bunnicula
|
posted on July 13, 2004 05:39:39 PM new
A day or so ago, I said on another thread that the so-called terror alerts we are subjected to were always too nebulous and vague. Now the GAO is saying that it agrees with my feelings and that of so many others:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/07/13/terror.security.reut/index.html
GAO report criticizes terror warnings
Tuesday, July 13, 2004 Posted: 8:32 PM EDT (0032 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 General Accounting Office, the 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 reelection.
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." Randall Yim, the head of GAO's homeland security division, told Reuters.
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."
|
logansdad
|
posted on July 13, 2004 06:40:17 PM new
More scare tatics by the government. They will keep issuing these warnings and people will stop paying attention to them after awhile. Then when a real attack is supposed to happen people will think it is just another fake scare tatic.
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
All Things Just Keep Getting Better
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
|
fenix03
|
posted on July 13, 2004 06:51:23 PM new
I always thought it was ironic that the government tells people that they are the first line of defense in these situations but then fails to tell them what they are supposed to be watching for. They just put up a big sign that says beware of............
Of course telling people that they should call 911 anytime they see something that they think is unusual is always a great idea. I bet 911 operaters just loved that incredibly vague and irresponsible piece of advice given out last week.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Jul 13, 2004 06:53 PM ]
|
kiara
|
posted on July 13, 2004 06:54:48 PM new
It's all the very same as when Al Gore spoke out the end of May and the city officials had not been made aware of the heightened alert when one was suddenly announced.
I just read this thread over and nothing much has changed at all since then. Except now even less people are supporting Bush..... which is a good thing.
http://www.vendio.com/mesg/read.html?num=28&id=211934&thread=211865
[ edited by kiara on Jul 13, 2004 06:55 PM ]
|
Linda_K
|
posted on July 13, 2004 07:28:22 PM new
GAO agrees that terror alerts are too nebulous.
Heck...I agree they're nebulous. That's not the point. All the 'chatter' that was going on before 9-11 was nebulous too. Nothing specific to hone in on....nothing specific to be directly pointed to - and then....the planes crashed into our towers.
IMO, that's why they decided to put this 'warning' system in ....*to please those who complained about not being warned* there was danger lurking around before 9-11 happened.
Still not happy.
They can't give specifics if they don't have them to give. But each time the same 'chatter' that ocurred before 9-11 starts up again they give another warning. As people tend to become complacent and this is just a reminder that there's MORE of a chance something might happen...than on any given day. And as even dems have pointed out....it is cause for increased concern.
Re-elect President Bush!!
|
fenix03
|
posted on July 13, 2004 07:37:20 PM new
Linda - the only problem with your arguement is that prior to 9-11 there was information that terrorists were planning on using airplanes. Who knows if having that knowledge at hand may have resulted in stopping more than just 1 of the hijackers from boarding a plane that day... possibly even a couple of the pilots.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
|
Linda_K
|
posted on July 13, 2004 07:46:56 PM new
fenix - Airplanes were mentioned as a threat years ago....even ol' Al Gore was going to do something about shoring them up...and did little.
There was no specific mention that airplanes were going to be used in that attack....everything looks so diffent with 20/20 hindsight. If they'd have know....they would have worked to prevent it from happening. They didn't.
Re-elect President Bush!!
|
crowfarm
|
posted on July 14, 2004 12:07:28 AM new
But again I don't understand.....Bushy said the world is now a safer place ! I sure wish he and his administration would quit flip flopping so much!
|
cblev65252
|
posted on July 14, 2004 05:47:35 AM new
Sure wish I knew where that "safer" place is. IMO, we are in more danger now than prior to 911. Instead of exhaustingly searching for bin Laden, we blew up Iraq. Instead of spending our money and resources in Afghanistan, we are now spending our money rebuilding what we didn't need to blow up in the first place. Instead of making bin Laden's position within the Islamic community weaker, we've made it stronger. All this while knowing that the Islamic community is not judging the people of the U.S. separately from the government of the U.S. Instead, they are judging us as a whole even though the majority of us are angry about the way things have been handled. Yes, I feel safer.
Cheryl
[ edited by cblev65252 on Jul 14, 2004 05:49 AM ]
|
Helenjw
|
posted on July 14, 2004 06:13:54 AM new
lindak says, "There was no specific mention that airplanes were going to be used in that attack....everything looks so diffent with 20/20 hindsight. If they'd have know....they would have worked to prevent it from happening. They didn't."
Oh yes there was. http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/18/intelligence.hearings/
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. intelligence officials had several warnings that terrorists might attack the United States on its home soil -- even using airplanes as weapons -- well before the September 11, 2001 attacks, two congressional committees said in a report released Wednesday.
Read the 9/11 investigation. http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/911.html
BTW... If you haven't installed a google search bar you can find one here.... Search the web with Google from any site It attaches to the top of your page and is very useful for quick checks of everything with links to news, etc. Google linda's info. I see a lot of misinformation right now but I don't have time to correct it all.
Later gators~
[ edited by Helenjw on Jul 14, 2004 07:47 AM ]
|
logansdad
|
posted on July 14, 2004 06:31:43 AM new
The CIA says we are loosing the war on terror:
http://www.nbc5.com/news/3527313/detail.html??z=dp&dpswid=1167317&dppid=65172
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
All Things Just Keep Getting Better
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
|
neroter12
|
posted on July 14, 2004 08:28:49 AM new
Logan: Of course we are losing the war on terror!
Does any body remember that little mentioned bit about the map cordinates being wrong when distributed to the military? Who did that? -Bush?
Does anybody remember it was brought up Bin Laden needs dialysis? They did find out a machine was bought in China and was supposedly shipped to Kandahar for him. [And purportedly there is a chip in the machine that should be able to be tracked or found.] So, where did that lead go? Nowhere.
He is either dead or already captured.
We'll see if he gets pulled out of the hat for elections.
|
logansdad
|
posted on July 14, 2004 08:44:07 AM new
Neroter, In my opinion the war on terror is just like like the war on drugs. There will never be a winner and it will be fought for decades. The only thing that can be done is to reduce the damage and try and stop the bad guys. If they are determined they will keep finding ways to do damage.
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
All Things Just Keep Getting Better
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
|
crowfarm
|
posted on July 14, 2004 09:40:18 AM new
Neroter syas, "He is either dead or already captured.
We'll see if he gets pulled out of the hat for elections."
You NAILED it! And you're not alone...I hear this theory from a lot of different directions.
It just may be the PLANNED October surprise!
|
bob9585
|
posted on July 14, 2004 10:56:03 AM new
Back to the topic - terror alerts.
This is pure CYA on the part of the Government.
If they knew of a specific plot, they would stop it. If they don't but believe something is about to happen they raise the levels and if another attack occurs they can say "see, we had the warnings up".
Kind of like putting an "icy walk" sign out instead of clearing the ice.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on July 14, 2004 11:38:19 AM new
I agree with you Bunni and Logan. I also wonder if there is an attack, and you're only on yellow alert instead of red, what will happen then?
Bob, if Bin Ladan has already been captured or is dead AND the U.S. knows and isn't saying anything, that would hurt them more than the Iraqi invasion, so I have my doubts.
|
crowfarm
|
posted on July 14, 2004 12:10:50 PM new
Kraft, What do you mean by the "U.S."?
If you mean the bush administration they can and will do anything to get Bush re-appointed and hiding Bin Laden until October would not be a problem.
It may hurt them if the PUBLIC found out but that wouldn't be until AFTER the election.
Look at how many people now know that the war in Iraq was planned long before 9/11!!!!!
The bushies kept that secret quite awhile.
|
Reamond
|
posted on July 14, 2004 12:13:44 PM new
Those are some pretty damning assertions in that article.
I agree about Saudi Arabia. But I agree about Israel only to the point to which Israel stops behaving as a democracy.
I am surprised that only 53% of the American people think that Iraq was an unnecessary war. I would think that at least 80% would have figured that out.
If Kerry doesn't win in November, we deserve the messes we get led into.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on July 14, 2004 12:31:03 PM new
You're right Crow, I should have said Bush & Co. instead of the U.S. They are definately NOT one in the same. 
Although it wouldn't surprise me at all, I just couldn't imagine how they'd be able to pull that one off without the American people completely turning on them. But then somehow, some way, this administration has convinced quite a few that lies and tall tails are not only OK but the Christian way.
|
neroter12
|
posted on July 14, 2004 03:19:46 PM new
I dont think bin laden is a well man. If he has been hiding out in the mountains for what - 2 years now - the united states as an enemy is in a lot more trouble than anybody could imagine. The reference to his dialysis had unquotable sources saying the CIA helped him to a hospital in afganistian etc. etc. So maybe John Grisham's ideas are not so fictional afterall
|
