Heads Up! Major terror alert almost certainly coming next week!!

[wvrevy]

Mugg Man - It's "he" not "she" Other than that, I can't see where you've posted anything that was factually incorrect. I just happened to have read that Olbermann story and thought it would bolster your argument a bit, since it included a lot of the actual dates and events that you were referring to.

As for a "response" from the right: don't hold your breath. I've found that they don't do well when confronted with facts that go against their illusions of a president that actually knows what he is doing and is acting in anyone's best interests but his own. You'll get a lot of argument about things on the fringe (such as accusations of name-calling), but nothing on the real and verifiable events being discussed.

One other fact that you won't see them confront: Tom Ridge, since he has left DHS, has openly admitted that the "alert" was often raised against his advice as Director of Homeland Security, since he did not believe that any evidence was either credible or worthy of raising a public alert. Maybe he's actually read those stories of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" and knows that you can only do that so many times before it becomes useless.

 

[ducklite]

I think the poster was commenting on the fact that Robert Byrd was once a member of the KKK.

I realize this, I was jsut trying to continue the amusing side of this thread.

Anne

 

[cheerbop]

They used to say those types of things about Clinton too. Of course it wasn't terror alerts but that he would do things (like dropping bombs on Afghanistan) when bad press was about to be released about him or his administration (like Monica Lewinsky). I didn't really believe it about Clinton and I don't really believe it about Bush. I think the timing of any terror alerts is based only on the receiving of terror information.

I agree!

 

[KingsFanInRI]

Maybe Ted Kennedy got his driver's license back!?

 

[What the Heck]

As for a "response" from the right: don't hold your breath. I've found that they don't do well when confronted with facts that go against their illusions of a president that actually knows what he is doing and is acting in anyone's best interests but his own. You'll get a lot of argument about things on the fringe (such as accusations of name-calling), but nothing on the real and verifiable events being discussed.

I thought Clinton wasn't president any more?

I would also point out that if Mugg Mann's #1 point were true, according to the left, we would always be under a "new" terror alert, since, according to the left it is always a bad week for the President.

It is an impressive list, wv, and it would be even more impressive if it didn't include the last 2. Those were the pilots going into restricted airspace. This shows a very clear bias that Mr. Olberman has. Many of us have heard about dirty bombs that can fit inside of a suitcase, suppose a dirty bomb is put on an airplane? After the fact they turned out to be nothing, but in todays world they can't be taken lightly.

I would also be impressed even more if these were the only times that the level was played with.

And, of course, it would be even more impressive if the Democratic Senators on the Intelligence committee were screaming about the "wag the dog", since they would have the intelligence in front of them. Their silence is deafening.

 

[momof2inPA]

I bet the Republicans are hoping for Wilma to strengthen so they won't have to make up any diversions.

 

[DisOrBust]

Thank God Wilma's coming.....

 

[What the Heck]

One other fact that you won't see them confront: Tom Ridge, since he has left DHS, has openly admitted that the "alert" was often raised against his advice as Director of Homeland Security, since he did not believe that any evidence was either credible or worthy of raising a public alert. Maybe he's actually read those stories of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" and knows that you can only do that so many times before it becomes useless.

This is a good point and deserves a response. I don't know what intelligence they had, but again, I would hope that the other side of the house (besides Crazy Howard) would be also pointing out that the intelligence isn't there to support it. No matter if it's there or not, I think a little bit of "crying wolf" has already taken place. Look how blaize we are about it now? It might take another attack for us to take it serious again.

 

[eclectics]

As A New Yorker, I found it interesting that Mr. Bloomberg put NYC on higher alert for (as it turned out) no good reason. Is there a election coming up???? Nobody (Federal, State, Local) should use scare tactics to distract or further their political ambitions. We live in enough stress already.

 

[What the Heck]

Another coincidence? How come this part of the blog was left out:

To summarize, coincidences are coincidences.

We could probably construct a similar time line of terror events and warnings, and their relationship to - the opening of new Walmarts around the country.

Are these coincidences signs that the government’s approach has worked because none of the announced threats ever materialized? Are they signs that the government has not yet mastered how and when to inform the public?

Is there, in addition to the "fog of war" a simple, benign, "fog of intelligence”?

But, if merely a reasonable case can be made that any of these juxtapositions of events are more than just coincidences, it underscores the need for questions to be asked in this country - questions about what is prudence, and what is fear-mongering; questions about which is the threat of death by terror, and which is the terror of threat.

(I thought the bananaman would make a better quotation marks). WV, was your computer taken over by a right wing co-conspirator due to the potential damage that might be done to a new threat warning?

 

[transparant]

They used to say those types of things about Clinton too. Of course it wasn't terror alerts but that he would do things (like dropping bombs on Afghanistan) when bad press was about to be released about him or his administration (like Monica Lewinsky). I didn't really believe it about Clinton and I don't really believe it about Bush. I think the timing of any terror alerts is based only on the receiving of terror information.

I agree - as I'm sure most intelligent people would agree with you as well.

 

[curlyjbs]

Thank God Wilma's coming.....

Made me laugh!

Connie

 

[wvrevy]

What the heck - 3 or 4 times is a coincidence. 13 ?!? As for why I cut out the rest of the article...See, I was posting FACTS, not Olberman's speculation. I also didn't include his introduction, in case anyone wants to make a point of that. I realize that sometimes you guys think that commentary is the same as a fact, but I hate to tell you, it isn't. You simply can not refute the facts, no matter how you try to slime the Dems or anyone else. Oh, and those airplanes were such a threat...that the president wasn't even interrupted on his afternoon bike ride to be told that it had happened. Nice spin, but it doesn't hold water.

Transparant - Nice job of insulting everyone that disagrees with you. And here I thought you were such a nice person.

 

[Mad4Mickey]

I stay away from these thread but there are so many that get started I just wanted to say .....

If "the other" guy was in charge on 9/11 he would still be curled up in the corner of his bedroom blowing boogers and slinging snot everywhere.
W did what he had to do . If he didnt then we would still have these threads but they would be talkign about what he didnt do instead of what he did do .

Freedom is not FREE ....

 

[wvrevy]

I stay away from these thread but there are so many that get started I just wanted to say .....

If "the other" guy was in charge on 9/11 he would still be curled up in the corner of his bedroom blowing boogers and slinging snot everywhere.
W did what he had to do . If he didnt then we would still have these threads but they would be talkign about what he didnt do instead of what he did do .

Freedom is not FREE ....

There's so much wrong with this, I don't know where to start. Regardless, it has nothing to do with the subject at hand, that being that any time this administration gets itself into political trouble or needs to draw attention away from some situation, they raise the terror alert or otherwise do something in attempt to scare people into forgetting how inept they are.

And in case you forgot, the guy responsible for 9/11 wasn't Saddam Hussein. THAT guy is still walking around FREE. As I said, it's a shame that the administration's distraction techniques work so well with some people.

 

[transparant]

And here I thought you were such a nice person.

You thought correctly.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I bet the Republicans are hoping for Wilma to strengthen so they won't have to make up any diversions.

NOT even remotely funny!

 

[wvrevy]

You thought correctly.

Really ? I wasn't aware that calling people stupid was something that "nice" people did.

I agree - as I'm sure most intelligent people would agree with you as well.

No...no, that doesn't read like something a "nice" person would say at all.

 

[transparant]

Really ? I wasn't aware that calling people stupid was something that "nice" people did.



No...no, that doesn't read like something a "nice" person would say at all.

Never said the word stupid. But now that I think about it - yeah, you're right - I'm a big bad meany. People run when they see me coming. Yeah...I'm mean alright.

 

[momof2inPA]

I agree - as I'm sure most intelligent people would agree with you as well.

No, no, you are the only one on the boards smart enough to figure these things out, Transparant (or is it parent). We all look to you for guidance.