So, last night I got my weekly fix of 24 in a special Sunday night presentation instead of its usual Tuesday time slot. As loyal viewers of the series no doubt know already, the adventures of Jack Bauer and the gang at CTU were pre-empted this week for one of President Bush’s infrequent press conferences (actually, it was more of a short speech followed by a Q-and-A session, but subtle distinctions have never been the President’s strong suit).

The pre-emption was no big deal, really. Sorry to disappoint those who were hoping to read a good rant about my favorite TV show getting bumped because some politician needed the airtime. I haven’t done that since Jimmy Carter interrupted the premiere of Battlestar Galactica way back in 1978, and I was only seven then. I’m a big boy now, and I recognize that it’s not the end of the world if you must wait a few days to catch a TV show (hey, at least they reschedule stuff now; I didn’t see the complete Battlestar pilot for years after that first disastrous broadcast). Acceptance aside, however, I have been thinking a lot about Bush’s appearance last Tuesday and the reasons behind it.

I don’t think anyone can accuse me of being partisan for noting that this little bull session with the Washington press corps was basically intended as damage control following what had been a rough couple of weeks for the Bush administration. There was the widespread “unrest” in Iraq, of course, but Bush has also been hammered recently by accusations that he didn’t do enough to stop the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It is this second point that I want to address here.

My feelings about our current president are on record here at Simple Tricks. I don’t like the guy and I will happy to see him consigned to the history books. That said, however, I don’t think it is appropriate to lay the blame for 9/11 at his feet.

Trust me, it isn’t easy for me to say that. As far as I’m concerned, this country has pretty much gone to shit in the last three years and, yes, I do blame the president and his policies for much (but not all) of the deterioration. Nevertheless, I just don’t believe that what happened on that sparkling September morning two-and-a-half years ago was his fault, and I think it’s both inaccurate and a waste of time for his opponents to try and pin it solely on him, as some seem intent on doing.

Any student of history, especially the history of disasters, should understand that an event like 9/11 is not the responsibility of any one human being or group of humans (not counting the evil bastards who planned the attacks and drove those planes into their targets, of course — I’m speaking of those who failed to stop them). Take the Titanic, for example. Everyone knows the story of the “unsinkable” ship that struck an iceberg and went to the bottom, killing just under 2000 people in the process. When considering that timeless tale, it’s tempting to blame Captain Smith for racing through ice-infested waters at an unsafe speed, or on the bureaucrat who decided that the ship didn’t need very many lifeboats (the thinking was that the ship could serve as its own lifeboat if it became crippled and partially flooded; the problem, of course, was that more watertight compartments flooded than anyone believed ever would). The truth, however, is that both men were responsible, as were dozens of others who all made decisions that, taken individually, were not harmful, but together added up to a disaster that shocked the world of 1912 every bit as badly as 9/11 shook us here in 2001. There were also elements in the Titanic disaster that were entirely beyond human control: the primitive metallurgy of the day that led to brittle, easily-damaged rivetheads, for instance, or the freak weather patterns that created more icebergs than were normally seen in April.

I believe 9/11 was the exact same type of phenomenon, a complex matrix of decisions, conditions, and coincidences that, when combined with the twisted will of the hijackers, added up to mass death. Perhaps Gee-Dub could’ve been more proactive in trying to prevent the attacks, but that doesn’t mean his efforts would have been effective. I believe that those attacks, or something very much like them, could have happened on anyone’s watch and were probably inevitable given the way things have developed in the world over the past 20 years. They weren’t Bush’s fault, and, no, my Republican friends, they weren’t the fault of Bill Clinton, either. (Remember, if you will, that the Clinton administration was effectively hamstrung by an uncooperative Republican-controlled Congress that thought it was better to shut down the government than find a way to work with a man they didn’t especially like, not to mention constant accusations of “wagging the dog” anytime he did attempt to be proactive about the developing terrorist problem.) If you really want to blame one particular individual for 9/11, you’ll probably have to go all the way back to Ronald Reagan, whose Cold War policies toward the Afghanistan conflict resulted in Osama bin Laden learning the guerilla tactics and hatred of all things Western that he’s now using on us. And even then, I think you’d be faced with the dilemma of viewing decisions through the lens of hindsight. What we know now is not what Reagan’s people knew then.

If I was going to judge George Dubya on 9/11-related issues (and I will come Election Day), it would be for his direct response to 9/11 and his actions since that dark day, including his great resistance even to the formation of a commission to investigate the attacks. To my mind, Bush’s outright disdain of the commission indicates that he at least thinks he’s got something to hide, even if he really doesn’t. But that’s another post and another debate.

I guess what it all comes down to for me is a simple question: what is the purpose of the 9/11 Commission? Is it to identify the bureaucratic and policy weaknesses that enabled the terrorists to accomplish their mission? Great, let it proceed and then let’s take swift action to plug the holes. But if the Commission’s purpose is to find a scapegoat, which is how it has appeared during the last couple of weeks, then it’s a colossal waste of time and tax-payers’ money. Putting someone’s head on a platter won’t bring back those 3000 people who were just trying to make a living in a couple of really tall buildings. Finding truly effective means to identify and prevent such attacks, without stripping Americans of the rights that make us American, might allow those dead to rest easier, though.