The "Old info" story is spreading nationwide

[NWHarkness]

Just taking a look at Google News, I see some variation of "Terror Alert Based On Old Info" popping up all over. Just on the first page of a list of what is at this time 233 stories, I see it in:

Seattle Times
Hartford Courant
Kansas City Star
Houston Chronicle
San Francisco Chronicle
Los Angeles Times...

This story is out there. For once, the mendacity of the Bush regime is being exposed to the light of day.

[bluestateguy]

1. They really fucked this up...

because they just made it harder to get people's attention when the threats are actually real.

[Bluebear]

2. Omaha World Herald, The State (SC), Bloomberg News.....

[Cat Atomic]

3. If this gets play, it's going to be damaging to Bush, big time.

Using these terror threats simply to distract from the Democratic Convention coverage is the height of irresponsibility. It just doesn't get any more reckless and juvenile. People will be pissed.

Ridge's own praise of Bush during his announcement only highlights the whole thing.

[Spoon]

4. Has everyone here lost their minds?

The guy who was arrested had older info, but he almost certainly shared it with others - who could've "updated" it. Those places need extra protection, it's a no brainer. Kerry would and should have done the same. I give Bush a pass - this time :)

[RummyTheDummy]

6. Well as long as you're willing to give him a pass........

I guess that makes using 3-4 year-old info to spook the 'Merican people when your opponent is picking up steam okay.

Your line of reasoning is their cover. They're counting on the naive to buy their bullshit.

[KharmaTrain]

7. And How Long Will You Think About It The Next Time???

We need a leader whose word on such a serious matter is beyond question. If you hear of the next threat and it's legit, do you wait until it's verified to act? That's what these cry wolf situation have created.

All partisanship aside, this system was supposed to be used with extreme care and certainty. By raising and lowering and it being reported that the information used in the warnings was old or from unverifiable sources, it diminishes the purpose of the system and creates an even more dangerous situation than existed before 9/11.

In 2000 several plots were uncovered and foiled without Janet Reno or Sandy Berger or Carrottop coming out and saying the sky is falling. They did it through international cooperation and just hard-nosed intelligence and police work. People were heads up and we learned after-the-fact.

From what we've learned about 9/11 it could have been prevented if this regime had listened to some of the same sources that Berger and others did in 2000. Would 9/11 have been prevented? Who knows, but this regime was totally neglegent as no effort was made even when intelligence showed something big was happening. Now when they say it, it holds little import. If anything I csn see bin Laden in his cave with the wide screen laughing at these assclowns who are disrupting more lives with terror warning Elmo or Ernie or Kinky Winky than anything he could do.

Keep your head in the sand, that's what giving this regime a pass is doing.

[Spoon]

9. Please reread my post.

I said I give him a pass, THIS TIME. The other alerts were definately based on shakey info and (likely) should never have happened, but this one has me worried. Sorry, but the info could've been shared and a plan could be in place at this time.

It would be very hard to protect those buildings without the info "coming out".

[RummyTheDummy]

10. Just how many times does he have to cry wolf

To convice you he's full of shit? One would think the "exploding styrofoam cooler" thing this July 4th would have been enough, not to mention the BS from the previous three years.

[shraby]

15. How about the pregnant women

with wires hanging, or people dressed in coats in warm weather. LOL

[TheWatcher]

23. How in the World Can You Give them a Pass on FIVE YEAR OLD INFO?

The other reports were based on Shaky information, but did it ever occur to you that maybe they know if they use shaky, bullshit information one too many times, then the Public would begin to smell their BULLSHIT?

So this time they decided it would be a good idea to use real info.

The Problem is the Info was so OUTDATED that it is no longer RELEVANT.

The difference this time is that someone decided to CALL THEM ON IT.

Don't buy into the spin.

This is Bullshit and they have been CAUGHT.

[sendero]

29. This is about the fourth time....

.... they've done this. Exactly how many passes are you giving out?

Bush* used up his passes with me when he lied to our face about the reasons to go to war with Iraq.

BTW, would you loan me a thousand dollars? I'll pay you back, honest.

[janx]

34. How do you feel about his sending his wife and children

to campaign for him in one of the buildings that was supposedly a major target of attack?

[goclark]

45. I will never give him a pass!

Why didn't they say in making the original announcement that it was 3/4 years back when it was first documented."
No, they didn't say it then because they wanted us to believe that it was all brand new info.

He / They are telling LIES big time and playing with any thread of the truth.

[Robbien]

8. You are willing to give BushCo a pass?

qualified by a this time?

Only a doormat will give Bush a pass, this time, after he has knocked you down, kicked and spat on you, killed your sons and daughters in an invasion and stolen all your money out of the national treasury.

But you are still willing to give him a pass.

[Spoon]

14. When Kerry takes office, you're in effect insuring that he'll

never do anything to thwart threats, for fear of "crying wolf". I don't want that, do you?

[Gore1FL]

21. The issue is not reponsindg to terror info

its about waiting three years and releasing the data 3 days after the DNC.

This is not about responding to possible attacks, but using the potentila of terror attacks for political gain.

[tomfodw]

27. Of course not

As someone posted above, Clinton stopped numerous threats without going public beforehand (or, in many cases, afterward either). He didn't have a whole department whose only function, as far as I can tell, is to change the color of its alert status and scare the shit out of the American public every time Bush thinks he's in political trouble.

I expect John Kerry to actually do something about terror and not just issue vague threat warnings. It's almost 3 years since 9-11 - the intelligence gleaned from the guy captured in Pakistan is more than three years old. What's going on with our intelligence agencies - why didn't we know about this years ago? What don't we know about now?

I expect - and I hope we have the chance to find out - that Kerry will issue warnings only when they actually serve the public interest. When the threat is specific enough to merit causing a possible public panic in the hope of actually needing to let people know. I don't see that here, considering how old the news is. As the Washington Post quoted an intelligence figure, there was nothing new here and he didn't see why all the fuss.

Bingo.

[Chomskyite]

12. Then why don't you SAY so?

If you're going before the American public and you're expecting your credibility to last beyond the news cycle, why don't you preface your remarks with "Keep in mind that even though the information in the computers is over three years old, we still believe this response is warranted."

If you omit mentioning that, and it comes out the next day in the NY Times and in the Post, you look like you were embarrassed by that info. And in the case of terror warnings, you can't afford to lose credibility like this.

[TheWatcher]

22. No, But You Appear to Have Drunk The Kool-Aid

The Alert is PHONY.

It was based on 3-5 Year Old Info.

The Alert was used for Political Purposes.

With All Due Respect....

WAKE UP.

We cannot give Bush A Pass.

These Terror Alerts are only as real as the people in power want them to be.

They haven't told the truth from day one.

Don't get caught up in the Spin.

[LuminousX]

26. Would you have sent your wife to one of the targets if you thought

the threat was credible?

[progressivebydesign]

43. I've been making that point..

.. the government would NEVER allow the First Family to go there if they REALLY thought it was a fresh threat. It was stale, and those fuckers ran with it.. for political purposes.

[gasperc]

31. they knew it was old, they could have said that and added a but

but what is becoming transparent is that there was no but, it was years old and there is no new intelligence that indicates that an attack was immenent. And why would the president send in his own wife if the threat was so high and certain???

[A_Possum]

36. I'd have gone along IF they had said it was old info...

If they had just said, this is old info but updated several months ago, so we're hardening security, that would have been reasonable enough to pass muster. (Although personally I think the timing stinks.)

However, they didn't do that. They made every effort to give the clear impression there was "hair on fire" chatter about an imminent attack.

That changes it completely from a no brainer to an irresponsible political ploy.

[Arianrhod]

39. Giving * a pass

is as good as agreeing with his policies, IMO.

Do you give him a pass on Fallujah and Abu Ghraib, too?

[ClassWarrior]

40. OF COURSE THEY NEED EXTRA PROTECTION.

So why the hell haven't they been getting it for the past FOUR YEARS?? Since before 9/11, if you bother to count back. And if they have been getting extra protection all that time, why the hell is it being used to prop up a terra 'lert JUST NOW??

[progressivebydesign]

42. Umm.. so, because it was discussed 3 -4 years ago..

.. that means that these buildings will have barricades, police dogs, sharpshooters, etc., for how long? Eternity? I think the point was that the info was 3 -4 years old.. meaning they were in consideration during the 9/11 planning. I really doubt that we need to live like we're in an occupied country for the rest of our lives, because the guy mentioned those buildings from supposed conversations 3-4 years ago.

Admit it. Bush and company made this sound like the attacks were "imminent", they actually said they were. And we have Tom Ridge saying on TV that this new level of response was 'because of President Bush's excellent handling of the War of Terror'. No lie.

This was a political move. Plain and simple. It's the most disgusting manipulation of Americans for political gain I've ever seen. The fact that Bush sent his wife and daughters TO one of the buildings in question yesterday, should be the biggest tip-off that the info was stale. The government would NEVER allow the First Family to be there, if there was even a HINT of danger. No way. It's all a political game.

[scottxyz]

5. Here's more links

http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=terror+alert+reports+old&c=&ei=UTF-8
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&edition=us&ie=UTF-8&newsclusterurl=http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/9305507.htm


Of course it HAS to spread nationwide.

This isn't some conspiracy theory that has to ferment on DU for months before people figure out there might be some truth to it.

This is FRONT PAGE NEWS in the New York Times and the Washington Post.

There's no way the other news outlets can ignore this.

[Michael Harrington]

13. I'd love to think so, but...

I can almost hear the mealy mouth explainations and excuses now. Lieberman will be tapped to do his song and dance and this will all just go away.

I so hope that I'm wrong.

[fishface]

11. It seems there's nothing this turd won't do to get elected.

No matter what the cost to the rest of the country.

[jeff30997]

17. I'm not sure that he gives a damn about being elected...

As long as he's still in power, if you know what i mean.

[Michael_UK]

16. It's just broken on the BBC n/t

[jeff30997]

18. I wonder how much time it will take for CNN to mention it...

Very briefly,of course.

[NoBorders]

33. Still not on CNN - but on every other major news site -eom

[Pachamama]

37. Well, didn't you know - CNN was taken over the Right about 2 wks ago

In case since your a Newbie, CNN is trying to Outfox Faux news and quite miserably, since not only won't they succeed at outfoxing the original, but they meanwhile are losing their loyal base of liberal voters - me included.

Did you see any of their "so-called convention coverage"? It was shameful - so no surprises here that they haven't covered the story yet.

PS: Welcome to the DU! :hi: We love Newbies in our freethinking forum - :toast:

[NoBorders]

49. yeah, I gave up on CNN since Woodruff started smearing W. Clark

I've pretty much written off all TV news actually, except PBS. I do find myself watching on occasion, just to see what the 'average American' is seeing. But then I get infuriated and have to turn it off.

I'll be watching CNN though to see if the first person they have on after Bush's speech at the Rep convention is Terry McCaulif.

And thanks for the welcom! I've lurked here awhile. Sometimes it is a salve to my anger, but sometimes it just amplifies my anger! :-)

[radfringe]

19. he's the "recycling" pResident

recycled campaign themes, recycled cabinet personell, recycled government policies, recycled the federal deficit - so it's not surprising he wouldn't recycle old info

meanwhile -- consider this:

old or new info - it came from intelligence sources (at some point in time)

these are the same intelligence sources that dropped the ball on 9-11, dropped the ball on WMDs, and the same intelligence sources that "mis-lead" bush*

so ask yourself if you can believe any info being given to us as being credible and/or not politically motivated or manipulated

[jeff30997]

20. Good point.

[joanne]

24. kick

[Walt Starr]

25. Wait until the story about how there is no intelligence about attacks

in the suspect's computer hits mainstream American press:

"Sheikh Rashid Ahmed denied that plans for fresh attacks on the US and UK were found on the suspects' computers. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3532360.stm

[yardwork]

28. The Bush apologists are out in force, too

but their arguments are getting lamer and lamer even to their own ears.

This supports what Howard Dean said earlier this week, and gives Dean a boost in credibility.

Good job, BushCo!

[Eurobabe]

30. lack of trust, lack of trust, lack of trust

spread the word. these NEOCONS have lied too many times. cry wolf much?

[ElementaryPenguin]

32. Lying about a BLOW-JOB is STILL worse than lying about national security

IN DUMB-ASS 'MURICA!!!!

:puke:

[Straight Shooter]

38. From BLOW JOBS to SNOW JOBS

All bush is doing is setting us up for a terror attack with greater casualties because we cannot trust him or his team to filter intelligence. When the day does come, if it comes, people will fail to protect themselves because they've heard it all before.

It's the danger of apathy to terror info that bush is blindly leading his country into, but he says his solemn duty is to protect us. AFAIC, he can protect us best by going back to his hog ranch and playing with plastic toys instead of the lives of real people.

[Pachamama]

35. They have known this for months, years - why now? Hmmm....

...I just can't figure out why they would want to release this old info.....just can't figure it out....any ideas folks?

:think:

[Danger Duck]

41. Anybody catch the Daily Show

last night? They did a pretty good spoof of this. I think Al Franken brought it up on Letterman too.

[tedzbear]

44. Bush sent First Lady to visit workers at Citicorp...

...to cheer up the civilians waiting in long lines to get to their offices.

I am thinking if it was soooo dangerous why would they put the First lady in harms way?

I smell fraud here folks.

:bounce:

[Pachamama]

50. Nice guy....

yeah....doesn't sound like he's too worried about Pickles....:eyes:

[milkyway]

46. And Howard Dean had already planted the seed, so people will be more

receptive to the idea that bush overplayed the possibility of an attack for political purposes. Some people may not have made the leap from exaggerated alert to it being politically motivated, but Dean has already made the connection for them.

[ignatius 2]

47. The other troubling info is that the guy was arrested weeks ago,

and the "info" was only released on Sunday? How the heck long does it take to check a hard drive? Pakistan pardoned a scientist with our blessings who sold nuke secrets to N. Korea and others. How in the hell can we believe or trust anything coming out of Pakistan?

Sending in the skirt btigae, ie. Laura and the twins was just pathetic.

When are the American peole going to finally tire of being the saps for this sick and vile administration?

[indie_voter]

48. Story from BBC says no plans for "fresh attacks" found in Pakistan raid

Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said the breakthrough had led to seven or eight more suspects being detained in the last two days.

Last month Pakistan arrested a key al-Qaeda suspect, as well as a man it said was an al-Qaeda computer expert.

Sheikh Rashid Ahmed denied that plans for fresh attacks on the US and UK were found on the suspects' computers.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3532360.stm

[AmerDem]

51. seeing as it has been about 24 hours, i wouldn't say "spreading"

The info is out there for sure but it was and is hardly covered with a tough scrutinizing eye you would hope for. This is to be expected. This is know different then the literally countless number of crimes, all in out lies, smears, name outings and totally fabricated stories the press chose not to run. We are in a true fascist scenario when it comes to the white house and news media. Don't expect any explosion over anything. like always the general public is left to fend for itself. Not only are we now expected to read and watch the news but we have to read thru all the lies and come up to what we feel is the truth.

America is in one sorry mess.