Why did the press tell exactly where everything was?

The press has generally done a good job reporting on the terrorists, but one thing bugs me. Why did they start telling over the air where all the most vulnerable places were in the whole country? They started telling about tunnels, buildings, bridges, and other places that were vulnerable to attack! And they also tried to tell exactly where the president, vice president, and speaker of the House were. Now I know these guys had pretty much all the information they needed, but don’t you think it’s kind of stupid to tell everybody where everything is? Or am I the only one who noticed?

I remember the Pauly Shore movie In The Army Now. In it, they are in Chad, captured and taken to a Lybian(sp?) base where the leader of the Lybians is watching CNN. He sees that CNN says when the U.S. is going to start bombing, so he’s ready for them. Freedom of the press is important, but so’s national security.

Around here, the reporters wouldn’t say where Bush was, so that’s at least one good thing.

Two things. Firstly, you say the media broadcast where tunnels, bridges and buildings were and appear to imply that this was somehow giving away possible target information.
Can I reveal that despite the fact that I am a foreigner I have had no difficulty in amassing a dossier of such information at my home, which I store for future unspecified use (mwahaha)? I gathered this information from secret sources such as tourist guides and maps, bought from US traitors known as “bookstores”. I have, by the underhanded technique of using commercial airlines and a passport, even managed to organise personal visits to the States. Recently I have utilized amazing surveillance technology that is little known in your country but which we refer to as the internet.

Secondly and perhaps more seriously, it’s funny how everyone you meet has heard the adage that the first casualty of war is the truth, but when war starts, they forget this immediately and believe every news bulletin. How do you know that what you were told about the President’s location was correct?

And even if it was, the only information I heard about his location was either that he was at some bunker, or that he was at an unspecified location in the air. Not much of a target. And if you were trying to kill him, wouldn’t you just have done it a week ago when he was giving this or that speech at this or that public location instead of after the whole country’s forces have gone on red alert?

The first channel I was watching this morning had Jim Miklachevsky (sp?) saying, "I’m standing in front of the Pentagon…yabber yabber…they missed the offices of the chief of staff, which is about sixty feet south east of where I’m standing…

Just in case someone wanted to finish the job.

Just a few hours ago, they showed W strolling into the White House.

Alright guys.

Thousands of Americans were just assasinated by terrorists, and one plane was perhaps heading for Camp David.

So, on the SAME DAY, you show the President walking into the most obvious target in America?

It doesn’t make sense, says I.

The point of showing the president walking into the White House was to indicate that he, and by extension the rest of the United States, wasn’t going to run and hide.

Whatever misgivings you may have about the President, you must admit that you could see that Texas Anger in his eyes during his first few speeches.

He’s not just George W. Bush… he’s the figurehead. If he vanishes, we’ve lost. If he steps right into the line of fire, he’s saying, “We ain’t scared of nothin’, you bastards.”

Which is important, IMHO. We can’t be shown as beaten. W is right, we will “pass the test.”

bluethree, it’s not like that information was secret. You can take tours of the Pentagon, on which they reveal that kind of info.

As the last three posters pointed out, giving out this kind of information is a way of saying to the terrorists, “We’re not going to hide in the dark cos we’re not afraid of you.” That was very important to hear yesterday. Yes, we saw Bush walk into the White House in the open; what we didn’t see were the kajillion snipers and Secret Service agents watching his back.

That’s also why you didn’t see him walking in the middle of a mob of Secret Service men. He was alone, walking across that lawn, because right then that was about the safest place he could have been.

During the course of yesterday’s attacks, really important information was kept under wraps. When the President left Florida (everyone knew he was there to begin with), he was flown to Louisiana with no one knowing where he was. When he left Louisiana, he was flown to Nebraska, again with no one knowing where he was. His return to D.C. didn’t occur until authorities were quite certain that the round of attacks was over, and obviously they had by that point secured the area around the White House and were certain the President could be safely shown entering the White House.

Locations of other officials was similarly kept secret once they had moved from known locations.

The positions of buildings is obviously known data; mentioning them is hardly a help to those who planned the attacks. At a guess (STRICTLY a guess), the United flight that was headed from Newark to San Francisco might have been intended to hit the Sears Tower or some similar location, which attempt was short-circuited by the order to land all aircraft at once (I can’t be sure of the timeline on this, having failed to see exactly when that order issued). But, basically, the attacks appear to have been pre-planned, exquisitely timed for maximum effect, and not dependent on information issued after they started.

Well, according to the flight graphic from today’s Washington Post the Pennsylvania crash had already reached as far as Cleveland before turning around and heading towards DC. So I doubt the Sears Tower was the goal.

None of that stuff (where the buildings are, who’s offices are where) is controlled data. Heck, anyone can get it from a zillion sources.

They dont say where the Pres is…

Hey, why didn’t they arrest Osama when they had him on camera yesterday, eh?

honestly, i think that the government wants the press to believe that they have the truth in their hands. whether or not the press has the correct info is another question, but if the press does have info, correct or not, it makes the U.S. look extremely confident, in that they keep nothing a secret and share everything with the citizens, and show W going into the white house. W going back to the white house was actually an extremely significant move that showed a lot of guts in my mind. they were trying to make a point that the terrorists had not won.

The press needs to use a little grey matter, though. There were reports that the local media in Boston (unconfirmed, as far as I’ve seen so far, anyone else hear this?) were broadcasting that the authorities were monitoring a room that contains suspects and then named the hotel and floor number. If that’s true and anyone was injured due to the leak I think the station should be made to pay.

Also, during press conferences the reporters would ask where secret information came from. The Press Secretary would say no comment, so the next reporter would ask for exact details of the TYPE of secret information was gathered… They asked variations on the same question at least four times, phrasing it differently each time. I think the press should just sit on their hands until the crises is over before asking for information about people infiltrating suspected organizations, how we were able to get details of Assam’s conversations, etc. There is a time and place for everything, but the time is not right when people’s lives are on the line.