9 Incomplete Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission
By: Mickey McCarter
09/01/2011 ( 4:15am)
Nine of the 41 recommendations issued by the 9/11 Commission seven years ago remain unfilled, leaving the chairmen of the commission to press for their complete implementation in a report card issued Wednesday.
Former 9/11 Commission Chair Tom Kean and Vice Chair Lee Hamilton, now co-chairs of the National Security Preparedness Group at the Bipartisan Policy Center think tank, unveiled their Tenth Anniversary Report Card: The Status of the 9/11 Commission Recommendations at a press conference in Washington, DC, calling upon the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), state and local governments, the White House, and Congress to complete work on the nine remaining recommendations. The two chairs were joined by seven out of 10 of the 9/11 commissioners.
"The good news is that a lot of progress has been made on a good many of those recommendations," Kean said at the conference. "One of these is the transformation of the intelligence community and breaking down the barriers that were so terrible, so costly, in information sharing. Legal policy and cultural barriers between agencies created serious impediments to information sharing that prevented disruption of the 9/11 attacks."
He added, "It's not perfect, but it's a lot better than it was before 9/11."
The first incomplete recommendation involves unity of command and effort, which requires action from DHS and state and local communities, Kean said. Every disaster response requires someone in charge, as demonstrated by large catastrophes like 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina, where failures in leadership cost lives.
Still, many metropolitan areas have not addressed the question of who's in charge in a major disaster, he lamented.
"Failure to resolve the basic building blocks of established roles and responsibilities in dealing with catastrophic disaster planning can result in confusion at a scene and it will cost lives in the future and it has cost lives in the past," Kean stated.
And first responders coming together in a disaster still are not assured of their capabilities to talk to each other, Kean noted, leaving radio interoperability as the second recommendation not completely fulfilled.
Congress has stalled on various proposals to allocate the D-Block of radio frequency spectrum to first responders, Kean said, leaving many firemen, policemen, medical personnel, and rescue workers unable to talk directly in a disaster scene. People have died due to that shortfall.
"They died because of that in 9/11; they died because of that in Katrina; and they will die in the future unless this particular problem is not solved," Kean remarked.
Congress must reform itself to consolidate jurisdiction over DHS to complete a third unfinished recommendation. It also should stand up appropriations panels that fund the intelligence agencies instead of allocating that responsibility to defense subcommittees, Kean said.
Reforming Congress is very difficult to do but very necessary, Kean emphasized. But DHS spends so much time preparing and testifying before nearly 100 committees and subcommittees that it loses valuable time protecting the American public.
"Congress should immediately consolidate jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security in the House and Senate homeland security committees," Kean said.
Hamilton noted that Congress established a Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board as recommended by the 9/11 Commission but that board has laid dormant for more than three years now. As dormant, the board constitutes a fourth unfulfilled recommendation.
Since 9/11, the executive branch has received expanded authorities to conduct surveillance and to collect information, Hamilton said, making a strong board a public necessity.
"Even if these powers are being employed in a careful way respectful of civil liberties, the history of the abuse of such powers should give us pause and make us commit that mechanisms are in place to protect our liberty," Hamilton said.
He called upon President Barack Obama to appoint the board's five members and for Congress to confirm them quickly. Obama recently appointed only two members, who have not yet received confirmation.
The president or Congress also should move to strengthen the power of the director of national intelligence (DNI). The implementation of that position remains a fifth unfulfilled recommendation.
In the last six years, the DNI has improved information sharing and coordination among intelligence agencies, Hamilton acknowledged, but it remains unclear that the DNI is the driving force for intelligence integration envisioned by the 9/11 Commission.
The DNI has no or ambiguous powers on the budget and personnel for intelligence agencies, leading to a need for further clarity. Congress could clarify the DNI's leadership on these matters through legislation or the president could use executive power to align the intelligence agencies more closely under the DNI's command.
As a sixth unfulfilled recommendation, Kean and Hamilton identified the incomplete DHS system for biometric entry-exit screening to track foreign nationals as they enter or leave the United States.
"The Department of Homeland Security has deployed a system that checks all individuals who arrive at US borders, ensures they are who they say they are, and helps prevent known terrorists from entering the country. But the exit portion of the system has not been completed, so we do not know with any certainty who has left the country or remains here on an expired visa," Hamilton said.
An exit tracking capability would have helped law enforcement searching for two of the 19 hijackers who had overstayed their visas, he added, calling on DHS to add the exit capability to the US-VISIT system.
Seventh, state governments must move to comply with DHS regulations for secure identification, including driver's licenses, Hamilton insisted, noting that 18 of the 19 9/11 hijackers obtained 30 state-issued IDs amongst them, thereby enabling them to easily board airplanes on 9/11.
Due to the ease of fraudulent activity to obtain official identification, the 9/11 Commission pressed the federal government to set standards for the issuance of secure birth certificates and identifications. In 2008, DHS promulgated regulations for secure standards and benchmarks for state driver's licenses, but it has waived compliance with those regulations until 2013.
"This delay in compliance creates vulnerabilities and makes us less safe. No further delay should be authorized and instead the deadline in our view should be accelerated," Hamilton said.
Eighth, DHS must improve the way it sets requirements for screening technologies and how it works with industry to test and field those technologies, according to the report card.
"Unfortunately, the explosives detection technology lacks reliability and lags in its capability to automatically identify concealed weapons and explosives," Hamilton asserted. "The next generation whole body scanning machines are also not effective at detecting explosives hidden within the body and raise privacy and health concerns that DHS has not fully addressed."
Finally, the White House and Congress must resolve issues related to standards for terrorist detention.
Obama largely fulfilled this recommendation with executive orders on the treatment of detainees when he became president, bringing the US treatment of detainees into line with the Geneva Conventions, Hamilton said. But terrorist detainees still languish in the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, contrary to ideals of due process.
"Congress and president must decide how to handle detainees ground in fairness, respect for due process, and protecting the American people," Hamilton stated.
 | Union Bosses Call It Quits With Democrat Party: Obama Indebting The American DreamVolubrjotr | September 2, 2011 at 00:26 | Tags: AFL–CIO, democratic, Glass–Steagall Act, Lyndon LaRouche, Marcy Kaptur, new jersey, unions, United State, United States House of Representatives | Categories: barack obama, government, obama, political, politics, soetoro, subversion, treason, yes we can | URL: http://wp.me/psXSG-bSR |
This morning, the State Convention of the New Jersey AFL-CIO voted up a resolution of support for the Glass-Steagall bill which has been introduced into the House of Representatives by Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), H.R. 1489. The full body, by a unanimous voice vote, approved the following resolution, which had been voted by its Executive [...]
 | WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! |
Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com
George Bush uttered the descriptor "Islamofascism" ONCE during his administration and was categorically rebuked for linking a soi dissant "peaceful" religion with a pejorative term. The reference was deemed offensive and racist and was never heard again.
Why in G-d's name would we EVER spend 30 seconds worrying about offending those who are committed to destroying us? We didn't hesitate to use such terminology when describing the Nazis or Japanese imperialists! Islam scripturally refers to Jews, Christians, etc. as "kafirs" and apes and pigs. Why the fuss over "Islamofascism" for a supremacist, totalitarian, militaristic ideology?
Under Obama, the head of our national security function turned her focus to patriotic Americans who oppose the killing of the unborn and cherish the constitutional right to defend themselves. She further obscured the "counterterrorist" lexicography by referring to "man-caused disasters" and "overseas contingency operations." The words "Islamic" and "terrorism" were never to be conjoined again and negative references to "Islam" and "Muslim" were expunged from all official communications.
Now, the assault against our First Amendment advances with the apocryphal battle to curtail nonexistent "Islamophobia." With the latest Obama/OIC proposal - an end run around Congress - Islamic blasphemy codes could be instituted that would officially restrict any and all discussion - thus understanding - of the dire threat we face from Islam.
Janet Levy,
Los Angeles
NINA SHEA
SEPTEMBER 1, 2011 4:00 A.M. The Administration Takes on 'Islamophobia' An unprecedented collaboration between the Obama administration and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC, formerly called the Organization of the Islamic Conference) to combat "Islamophobia" may soon result in the delegitimization of freedom of expression as a human right. The administration is taking the lead in an international effort to "implement" a U.N. resolution against religious "stereotyping," specifically as applied to Islam. To be sure, it argues that the effort should not result in free-speech curbs. However, its partners in the collaboration, the 56 member states of the OIC, have no such qualms. Many of them police private speech through Islamic blasphemy laws and the OIC has long worked to see such codes applied universally. Under Muslim pressure, Western Europe now has laws against religious hate speech that serve as proxies for Islamic blasphemy codes. Last March, U.S. diplomats maneuvered the adoption of Resolution 16/18 within the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC). Non-binding, this resolution, inter alia, expresses concern about religious "stereotyping" and "negative profiling" but does not limit free speech. It was intended to — and did — replace the OIC's decidedly dangerous resolution against "defamation of religions," which protected religious institutions instead of individual freedoms. But thanks to a puzzling U.S. diplomatic initiative that was unveiled in July, Resolution 16/18 is poised to become a springboard for a greatly reinvigorated international effort to criminalize speech against Islam, the very thing it was designed to quash. Citing a need to "move to implementation" of Resolution 16/18, the Obama administration has inexplicably decided to launch a major international effort against Islamophobia in partnership with the Saudi-based OIC. This is being voluntarily assumed at American expense, outside the U.N. framework, and is not required by the resolution itself. On July 15, a few days after the Norway massacre, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton co-chaired an OIC session in Istanbul on religious intolerance. It was there that she announced the initiative, inviting the OIC member-states' foreign ministers and representatives to the inaugural meeting of the effort that the U.S. government would host this fall in Washington. She envisions it as the first in a series of meetings to decide how best to implement Resolution 16/18. In making the announcement, Clinton was firm in asserting that the U.S. does not want to see speech restrictions: "The resolution calls upon states to 'counter offensive expression through education, interfaith dialogue, and public debate . . . but not to criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence.'" (This is the First Amendment standard set forth in the 1969 Supreme Court case of Brandenburg v. Ohio.) With the United States providing this new world stage for presenting grievances of "Islamophobia" against the West, the OIC rallied around the initiative as the propaganda windfall that it is. It promptly reasserted its demands for global blasphemy laws, once again sounding the call of its failed U.N. campaign for international laws against the so-called defamation of Islam. It has made plain its aim to use the upcoming conference to further pressure Western governments to regulate speech on behalf of Islam. The OIC's understanding of the upcoming meetings is that they will "aim at developing a legal basis for the U.N. Human Rights Council's resolution which [will] help in enacting domestic laws for the countries involved in the issue, as well as formulating international laws preventing inciting hatred resulting from the continued defamation of religions." In an August 17 op-ed on the initiative, OIC secretary general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu was enthusiastic. He expressed concern that "anti-Islam and anti-Muslim attitudes and activities, known as Islamophobia, are increasingly finding place in the agenda of ultra-right wing political parties and civil societies in the West in their anti-immigrant and anti-multiculturalism policies," and that "their views are being promoted under the banner of freedom of expression." This parallels the old Soviet-bloc attack on the First Amendment as an official sanctioning of racism. Citing a familiar litany of examples — "the publication of offensive cartoons of the Prophet six years ago that sparked outrage across the Muslim world, the publicity around the film Fitna and the more recent Qur'an burnings" — Ihsanoglu was emphatic that "no one has the right to insult another for their beliefs or to incite hatred and prejudice" and that "freedom of expression has to be exercised with responsibility." In a separate OIC news report, Ihsanoglu raised the stakes further. He warned against the "institutionalization of the phenomenon of Islamophobia through the involvement of the European extreme right in government institutions and political action." Amb. Zamir Akram, Pakistan's Permanent Representative on behalf of the OIC to the HRC, commented regarding the initiative that the OIC would not compromise on "anything against the Quran, anything against the Prophet and anything against the Muslim community in terms of discrimination." As for reciprocity — for example, reforming the Saudi national curriculum that continues to teach students to "kill" Jews, "fight" polytheists, view Christians as "enemies," and spread Islam through "jihad" — there probably won't be any. This initiative is shaping up to be one-sided. As Akram said, "The Resolution 16/18 was driven more by the kind of discrimination in Europe and the West in general against Muslims." He added: "I don't think any country in the Muslim world is deliberately discriminating against minorities." Ihsanoglu took a similar tack, writing that "the Islamic faith is based on tolerance and acceptance of other religions. It does not condone discrimination of human beings on the basis of caste, creed, color, or faith." (In his op-ed, Ihsanoglu also declared that "the OIC has never sought to limit freedom of expression.") Having won the latest round in the ideological contest for individual rights and freedoms at the United Nations this past March, the administration is now gratuitously establishing a new "transnational" forum to essentially re-litigate the matter with a body that is openly hostile to such freedoms. This forum's agenda is to be structured so that freedom of expression will be put on trial and inevitably condemned by most forum participants as, itself, a human-rights violation. In raising OIC expectations that "anti-Islam and anti-Muslim attitudes" will be dealt with under soon-to-be-drafted "implementation" procedures, the administration is riding a tiger. In his 2009 Cairo speech, President Obama said, "I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam whenever they appear." There are a number of problems with this statement: One is that it encourages the diplomatic folly that is this conference. — Nina Shea is director of the Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom and co-author, with Paul Marshall, of Silenced: How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes are Choking Freedoms Worldwide (Oxford University Press, November 2011). |
| Daily Presidential Tracking Poll Thursday, September 01, 2011 The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 19% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -24 (see trends). Texas Governor Rick Perry leads President Obama by three in an early look at Election 2012. Other Republican hopefuls trail by single digits. A proposal has been made for the federal government to spend $46 billion to hire a million people on a temporary basis. Thirty percent (30%) favor the idea while 51% are opposed. The Presidential Approval Index is calculated by subtracting the number who Strongly Disapprove from the number who Strongly Approve. It is updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update). Updates are also available on Twitter and Facebook. Overall, 43% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's performance. Fifty-six percent (56%) at least somewhat disapprove. Just 16% believe the nation is generally heading in the right direction. Scott Rasmussen's book on the Tea Party, Mad as Hell, will be released in paperback next Tuesday. You can pre-order now. New polling shows that Tea Party negatives are on the rise. Just 29% say they would consider it a positive to hear a candidate described as affiliated with that movement. Forty-three percent (43%) say it would be a negative. Describing someone as a conservative earns much better reviews. (More Below)
The Wall Street Journal has called Scott "America's leading insurgent pollster" and the Washington Post says he is a "driving force in American politics." If you'd like Scott to speak to your organization, meeting, or conference, please contact Premiere Speakers. You can also follow Scott on Facebook. In a book released last year, Scott observed that "the gap between Americans who want to govern themselves and politicians who want to rule over them may be as big today as the gap between the colonies and England during the 18th century." He added that "the American people don't want to be governed from the left, the right, or the center. They want to govern themselves." In Search of Self-Governance is available at Amazon.com. MAD AS HELL: How the Tea Party Movement is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System, by Scott Rasmussen and Doug Schoen, can be ordered at Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble, and other outlets. It's also available in bookstores everywhere. It is important to remember that the Rasmussen Reports job approval ratings are based upon a sample of likely voters. Some other firms base their approval ratings on samples of all adults. Obama's numbers are always several points higher in a poll of adults rather than likely voters. That's because some of the president's most enthusiastic supporters, such as young adults, are less likely to turn out to vote. It is also important to check the details of question wording when comparing approval ratings from different firms. (More Below)
Rasmussen Reports has been a pioneer in the use of automated telephone polling techniques, but many other firms still utilize their own operator-assisted technology (see methodology). Pollsters for Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton have cited our "unchallenged record for both integrity and accuracy." The Pew Center noted that Rasmussen Reports beat traditional media in covering Scott Brown's upset win in Massachusetts earlier this year: "It was polling-not journalistic reporting-that caught the wave in the race to succeed Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy." Rasmussen Reports was also the first to show Joe Sestak catching Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary race last year. Once again in 2010, Rasmussen Reports polling provided an accurate preview of Election Night outcomes. See how we did. Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, noted, "This was one tough election to poll and forecast. Rasmussen Reports caught the major trends of the election year nationally and in most states." In December 2009, a full 11 months before Election Day. A Democratic strategist concluded that if the Rasmussen Reports Generic Congressional Ballot data was accurate, Republicans would gain 62 seats in the House during the 2010 elections. Other polls at the time suggested the Democrats would retain a comfortable majority. The Republicans gained 63 seats in the 2010 elections. Rasmussen's final 2010 projections were published in the Wall Street Journal. Scott Rasmussen noted that "it would be wise for all Republicans to remember that their team didn't win, the other team lost. Heading into 2012, voters will remain ready to vote against the party in power unless they are given a reason not to do so." In the 2009 New Jersey Governor's race, automated polls tended to be more accurate than operator-assisted polling techniques. On reviewing the state polling results from 2009, Mickey Kaus offered this assessment, "If you have a choice between Rasmussen and, say, the prestigious N.Y. Times, go with Rasmussen!" In 2008, Obama won 53%-46% and our final poll showed Obama winning 52% to 46%. While we were pleased with the final result, Rasmussen Reports was especially pleased with the stability of our results. On every single day for the last six weeks of the campaign, our daily tracking showed Obama with a stable and solid lead attracting more than 50% of the vote. We also have provided a summary of our 2008 state-by-state presidential results for your review. In 2004 George W. Bush received 50.7% of the vote while John Kerry earned 48.3%. Rasmussen Reports polling projected that Bush would win 50.2% to 48.5%. We were the only firm to project both candidates' totals within half a percentage point by (see our 2004 results). See also our 2008 state results for Senate and governor. See 2006 results for Senate and Governor. Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Results are also compiled on a full-week basis and crosstabs for full-week results are available for Platinum Members. Like all polling firms, Rasmussen Reports weights its data to reflect the population at large (see methodology). Among other targets, Rasmussen Reports weights data by political party affiliation using a dynamic weighting process. While partisan affiliation is generally quite stable over time, there are a fair number of people who waver between allegiance to a particular party or independent status. Our baseline targets are established based upon separate survey interviews with a sample of adults nationwide completed during the preceding three months (a total of 45,000 interviews) and targets are updated monthly. Currently, the baseline targets for the adult population are 34.9% Republicans, 34.1% Democrats, and 31.0% unaffiliated. Likely voter samples typically show a slightly larger advantage for the Republicans. A review of last week's key polls is posted each Saturday morning. To get a sense of longer-term trends, check out our month-by-month review of the president's numbers. | ||
| |
As part of a Web 2.0 project for political education, the german non-profit organisation /e-politik.de/ e.V. has released an animated video about human rights. Currently there are german, english, spanish and french versions- an arabic version and a version with chinese subtitles are coming soon. All clips are accessible on our YouTube channel (www.youtube.com/weareedeos) .The clips are licensed as Creative Commons and can be used, shared and embedded. If you like the clip, please circulate widely (i.e. Newsletter, Facebook). Feedback would be appreciated.
For more information about the project, please visit: http://edeos.org/en/project_wissenswerte.html
Please do not hesitate to contact me for further information.
Best regards,
Jan Künzl
-Project Manager WissensWerte- Gaudystr. 2 10437 Berlin/Germany contact@edeos.org Tel: +4930/23130075 Mob: +49176/20790628
|
| This message was sent to majors.bruce@gmail.com from: Gary Johnson 2012 | 731 E. South Temple | Salt Lake City, UT 84102, USA | Email Marketing by |
| Unsubscribe |
