PDA

View Full Version : Ridge Warns of Unspecified Terror Threat in U.S.




zimv20
Jul 8, 2004, 03:08 PM
link (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&e=1&u=/nm/20040708/ts_nm/security_ridge_dc)


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge on Thursday warned Americans that al Qaeda may try to carry out "a large-scale attack" to disrupt upcoming elections, but offered no details and had no plans to raise the terror threat level.


"Since September 11th, 2001, we have had intelligence that al Qaeda intends to launch more attacks against the homeland," he said.

"Credible reporting now indicates that al Qaeda is moving forward with its plans to carry out a large-scale attack in the United States in an effort to disrupt our democratic process."

But he said authorities had no specific intelligence about whether al Qaeda was targeting either the Democratic convention later this month in Boston or the Republican convention in New York at the end of August.

The terror alert level will stay at elevated, or yellow -- the third of five levels on the color-coded scale.

i find the timing curious. the day after the Edwards as VP annoucement, news of the Lay indictment was leaked. the next day, Ridge issues another terror warning, but w/ no new information and no change of the alert level.

seems others are wondering the same thing...

When asked about the timing of his announcement -- in a week Democrats have captured attention with announcement of presidential candidate John Kerry's running mate and as the campaign begins to heat up before the Nov. 2 election -- Ridge denied any political motivation.

"We are basically laying out before the general public the kind of information that we've received," he said. "And it's not us -- these are not conjectures or mythical statements we are making. These are pieces of information that we could trace comfortably to sources that we deem to be credible."



IJ Reilly
Jul 8, 2004, 03:20 PM
The terror threat level will be raised between now and the election. I predicted this probably close to a year ago.

skunk
Jul 8, 2004, 03:30 PM
The terror threat level will be raised between now and the election. I predicted this probably close to a year ago.
I'm surprised it doesn't just follow the polls...

blackfox
Jul 8, 2004, 04:16 PM
Does anyone even pay attention to this anymore?

It seems like a case of "the boy who cried wolf" to me.

If you are the administration, it is a nice tool to have in your political bag o' tricks, though...

Question: If there was another terrorist attack between now and the election, would it benefit or hurt Bush?
.
On one hand, his administration would have "let" it happen, despite all their "tough talk", and it would highlight their lack of funding for Homeland Security etc.

OTOH, the country might just rally around Bush in a time of crisis, regardless of any potential merit/rationality behind such a decision.

Hmmm...

skunk
Jul 8, 2004, 04:18 PM
OTOH, the country might just rally around Bush in a time of crisis, regardless of any potential merit/rationality behind such a decision.

Hmmm...
I hate to say it, but I think this is more likely.

blackfox
Jul 8, 2004, 04:43 PM
I hate to say it, but I think this is more likely.
Really? A second attack would be much different than 9/11, as we are fighting a WOT, and the Pres. has made it his priority. He cannot claim the same amount of surprise, and charges of him concentrating money and forces in Iraq would gain added force. If I was Kerry, it would be an excellent opportunity (though not one anyone welcomes) for him to lambast the Presidents' efforts and competence in fighting terrorism and keeping the US safe, and an excellent opportunity to position himself as a fresh alternative...

Bush might initially get the "fear" vote, so to speak, but I believe Kerry would get the resultant "anger" vote, which in part could be channeled towards GW's inept leadership...

Neserk
Jul 8, 2004, 05:14 PM
Does anyone even pay attention to this anymore?

..

No. I generally think it is a ploy to scare people into voting for Bush by dragging up feelings that were felt after 9/11. Since people now blame Bush for 9/11 it isn't going to work.

Thanatoast
Jul 8, 2004, 06:25 PM
Does anyone even pay attention to this anymore?

OTOH, the country might just rally around Bush in a time of crisis, regardless of any potential merit/rationality behind such a decision.

Hmmm...
To the first point, I don't, but Bush is still polling in the mid to high 40's, so some significant portion of the country does.

If there were a terrorist attack, there would definitely be a "rally around the flag" effect. I think it would even be a political coup for Bush. Kerry wouldn't dare attack him for fear of "using this terrible tragedy to play base, mud-slinging political games.

Bush, meanwhile, could claim that he has been held back by pansy-waisted Democrats who were "unwilling to do what's necessary to protect this Great Nation Of Ours by reducing civil liberties even farther and giving the administration even more power.

mactastic
Jul 8, 2004, 07:04 PM
Hmmm... a little 'wagging the dog' perhaps? :p

Sayhey
Jul 8, 2004, 08:51 PM
Hmmm... a little 'wagging the dog' perhaps? :p

Or for the real paranoids among us, how about a replay of the Reichstag fire? I hear there are plans being develop for if the elections have to be postponed. :eek:

Trouble with all this stuff is, although I wouldn't doubt Rove and Co. will do just about anything they can get away with in order to stay in power, I also don't doubt al Qaeda is planning another attack. All we can do is work to get this fool out of the White House and hope the professionals in the FBI, CIA, etc do their job to stop future attacks. Not a lot to hang onto right now, but it's the best we've got.

mactastic
Jul 8, 2004, 08:56 PM
No, I don't doubt that either Sayhey. And really I don't think this is wagging the dog. More like CYA. Lets call it an innoculation against charges of unreadiness if there were to be another major attack on American soil between now and November.