Posted on 10/31/2001 5:47:14 AM PST by Zviadist
New terror warning bewilders America
White House officials found themselves on the defensive yesterday after Americans reacted more with bemusement than alarm to the administration's warning to be on heightened alert because of a new "credible but non-specific" threat of a terrorist attack.
The vagueness of the instruction left people uncertain how to respond. And, in a series of breakfast TV appearances and then a press conference, Tom Ridge, the homeland security coordinator, gave a rather spluttering defence of the decision to go public on the subject at all, admitting that it had been a marginal one. But he defended it on grounds of both open government and public safety.
"The story you tell your children is the little boy who cried wolf, and I appreciate the concern, It's a fine line that we walk. I think people understand that. But it's better that if we have information, we share it with the American people, however incomplete it might be.
"If everybody has a heightened sense of alert, we send a signal not only to Americans, but also to those who would terrorise us, that we are on guard."
The message, he concluded, was this: "Live your lives. Continue to be American. But be alert."
The warning was sent out to the 18,000 different agencies responsible for law enforcement in the US, ranging from the New York police department to small-town operations with one patrol car.
It mentioned that the attack might occur, somehow, somewhere, at home or abroad, in about the next week.
A similar, and equally nebulous, message went out on October 11, exactly a month after the hijacks, and some officials believe that it may have deflected action that was planned at the time.
The administration is aware of the danger of diminishing returns, and of the impression that officials are concerned to protect their own hide as well as the public. "It's a case of damned if we do say anything and damned if we don't," said one White House source.
Far from Washington, the 18,000 agencies did their best to wrestle with the implications of the vague warning, and responded in contrasting ways.
In Aberdeen, South Dakota - population 25,000 - the state highway patrol switched at once to 12-hour shifts, wearing tactical gear and carrying M-16 rifles.
But when the news arrived over the old-fashioned teletype machine at the Aberdeen police HQ, it was decided not to go on to official high alert, which was last invoked during flooding a few years back.
"We've been working out at the airport since September 11 and have armed guards meeting each flight, but other than that we haven't taken any specificaction," said Ron Vanmeter, the assistant police chief. "We understand it can happen here the same as anywhere else, but we need to have more information that would be relevant to South Dakota."
Meanwhile, the White House reverted to its policy of the two senior figures playing Box and Cox. Vice-president Dick Cheney was hustled back to his "secret location" while President George Bush was going ahead with his plans to spend the evening in the least secret location imaginable: he was due to throw the ceremonial first pitch at the start of the World Series baseball game at Yankee Stadium, New York.
By contrast, the governor of Louisiana, Mike Foster, cancelled a trip to Washington, not out of fear, he insisted, but in case he could not get back to his office to take charge if anything happened.
More menial officials seemed uncertain what on earth they were meant to do. "We're already as alert as we could be," wailed a policeman in Georgia.
The warning came a matter of hours after the 442-metre (1,450ft) Sears Tower, the tallest building in the US - slightly higher than either of the World Trade Centre towers were - reopened its 103rd-floor observation deck to the public for the first time in seven weeks. "We're sending a message that the terrorists have failed," said a spokesman.
In suburban gardens across the country the flags that have been out for the past seven weeks have now been partly superseded by millions of Halloween displays, often featuring ghosts, mock graveyards, impaled witches and spookily arranged cotton wool.
Some schools have warned children that their costumes for today's festivities should be non-violent and non-scary.
But the tradition of deliberate scariness remains. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer insisted yesterday that among the mountain of non-evidence, there was also no hint that the feared attacks might have anything to do with Halloween.
A country on edge
· A liquified natural gas tanker entered Boston harbour yesterday surrounded by coastguard boats while police cars cruised streets onshore, because of fears that the tanker could be a terrorist target
· A Florida highway patrol trooper sparked an anthrax alert when he said he felt nauseous and began hyper-ventilating after stopping a Middle Eastern man for speeding. He was rushed to a medical centre by helicopter and hosed down for possible contamination, but was said yesterday to have suffered an anxiety attack
· Film and pop star Jennifer Lopez is too frightened to travel to New York to promote her new fashion line, sources close to the star told the New York Post
In Aberdeen, South Dakota - population 25,000 - the state highway patrol switched at once to 12-hour shifts, wearing tactical gear and carrying M-16 rifles.
This country has gone completely insane. And what the hell are these small town cops doing with military rifles? Fascist takeover!
only other thing I could think of was that maybe this is more of a message to anyone planning an attack: don't try it...we're all watching?
Fat lot of good that will do. These people aren't wearing "Osama" t-shirts. A bunch of paranoid kook Americans looking under their beds for "ragheads" aren't going to stop people who are willing to blow themselves up to make a point. Jeez, we're so weak and lily-livered that a couple of anthrax spores have crippled the entire nation. Certainly the rugged frontier spirit that once was America is long gone and the "New Feminine American Man" has come to the fore. Where is Teddy Roosevelt when we need him?
Lol. And you're accusing everyone else of overreacting?
Lol. And you're accusing everyone else of overreacting?
And your local small-town cop with an M-16 on the beat doesn't concern you at all? I have been to countries where this is the norm. Trust me, they are a hell of a lot LESS safe. There is an inversely proportional relationship between the outward appearance of security forces and real security. But I don't expect many people here to understant that. They are too busy bending over for big daddy government, who promises to protect them from all evil.
Gee, that should have been a front page story all by itself....
It serves a very real practical purpose. When the government receives a non-specific threat which it feels there is good reason to take seriously, it has two choices:
1) Keep quiet so as not to create more panic among the general population, or
2) Make the credible threat announcement to the public.
If it chooses course 1 and something horrible happens, then the struggle against terrorism is effectively over because the primary story in the media in the days after the tragedy will be that the government had information and didn't share it with the media, or with the public. The tragedy itself would be the lesser story. They wouldn't be interested in the fact that there was insufficient intelligence about the event to have prevented it or that they were trying to avoid creating a panic. The media (with plenty of encouragement from the political opposition) would focus on the administration's culpability for what had happened.
In a reasonable world, one where the media recognized that their job was no more essential or privileged than anyone else's, course 1 would obviously make more sense. There's nothing we can do to respond to the alert, other than worry more than before. In the world we currently inhabit, to keep quiet and not raise public alarm is a luxury not available to Mr. Bush and his administration if they are determined to see through to the end the war against terrorism.
So have I. But I understood there was a helluvalot more going on in these countries to make them unsafe than soldiers holding a rifles.
To answer your question, no. I'm not concerned about cops holding M16s in cases where terrorist attacks are imminent.
If it chooses course 1 and something horrible happens, then the struggle against terrorism is effectively over because the primary story in the media in the days after the tragedy will be that the government had information and didn't share it with the media, or with the public.
So your argument is that it is OK to work Americans into a frenzied panic because it is a good media and PR strategy, even though we agree that it won't do a thing to actually protect people. So it is more important to been seen "doing good" than actually doing good. Interesting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.