Expert: Terror Threat Warning 'Irresponsible' - The Orange Mane

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 08-03-2004, 02:51 AM

Expert: Terror Threat Warning 'Irresponsible'

NPR Morning Edition today:

Larry Johnson, a former counter-terrorism official at the CIA and State Department, calls the Bush administration "irresponsible" for raising the terror threat level. Johnson says intelligence suggests attacks on U.S. financial institutions have been considered--not that they are in the works. He speaks with NPR's Steve Inskeep.

http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=3809463

watermock · 08-03-2004, 03:06 AM

NPR Radio?

Well, that's a significant move from BartCop.

Your crazy. Two Commanders were arrested. The computers were taken secondary. It was very specific information, especially about how they operate, moles, and other valuable information.

Your so delusional that any good news is immediately dismissed. Fact is, we made an intelligence coup, we have men talking, and you dismiss it out of hand when information is still coming in. God your a tool.

We just picked up Zarquawi's message courier to Usama and have picked up more Ql Queada suspects, 5 I think, just this morning.

Poor LABF. You honestly don't get it do you. It took time to infiltrate their rats nest, now eggs are falling. We are nabbing them left and right, IN PAKISTAN.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 08-03-2004, 03:13 AM

watermock · 08-03-2004, 03:16 AM

That doesn't mean there isn't a clear and present danger. I does mean we are making progress. We are breaking eggs as I type. Sorry buddy.

watermock · 08-03-2004, 03:17 AM

News breaking. Courier for #2 intended for Usama captured. Several more captures in Pakistan.

They must be Bush plants for the election right?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 08-03-2004, 03:47 AM

Rascal · 08-03-2004, 06:34 AM

Mock makes good points and all LABF can resort to is posting cartoons.

LABF must have went to the same debate school as Bush.

Exile_In_SJ · 08-03-2004, 06:57 AM

LABF always resorts to cartoons when he can't come up with anything else..

TexanBob · 08-03-2004, 08:55 AM

Are the threat warnings any more irresponsible than the people dismissing threat warnings as "politically motivated"? If we stop the terrorists, they call it political grandstanding. If we don't, people die and they demand inquiries into what went wrong.

As far as the liberals are concerned, it's damned if you do and damned if you don't - so **** 'em. We're just going to do the right thing and try to ignore you quivering ninnies.

Exile_In_SJ · 08-03-2004, 09:05 AM

That's what leadership is about, you do what you feel is right and ignore the bleating and sniping from the opposition.

Old Dude · 08-03-2004, 09:09 AM

Well, at least they gave some details this time. That's better than a generic "color" alert.

Sounds like the info is a little dated, though. And I have no doubt that the administration timed the release for the end of the Dem convention. But that's politics. No big deal.

At any rate, Al-Q does tend to stick with an objective until they get it done, so this can't be real happy news for people working in those buildings.

mosca · 08-03-2004, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Dude

At any rate, Al-Q does tend to stick with an objective until they get it done, so this can't be real happy news for people working in those buildings.

sort of curious as to what you're getting at here. sure, we've all heard about how they are meticulous and patient in their planning, and yes, they did take down the WTC after the initial attack in the early 90s and then finally with the airplane thing.
but are you implying that it's inevitable that al-qaeda is gonna take down these financial institutions in NYC? i agree that they will strike us hard again somewhere but don't necessarily think that we should just lay down and say that it's automatic that they can take out certain targets at will. soft targets seem more likely to me.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 08-03-2004, 03:23 PM

Mock makes good points and all LABF can resort to is posting cartoons.

Riiiiiight.

Drunken, incoherent, barely-literate, 10,000 word rants w/no references and no substantiated facts (calling people "dimwits" every other sentence) always constitute "good arguments."

FYI, I put psychomock on "ignore."

Amazing how much better it smells in here!

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 08-03-2004, 03:28 PM

Sounds like the info is a little dated, though. And I have no doubt that the administration timed the release for the end of the Dem convention. But that's politics. No big deal.

Actually, using (outdated) intel, using the Office of Homeland Security, and needlessly frightening people for purely political purposes is a big deal, IMO. It's a flagrant abuse of power. Just another example of how low this criminal junta will stoop in its efforts to hold onto power.

watermock · 08-03-2004, 11:12 PM

Of course you put me on ignore. Has it ever occured to this fool that it takes time to present prima facie arguments? Hell no, not when you can post a cartoon from some zombie website.

Every time I beat this fool down, I have to use some type. Sorry, but if your going to throw out hundreds of rediculous assertions, it takes hundreds of replies. I could care less what you do. Osterich.

Rascal · 08-04-2004, 08:40 AM

Hey numbnuts...if your own poster boy (ie Clinton) says that he thinks it was a good thing to go to alert and doesn't think it was politically motivated why in the hell should I even bother listening to you (I don't listen to anyway but nevertheless)?

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 08-04-2004, 06:10 PM

Hey numbnuts...if your own poster boy (ie Clinton) says that he thinks it was a good thing to go to alert and doesn't think it was politically motivated why in the hell should I even bother listening to you

Hey assclown...unlike Clinton, I'm not a former president who is bound by any considerations of presidential etiquette/protocol when it comes to criticizing the actions of your poster boy (i.e., the Saudi Sock Puppet) and his illegitimate administration.

A matter of trust

We learned today from both the New York Times and the Washington Post that most of the intelligence underlying yesterday's terror briefing from Homeland Security Chief Tom Ridge is more than three years old.

Americans want to believe — and should be able to believe — that no matter how partisan the administration is, some things are beyond the reach of politics. Terror alerts ought to be one of those things. We ought to be confident that when a special report breaks in with news that the nation's security level has been raised, that it's not being manipulated for political ends.

But when Tom Ridge uses the announcement to campaign for President Bush and when the rise in alert status comes as the result of no new intelligence, why should we be surprised that many Americans and various news outlets have started to question whether these alerts are politically motivated?

And there's more. Yesterday Bush conducted a charade when he appeared in the Rose Garden to say that he was going to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. In fact, as the New York Times says today, Bush:

rejected the panel's most significant ideas, and thus missed a chance to confront the twin burdens he faces at this late point in his term: the need to get intelligence reform moving whether he's re-elected or not, and the equally urgent need to repair the government's credibility on national security.

And the Times reiterates the that the public is suspicious of these terror warnings, "suspicions the administration has sown by misleading the public on security." If the public cannot trust that President Bush won't politicize the most basic security information, how can we trust him on anything else?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/03/politics/03intel.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Aug2.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/03/opinion/03tue1.html

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 08-04-2004, 06:19 PM

The legacy of Katherine Harris

First she makes up the rules for an election, now she's making up terrorist plots…

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/loc...a-news-florida

watermock · 08-05-2004, 08:54 AM

It doesn't matter if I'm on ignore, you just got b****slapped for the 200th time:

Suspect confirmed terror threat, federal officials say
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Bush administration learned from a third person, separate from two prisoners identified this week, that al-Qaeda was plotting to attack American financial buildings, officials said.
The information from the third person was "another new stream of intelligence" that supported the White House decision to issue a terror warning on Sunday, the officials said.

The information arrived days before the public alert, as officials were reviewing reams of recently obtained documents and photographs that showed surveillance of five buildings in New York City, New Jersey and Washington carried out years earlier by al-Qaeda.

"Old information isn't irrelevant information — particularly with this kind of enemy," Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said Wednesday in Nashville

The information corroborating al-Qaeda's intentions to carry out attacks against U.S. financial buildings came from someone other than two men recently captured in Pakistan, said a senior Justice Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity. It was unclear whether the person was a prisoner or informant.

Information from the two captives — a young militant familiar with computers and a man indicted for the U.S. embassy bombings in Africa in 1998 — had provided the bulk of the intelligence that led to Sunday's warnings.

The corroborating information did not specify targets in the United States or say when an attack might be planned, the official said. But it so closely tracked the other intelligence that U.S. financial buildings had already been under surveillance by al-Qaeda that it contributed to the decision to issue the public warnings.

"Coupled with general threat reporting, coupled with other pieces of information, then all of the sudden you say to yourself, 'This is a time when we have to talk to America about the threat.' And that's exactly what we did," Ridge said.

A U.S. counterterrorism official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said the surveillance information last week was married with "very recent and current activity" from al-Qaeda, blamed for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, indicating the group's interest in attacking this year. This information, which includes debriefings and other means of gathering information, is causing the administration serious concern, the official said.

"A bunch of things came together at the same time," Frances Townsend, the White House Homeland Security adviser, said in an interview Wednesday with National Public Radio. She said the corroborating information came from "a very sensitive ongoing investigation in another part of the world."

The FBI is monitoring al-Qaeda operatives and others associated with Islamic terror groups inside the United States, although these people have not been directly linked to the threat against financial buildings, the Justice Department official said. These people include financiers for Ansar al-Islam, a group linked to al-Qaeda, the official said.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan declined to describe in detail what he called "another new stream of intelligence," saying it might endanger continuing intelligence operations. He criticized as an "irresponsible suggestion" any criticism that the administration had issued a terror warning for political purposes.

"When you connect all these streams of intelligence, it paints an alarming picture," McClellan told reporters aboard Air Force One during a campaign flight to Iowa.

Ridge and other senior administration officials spent parts of Wednesday defending the warnings, which came on the heels of the Democratic National Convention and drew attention from the presidential campaign of nominee John Kerry.

"I categorically state that the none of the terror threats are politically motivated," Ridge said.

In New York, Treasury Secretary John Snow said suggestions that terror alerts were manipulated were "pure, unadulterated nonsense." Snow toured the floor of the New York Stock Exchange and praised traders for their resilience in the face of such warnings.

Also Wednesday, intelligence officials told Congress their organizations have made strides since the 2001 terror attacks and cautioned lawmakers against moving too far or fast in the name of intelligence reform. CIA Deputy Director Jami Miscik and other top CIA, FBI and State Department officials appeared in a rare public hearing, and told Congress any changes should be based on intelligence work today, not on problems that existed before September 2001.

Sideburn · 08-05-2004, 09:07 AM

Day after day we get a new terror bust in the NY area. Today in Albany. I for one am glad that the administration acted "irresponsible".

watermock · 08-05-2004, 09:11 AM

Look at what Al Sadyr did again today. Retreated into a Mosque. He's just itching that we blow a Mosque up to kingdom come.

Exile_In_SJ · 08-05-2004, 09:14 AM

I'm glad that our law enforcement services pulled off this sting. I hope that they are infiltrating some more of these radical Islamic groups.

I can see what would happen if they didn't and some terrorists were able to pull something off and then people would be crying about why our law enforcement groups didn't infiltrate these Islamic radical groups.

Good job guys.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 08-05-2004, 06:01 PM

mosca · 08-05-2004, 10:44 PM

on nightline this evening they had more than one 'expert' who made the good point that the color-coded threat alerts are more for law enforcement use than for the public.

watermock · 08-05-2004, 11:18 PM

Better safe than sorry.

It's amazing the Osteriches still declare the threat isn't clear and present. At the same time, they declare that warning signs were ignored. And one other thing that struck me....when has LABF defended Kerry?

As many have pointed out, Heinz-Kerry could be running on changing our language to Portugese and it wouldn't effect poll results. Kerry has hit the ceiling.

08-03-2004, 02:51 AM	#1
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	Expert: Terror Threat Warning 'Irresponsible' Expert: Terror Threat Warning 'Irresponsible' NPR Morning Edition today: Larry Johnson, a former counter-terrorism official at the CIA and State Department, calls the Bush administration "irresponsible" for raising the terror threat level. Johnson says intelligence suggests attacks on U.S. financial institutions have been considered--not that they are in the works. He speaks with NPR's Steve Inskeep. http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=3809463

08-05-2004, 08:54 AM	#19
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	Hey Dimwit It doesn't matter if I'm on ignore, you just got b****slapped for the 200th time: Suspect confirmed terror threat, federal officials say WASHINGTON (AP) — The Bush administration learned from a third person, separate from two prisoners identified this week, that al-Qaeda was plotting to attack American financial buildings, officials said. The information from the third person was "another new stream of intelligence" that supported the White House decision to issue a terror warning on Sunday, the officials said. The information arrived days before the public alert, as officials were reviewing reams of recently obtained documents and photographs that showed surveillance of five buildings in New York City, New Jersey and Washington carried out years earlier by al-Qaeda. "Old information isn't irrelevant information — particularly with this kind of enemy," Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said Wednesday in Nashville The information corroborating al-Qaeda's intentions to carry out attacks against U.S. financial buildings came from someone other than two men recently captured in Pakistan, said a senior Justice Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity. It was unclear whether the person was a prisoner or informant. Information from the two captives — a young militant familiar with computers and a man indicted for the U.S. embassy bombings in Africa in 1998 — had provided the bulk of the intelligence that led to Sunday's warnings. The corroborating information did not specify targets in the United States or say when an attack might be planned, the official said. But it so closely tracked the other intelligence that U.S. financial buildings had already been under surveillance by al-Qaeda that it contributed to the decision to issue the public warnings. "Coupled with general threat reporting, coupled with other pieces of information, then all of the sudden you say to yourself, 'This is a time when we have to talk to America about the threat.' And that's exactly what we did," Ridge said. A U.S. counterterrorism official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said the surveillance information last week was married with "very recent and current activity" from al-Qaeda, blamed for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, indicating the group's interest in attacking this year. This information, which includes debriefings and other means of gathering information, is causing the administration serious concern, the official said. "A bunch of things came together at the same time," Frances Townsend, the White House Homeland Security adviser, said in an interview Wednesday with National Public Radio. She said the corroborating information came from "a very sensitive ongoing investigation in another part of the world." The FBI is monitoring al-Qaeda operatives and others associated with Islamic terror groups inside the United States, although these people have not been directly linked to the threat against financial buildings, the Justice Department official said. These people include financiers for Ansar al-Islam, a group linked to al-Qaeda, the official said. White House spokesman Scott McClellan declined to describe in detail what he called "another new stream of intelligence," saying it might endanger continuing intelligence operations. He criticized as an "irresponsible suggestion" any criticism that the administration had issued a terror warning for political purposes. "When you connect all these streams of intelligence, it paints an alarming picture," McClellan told reporters aboard Air Force One during a campaign flight to Iowa. Ridge and other senior administration officials spent parts of Wednesday defending the warnings, which came on the heels of the Democratic National Convention and drew attention from the presidential campaign of nominee John Kerry. "I categorically state that the none of the terror threats are politically motivated," Ridge said. In New York, Treasury Secretary John Snow said suggestions that terror alerts were manipulated were "pure, unadulterated nonsense." Snow toured the floor of the New York Stock Exchange and praised traders for their resilience in the face of such warnings. Also Wednesday, intelligence officials told Congress their organizations have made strides since the 2001 terror attacks and cautioned lawmakers against moving too far or fast in the name of intelligence reform. CIA Deputy Director Jami Miscik and other top CIA, FBI and State Department officials appeared in a rare public hearing, and told Congress any changes should be based on intelligence work today, not on problems that existed before September 2001.

08-05-2004, 09:07 AM	#20
Sideburn Thanks for the memories Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 3,390	Day after day we get a new terror bust in the NY area. Today in Albany. I for one am glad that the administration acted "irresponsible". __________________ The 2004 Neck Pony Nation / Orangemane Fantasy Football Champion Sideburn's Evil Head Brigade (14-1)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-03-2004, 03:06 AM	#2
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	NPR Radio? Well, that's a significant move from BartCop. Your crazy. Two Commanders were arrested. The computers were taken secondary. It was very specific information, especially about how they operate, moles, and other valuable information. Your so delusional that any good news is immediately dismissed. Fact is, we made an intelligence coup, we have men talking, and you dismiss it out of hand when information is still coming in. God your a tool. We just picked up Zarquawi's message courier to Usama and have picked up more Ql Queada suspects, 5 I think, just this morning. Poor LABF. You honestly don't get it do you. It took time to infiltrate their rats nest, now eggs are falling. We are nabbing them left and right, IN PAKISTAN. Last edited by watermock; 08-03-2004 at 03:13 AM..

08-03-2004, 03:13 AM	#3
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694

08-03-2004, 03:16 AM	#4
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	That doesn't mean there isn't a clear and present danger. I does mean we are making progress. We are breaking eggs as I type. Sorry buddy.

08-03-2004, 03:17 AM	#5
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	News breaking. Courier for #2 intended for Usama captured. Several more captures in Pakistan. They must be Bush plants for the election right?

08-03-2004, 03:47 AM	#6
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694

08-03-2004, 06:34 AM	#7
Rascal RIP Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 16,581 Adopt-a-Bronco: Turf	Mock makes good points and all LABF can resort to is posting cartoons. LABF must have went to the same debate school as Bush.

08-03-2004, 06:57 AM	#8
Exile_In_SJ Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,169	LABF always resorts to cartoons when he can't come up with anything else..

08-03-2004, 08:55 AM	#9
TexanBob Don't Argue With Me You Know I'm Right Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,023 Adopt-a-Bronco: Darris Nash	Are the threat warnings any more irresponsible than the people dismissing threat warnings as "politically motivated"? If we stop the terrorists, they call it political grandstanding. If we don't, people die and they demand inquiries into what went wrong. As far as the liberals are concerned, it's damned if you do and damned if you don't - so **** 'em. We're just going to do the right thing and try to ignore you quivering ninnies.

08-03-2004, 09:05 AM	#10
Exile_In_SJ Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,169	That's what leadership is about, you do what you feel is right and ignore the bleating and sniping from the opposition.

08-03-2004, 09:09 AM	#11
Old Dude Host Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: As if I'd tell you crazies! Posts: 14,158	Well, at least they gave some details this time. That's better than a generic "color" alert. Sounds like the info is a little dated, though. And I have no doubt that the administration timed the release for the end of the Dem convention. But that's politics. No big deal. At any rate, Al-Q does tend to stick with an objective until they get it done, so this can't be real happy news for people working in those buildings.

08-03-2004, 03:23 PM	#13
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	Mock makes good points and all LABF can resort to is posting cartoons. Riiiiiight. Drunken, incoherent, barely-literate, 10,000 word rants w/no references and no substantiated facts (calling people "dimwits" every other sentence) always constitute "good arguments." FYI, I put psychomock on "ignore." Amazing how much better it smells in here!

08-03-2004, 03:28 PM	#14
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	Sounds like the info is a little dated, though. And I have no doubt that the administration timed the release for the end of the Dem convention. But that's politics. No big deal. Actually, using (outdated) intel, using the Office of Homeland Security, and needlessly frightening people for purely political purposes is a big deal, IMO. It's a flagrant abuse of power. Just another example of how low this criminal junta will stoop in its efforts to hold onto power.

08-03-2004, 11:12 PM	#15
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	Of course you put me on ignore. Has it ever occured to this fool that it takes time to present prima facie arguments? Hell no, not when you can post a cartoon from some zombie website. Every time I beat this fool down, I have to use some type. Sorry, but if your going to throw out hundreds of rediculous assertions, it takes hundreds of replies. I could care less what you do. Osterich.

08-04-2004, 08:40 AM	#16
Rascal RIP Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 16,581 Adopt-a-Bronco: Turf	Hey numbnuts...if your own poster boy (ie Clinton) says that he thinks it was a good thing to go to alert and doesn't think it was politically motivated why in the hell should I even bother listening to you (I don't listen to anyway but nevertheless)?

08-04-2004, 06:10 PM	#17
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	Hey numbnuts...if your own poster boy (ie Clinton) says that he thinks it was a good thing to go to alert and doesn't think it was politically motivated why in the hell should I even bother listening to you Hey assclown...unlike Clinton, I'm not a former president who is bound by any considerations of presidential etiquette/protocol when it comes to criticizing the actions of your poster boy (i.e., the Saudi Sock Puppet) and his illegitimate administration. A matter of trust We learned today from both the New York Times and the Washington Post that most of the intelligence underlying yesterday's terror briefing from Homeland Security Chief Tom Ridge is more than three years old. Americans want to believe — and should be able to believe — that no matter how partisan the administration is, some things are beyond the reach of politics. Terror alerts ought to be one of those things. We ought to be confident that when a special report breaks in with news that the nation's security level has been raised, that it's not being manipulated for political ends. But when Tom Ridge uses the announcement to campaign for President Bush and when the rise in alert status comes as the result of no new intelligence, why should we be surprised that many Americans and various news outlets have started to question whether these alerts are politically motivated? And there's more. Yesterday Bush conducted a charade when he appeared in the Rose Garden to say that he was going to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. In fact, as the New York Times says today, Bush: rejected the panel's most significant ideas, and thus missed a chance to confront the twin burdens he faces at this late point in his term: the need to get intelligence reform moving whether he's re-elected or not, and the equally urgent need to repair the government's credibility on national security. And the Times reiterates the that the public is suspicious of these terror warnings, "suspicions the administration has sown by misleading the public on security." If the public cannot trust that President Bush won't politicize the most basic security information, how can we trust him on anything else? http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/03/politics/03intel.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Aug2.html http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/03/opinion/03tue1.html

08-04-2004, 06:19 PM	#18
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	The legacy of Katherine Harris First she makes up the rules for an election, now she's making up terrorist plots… http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/loc...a-news-florida

08-05-2004, 09:11 AM	#21
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	Look at what Al Sadyr did again today. Retreated into a Mosque. He's just itching that we blow a Mosque up to kingdom come.

08-05-2004, 09:14 AM	#22
Exile_In_SJ Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,169	I'm glad that our law enforcement services pulled off this sting. I hope that they are infiltrating some more of these radical Islamic groups. I can see what would happen if they didn't and some terrorists were able to pull something off and then people would be crying about why our law enforcement groups didn't infiltrate these Islamic radical groups. Good job guys.

08-05-2004, 06:01 PM	#23
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694

08-05-2004, 10:44 PM	#24
mosca grand pubah honest optimism Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,950 Adopt-a-Bronco: Bubby Brister	on nightline this evening they had more than one 'expert' who made the good point that the color-coded threat alerts are more for law enforcement use than for the public.

08-05-2004, 11:18 PM	#25
watermock "Hoodie Jr" "Hug me!" Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Hot Springs, Ouachitah Posts: 77,090	Better safe than sorry. It's amazing the Osteriches still declare the threat isn't clear and present. At the same time, they declare that warning signs were ignored. And one other thing that struck me....when has LABF defended Kerry? As many have pointed out, Heinz-Kerry could be running on changing our language to Portugese and it wouldn't effect poll results. Kerry has hit the ceiling.