Want to learn how to create and sustain a national psychosis? Look no
further than the Department of Homeland Security.

While I've not done a scientific review of terror alerts since September 11,
I do know that that the phrase "while there is no credible or specific
evidence..." (or some variation thereof) is repeatedly used when discussing
the potential for terrorist attacks, as shown below.  Government warnings
that terrorists might use "offensive scuba divers", "floating Styrofoam
picnic coolers", "rental cars", "helicopters" and (perhaps one day) even
"halitosis" to attack America nearly always contain such wording.

Why? 

Such unspecific language is all that's needed to generate fear, uncertainty,
and reignite public concern/interest/support in the so-called "War" on
Terrorism while simultaneously allowing government officials to "cover
themselves" in the court of public opinion in the remote event such a tactic
actually is used during a future terror attack against us.  It's also
convenient that alerts worded as such don't need to be based on any sound,
confirmed, accurate intelligence information in order to generate hysterical
media coverage and be effective from an [unspoken] political advantage, let
alone the aforementioned "cover-thyself" one.  The mere fact it's being
announced by the government lends a perceived importance and urgency to the
message, even if it's based on three-year-old intelligence information.

Consider that Israel, Ireland, the UK, and other nations having dealt with
terrorism for decades don't have a Rainbow-Brite National Threat Advisory
System nor do they inundate their citizens with vague, goofy, and
suspiciously-timed warnings about possible-but-unsubstantiated (read "new
and exciting") terror attack methods and targets. The continual public
relations scramble by the US government to warn against any and every
possible method of terrorist attack indicates that it still does not fully
understand the nature of terrorism or unconventional warfare and perhaps is
allowing political interests to influence, directly or indirectly, the
objective work of protecting this country.

The very nature of terrorism is such that no matter what level of effort you
devote to the matter, it is NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE to prevent (or "eliminate") it
-- and running around to place parts of the country on "code orange" while
telling other parts to "remain calm" is, in my mind, the wrong approach to
protecting the homeland. This response only costs time, money, stress, and
gives the terrorists (not to mention other nations) a good laugh as they
watch Americans scramble back-and-forth to meet or tolerate the requirements
and burdens of our ever-changing color code alert levels.

As 'Sir Humphrey Appleby' once said, politicians like to panic -- they need
activity. After all, it's their substitute for achievement.

Some achievement.  

-rick
Infowarrior.org




(1) FDA Warns of Terrorist Drug Tampering
New York Times
August 12, 2004

< snip >

``Cues from chatter'' gathered around the world are raising concerns that
terrorists might try to attack the domestic food and drug supply,
particularly illegally imported prescription drugs, acting Food and Drug
Administration Commissioner Lester M. Crawford says.

``While we must assume that such a threat exists generally, we have no
specific information now about any al-Qaida threats to our food or drug
supply,'' said Brian Roehrkasse, spokesman for the Homeland Security
Department.

(RICK:  This is a politically-timely "terror alert" given the raging debate
about the importation of cheaper prescription drugs from Canada. Despite a
few instances of drug tampering over the years by domestic groups within the
United States, publicizing spooky and gloomy  "clues from chatter" at this
present moment might this be an unspoken attempt to strengthen the
government's drug-safety argument in this very hot topic this election year?
Conspiracy theories abound.)

< snip >


(2) Capitol Police Chief Sees No Specific Threat to Hill
Washington Post
August 10, 2004

"Although there is no credible, specific evidence supporting the use of
helicopters in aerial attacks within the United States, the threat cannot be
discounted," the FBI said in one of the bulletins.


--
You are a subscribed member of the infowarrior list. Visit 
www.infowarrior.org for list information or to unsubscribe. This message 
may be redistributed freely in its entirety. Any and all copyrights 
appearing in list messages are maintained by their respective owners.

Reply via email to