Two recurring news stories always mystify me: Terror alerts and locations that are vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Today (9/23/09) the Associated Press reports that the, "Government expanded a terrorist warning from transit systems to U.S. stadiums, hotels and entertainment complexes," apparently leaving us comfort zones in bars (although "places of immorality and sin" are on the al-Qaeda list of targets). The government warning concedes, however, that they "have no information regarding the timing, location or target of any planned attack." So what is a citizen supposed to do with this information?
I suppose that there is an argument to be made that it might help if citizens were on the look out for suspicious activity. Certainly law enforcement should have the information, no matter what it contains, but I question the purpose in advising the public. Of course, I do not challenge the media's right to publish such stories, but rather its judgment in doing so. Creating fear in persons who are powerless to do anything about it, in my mind, serves no useful purpose.
More problematic for me are the recurring stories about general categories or specific locations that are vulnerable to terrorist attacks. I have seen stories with visual depictions, drawings and photos, such as where a ladder could be placed to gain access to a high risk target or general stories how attacks upon particular types of targets could have devastating effects upon large numbers of people or the economy. They are virtual "how-to" manuals. I recognize that the answer to such criticism is that the terrorists already have this information, but I still ask: Suppose they don't, and even if they do, what purpose do such articles serve. Now that we know, what should we do other than be afraid?
Earl Ofari Hutchinson: Did Obama Break His Campaign Promise to Scrap the Patriot Act?
Provisions of the Patriot Act that remain on the books are legally questionable and constitutionally suspect. President Obama has given no hint that he'll change them.
The last thing that really scared me was in Sept. 2005 when I saw US citizins begging for water in New Orleans. Now that was a real terror alert.
1) Pay attention. 2) Carry on as if nothing were happening - other than the normal precautions listed. It's easy, it's useful, and it's fun. Adds spice to life. How 'bout those deadly stadiums? Frak it, I'm going to the game!
I also wonder sometimes about the need for alarmist behavior. I am always cost-conscious and aware of any out-of-the-ordinary events, objects or otherwise. It's never a bad idea to be prudent, to economize, or to take stock of who has our best interests. But when a large group of people who live large on bailout cash while others who've worked hard their whole lives flounder, are shelling out the safety advise— I do tend to employ a bit of restraint in how I perceive the information…
This is a possible response if you become terrified of a terrorist attack. It's a terror of going out in public.
Not much fun, but you'd stand a good chance of not being killed or kidnapped by terrorists if you never ventured outside your home.
Or you could start gobbling anti-anxiety meds and go out and party hearty. A terrorist attack then would lose its impact.
Scream, yell and dash about
Be scared!
How often are Americans going to fall for this childish crap? This nation was attacked only twice by Middle East terrorists. The first occurred during Clinton's presidency. The perpetrators are now in jail. The second occurred during the Bush presidency and the perpetrators are free 8 years later.
Vote Republican indeed.