• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Terror Alerts

Mighty_Emperor

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
19,407
We get moved up to an amber status then downgraded, the army turn up at Heathrow for a few days, etc. but nothing ever happens. Have they really diverted terror threats successfully (if so why have we never caught anyone?) or are we just being manipulated to help maintain our support for The War Against Terror?

Personally I'm still unsure about this issue but these artice thros some interesting light on things:

Terror threat source called into question

Ashcroft cites al-Qaida plan, but how credible is the information?

By Lisa Myers
Senior investigative correspondent
NBC News
Updated: 6:57 p.m. ET May 28, 2004

WASHINGTON - Earlier this week Attorney General John Ashcroft warned of an attack planned on America for sometime in the coming months. That may happen, but NBC News has learned one of Ashcroft’s sources is highly suspect.

In warning Americans to brace for a possible attack, Ashcroft cited what he called “credible intelligence from multiple sources,” saying that “just after New Year's, al-Qaida announced openly that preparations for an attack on the United States were 70 percent complete.… After the March 11 attack in Madrid, Spain, an al-Qaida spokesman announced that 90 percent of the arrangements for an attack in the United States were complete.”

But terrorism experts tell NBC News there's no evidence a credible al-Qaida spokesman ever said that, and the claims actually were made by a largely discredited group, Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades, known for putting propaganda on the Internet.

“This particular group is not really taken seriously by Western intelligence,” said terrorism expert M.J. Gohel of the Asia-Pacific Foundation, an international policy assessment group. “It does not appear to have any real field operational capability. But it is certainly part of the global jihad movement — part of its propaganda wing, if you like. It likes to weave a web of lies; it likes to put out disinformation so that the truth is deeply buried. So it is a dangerous group in that sense, but it is not taken seriously in terms of its operational capability.”

The group has claimed responsibility for the power blackout in the Northeast last year, a power outage in London and the Madrid bombing. None of the claims was found to be credible.

“The only thing they haven't claimed credit for recently is the cicada invasion of Washington,”
said expert Roger Cressey, former chief of staff of the critical infrastructure protection board at the White House and now an analyst for NBC News. Cressey also served as deputy to former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke.

A senior U.S. intelligence official previously told NBC News that this group has no known operational capability and may be no more than one man with a fax machine.

Friday, Ashcroft's spokesman blamed the FBI, and the FBI admitted claims that terrorists were 90 percent ready to attack came not from al-Qaida, but from the Abu Hafs al-Masri Brigades’ statements.

That the FBI apparently took the group seriously also troubles experts.

“To give this group any type of credibility is reckless,” said terrorism expert and NBC analyst Steve Emerson, “because it simply doesn't represent anything but one person claiming credit for attacks that has no control or not connected to, but simply trying to jump on the publicity bandwagon.”

He believes it reflects a larger failing on the part of the FBI.

“Portraying this group seriously is simply a reflection of the FBI's continued failures since 9/11 to basically develop an analytic capability at headquarters in assessing terrorist intelligence,” Emerson said.

Senior intelligence and homeland security officials tell NBC News they were surprised by Ashcroft's claims and know of no credible intelligence that al-Qaida is 90 percent ready to attack. But all agree there is plenty of credible intelligence that al-Qaida has plans in the works, and they hope Ashcroft's use of questionable information doesn’t undermine public trust.

Ashcroft and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge issued an unusual joint statement Friday, assuring the American people that “we are working together" against terror. Some critics have suggested there's a disconnect, that the Justice Department did not collaborate with Homeland Security before issuing this week's terror warning.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5087301/

Emps
 
FBI issues alert for stolen propane tankers

Wednesday, June 2, 2004 Posted: 0002 GMT (0802 HKT)


SAN ANTONIO, Texas (Reuters) -- FBI agents in Texas issued a nationwide alert Tuesday for two stolen propane tanker trucks, laden with thousands of gallons of the volatile liquefied gas.

A San Antonio gas company discovered the trucks, one carrying 3,000 gallons and the other carrying 2,500 gallons, had been stolen after employees returned Tuesday from the Memorial Day holiday weekend, the FBI said.

The thefts could have occurred as early as May 25, FBI Agent Patrick Patterson said.

"Propane is one of the elements that terrorists have been trained on, so we're very concerned about it," Patterson told a news conference.

The FBI was concerned the trucks or the propane could be used as a bomb, but Patterson said there was no indication that was the purpose of the theft.

The FBI and San Antonio police said propane thefts were common in south Texas, given its proximity to northern Mexico.

Propane is a commonly used fuel there, and a professional propane theft ring was operating in San Antonio as recently as last year, San Antonio Police Chief Albert Ortiz said.


A tanker was converted into a truck bomb for the Khobar Towers apartment bombing in Dharan, Saudi Arabia, nearly eight years ago, he said. The June 25, 1996, explosion killed 19 U.S. Air Force personnel and wounded 372 other people.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/06/01/fbi.propane.reut/

My concern is that by issuing warnings based on poor sources (as I mentioned above) or from completely unrelated incidents (in this post) that they:

1. Will be like the boy who cried wolf and people will no longer be interested or keep an eye out for suspicious activity.

2. That they are using this for their own ends to keep us at a higher state of anxiety while they use this to push through laws, commit acts, etc. which erode our freedoms.

Emps
 
Propane Trucks Stolen in Texas Are Found

LAREDO, Texas (AP) - Two propane-delivery trucks were found Wednesday after being stolen from a gas company over the weekend, a theft that raised fears of what could happen if terrorists got hold of the explosive fuel.

The trucks were found on a highway just outside of Laredo, San Antonio police spokeswoman Sandy Gutierrez said. She did not know whether the trucks were still carrying the fuel.

An FBI spokesman in Laredo did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment.

Police Chief Albert Ortiz said Tuesday that his department does not suspect that terrorism was behind the thefts. But officials said that since Sept. 11, such a possibility cannot be ignored.

``Four years ago, we probably would not be too concerned about this, San Antonio FBI agent Patrick Patterson said Wednesday on NBC's ``Today.'' ``It would be a major theft and handled like any other criminal investigation. Because of the nature of the day, we are very, very concerned about the whereabouts of these two trucks.''

One of the tankers carried about 3,000 gallons of propane, while the other held 2,600 gallons, police said. The trucks were taken from a parking lot owned by Ferrellgas and have the company logo on them.

Another FBI spokesman, Rene Salinas, said the market for propane in Mexico is strong and that the thieves could have been filling an order, mirroring a similar theft about nine months ago. A nationwide alert has been posted and law enforcement officials in Mexico also have been contacted, he said.

``We don't want to alarm anyone,'' Salinas said. ``But we do want people to be on the lookout.''

Also under investigation is the weekend theft of 15 gas canisters from an ambulance supply company. Authorities do not believe the thefts are related.


06/02/04 15:36

© Copyright The Associated Press.

source

FWIW, Emps, I agree completely with your points 1 and especially two. These people have been playing the Politics of Fear to justify their own ends for 33 months now. It's disgusting. -lopaka:mad:
 
Ridge says al Qaeda planning attack
Terrorists' aim is to influence presidential vote, security chief says

Thursday, July 8, 2004 Posted: 11:55 AM EDT (1555 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Al Qaeda plans a large-scale attack on the United States "in an effort to disrupt the democratic process" before November's elections, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said Thursday.

Ridge cited "recent interdictions" for the new warning. He said U.S. officials have no precise knowledge of the time, place or method of attack, but said they are "actively working to gain that knowledge."

"We know they have the capability to succeed and they also hold the mistaken belief that their attacks will have an impact on America's resolve," Ridge said.

Ridge did not raise the national color-coded threat level beyond its current yellow, or elevated, level.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, speaking before the briefing, said the intelligence was "very non-specific" and there was "no reason for panic, no reason for paralysis."

"The reality is of increased risk here in the homeland over the next several weeks, the next several months," Frist said.
Accusations of scaremongering

Officials say there is no specific intelligence of a planned attack on either of the major political conventions. The four-day Democratic convention kicks off July 26 in Boston, Massachusetts, and the Republican National Convention begins August 30 in New York City.

Officials say Ridge thinks it is time to again raise public awareness.

Because there is no plan to raise the threat level and only general information, some Democrats privately have questioned whether the timing of the announcement is politically motivated.

A senior administration official said accusations of scaremongering are to be expected. But the official, who has read Ridge's prepared remarks, added, "This is one of those damned if you do and damned if you don'ts, and our default is 'do.' "
Alert level raised 5 times

A senior campaign adviser to Sen. John Kerry, President Bush's expected rival in November, said he is giving the White House the benefit of the doubt. He added, however, that the White House would have to explain its reasons for the new warnings.

The color-coded alert level has been raised five times to orange, or high, since the system's inception after the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

The last time the alert level was raised was in December, after a taped threat from al Qaeda's No. 2 figure, Ayman al-Zawahiri. The alert level was dropped the following month.

CNN Homeland Security Producer Mike Ahlers contributed to this report.


© 2004 Cable News Network

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/07/08/ridge.alqaeda/index.html

Forgive me for being cynical here, but "Ridge thinks it's time again to raise public awareness." Why is now the time ? Because Kerry just announced his running mate and so has been getting free publicity? I know what's bumped that as the lead story now.

If not that, why? If there's no time, place or method even hinted at, exactly what does he hope my awareness is raised in the service or purpose of doing?

But they insist that the terrorists believe an attack would weaken " America's resolve" for what exacty? Four more years?


:hmph:
 
GAO to Ridge: These Ain't Helping

And of course his last press conference is what set up the "let's delay the elections" scenario.-lopaka


GAO report criticizes terror warnings

Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Posted: 9:28 PM EDT (0128 GMT)



WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- U.S. government terror warnings to local police and citizens fail to give the specific information many authorities say is needed to protect the public, a report made for Congress said Monday.

The report followed a series of official warnings about possible attacks -- most recently voiced last week by Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge -- which lacked new intelligence or details on the threat and how to respond.

The report by the Government Accountability Office, the independent, nonpartisan investigative arm of Congress, was based on survey of 28 agencies and 56 states and territories.

Those responding "generally indicated that they did not receive specific threat information and guidance, which they believe hindered their ability to determine and implement protective measures," the report said.

Some critics have accused President Bush's administration of using terrorism warnings as a political tool. Bush has made the fight against global terrorism a major theme of his campaign for re-election.

The administration denies playing politics with terror threats, but a GAO official said the warning system's credibility could be undermined by vague announcements.

"When the government gives warnings without more information about why they're giving them ... that inevitably leads to people questioning whether the timing is a diversion, or politically motivated," said Randall Yim, head of GAO's homeland security division.

The report urged the Department of Homeland Security to give "specific information about the nature, location and timing of the threat, and guidance on action to take."

A failure to deliver specific information in terror warnings can leave agencies unable to gauge risk or develop an effective response, it said.

It recommended that the department publicize threats quickly and through multiple channels, and said many authorities reported they had first learned about threat warnings from media sources.

Government officials have said that the nature of terrorist threats and the classified information on which they are often based make it difficult to give more detailed information.

But Yim said recent warnings may be counterproductive.

"They didn't say what was new and they didn't suggest any additional measures to be taken other than please be a little bit more vigilant and please go about your shopping. I think that that really attacks the credibility of the government warning system."

GAO was formerly known as the General Accounting Office. Under recent legislation, it changed its name to the Government Accountability Office.

Copyright 2004 Reuters. All rights reserved.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/07/13/terror.security.reut/index.html
 
I too noticed the exquisite timing of the recent highly informative and helpful Speculative Warning of a Hypothetical Terrorist Act Possibly Somewhere In the Country At A Time Unknown, about which I have done precisely nothing as I have no information to act on. Maybe I'd better vote Republican and just hope for the best, huh?
However I noticed it came on the same day as Ken Lay, special advisor to Cheney and co's Energy Task Force, was led in handcuffs into a Houston court room. No-one really talks about Lay's tightness with GWB and the present Administration. What friends our Prez keeps! First the Bin Ladens, now the biggest corporate crook in history.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0708042lay1.html
 
Could it get any vaguer?

FBI issues terror alert in Western states

California, New Mexico among those advised of vague threat

The Associated Press
Updated: 3:56 p.m. ET July 29, 2004

WASHINGTON - The FBI warned police in California and New Mexico that it received information about possible terrorist activity in their states. However, the warning wasn’t specific about particular targets or a method of attack, a federal law enforcement official said Thursday.

The FBI decided to pass along the threat information but warned that it was considered unsubstantiated and uncorroborated, said the official, who spoke only on condition of anonymity.

The vague warning was distributed to authorities in California, New Mexico and some other Western states the official did not identify.

U.S. officials earlier this month warned that a regular stream of intelligence indicates al-Qaida wants to attack the United States to disrupt the upcoming elections.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has said the government does not have specific knowledge about where, when or how an attack might take place.

Security was extremely tight at the Democratic National Convention in Boston this week. No terrorist-related activity has been reported.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5550493/
 
Could it get any vaguer?

well according to the bbc...


US terror plot intelligence 'old'


Security has been stepped up in New York and other cities
There are claims that new warnings of al-Qaeda attacks on US cities are based on old intelligence.
Security has been tightened around financial institutions in three cities, following the discovery of detailed information about them.

President George W Bush described the US as a "nation in danger".

But US newspapers say officials investigating the information believe much of it was compiled by al-Qaeda before the 11 September 2001 attacks.

The sources reportedly told the New York Times and Washington Post that they were unsure if Osama Bin Laden's network was still conducting surveillance on the sites.

The Post said officials believed much of the information was gathered by al-Qaeda from public sources like the internet.

Employees turned up for work this week despite the specific warnings against the New York Stock Exchange, the Citigroup Center building in New York, the International Monetary Fund and World Bank buildings in Washington DC, and Prudential Financial's headquarters in Newark, New Jersey.

National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice described the intelligence behind the warnings as being extraordinarily detailed and "unlike anything that I have seen".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3530358.stm
 
KEEP MOVING! NOTHING TO SEE HERE!!

Remember back in the eighties the leaflet they sent to every householded informing us of what to do in the event of a Nuclear bomb dropping on England?

History repeating itself, right here, right now.

Move along...
 
They papers are adding to the problem. over here For example today the Times on line http://www.timesonline.co.uk/

Headlines say:

"Terror Threat to London Banks"

"Terror threat to London uncovered in al-Qaeda raid"


But actually go on to say in their reports :
"They included high-profile American institutions, such as Citigroup, which is based in one of the "twin towers" of Canary Wharf, and the Bank of America and Merrill Lynch, which have headquarters in London, although security sources said that no specific threat had been made against any company in Britain."

"Much of the information that led the authorities to raise the terror alert is three or four years old, according to a report in The New York Times this morning. Intelligence and law enforcement officials reported on Monday the newspaper says that they had not yet found concrete evidence that a terrorist plot or preparatory surveillance operations were still under way"
 
I've been asking myself what do we (the public) actually gain from knowing there is an (alleged?) increase in terrorist attacks in the UK or the US and I can't really come up with any answers.

Anyone got any ideas?

H.
 
You know, when they first broke the news about the heightened terror alert in NY and elsewhere, my first thought was that this was a way of stealing headlines from the Democratic National Convention.
 
Well, yeah. Ridge's press conference in July was held just as Kerry announced Edwards as his running mate (see above).

Two other things this does, is 1) Help intimidate or provide an excuse for police-state like tactics against protestors for the Republican National Convention. eg The city of New York has refused to issue any protest permits, their claim is that the protestors would "hurt the grass in Central Park".

Similarly, for about a month or more the FBI has been releasing hysterical statements and questioning the friends, family and members of a little anarchist group in town...these kids are about 19 years old and do stuff like Leonard Peltier support and serve Food Not Bombs, they could give two whits about the election or who is the president. But there's been twice now (once involving *intelligence* that the Feds gathered from reading the web about non-violent protests for some animal rights guy who's in jail, and the second during the Democratic National Convention, that there's these "domestic terrorist groups" in our midst.

And 2), if nothing happens during the RNC, the administration gets to claim "see, we're keeping the country safe. 'They' wanted to, but we stopped 'em".

People had tuned out the semi-regular announcements about threats, so increase the color-code, and hey, it's news again.

I suppose this reflects the worst kind of cynicism on my part, but I've simply reached the point where I assume the admin is acting in bad faith in furthering its own self-interests until proven otherwise.
 
More on 'The Politics of Fear'

Study: Fear shapes voters' views
Responses to candidates differ after thinking about tragedy

Friday, July 30, 2004 Posted: 2:58 PM EDT (1858 GMT)


WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President George W. Bush may be tapping into solid human psychology when he invokes the September 11 attacks while campaigning for the next election, U.S. researchers said on Thursday.

Talking about death can raise people's need for psychological security, the researchers report in studies to be published in the December issue of the journal Psychological Science and the September issue of the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

"There are people all over who are claiming every time Bush is in trouble he generates fear by declaring an imminent threat," said Sheldon Solomon of Skidmore College in Saratoga Springs, New York, who worked on the study.

"We are saying this is psychologically useful," said Solomon.

Jeff Greenberg, a professor of psychology at the University of Arizona in Tucson, said generating fear was a common tactic.

"A lot of leaders gain their appeal by helping people feel they are heroic, particularly in a fight against evil," Greenberg said in a telephone interview from Hawaii, where he presented the findings to a meeting of the American Psychological Association.

"Sometimes that may be the right thing to do. But it is a psychological approach, particularly when death is close to peoples' consciousness."

For their first study, Solomon, Greenberg and colleagues asked students to think about either their own death or a neutral topic.

They then read the campaign statements of three hypothetical candidates for governor, each with a different leadership style. One was charismatic, said Solomon.

"That was a person who declared our country to be great and the people in it to be special," Solomon, who worked on the study, said in a telephone interview.

The others were task-oriented -- focusing on the job to be done -- or relationship-oriented -- with a "let's get it done together" style, Solomon said.
Fearing doom, choosing charisma

The students who thought about death were much more likely to choose the charismatic leader, they found. Only four out of about 100 chose that imaginary leader when thinking about exams, but 30 did after thinking about death.

Greenberg, Solomon and colleagues then decided to test the idea further and set up four separate studies at different universities.

"In one we asked half the people to think about the September 11 attacks, or to think about watching TV," Solomon said. "What we found was staggering."

When asked to think about television, the 100 or so volunteers did not approve of Bush or his policies in Iraq. But when asked to think about Sept. 11 first and then asked about their attitudes to Bush, another 100 volunteers had very different reactions.

"They had a very strong approval of President Bush and his policy in Iraq," Solomon said.

Solomon, a social psychologist who specializes in terrorism, said it was very rare for a person's opinions to differ so strongly depending on the situation.

Another study focused directly on Bush and his Democratic challenger, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry.

The volunteers were aged from 18 into their 50s and described themselves as ranging from liberal to deeply conservative. No matter what a person's political conviction, thinking about death made them tend to favor Bush, Solomon said. Otherwise, they preferred Kerry.

"I think this should concern anybody," Solomon said. "If I was speaking lightly, I would say that people in their, quote, right minds, unquote, don't care much for President Bush and his policies in Iraq."

He wants voters to be aware of psychological pressures and how they are used.

"If people are aware that thinking about death makes them act differently, then they don't act differently," Solomon said. Solomon says he personally opposes Bush but describes himself as a political independent who could vote Republican.

Copyright 2004 Reuters.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/07/30/vote.psych.reut/index.html
 
lopaka said:
I suppose this reflects the worst kind of cynicism on my part, but I've simply reached the point where I assume the admin is acting in bad faith in furthering its own self-interests until proven otherwise.

IIRC, didn't some US intelligence bigwing make a press call last week in which he trotted out some details - and then went on to praise GWB for his stance on various matters relating to TWAT, etc.? I don't think anyone could be accused of being cynical after seeing such stuff - it comes across as quite blatant electioneering for GWB.
 
As a sidebar, anyone monitoring financial markets will note the repeated warnings and fears of a terrorist attack has pushed the oil price to a 21 year high of ~$42. This has allowed oil operating companies to make a huge, fat profit off the back of fear. There are other factors in this, but its interesting - particularly since we now learn this is old news and released a few days after the DNC.
 
At the service of politicians

Media coverage of terrorism has ballooned since 9/11, despite the fact that the number of incidents and victims is the lowest for years

Justin Lewis
Wednesday August 4, 2004
The Guardian

The millennium may not be very old, but there's no doubt which news story has dominated it thus far. Since the attacks on the twin towers on September 11 2001, terrorism has remained at the top of the news agenda. Whether it is terrorist incidents, arrests, warnings from politicians or coverage of the actions carried out in the name of the "war on terror", we have seen more sustained coverage of the issue than at any other time in the modern era.

This is true even if we exclude the peak year of 2001. Since January 2002, the Times, Financial Times, the Guardian, the Mail and the Mirror, have, between them, run an average of 400 stories about international terrorism every year. And the trend is upward, not downward. If we compare that with a four-and-a-half-year period before 9/11 (from 1997 to mid 2001), this amounts to a five-fold increase in news coverage.

Conventional wisdom - informed by a steady stream of political rhetoric - says that this is a response to the increasing risk posed by global terrorism since the attack on the twin towers. Indeed, the British government's recent leaflet advising citizens what to do in the event of an attack - together with a succession of warnings from the US government - imply the risk has reached unprecedented levels. And yet what is strikingly absent from both public discussion or news coverage is that there is little concrete evidence to support this view.

The US government's own figures on international terrorism - which it defines as the targeting of non-combatants or property by non-state agents and includes the actions of groups like the IRA, the UDF and Eta - suggests that the most active period of international terrorist activity was the mid-80s. With occasional blips - such as 1991 and 1999 to 2001 - the annual number of terrorist attacks has been in general decline since then.

The evidence suggests that the attack on 9/11 was not the dawn of a new era of global terrorism, but a devastating one-off. Indeed, the years since then have seen fewer incidents per year than at any time in the last 20 years. The recent annual rate is only a third of the level reached between 1985 and 1988.

But surely the attacks in the US, Bali and Madrid show that the scale of terrorist attacks has escalated, even if there are fewer of them? Well, again, the figures tell a different story. In terms of the number of casual ties of international terrorism from 1998 to 2003, the peak year was not 2001, as most people might assume. Despite the 4,465 casualties on 9/11 (which alone accounted for 77% ofcasualties that year) there were more victims from international terrorist attacks three years earlier, in 1998.

The fact that 80% of the casualties that year were in Africa might partly explain (though by no means excuse) the lack of political and media interest. But this explanation only goes so far: after all, many of the 1998 incidents involved attacks by al-Qaida on US targets, and there were also a comparatively high number of casualties (405) that year in western Europe.

Indeed, a closer look at the last 20 years of media coverage of international terrorism reveals that there is little relation between the number of international terrorist incidents in any given year and the use of the term in the press.

If we take the Times, Financial Times and the Guardian, for example, we see fluctuations in media coverage that bear little relation to global trends. International terrorism became highly newsworthy in 1986 (receiving more mentions than any of the last 20 years except 2001). This was the year in which Libya became the bête noire of international terrorism, and President Reagan ordered the bombing of Tripoli. But while the US data shows an increase in the number of terrorist attacks in 1987, news coverage that year dropped significantly, to less than a quarter of the 1986 level.

But the biggest mismatch between the coverage of terrorism and terrorist incidents is, without doubt, the period from 2002 to the present day. News coverage is at its highest-ever sustained level, while there have been fewer terrorist attacks than at any time in the last two decades.

How to explain this discrepancy? Well, unfortunately, it's not unusual to see media coverage bear little relation to actual levels of risk. Media research on agenda-setting shows that - whether the topic is crime, drugs, war or the environment - there is often little relation between the volume of coverage and real-world trends.

In many instances, what the media are responding to is not an increase in the problem but an increase of political rhetoric. Both the war on drugs and the war on terror boosted media coverage which, in turn, justified a series of political initiatives.

This, combined with the US-centric nature of British news media, meant that the idea that "the world changed" on 9/11 became a self-fulfilling prophecy. So, just as the war on drugs in the US in the late 80s led to a massive increase in news coverage about the issue - while drug use remained fairly static - so the war on terror has made every act, threat or worry about terrorism far more newsworthy than hitherto.

This kind of coverage distorts our perception of risk. So, despite the government's chief scientific adviser's warning that global warming is a much greater threat to life than global terrorism, terrorism ranks high on the public's list of concerns, while climate change scarcely registers. Worse, it creates a news climate - in the US at least - where politicians can expend considerable energy and public money on the war on terror while issues like global warming can be brushed aside.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/analysis/story/0,,1275467,00.html
 
Terror Alerts Nothing New

Sadly, there's nothing new in manipulating the release of intelligence of terrorist activities for political purposes.

Information about the "gunpowder plot" (Guy Fawkes, Robert Catesby etc) was leaked to James VI by Robert Cecil in such a way as to lead James to believe that he himself had uncovered the plot, thus maximising Cecil's political kudos Info here .
 
Arthur: Good point.

--------------
Harris' words surprise officals

BY DAVID HACKETT


VENICE -- Officials in Indiana and Washington, D.C., said they are dumbfounded by a statement U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris made about a terrorist plot to blow up a power grid in Indiana.

In making the statement during a speech to 600 people Monday night in Venice, Harris either shared a closely held secret or passed along second-hand information as fact.

A staff member of the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which oversees the nation's intelligence operations, said he had heard of no such plot.

And Indiana officials in the county where the power grid is located were at a loss to explain where the information originated.

"As the sheriff of this county, I would certainly be aware of such a threat," Hamilton County Sheriff Doug Carter said. "I have no information to corroborate any of that."

In an interview Tuesday, Harris would not reveal the name of the mayor who told her about the threat or provide further details.

She said in the speech that a man of Middle Eastern heritage had been arrested in the plot and that explosives were found in his home in Carmel, a suburb north of Indianapolis.

Harris, a Republican from Longboat Key who is running for re-election, said the case was an example of the nation's success in fighting terrorism.

Carmel Mayor James Brainard and a spokesman for Indiana Gov. Joe Kernan said they had no knowledge of such a plot. Brainard said he had never spoken to Harris.

President Bush's fight against terrorism was a key part of the speech Harris gave Monday at a Republican rally in support of Bush at the Holiday Inn in Venice.

During the speech, she also said 100 terrorist threats against the United States had been thwarted since Sept. 11, 2001.

Applause greeted many of her comments.

On Tuesday, Harris disputed a statement in a Herald-Tribune article that said she learned of the 100 threats from classified information.

She said the information originated with Attorney General John Ashcroft and was not classified.

In testimony before Congress on April 1, 2003, Ashcroft said: "The FBI indicates that since Sept. 11, 2001, over 100 terrorist plots have been disrupted."

Similar statements have also been made by Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., in defense of the Patriot Act.

But the staff member of the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence said potential attacks are hard to define.

"It's

---------
. . . s impossible to say how many attacks have been stopped," the staff member said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "If you're talking about terrorists strapped with explosives ready to blow themselves up in a shopping mall, we certainly haven't had that."

Ed Turzanski, a terrorism expert at LaSalle University in Philadelphia, said that "by using a broad brush" you could say that 100 potential terrorists have been stopped since Sept. 11.

"That would include home-grown fanatics, money launderers and others related to terrorism," Turzanski said. "In that case, 100 is a conservative figure. But if you're talking about 100 potential attacks like Sept. 11, no way."

Turzanski said he was unaware of a plot in Indiana.

He said that making such statements without providing specific details to back them up "only serves to erode public confidence" in the credibility of government.

A spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security would not comment Tuesday on Harris' statements.

Harris' comments were seized upon Tuesday by one of her Democratic opponents.

Floyd Jay Winters, one of four Democrats running for the nomination to oppose Harris in this fall's election, called it irresponsible to bring up allegations at a rally but provide no details.

In the case of the alleged plot in Indiana, "it will only incite fear if it's not true and if it is true, she shouldn't be talking about it because it is classified," Winters said.

But Don O'Nesky, head of the Republican Club of South Sarasota County, which sponsored Monday's event, said Harris' comments rang true.

O'Nesky said there are terrorists in communities throughout America and he praised Harris for speaking out on the subject.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040804/NEWS/408040633/1017/POLITICS10
 
Errrr, Katherine Harris. Republican from Florida. Current Congresswoman. Former Florida Secretary of State. Proven track record of being willing to say or do absolutely anything to help George W. Bush occupy the White House.

I'm sure glad these reports about all these Thwarted Terror Plots are coming from credible, unbiased sources. :rolleyes:
 
'No specific terror threat to Heathrow'

The Home Office today denied that there was any specific terrorist threat to Heathrow airport following reports that a suspected al-Qaida computer expert arrested in Pakistan had passed on plans to attack it.
Intelligence officials in Pakistan told the Associated Press that Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan, arrested in Lahore last month, had photographs and maps of the airport and underpasses running beneath several London buildings on his computer.

Mr Khan reportedly acted as an al-Qaida "postman", passing coded information between terrorists, including a suspected al-Qaida leader arrested in London yesterday.

According to a report in the Times, an unnamed Pakistani official said Mr Khan had been in "direct contact" with the London suspect, who was named in the report as Abu Musa al-Hindi, codenamed Bilal.

Bilal was the head of an al-Qaida cell in Britain charged with carrying out the attack on Heathrow, the Times report alleged, quoting the Pakistani security official.

The Home Office, however, said the public should remain "alert but not alarmed" about the reported plan for a terror strike.
:hmm:
 
Harris Regrets Bogus Terror Plot Claim

Thu Aug 5, 5:26 AM ET


By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Republican Rep. Katherine Harris (news, bio, voting record) said Wednesday she regrets concerns caused by her claim that a plot existed to blow up the power grid in Carmel, Ind. City officials disputed the claims of a plot.


"I was told in an open, group setting that a recent situation threatened a Midwestern community and that it had been diffused," Harris said Wednesday. "I regret that I had no knowledge of the sensitive nature of this situation and any undue concern this may have caused."

But the Florida lawmaker stands by her statement that the United States has thwarted more than 100 potential terrorist attacks.

Harris, who was at the center of the political storm over the disputed 2000 presidential election, made the comments about terrorism and the plot on Monday at a rally for President Bush (news - web sites) in Venice, Fla., and a subsequent interview with the Sarasota Herald-Tribune.

She told the audience that while in the Midwest recently, a mayor told her about a plot in Carmel and how a man of Middle Eastern heritage had been arrested and hundreds of pounds of explosives were found in his home.

"He had plans to blow up the area's entire power grid," she said, according to the newspaper.

City officials in Carmel said they know of no such plot.

"We're aware of the comments we read in the paper," said Tim Green, assistant chief of police in Carmel, a town about 10 miles north of Indianapolis. "We're not aware of any plans to blow up Carmel's power grid."

But Harris stood by her comments to the newspaper that the United States has thwarted potential attacks in the last three years.

"Actually, it's been more than 100," she told the newspaper. "It's classified ... obviously not classified to me ... but things I can't go into details about."

Jessica Furst, a spokeswoman for Harris, said that quote was incorrect and the congresswoman never said the information about the 100 thwarted attacks was classified. The information came from statements by Attorney General John Ashcroft (news - web sites), she said.

Harris said Wednesday in a statement that her comments underscore the need "for each of us to remain alert and vigilant in fighting terrorism."

Harris serves on the House Financial Services Committee and the International Relations Committee, which often gets briefed on terrorism. She does not serve on the House Intelligence Committee.

Disclosure of classified information is forbidden by law and by the rules of Congress, which require members to take an oath. However, prosecutions or sanctions of members for revealing secret information are rare.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=512&u=/ap/20040805/ap_on_go_co/harris_terror_plot_4
 
Blunkett defends terror secrecy


The home secretary has rejected calls for the UK Government to follow the US in giving the exact al-Qaeda threat.
David Blunkett told the Observer newspaper on Sunday he would not "feed the news frenzy", defending his government's more cautious approach.

Earlier in the week David Davis, shadow home secretary, criticised ministers for failing to share more information with the public.

It followed claims of al-Qaeda plans for attacks both here and in the US.

These included the security operation around financial institutions in America, the arrest of 12 suspects across England and claims about possible plans for an al -Qaeda attack on Heathrow Airport.

Mr Davis claimed there was an "unwillingness" on the government's part to reveal the nature of the threats.

But Mr Blunkett wrote: "Of course, it is not possible for me to comment on last week's arrests and the action which has followed. These are operational matters."

He told the newspaper he had issued an "appropriate statement" after last week's arrests and gave his reasons for refusing to comment further.

He said: "Had I done so without having anything additional to add, I would have merely added to the speculation, to the hype, to the desire for something to say for its own sake.

"In other words, to feed the news frenzy in a slack news period."


add to the speculation, to the hype, to the desire for something to say for its own sake? I thought that was his policy?:confused:
 
Start scaring them young

Homeland Security targets kids in awareness campaign


MIMI HALL GANNETT NEWS SERVICE

WASHINGTON -- The Homeland Security Department is enlisting new allies in its effort to prepare the nation for another terrorist attack: your kids and your boss.

Starting next month, children in grades four though eight and employers nationwide will be asked to help get families and companies better prepared to respond to a crisis.

In schools, on the Internet and in television and radio ads, kids will be introduced to a Homeland Security mascot in the form of a dog, an American shepherd.

The campaign, through Ad Council advertisements, will encourage families to develop and talk about a communication plan -- where kids should go, who would pick them up, how they would make contact -- for an emergency.

The Homeland Security Department and groups such as the American Red Cross have been encouraging families to make plans and prepare emergency kits that include food and water, flashlights, battery-powered radios and anything else they might need for up to three days if the power is out.

Officials have promoted these preparations as crucial not just for a terrorist attack but for natural disasters, too. Polls show four in 10 Americans have followed the advice.

With the second phase of the "Ready" campaign -- "Ready for Kids" and "Ready for Business" -- officials aim to improve on those numbers.

Among the organizations spreading the word: the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Salvation Army and U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

"It takes a long time to create a movement," says Susan Neely, who's in charge of the programs at Homeland Security. "Seat belts took 20 years."

Now, just as children learned to take shelter during a nuclear attack or bug their parents to quit smoking and wear seat belts, officials hope grade-school kids will prompt recalcitrant moms and dads to put together a plan.

In one radio ad, for example, a confused child asks his mother how he's supposed to know what to do, where to go and who will pick him up if the power goes out and phones aren't working.

Starbucks will offer communication plan templates at its stores, and Nextel will distribute them at NASCAR races. Wal-Mart, Target and other stores will sell ready-made emergency kits.

Employers will be encouraged to develop continuity plans, so they can keep operating through a crisis. They'll also be urged to review insurance policies, give employees wallet cards to get company information and clearly mark exit routes from buildings.

http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20040809/topstories/117208.shtml
 
Right this seems one of the most specific terror alerts (plans down to the screwdriver level even!!) so we'll see what happens:

Bin Laden hints major assassination


By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES


U.S. intelligence officials say a high-profile political assassination, triggered by the public release of a new message from Osama bin Laden, will lead off the next major al Qaeda terrorist attack, The Washington Times has learned.
The assassination plan is among new details of al Qaeda plots disclosed by U.S. officials familiar with intelligence reports who, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the killing could be carried out against a U.S. or foreign leader either in the United States or abroad.

The officials mentioned Saudi Arabia and Yemen, two nations that are working with the United States in the battle against al Qaeda, as likely locales for the opening assassination.
The planning for the attacks to follow involves "multiple targets in multiple venues" across the United States, one official said.
The new details of al Qaeda's plans were found on a laptop computer belonging to arrested al Qaeda operative Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan of Pakistan.
"We're talking about planning at the screwdriver level," one official said. "It is very detailed."
Khan was arrested July 13 in Lahore, Pakistan, along with Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, a Tanzanian who was indicted in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Africa and was on the FBI's list of most-wanted terrorists.
U.S. and allied counterterrorism officials are pursuing leads on other terrorists based on the data from Khan's seized laptop. At least one arrest in Britain has been made so far, and others are expected, the officials said.
Additionally, U.S. intelligence officials said they think that several al Qaeda terrorists already in the United States are part of the plot, although their identities and locations are not known.
The targets, in addition to the financial institutions in New York, Washington and Newark, N.J., that have been the subject of public warnings, include such economic-related targets as oil and gas facilities with a view toward disrupting the November election.
"The goal of the next attack is twofold: to damage the U.S. economy and to undermine the U.S. election," the official said. "The view of al Qaeda is 'anybody but Bush.' "
The officials also said the terrorist group has begun using female members for preattack surveillance and possibly as suicide bombers, thinking that women will have an easier time getting past security checkpoints at airports, borders and ports.
The al Qaeda attack plans call for bombings using trucks and cars, and hijacked aircraft, including commercial airliners and helicopters.
"There is a particular concern that chemical trucks will be used," one official said.
Regarding the new bin Laden message, the officials said there are intelligence reports, some of them sketchy, that a new tape from the al Qaeda leader will surface soon.
In the past, video and audio messages by bin Laden or his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, were broadcast days or weeks before an attack, the officials said.
"The message likely will be the signal for the attack to be launched," one official said.
A second U.S. official said one intelligence agency was aware of unconfirmed reports of a new bin Laden tape.
"There may be such a tape, but it hasn't surfaced and we haven't seen it," this official said.
Bin Laden last released a taped message in April. The CIA said that the audiotape probably was the voice of bin Laden and that the mention of the March 11 Madrid train bombings shows that the tape was current.
That tape offered a "truce" for any European state that pledged to stop attacking Muslims and end cooperation with the United States.
Contrary to what some Democratic critics of the Bush administration have said, intelligence officials said the new details of al Qaeda planning were obtained from the Khan laptop. The terrorist group was in the process of updating older attack plans, the officials said.
On Aug. 2, the Bush administration raised the terrorism threat level from "elevated" to "high" for five finance-related sites in the District, New York and New Jersey, based on the intelligence in Khan's computer, as well as other intelligence.
Frances Townsend, a White House homeland-security adviser, said Sunday that the government has received a steady "stream" of intelligence indicating that an al Qaeda attack is planned.
"What we know now that we didn't know six months ago is that they've done a good deal of planning and surveillance work to accomplish that goal," she said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040811-123531-3824r.htm
 
Starbucks will offer communication plan templates at its stores, and Nextel will distribute them at NASCAR races. Wal-Mart, Target and other stores will sell ready-made emergency kits.

I wondered how soon big business would stick its snout in. :rolleyes:
 
Right, this story has me 99% convinced that this administration is deliberately trying to scare the electorate, and cleverly trying to mix two issues at once. For you Euro guys until recently seniors were importing prescription drugs from Canada because it was cheaper. The Bush admin, in keeping with its policy of open and fair global trade of course, banned it. Now they're trying to say its a terror target! We all know that Canada is a banana republic with no modern safeguards, of course. You couldn't make this stuff up.

Let's remember something - there was ONE terrorist attack THREE YEARS AGO. Let's get some perspective here.
 
I think most Americans would admit that they suspected the Canadians were behind it all (Lincoln, Pearl Habour, JFK, 9/11, etc.) and have only been biding their time wiating for the perfect moment to strike - streaming across the border like the Golden Horde.

Probably.
 
We all know that Canada is a banana republic with no modern safeguards, of course.

Well, we've been subverting you from within, of course, and offloading our more obnoxious citizens onto you: William Shatner, Celine Dion, Leslie Nielsen, Shania "I Have About As Much Ojibway Blood As Sarah Ferguson" Twain, Jim Carey, David Frum, Wayne Gretzky, Alex Trebek...Btw, I would also like to deeply apologize to the British people for dumping Conrad Black on them but frankly, we'd had it.
 
http://www.whbf.com/Global/story.asp?S=2195545

Clerical error puts Kennedy on "no fly" list
August 19, 2004

CAPITOL HILL The Senate Judiciary Committee has heard this morning from one of its own about some of the problems with airline "no fly" watch lists.

Massachusetts Democrat Ted Kennedy says he had a close encounter with the lists when trying to take the U-S Airways shuttle out of Washington to Boston.

The ticket agent wouldnt let him on the plane. His name was on the list -- in error. After a flurry of phone calls, Kennedy was able to fly home, but then the same thing happened coming back to Washington.

Kennedy says it took three calls to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to get his name stricken from the list. The process took several weeks, in all.

And Kennedy asks -- what about the little guy?
 
Back
Top