It’s July 2006 — do you know where your terror alert level is?

July 10, 2006

Garance Franke-Ruta had an item today on an issue that’s just waiting for more attention.

Funny how we’ve only had one elevation of the national threat level since President Bush was re-elected, and how the last such alert based on “new and unusually specific information about where al-Qaeda would like to attack” was lowered on November 10, 2004. Since then we’ve had a single alert, for the rail transportation sector after the London bombings (and which was a less panic-inducing than usual, as it came with a warning that there was “no specific, credible information suggesting an imminent attack here in the United States”).

Is America really that much safer from al-Qaeda plots than it used to be? Or has the Department of Homeland Security simply changed the threshold it uses for issuing alerts?

Or was the old threshold a joke anyway? Let’s not forget that former DHS Chief Tom Ridge explained, after leaving his post, that “there was only flimsy evidence to justify raising the threat level,” which, coincidentally, happened quite a bit in 2004. Remind me, was there some kind of presidential election or something going on at the time? Something about the need for people to be afraid?

The Boston Globe noted today that the GOP is putting all of its midterm-election eggs in the national security basket. Does that mean a return to threat-level orange before November? It’s tempting to think the administration would hesitate before pulling too blatant a stunt, but if desperation sinks in, I have to assume every option is on the table.

Yes, it is a shame that the Bush gang has made cynicism the norm.

The problem is that the color codes were so much less intuitive than my proposed Animal Codes.

But I could never get Tom Ridge to take a meeting.

  • Which is the better option for the GOP in the fall

    1) Terror Alert raised to Orange – Vote Republican or the terrorists will kill you

    OR

    2) Terror Alert level a pleasant (but still dangerous) Yellow since Bush Re-election- Vote Republican since they have done such a good job keeping your children and pets safe from terrorism. Obviously as the Iraqi’s stand up America is safer

    I predict that they somehow manage to do both. Threat level raised in mid-late October so they can claim to be doing a good job and then spend the last two weeks for the election cycle screaming about how you need to vote for Rick Santorum because he is strong on terror.

  • They appear to have finally caught on to how everyone thinks the color-coded Terror Alert Levels are a joke.

    So they’ve replaced this kind of scare tactic with a new one: rounding up groups of terrorist wannabes for “plotting”, and making a very big deal about it in the MSM.

  • pk- these are good. I like the animal plan. Harkens back to the hunter/gatherer days.

    What about these slight changes:
    Low — Golden Retriever puppy
    Guarded — Black man on street corner
    Elevated — Monkey with a Nail Gun
    High — Dick Cheny in Blaze Orange hat and vest
    SEVERE — Ann Coulter

  • Nice bit of intelligence analysis there JohnnyB. Yes, they want to catch all the terrorist wannabes as possible and parade them around.

    Of course, on the Holland Tunnel plot, they only have three of the ten plotters, and none of them were ever in the United States.

    They probably just all figured they would buy student visas. After all, why bother risking your neck crossing the Mexican/American border when you can get some school to accept your bribe to get into America on an airplane.

  • I don’t think you’ve been consistent enough with your terror alert MNProgressive.

    It should be:

    Low – David Brooks on a blog website
    Guarded – Alan Keyes running for the Senate
    Elevated – Rush Limbaugh popping unproscribed Viagra
    High – Dick Cheney in a Blaze Orange hat and vest
    Severe – Ann Coulter in black dominatrix gear

  • The GOPers have got it made for this fall. If there’s a terror attack or the threat level is raised, it’s because of Iran and all of the terrorists in Iraq. If there are no attacks, it’s because W and the gang is “keeping you safe”. Maybe the BA will just keep coming up with more bogus “terror plots” to keep people sufficiently afraid.

    …………………………………………………………………………………………….

    http://www.sunstateactivist.org/ssablog.php
    A terror plot hoax? It sure looks that way.
    http://www.sunstateactivist.org/ssablog.php

  • I think you can assume that Bush’s trip to Iraq, the arrests of the terror-plotters in Miami and Lebanon, the Congressional “debate” over cut-and-run, as well as Bush’s outrage at the N.Y. Times, have been dress rehearsals for November. Rove has, no doubt, orchestrated each media event, and polled his little heart out trying to understand the consequences in terms of voter sentiment.

    I think Rove has concluded that the Democrats do not have any chance of taking the Senate and only an outside chance of taking the House, even if the Republicans love their remaining toe-hold in the Northeast to revulsion at Bush pandering to the right-wing.

    I don’t see much evidence of ethical limits on what Bush will do. If the dress reheasals indicate he needs the big guns, I would fully expect bombing Iran or North Korea. We might even see Bush blowing up Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan — if necessary, maybe even two or three times on Fox.

    Still, Rove takes professional pride in getting as close as possible to 50.1% as possible, so I would expect a careful calibration.

  • Ann Coulter……Dick Cheney with a shotgun……on a hunting trip……

    No no no, that would just be too ironic for words……bad Curmudgeon, bad bad Curmudgeon…../bonk self…..

  • MNP and Lance,

    Funny funny stuff.

    Can’t the Bushbots make it even more simple. Just base it on Doofus 7 (Miami) logic with a little snark from The Daily Show.

    Threat is physical – points to head.
    Threat is mental – flexes muscles.

    About as accurate as the current terror system.

    • Comments are closed.