Latest "terror alert" based on 3-4 year-old information

I haven’t seen a thread on this yet so here you go

I really want to take off the tinfoil. It itches. but I everytime I take it off my head, they start shooting those rays at me.

The White House wouldn’t use obsolete, pre-9/11 intelligence as an excuse to trump up a fake terror warning in the wake of the DNC, would they?

Would they?

Dude, the hamsters, think of the hamsters.

“Here we go again…latest terror alert”

Your OP is the current argument.

That’s it, GWB has officially gone off the deep end and is now taking the bible quite literally: “Out of the mouths of babes…etc.” I mean, who listens to preschoolers about terror alerts?

Oh. You meant the information was 3-4 years old. Never mind…

If they didn’t, assholes like you would be screaming, “Bush isn’t doing everything he can! He’s Hitler!”

I think this is a slightly different take on it than that thread World Eater I get the feeling from that one of slight paranoia. This one just boggles the mind.

I hate rampant conspiracy as much as anyone here too. But if this terror warning isn’t politically-motivated, it’s plain dumb IMHO.

Let’s say the information they found is legit. If what we’ve seen from actions on previous warnings holds true, security at the affected buildings will be stepped up for a couple of months, then quietly revert back to as it was before the warning. I suppose one has to hope that an attack has been planned to be carried out during, and only during, the next two months.

Furthermore, the investigation into 9/11 suggested that only a handful of top Al Qaeda leaders knew the whole of the plan; most of those involved only knew parts of the operation. What was found might well have been only a small portion of a larger plan of attack. In which case, while we concentrate our efforts on a selected five targets, AQ continues to prepare attacks on other targets. At least the vaguer warnings had the advantage of heightening security on a broad range of potential targets; these specific warnings might be giving us a false sense of safety.

Well, may the hamsters at least look favorably on me for trying.

There must be a name for this type of fallacy. The unsupported assertion that a different event would have provoked a different reponse from the opponent in the debate. I suppose it’s a form of as hominem as well as a red herring. In any case it’s evasive and unresponsive.

Do me a favore, SOOFE, don’t make assumptions about what I would and would not do. If you want to know what I think, just ask me.

I think what’s really charming is this quote from Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge:

Unless there is more to this story (and there may well be, who knows), I’m going to offer the following two interpretations of these events.

  1. Charitable interpretation: Bushco over-reacted to old information.

  2. Uncharitable interpretation: Bushco issued terror alerts based on old information for political gain.

I agree with Duke. The Bush administration is either too dumb or too conniving to deserve this Republican’s (and I use the term loosely) vote in November. Since I can’t bring myself to vote for Kerry, I guess I’ll vote Libertarian.

Assuming they even manage to get on the ballot here.

I posted on this in the other “terror alert” thread. It seems to me that unless there is some basis to think that AlQaida is going to blow up the New York Stock Exchange within the next 36 hours (in which case telling people to go to work as if there was nothing wrong seems more than a little imprudent) the public announcement seems like telling Nazi Germany that the Allies had broken the Enigma code in the middle of the Battle of the Atlantic.

Beyond that, doesn’t it look as if the announcement is an admission of impotence – that we can’t do anything about a terror plot except block traffic and search purses? How can we regard ourselves as safer because of the efforts of the present Administration when the Administrations response to the possibility of a plot is to double the guard and raise the draw bridge rather than to go get the guys who are hatching and carrying out the plot?

This thing continues to make no sense except as a political ploy to keep up the scare. We have more dead in Iraq and a steady if not increasing level of disorder in that God forsaken country. The effort in Pakistan and Afghanistan has been to the greatest extent surrendered to local authorities of questionable competence and zeal, consumer spending is down, oil prices have reached a new high. What does the Reelection campaign have left except harping about sodomy and abortion, bad mouthing Mrs. Kerry and trying to keep us in a state of generalized terror?

It is begining to look as if the suspitions of not a few people, myself included, that the Administration is screaming 'Wolf" will shortly be confirmed.

You’re such an ass. I’m still waiting to find out how you interpret our activities in Iraq as an overwhelming success…


Someone who sits and reads to elementary school students while terroists attack?

If this latest terror “threat” is legitimate, why is the Statue of Liberty reopening?

I have to say this is one thing I found stupid in F9/11. I figured him jumping up mid sentence and screaming “SWEET CHRIST!” was not the proper way to go. Keeping calm while they fired up Air Force 1, and made sense of the situation, was the only rational thing anyone could have done.

Ridge Defends ‘Three-Year-Old’ U.S. Terror Alert

I had to look up the word “disabuse”. I hope they’ll now declare war on Iraq because they have some information about WMDs too.

Changing some characters and quoting from the movie Duck Soup:

George W Bush: Clear? Huh. Why a four-year-old child could understand this report.
[to SS]
George W Bush: Run out and find me a four-year-old child, I can’t make head or tail of it.

The Marx brothers could not have been more prophetic.

Uhm what the fuck Diogenes why didn’t you quote the next 3 paragraphs?

Not only did they issue a terror warning, they broke out the paramilitary forces and sent the NY financial district to Defcon One.

Or five, I always forget which way Defcon goes.

Hundreds of thousands of tax dollars (if not millions) pissed away, and we had no reason to believe attacks were imminent, certainly not within the one to two weeks we’ll maintain this security posture. We’ve done nothing to stop or even deter Al Qaida, further cynicized the public wrt the terror alert system, and all so the Shrub could shut people up talking about the DNC convention.

I didn’t quote it because it doesn’t add anything or make the warning any less bullshit. The Bushistas are just saying that AQ has planned long term events before so maybe all this obsolete, pre-9/11 horseshit really means the sky is falling. Even the so-called “update” is over six months old. The relevant info was contained in the portion I quoted, including the following:

They admit they have no evidence that any plot is still under way, yet Ridge said over the weekend that this threat was a “ten” on a one to ten scale of urgency and certainty.

I guess he needs a scale that goes to eleven.

Quite enough for me. Clearly, they haven’t the slightest qualm about inserting a partisan political plug in what is ostensibly an announcement of the gravest moment, an urgent warning demanding the utmost vigilence.

Cheap. Shoddy. Lame.