Ashcroft/DoJ deliberately cultivating paranoia?

kelley kwalker2 at gte.net
Thu Oct 11 18:38:05 PDT 2001


At 06:19 PM 10/11/01 -0700, Jordan Hayes wrote:
>Curtiss asks:
>
> > Isn't this kind of vague information better communicated
> > only to local law enforcement?

they already did convey to locals. they knew monday.


>I think the problem is that they are getting whacked with "Why didn't
>you know about Sept 11? And if you did know _something_ why didn't you
>say anything?" ...
>
>So this is sort of the other side of it; it's not like law enforcement
>isn't already working 12 hour shifts and at the highest state of alert,
>so it's not going to actually do anything.

I'm inclined to think it was agitprop, but then i heard that the military reminded enlisted of the procedures for shifting into Threatcon Delta.

of course, if you're really paranoid, you'd figure that the gov had planned that too. and that i'm a useful idiot! :)

the problem, also, is that they're a risking a great deal if they do that. they already warned everyone last week and nothing much happened. now they're doing it again. if nothing happens, then people will become desensitized to concerns and threats. people who are inured to these threats--like floridians were to hurricane warnings prior to Andrew--are not very inclined to think they need protection. and, my guess, still willing to put up a good fuss over the anti-terrorism bill.

kelley



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list