Latest Terror Alert - Obvious contradictions

Again, the media drops the ball. :grr:

NYTimes
New Qaeda Activity Is Said to Be Major Factor in Alert
"The White House offered a vigorous defense of its decision to heighten the alert in Manhattan, Newark and Washington, with officials saying there was still good reason for alarm. ''I think it's wrong and plain irresponsible to suggest that it was based on old information,'' Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said of the heightened warning as President Bush traveled to Dallas on a campaign swing."

Is Bush, our fearless leader at the White House with his advisors. Of course not! He's campaigning, telling people how safe we are.

Statue of Liberty Reopens to Public
The Statue of Liberty, hailed once again as ''a beacon of hope,'' welcomed tourists inside on Tuesday for the first time since the Sept. 11 attacks."

Well, uh...sure that makes sense, especially when there is "good reason for alarm" according to Scott McClellan..

"mmmmmm...financial institutions and government buildings, 3 year old info? sounds like they just uncovered a plot to bomb the World Trade Towers, the pentagon and perhaps the white house... - stay tuned next week they will be lighting lanterns in an old church tower, 1 if by land, 2 if by air...."

I think the "plans" are even older, probably developed around the
time of the FIRST WTC truck bomb. Possibly kept active as an
option through 9/11. But the hijack airliner attack had a lot
more going for it (easier to coordinate in some ways, all you have
to do is wait until the last scheduled flight is in the air before
you hijack any). It also has the shock value, plus, no matter what
the result (towers fall, don't fall) the guaranteed loss of life
is high. Downside is that you'll probably only be able to do it
once as airport security will instantly become better, plus passengers
will no longer wait for release/rescue. The other downside is
that your teams are gone... but that a positive too. Also it's
cheaper in a lot of ways.

I'm guessing that Bin Laden probably yellow lighted this list of
projects and then stopped it altogether after the success of 9/11.
Remember that he likes the next attack to top the last one... so
a mere truck bomb, even in a signature financial center building,
probably doesn't qualify (unless done with some sort of WMD).

I sure wish they would release more details (they given out so many).
Details like "Is that the entire list, or are you holding back
on one?" and "You say the file was updated as late as Jan of this
year, can you say what the update was and to which of the targets?"
They need to release this info because the people no longer have
faith in this administration... and there isn't any harm in releasing
it either, as the plans and observations were already laid bare
including details.

Oh yeah, one other question... "Did any of those other vague terror
alerts based on chatter actually have specific targets and details
associated with them?" and if not, "Why is this one SO different?"
(in other words, when you were telling us that it's ORANGE and
there was a possibility of a shopping mall exploding, where the
hell did you get that from? Not a computer file like this one,
so what... intercepted phone calls?)

general consensus from my co-workers is this "latest" terralert is at least 75% based on political motivation

while they remain concerned about future attacks - they are taking any and all terralerts with a few pounds of salt

other than blaming Clinton - the next excuse on bush*'s list is that he was "misled"

using that "excuse": he was misled about the 9-11 attack, misled about Iraq, misled about WMDs, misled about the economy -- seems he's prone to being easily misled. stands to reason that he could also have been misled about this recent "orange alert"

Next time some freeper say * was misled by bad intelligence
into Iraq (that the current wingnut explanation for the war),
simply say "OK, Bush was misled, that means that all of us now
accept that the intelligence was wrong, which means that knowing
what we all NOW know to be the case, Bush wouldn't go to war with
Iraq, right?" and when they nod their freeper little heads in
agreement, play them the sound bite from yesterday where Bush
says "Knowing what we know now, I still made the right decision
to go into Iraq".

So basically, Bush was misled in the actual invasion... but if he
HADN'T been misled (in other words, the CIA had told him nope,
no WMDs in Iraq), he would have LIED to us to go to war in Iraq.

It's a logic trap. No way out. The only way out is for Bush
to say "Yup, I was misled, we all were, and if I knew then what
we all know to be true now, I wouldn't have started a preemptive
war." And * simply will never say that.

So the next time they start yammering about how "Kerry and Edwards
voted for this war too" blah blah blah, just bring up the quote
and the logic trap.

You must have had your Wheaties! :D

Thanks for your comments!

the obvious Statue of Liberty/Terror Alert inconsistency. I swear, I feel like I am living in Bizarro world.

Tower, one of the buildings supposedly under attack. Would you send your wife and both daughters to a place of real danger, to hand out cups of coffee? If there were anything at all to this "alert". Pickles and the girls would be kept as far away from those five buildings as humanly possible.

seem to matter to Rove and company.

Think about it. What has the WH gotten from the latest "terra" scam? The photo-op of Dubya looking "Presidential" in the Rose Garden, flanked by Colin Powell and other symbols of national strength, seems to be their only positive.

For this they were willing to endure at least two days of questioning of their fundamental motives by talking heads on every cable channel. But the negatives must have been anticipated. It's as if their model of voter behavior has them watching network TV news with the sound always OFF. Every moment that Dubya is seen acting like a President "should" act, with no "deer in the headlights" moments televised and no one visibly protesting, must have an expected payoff at the ballotbox.

Thus it was essential for Ridge on Sunday to omit the key detail about the AGE of the "new intel". Had Ridge been honest on Sunday, there would have been QUESTIONS raised on that would have detracted from Dubya's extended photo-op in the Rose Garden on Monday.

Does CNN post transcripts of "Crossfire"? The program with Eleanor Holmes Norton, yesterday or the day before, included one key fact about the politicization of Homeland Security: The White House wanted AT LEAST ONE "HOMELAND SECURITY" PHOTO-OP EVERY MONTH for Dubya!