9/11 COMMISSION CALLS FOR PREEMPTIVE ACTION, NOT INDICTMENTS
The Democrats are giddy over Dick Clarke's new book and his claims that the Bush Adminstration did not take him seriously and take immediate action against Al Qaeda (or is it now, "Qaida"?). The 9/11 Commission is reporting that the reason 9/11 happened is because of the "Clinton and Bush administrations' failure to pursue military action against al-Qaida operatives allowed the Sept. 11 terrorists to elude capture despite warning signs years before the attacks."

But there's more. One reason for the failure was the Clinton Administration's desire to pursue a law enforcement-like solution. The Commission complains that the Clinton Administration knew of the terrorist links between Osama bin Laden and 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, but instead of taking preemptive military action, the administration "let years pass as it pursued criminal indictments and diplomatic solutions to subduing them abroad." The Bush Administration's failure was it's continuation of that same policy. And even today, the Democrats decry preemptive military action (while suggesting they should have taken such action on Dick Clarke's orders) and John Kerry even proposes a return to the failed policy that lead to 9/11, with a terrorism policyreliant on law enforcement. Kerry believes, in his words, that the fight against terrorism is "primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world."

I don't believe Kerry would follow the exact policy of the past. The world has changed and now that we know what the terrorists are capable of, even Kerry would probably be more likely to act militarily and even preemptively than Clinton . But his focus on law enforcement is troublesome. Waiting around for "better intelligence," indictment-sufficient evidence or diplomatic manuevering to get the French on board is dangerous. Right now, Kerry does not show that he fully understands this. But he still has time.

The focus of all partisans and patriots and the job of the 9/11 Commission should be on what we can do better, not on whether Clinton was wrong or if Bush should have changed course. We have hindsight now that renders objectivity with respect to what we'd have done in 1995 of 2001 impossible. Candidates when by focusing on the future, and only one is doing that now.