Another Terror Alert (Ho Hum)!

Uh oh; it's moved from Bert to Ernie:

Fact
Most Americans wouldn't know what to do in the event of another attack. I feel another one is coming.

Re: Fact


Why not, the last one did wonders for the administration.

Pistoff



That is a rather all encompassing statement. It would depend on the attack.
Some say forewarned is forearmed. I on the other hand believe it is primarily to cover the administrations and that massive bureaucracies [Homeland securities] ass in the event of an attack.

All this will accomplish is screw up people's travel plans (especially those flying) and interfere with celebration of our great national holiday: Xmas shopping. I bet the retailers are just thrilled about the new warning...

D'artagnan
A determined American shopper will never be deterred by a terror alert

I find it interesting that we are spending approx. 1.3billion per week in in Iraq, and for the US to be in code Orange the cost is approx. 1billion per week. That is probably a low estimate of the alert cost, back in April when the Orange alert was on for a month the cost from states and cities was estimated at 5billion for the month. It nearly doubles the cost of the war to put the nation on 'alert'.

How long can the alerts be justified?

As long as you have people who will second guess and throw blame at the doorstep of the current Administration if they said nothing.

How many articles and posts have you seen that claim:

'The Administration knew it was coming'

'The public should have been warned that the CIA had vague indications of 9/11'

'The Government needs to keep people informed about possible terrorist attacks'

You can't have it both ways.
Either we have no sort of warning about these kinds of possibilities and people learn to STFU when incidents DO happen or we have a warning system and people learn to deal with it.

At least through the next election....

I nearly choked on my pretzel! Very funny.

Careful there, littlek! Wouldn't want that to happen just before the holiday!

why not, everything else has happened.

As our future president Littlek, how would you handle this situation?

She'd eat the worries away in the form of rumballs.

cookie monster all the way!

Tis the season to be orange[/u]
Walid Phares, Ph D
December 22, 2003

As soon as Homeland Security officials declared the Orange Alert level this weekend, many in the US rushed to assess the "necessity" of such an elevated warning. But unfortunately, in the estimate of most, the evaluation was self-centered. One main soundbite ruled on the airwaves for a while:
"Beware of crying wolf." Typically consumer-driven in its construction, the concern that repetitive calls for Orange alert may well weaken the whole system is a fallacy by itself.

Reviewed carefully, the idea that mobilizing against the threat of terrorism is null if no terrorist attacks occur is suicidal. For precisely, one of the strategic tools in the War on Terror, and al Qaida's web in particular, is popular mobilization. Any reader of the mind of the Jihadists would conclude that when the Terrorists are about to strike, one thing can certainly deter them if any: It is their perception that they are marching in day light towards their target. If for that purpose alone, societies which have been condemned to fight back against Jihad Terrorism, have no choice but to sacrifice some of their energy to protect themselves from a greater danger.

This introduction was warranted as we are having hard time, because of our failing intellectual elites, in situating Terror threats as they unfold. Many of the opinion makers, although declining in numbers perceive the Jihadist threat with their own standards. While in reality, we need to evaluate al Qaida's intentions based on their mind set not ours. Hence, coping with Terrorists designs on America cannot be done through what is rational in our system of measurement or seen as tangible evidence by our legal system. We are facing a Terrorist threat produced by a different political culture. The way it thinks, it perceives its surroundings, and reacts to it is not necessarily identical to ours. And the division is not religious or economic as much as it is ideological.

So why are we in Orange alert again?

First, the term "again" is somewhat indicative of our misperception of the Jihadist Terror. Let it be clear, it is not us who decide in fact as to what color-code we move to, but al-Qaida. In the current War on Terror, which started on September 11, there are two camps, two armies and two decision-making centers. We simply don't move to a higher level by ourselves. In this war, the camp that wants the destruction of national economies, free cultures and human rights is certainly not the one produced by democracies. Hence, there is no notion of we're back to danger "again." The international society, particularly the United States is -in the eyes of al Qaida- in a constant state of Orange warning, if not red. In few words, and as well declared by the once Afghanistan-based organization, America's security is a target, a constant target, and will be targeted as objectives are acquired and timing ripe.

We need to understand that and live with it. The war on Terror is not an exception that we live from time to time. In fact, the times during which no strikes are scored on the homeland, are exceptions indicating that al Qaida is not able yet to strike as it wishes to. Harsh but true realty.

Why the current alert?

There are multiple reasons for why an Orange Alert was issued today, but they may not be comprehensive:

1) Al Qaida has a pattern of menacing Americans at home the closer they are to holidays or important national dates such as Fourth of July, Thanksgiving, Christmas or other holidays. That pattern was tested and is ideologically grounded. The war is against the "infidels." In the mind of the international Jihadists, striking fear in the heart of the enemy during its peak celebration of happiness and religious fervor is at the heart of its tactics. And on more practical realms, the launchers of the 9/11 attacks are still banking on its dividends. They know that the horrific images of that day of infamy are still present in the minds of all Americans. The Terrorists continue to use the psychological interests of the "big day." If they have a greater weapon, they would use it while preemptively terrorizing their victims. If they are still building the second generation 9/11, they would continue to use the dividends endlessly.

2) Over the past few months, Al Qaida has already issued at least two major threats against the US and Americans overseas. One by the voice of Usama Bin Laden last October and the other just few days ago by Ayman al Thawahiri. Both audiotapes threatened the homeland with strikes. The first call made it into a strategic must, the second made American civilians responsible for what will "ensue." Should these two declarations be taken seriously. I believe we should, even if no attacks would materialize. When the enemy -who killed 3,000 men and women in twenty minutes- manifest its intention of resuming the massacre, we need to stand up. By doing so, we extract from him the total effect of surprise.

3) Al Qaida delivered strikes in Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Turkey demonstrating that it is attempting to widen its hits regionally and internationally. That is meaningful and strategically important. The leadership of the organization is trying to deliver a message to the World Wide Web of Jihad. One that they are alive and well. Two that they are engaging in the second wave of the war, after Tora Bora and Baghdad. The Jihad logic makes it impeccably rational to order strikes within the US. Those calls for painful hits within the homeland were part almost of all al Qaida declarations systematically since the fall of the Taliban.

4) Al Qaida wants to send a message to the radicals in the region and in the world that the capture of Saddam Hussein is not a setback against their struggle against the US. While many Western critics of this theory see no basis for such assertion, most Middle East analysts see deep connection. Our mind set in this part of the world awaits for causality between two propositions: "How can al Qaida reacts to the fall of Saddam and prepares an attack against the US," said one of the former intelligence analysts today. He argued: "Bin laden doesn't care about Saddam, and besides al Qaida cannot prepare for such a short range strike in few days!" Well, that's how we fall into out own self-built trap. One, Bin Laden doesn't care about the presence of Saddam but he cares about his absence. Who will inherit the zaama (leadership) of the Jihad? To us, it doesn't seem important. To the Sultan of the holy war, it is crucial. He needs to strike at the heart of the enemy, to harvest the anger produced by the "dishonor" of the captured Arab dictator. Psychologically, and by Jihad logic, Bin laden has to do something, and something big. Did al Qaida wait till last week to plan the inland potential attack? Not at all. The cells have been mandated the planning ages ago. The decision to use their resources was made based on Jihadist strategic needs.

5) Believe it or not, al Qaida wants to send a message of comfort to its supporters: The Qadhafi decision to disarm Libya is not a setback to the Caliphate to come. Al-Jazeera showed quantitative frustration with this decision. It runs polls condemning Muaamar's decision to "surrender." Bin laden will go farther his own way. First threaten, and if possibly harm America. If you were the man, you would want to reestablish some respect in your region. Saddam is captured, Qadhafi relinquishes the Weapons of mass destruction. The ambiance is not so good in the neighborhood. Ayman al Thawahiri said: "we are taking over." Think of it with his mind set. How would he assert such a leadership other than challenging the great devil, the enemy that is causing such a collapse in his camp?

6) All of that translates into an increasing al Qaida's chatter. Communications have increased in a manner that leads many to believe that a strike is possible, or in the making. All of the above five points are the subjective components that constitute the background. The chatter, intelligence and other types of gathering are in the hands of able Government agencies. The merge between subjective and objective components is the map that leads to a mobilization decision. And that decision is in the hands of the national security team at the head of which is the US President.

But do we mobilize?

A) In its most simple understanding, mobilizing the public has a deterring impact on the Terrorists. It is basic, it goes along instincts. If you are the Jihad Terrorist, or any other type of infiltrated enemy, you would feel weaker and unstable if you know that your targeted enemy knows you're coming. Your world becomes insecure. Worse would be for you if you know that you are under the public's surveillance. Therefore, mobilizing is a counter strike, a preemptive one at least.

B) Raising the level of alert doesn't mean that the strike will necessarily occur. In our society, this may seem difficult to absorb. But if you borrow the experiences of national communities, which have faced Jihad Terrorism for years, such as the Israelis, the Turks and the Lebanese Christians, you would benefit from the legacy. Americans must come to realize that going up on alert levels is not a guarantee for a strike but an indicator of the existence of an intention to strike. We need to realize that victory against Terrorism comes after we mobilize to deter the enemy not after the enemy strike.

B) From here, what should we do? Above all it is important to continue with normal lives but at the same time send a message to the Terrorists that the US is ready. The real transformation has to take place inside our society. A mutation in the opposite direction of what the Terrorists have designed. That alone would insure small, but continuous victories in this war. If al Qaida has already introduced its human weapons among us, at least by mobilizing, it will create that moment of hesitation in its midst, that can save American and others lives around the world.

Walid Phares is a Terrorism expert and an MSNBC analyst. He teaches Mideast Studies and Conflicts

Remember..trust your govenrment... independent thought is treason...the government will protect your interests..spend money...go to church...be afraid...war is peace....do not question authority....

Love is hate...

Has anyone considered that, like teh frog in the pan of water who's temperature is slowly increasing, we as Americans are becoming more used to, and dismissive of, the sight of troops/more police on the streets, in public places, etc....?