| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 7/15 |
| 2004/5/27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30444 Activity:very high |
5/26 Politically motivated threat warnings?
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/politics/27terror.html
"' ... There's no real new intelligence, and a lot of this has been
out there already,' said one administration official who spoke on
the condition of anonymity."
\_ Yet another BushCo conspiracy to destroy American credibility around
the world for generations to come! So, if something blew up and
10,000 people got killed would you be the first one here screaming
that they didn't warn us? And then next you'll say they warn us
too much and you're 'terrorist alert weary'.
\_ General warnings count for shit, even if something does happen.
What matters is that they take the right precautions to keep
security tight. If they know of a specific threat, then by all
means warn us and take precautions, but just saying "something
bad might happen" is no better than fear-mongering.
\_ Rice got smashed for the last time when they had non specific
warnings and they didn't tell the world. Now they tell the
world about non-specific warnings and you bitch about it.
\_ Well, there's no new information. They haven't raised the
threat level. Why all the sudden warnings? Don't be such a
tool.
\_ Because Memorial Day is traditionally the kickoff for the
summer vacation season. And the suspicion is that there might
be an attack during the summer vacation season. Didn't you
see how Condi Rice got hammered for not doing anything after
the memo a month before 9/11 with no new or specific
information?
information? -emarkp
\_ But are they doing anything that they wouldn't be doing
anyway, besides trying to make big headlines that
essentially say, "WATCH OUT! BAD MUSLIMS! FEAR!"
The Condi threat memo is a nice attempt at a dodge, but
doesn't relate to this case at all.
\_ Uh, if they were doing anything different, you probably
wouldn't know about it. And how is the threat memo a
dodge? As I read it, the administration is getting
criticized for saying anything now, but would get
criticized later if they didn't say anything now.
-emarkp
\_ It's just the "I hate Bush no matter what" contingent
on the prowl. There's no point in talking with them.
\_ Read the polls lately? Looked around? Bush isn't
exactly Mr. Popularity these days.
\_ Are you the same person who was whining about
lack of substance above? Either you're here
to disucss things seriously or you're here to
fuck around, make noise, and tell us all
(again) how much you hate Bush. You can't have
it both ways. And you totally ducked what
emarkp had to say.
\_ Bush's strongest support comes from anti-terrorism. If there's
a successful attack and he didn't sound some warning, that will
take away from his #1 strength. Can't let that happen. Wouldn't
be prudent.
Raising the terror threat level costs money. If there's no
attack, or god-forbid the attack occurs after the threat level
is lowered, then this again takes away from his #1 strength.
\_ I have credible evidence that the Administration will attack
John Kerry in the near future.
\_ You think they'll send Ashcroft out with a bat to a Kerry
campaign stop and whack in his knees?
\_ They outsource that type of thing.
\_ I have no details of where or when they intend to attack,
but I think it's important that the American public be
reminded of how serious this is.
\_ That ice skater chick survived to get a silver medal.
John Kerry will ski again! |
| 7/15 |
|
| www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/politics/27terror.html Doug Mills/The New York Times Attorney General John Ashcroft, right, and FBI Director Robert Mueller today drew new attention to seven suspected Al Qaeda operatives. Business What type of ad will you see if your Weather Channel forecast calls for rain? Find out how TV advertisers can use regional conditions to make minute-by-minute advertising choices. As Ashcroft Warns of Attack, Some Question Threat and Its Timing By RICHARD W STEVENSON and ERIC LICHTBLAU Published: May 27, 2004 W ASHINGTON, May 26 - The Bush administration said on Wednesday that it had credible intelligence suggesting that Al Qaeda is planning to attack the United States in the next several months, a period in which events like an international summit meeting and the two political conventions could offer tempting targets. Attorney General John Ashcroft said at a news conference that intelligence reports and public statements by people associated with Al Qaeda suggested that the terrorist group was "almost ready to attack the United States" and harbored a "specific intention to hit the United States hard." Senator John Kerry, the expected Democratic presidential candidate, said the timing of the announcement appeared intended in part to distract attention from Mr Bush's sagging poll numbers and problems in Iraq. The administration did not raise the terrorist threat advisory from its current level of elevated, or yellow, and the White House said Mr Bush would not alter his schedule because of security concerns. "There's no real new intelligence, and a lot of this has been out there already," said one administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "There really is no significant change that would require us to change the alert level of the country." Mr Ashcroft called for greater public vigilance, especially in looking out for seven people sought by the FBI who are suspected of being Qaeda members or sympathizers. The names of six of the seven were publicly circulated by the authorities months ago, and officials who spoke on condition of anonymity said that they had no reason to believe any of the seven suspects were in the United States. Asked about the timing of his new warnings about the suspects, Mr Ashcroft said, "We believe the public, like all of us, needs a reminder." Some intelligence officials said they were uncertain that the link between the fresh intelligence and the likelihood of another attack was as apparent as Mr Ashcroft made it out to be. Officials at the Department of Homeland Security said just a day before Mr Ashcroft's announcement that they had no new intelligence pointing to the threat of an attack. Senator Richard J Durbin, an Illinois Democrat who is a member of the intelligence committee, said in an interview that the committee had received no word of any new information of the type Mr Ashcroft described. Mr Durbin said that if there were credible new information about a possible strike, he believed the intelligence committee should have been told about it. Other officials said they supported Mr Ashcroft's warnings. "I think he was right on the mark in terms of what Al Qaeda's intent is," said one counterterrorism official who spoke on condition of anonymity. The White House came under criticism this year for not acting more aggressively in August 2001 when Mr Bush was informed that Al Qaeda was planning to attack the United States or its interests abroad. In issuing a high-profile warning this time, the administration appeared intent on insulating itself from any perception that it was not responding vigorously enough. But the announcement also came after weeks in which Mr Bush's political standing has been battered by events in Iraq and as his re-election campaign is seeking to portray Mr Kerry as opposed to the USA Patriot Act, the law giving the government broad powers to combat terrorism. Harold Schaitberger, head of the International Association of Fire Fighters, told reporters in a conference call organized by Mr Kerry's campaign that he found the timing of the announcement to be "politically convenient at best" because it came after "we see the president's approval ratings plummet." Mr Kerry issued a statement in which he said he knew Americans had been "struck by the seriousness and concern coming from this administration," but went on to attack the administration for not doing more to bolster domestic security. Mr Bush's campaign responded by saying that Mr Kerry "has played politics with homeland security throughout this campaign." Of the seven people Mr Ashcroft asked the public and law enforcement agencies to watch out for, the only one whose name had not been previously released was Adam Yahiye Gadahn, 25, who officials said is an American citizen from California. Mr Gadahn converted to Islam and is believed to have attended Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan several years ago, officials said. He is thought to have done translation work for Al Qaeda and was associated with Abu Zubayda, a senior Qaeda associate now imprisoned by the United States, they said. |