Terror Alerts and the Bush Administration

Has anyone noticed that we haven't really had any terror alert fluctuation since the presidential election? Even with the rise in kidnappings, the attacks in Britian, and now the Bin Laden tape --the terror alert level doesn't move.

It seems a bit fishy to me.

[Phoebe]

Good Point!

[KCwife]

Actually according to United Press, 41 Westerners were killed by their captors in 2004 while only 11 were killed in 2005. Therefore, I do not think that kidnappings are on the rise. I think that because it is a young female this time, it is getting lots of media play. Furthermore, the terror alert is only supposed to move when there has been a credible or likely threat on American soil. In regards to the Presidential election theory: I believe that the reasoning for raising it then was along the lines of what happened in Spain before their elections, so they raised the alert. Now if something happens today, and it was not moved...then that would be fishy. Just my .02 cents.

[spotty_dog]

In the article about Bin Laden's audio tape that threatens more attacks in the US, CNN had this to say:

"No plans exist to raise the nation's threat level from "yellow" -- or elevated -- to "orange" -- or high, said Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke.

Knocke said the threat level has never been raised in reaction to an al Qaeda tape. The threat level has been raised seven times since the color warning system was created after the September 11, 2001, attacks."

[SueC]

I'm not sure about whether or not they ought to be raising it now, because I think the whole thing is kind of a sham. They do seem to raise the threat level when it suits whatever their political motive is. I would hope airport security and whatever other means of protecting us are out there would be just as vigilant regardless of the "threat level". They tell us we should go about living our lives as usual so what difference should it make?

After looking online a bit, it seems they decided to "re-evaluate" the warning system shortly after the election (again, seems convienent to me).

I'm not indicating that I think it should be raised. I'm just musing on the idea that since we've been past the election and the "If you want the country to be safe, you MUST vote for Bush." rhetoric, we've not heard much about the "terror threat".

I felt then as though the idea of security and safety was being used to scare people into voting for them, and I feel even more so now.

[DCJenn]

I've never believed any of the "terror threats" because really, what exactly would I do differently?

I live in the middle of one of the top 2 listed targets- am I not going to walk the dog on the Mall if we're 'Code Red'? (which we've never been) Sorry, the dog's gotta pee regardless.

I'm actually much more concerned about the psychos who like to shoot their guns around my neighborhood. That's a much more immediate concern to me. Even the druggies and homeless people are relatively peaceful- although I was accosted once by a homeless guy whose reality was WAY different than anyone elses.

Seriously, once you've lived in a Terror Target, you realize how completely useless the code system is. They couldn't possibly evacuate all of DC ANYWAY. (Do my brothers and sisters in the Big Apple feel the same way?)

Jenn