the terrorist attacks on September 11? The answer: a lot. This is, as G. Dubs might say, "an unfortunitude." We are America. These things aren't supposed to happen to us. This is the sort of thing that happens over in those other countries - daily, albeit on a smaller scale. Our news doesn't cover it that much because American Idol and Survivor are, understandably, more pressing world events but if you venture into the scary and sometimes silly (the Brits spell it "colour" - those cards) world of the foreign press you get a clearer idea of just how violent daily life on this planet is.

There are of course the conspiracy theorists out there who will tell you that this was all planned as part of the New World Order that the elected Bush liked to mention. They have a pretty good argument this time around, but I don't really know where I draw the line between laughing at and listening to them.

There is no question that Bush's approval rating soared from an embarrassing low to an amazing high after the attacks, but to suggest that he is behind them not only gives his diminished mental "capacitude" more credit than it deserves but it is counter-productive. So what if the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) wrote that we would need a new Pearl Harbor to gain acceptance for their idea to attack Iraq and dominate the world. So what if Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld are founding members of PNAC. All coincidences, I'm sure.

There might be something there I guess, but such thinking is un-American. We aren't supposed to question our government. That's the GOP's job. Besides, let us never lose focus of the most important thing: Ryan Seacrest.