Terrorist threat possibility.. Or scaremongering.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-07-08 10:12pm

CNN Linky

Al Qaeda, apparently, is going to try and 'disrupt the democratic process' in a style similar to Madrid. The nation is either being warned, or bamboozled. The article includes mention of this being called scaremongering.

Me, I think it's far more sophisticated. If you vote democratic, the terrorists have already won their goal, apparently.

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2004-07-08 10:52pm

Tom Ridge is blowing steam out of his ass; this is another scare tact brought to you by the US government. I'm sure there's a possibility that they've got Osama and will produce him shortly before the election.

Crazy Goji · Post by **Crazy Goji** » 2004-07-08 11:04pm

Crazy coincidence, the Daily Show is talking about it right now.

"Are the terrorists for John Kerry? And are Kerry's supporters terrorists?"

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-07-08 11:10pm

Five Bucks says that Osama wish he could pull this off...

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2004-07-08 11:17pm

It could actually be hard evidence as in the terrorists were or are contemplating it.. but does it mean it might actually happen? Yes or no. Either way, the government has to protect its ass now and come out to the public and say something might happen. Otherwise, if it does happen and they said nothing, they're going to get investigated again and asked why they didn't properly warn the public.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-07-08 11:20pm

did tom ridge just say they didnt have any.. hard.. evidence..? so basically, the guy is saying .. that osama wants to .. terrorise us? as opposed to the past decade of.. showering us with roses?

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-07-08 11:30pm

WOLF! WOLF!

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2004-07-08 11:32pm

Howedar wrote:WOLF! WOLF!

Give me a 'sex; I'm turning on the stereo and the classical track right now...

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2004-07-08 11:50pm

What would really piss me off is if the Bush administration tried claiming that voting for Kerry is appeasing the terrorists.

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2004-07-08 11:51pm

Alyeska wrote:What would really piss me off is if the Bush administration tried claiming that voting for Kerry is appeasing the terrorists.

At the rate things are going for dubya, he just might do that.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-07-09 01:08am

kojikun wrote:did tom ridge just say they didnt have any.. hard.. evidence..? so basically, the guy is saying .. that osama wants to .. terrorise us? as opposed to the past decade of.. showering us with roses?

Of course. Kerry just announced his VP candidate and got a boost in the polls. Bush has to draw attention away from that somehow.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-07-09 01:10am

Durandal wrote:
kojikun wrote:did tom ridge just say they didnt have any.. hard.. evidence..? so basically, the guy is saying .. that osama wants to .. terrorise us? as opposed to the past decade of.. showering us with roses?
Of course. Kerry just announced his VP candidate and got a boost in the polls.

Nope:

Worst VP bounce EVER

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-07-09 01:11am

Really? The Daily Show reported that Kerry was slightly ahead of Bush.

EDIT: CBS appears to agree with me.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/ ... 7915.shtml

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-07-09 01:18am

That's only one poll, Zogby and Rasmussen have the two in a dead heat. I was expecting Kerry to at least hit the low 50s, but I guess it either hasn't hit yet or it just isn't going to happen.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-07-09 01:18am

Now I betcha if Bush dumped Cheney he'd get a VP bounce, since Cheney seems to be pretty unpopular. But I don't see that happening.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-07-09 01:31am

It's a little too soon to tell whether or not Edwards is going to have a boost on the Kerry campaign. When the polls come out next week, then we'll know.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2004-07-09 01:42am

Joe wrote:Now I betcha if Bush dumped Cheney he'd get a VP bounce, since Cheney seems to be pretty unpopular. But I don't see that happening.

If Bush tried to dump Cheney he'd likely have more bruises from another "pretzel choking" type affair.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2004-07-09 01:44am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:
Joe wrote:Now I betcha if Bush dumped Cheney he'd get a VP bounce, since Cheney seems to be pretty unpopular. But I don't see that happening.
If Bush tried to dump Cheney he'd likely have more bruises from another "pretzel choking" type affair.

Bush dumping Cheney? That would be akin to Renfield trying to dump Dracula.

Marksist · Post by **Marksist** » 2004-07-09 10:22pm

Patrick Degan wrote:Bush dumping Cheney? That would be akin to Renfield trying to dump Dracula.

HAHA!

Funniest thing I've heard all day, thanks!

I just think this is a huge Red Herring. This fearmongering I think can be taken with a grain of salt, and if they have no proof, then I see no reason to believe I'll be terrorized in the near future.

I guess I'll just add this to the "more despicable shit Bush has done pile."

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-07-10 12:02am

Then again, if there was a big terrorist attack just before the elections, wouldn't a lot of people be more inclined to stick with Bush, just because? If the plan was to get Bush kicked out of office, it'd just end up backfiring. At least, that's what I think. I can't really tell if I'm seeing clearly or being overly pessemistic, though.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-07-10 12:05am

Mayabird wrote:Then again, if there was a big terrorist attack just before the elections, wouldn't a lot of people be more inclined to stick with Bush, just because? If the plan was to get Bush kicked out of office, it'd just end up backfiring. At least, that's what I think. I can't really tell if I'm seeing clearly or being overly pessemistic, though.

I don't know. There's the fact that Bush's handling of the months after 9/11 seems to be generally approved of, for the most part, but there's also the fact that another terrorist attack could raise questions about the government under Bush not absorbing the lessons of 9/11 and failing to make adequate adjustments to the homeland security bureaucracy, which could potentially swing the vote Kerry's way. It could go either way, I think.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-07-10 06:42am

Daschle is Worried

SPEARFISH -- Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said Thursday that he was very concerned about homeland security issues in the face of what he called the most sobering terror report he had heard recently.

The United States is tightening security in the face of a steady stream of intelligence indicating an attack aimed at disrupting elections, the White House said Thursday.

The Department of Homeland Security is addressing the threat and has efforts underway to ''ramp up security,'' White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Thursday.

"It is absolutely essential for the U.S. Senate to turn its attention to what we can do to make America safe," Daschle said.

Of particular concern are the nation's borders and ports, Daschle said, and there are security issues unresolved as the homeland security appropriations are "hung up" in the Senate.

Asked if the timing of the terror concerns might be aimed at stealing political thunder from the announcement of John Edwards as the democratic vice presidential candidate, Daschle replied, "The report is so sobering and so serious that I cannot bring myself to believe anyone in this administration would use this for political purposes."

Daschle said the most recent terror briefing was the second this week and contained information that there is a higher threat than there has been at any time since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

*****************

When Daschle starts talking like this, you KNOW it's damn serious.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-07-10 06:49am

[quote="MKSheppard"]*snip*/quote]

Interesting, but it's hard to know what to make of it. During an election year, you really can't take anything at face value and I doubt very much that Daschle is going to say anything to bolster Bush (and raising the alert about terrorism without an ulterior motive certainly qualifies).

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-07-10 06:54am

The Kernel wrote:Interesting, but it's hard to know what to make of it. During an election year, you really can't take anything at face value and I doubt very much that Daschle is going to say anything to bolster Bush (and raising the alert about terrorism without an ulterior motive certainly qualifies).

Daschle didn't bring politics into this until he was asked by a reporter, and
then he said politics had nothing to do with it; IE, he passed a chance up
to beat the Anti-Christ, W, up. And in other news;

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has canceled a planned visit to Israel next week, Israel Radio reported Friday. Ridge has warned that Al-Qaida may attempt an election time attack in the United States, and officials in Washington said that he prefers not to leave the country at such a sensitive time, according to the radio.

Morilore · Post by **Morilore** » 2004-07-10 08:55am

If there is a terror attack anything like 9/11 before November, you can be sure Bush is reelected. Remember what happened to his popularity right after September 11? Even though he was doing nothing but putting in inspirational appearances? If Osama's not an idiot, almost any attack he makes only shows that he WANTS Bush in charge.