Terror threat source called into question

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, May 28, 2004.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    link

    a little wagging the dog, perhaps?
     
  2. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #2
    Perhaps that's why, despite being '90%' sure of an attack in the works, they declined to actually raise the terror threat level, yet when the wind changed direction during the run-up to Dubya Dubya II the terror threat went up and down like a Vegas hooker.
     
  3. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #3
    Charming turn of phrase! :)
     
  4. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #4
    I have my duct-tape ready...plus I remember that hiding under my kitchen table will protect me from any nuclear attack...so bring it on, if that is Gods' will...
     
  5. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #5
    On the one hand the idea of a domestic attack this summer scares the hell out of me to the point of nightmares. :rolleyes: I think I'm too old to be having nightmares, but that is another matter.

    On the other hand I can't help but wonder if it is a way of pushing people into voting for Bush since his numbers got so high when it came time to go to Iraq to fight terrorism that was based in Afghanistan.
     
  6. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #6
    Did anyone notice that Tom Ridge had no part in this announcement? The DHC didn't raise the terror threat level, either.
     
  7. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #7
    I grant the problem of the crying "Wolf!" aspect. Trouble is, if something does happen, and nobody had said nuttin' about whatever info was had, there'd be a big hue and cry about the absence of a warning.

    Seems to me there's a lot of "Damned if you do, damned if you don't." in all this.

    'Rat
     
  8. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #8
    oh yeah, and peter jennings was pretty quick to point that out. though you'll notice, shortly thereafter, ridge went on record saying there continued to be close cooperation between the Dept. of Home. Def. and the Justice dept.

    he didn't say it w/ a lot of conviction, i noticed.
     
  9. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #9
    just saw this....

    i'm not sure if it's the same thing ashcroft was on about earlier this week or not...

    link
     
  10. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #10
    'Rat, of course this is a CYA manuver. This way no one can accuse the Bush administration of not warning us if there is a terror attack between now and November, nor of too much paranoia leading up to an election. Not that the opposition wouldn't try anyway, but this is an insurance policy for the administration. It's just another reason those stupid alert colors should be stopped.
     

Share This Page