Support NeoGAF

[Doth Togo]

Much of the information that led authorities to raise the terror alert at several large financial institutions in the NY and D.C. areas was 3 or 4 years old... NYT Tuesday Page One Splash To Claim: Intelligence and law enforcement officials 'had not yet found concrete evidence that a terror plot or preparatory surveillance operations were still under way'... WASH POST Page One: Alerts Stemmed from Pre-9/11 Acts /// 'There is nothing right now that we're hearing that is new,' said one senior law enforcement official who was briefed on the alert. 'Why did we go to this level?... I still don't know that'... POST: 'Most of the information was compiled prior to the Sept. 11 attacks and that there are serious doubts about the age of other, undated files'...

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...0040803/ts_washpost/a35466_2004aug2&printer=1

http://www.drudgereport.com/

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

Yeah, WTF happened today in NYC? I heard some stuff was closed down...

 

[belgurdo]

"The Democrats are gaining too much support! Shut down the east coast and add some new lines to the Bin Laden footage!"

 

[RiZ III]

Tom Ridge is there to get America paranoid. Thats his role.

 

[Flaming Duck]

On CBS news tonight they said the information came from a laptop from a midlevel operative. Most of the information was from before the WTC attacks, but they info had recently been accessed and updated or something like that.

 

[pnjtony]

man, that's just priceless

 

[SteveMeister]

The information on the laptop went back as far as 3 or 4 years, but had been updated in recent months. However, the US just came across this information after a US-Pakistani raid on an Al Qaeda cell LAST WEEK. One of the people arrested led investigators to a cache of documents, which included this information, which was NOT known before. THAT is why the terror alert was raised.

Honestly, get the whole story before you post a thread as misleading as this. And don't think that Drudge Report EVER posts the whole story.

 

[Mercury Fred]

Hmm, Kerry gets a little bounce after the DNC, there's a few weeks until the RNC, what to do, what to do...?

I know!!!! Let's dredge up old information, call it new, trot out Bush as "war president," scare the crap out of a bunch of New Yorkers and see if we can't just bump Kerry's positive wave from the front page.

Jesus, these schmucks will stop at nothing. Don't be surprised if they actually blow something up in an effort to "win" the election.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

On CBS news tonight they said the information came from a laptop from a midlevel operative. Most of the information was from before the WTC attacks, but they info had recently been accessed and updated or something like that.

Did you see Condi Rice on CBS today, she sounded like she was about to lose her composure or something. It may just be me, but she didn't sound like she had the confidence she usually does. Anywho, the meat of the interview was that she didn't know when the attacks would occur, just that they would happen in these specific locations, so, um, at least I am in the clear for an unspecified time.

 

[Flaming Duck]

Yeah, her voice seemed kind of shakey to me. I remember thinking "She's not a very good at lying." That, and I don't know if it was just my channel or what, but parts of it would skip, like they were editing the interview and didn't even try to make it all flow together, sometimes they even cut off parts of her replies.

 

[Ripclawe]

Story is up at the times

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/03/politics/03intel.html?hp=&pagewanted=print&position=

 

[Deleted member 1235]

Is this the worst government ever, or am I just old enough to notice things more now?

 

[Doth Togo]

^ ^ ^

Toss up. Nixon vs. "W"

 

[Dan]

Is this the worst government ever, or am I just old enough to notice things more now?

I would go with the latter, except that now there are higher stakes. A lot of similar government practices being applied to scarier situations.

 

[Ripclawe]

More from the Wash Post, I wouldn't go with fake, even the NYTIMES story didn't go that direction.

Pre-9/11 Acts Led To Alerts

Al Qaeda Arrest In June Opened Valuable Leads

 

[Tenguman]

Hrm, so if we had gotten attacked and they didn't say anything, the headlines would read

"THIS INFORMATION WAS 3 YEARS OLD! WHY DIDN'T THEY DO ANYTHING?"

though i agree, it does smell of politics

 

[Drensch]

I'm sure they get all kinds of "chatter" all the time. It's just really suspect when the decide that they need to trot it out, it always coincides with bad news for Bush. I don't see any issue with informing officials about "hot" info, but what the hell does telling everyone about it do, other than hyping anxiety? What is Bill Stockpick in NYC supposed to do, let alone, Joe bob Sixpack in Memphis? If you happen to look at the polls this weekend(take my word, I don't have a source it was on CNN earlier) Kerry had a bump presumably from the convention. The bump disappeared when Tom Ridge came out and played the fear card.

 

[MIMIC]

Fucking bullshit Bush Administration.

Tom Ridge's conference:

Secretary Ridge: Good afternoon, ladies and gentleman. President Bush has told you, and I have reiterated the promise, that when we have specific credible information, that we will share it. Now this afternoon, we do have new and unusually specific information about where al-Qaeda would like to attack. And as a result, today, the United States Government is raising the threat level to Code Orange for the financial services sector in New York City, Northern New Jersey and Washington, DC.

 

[Ripclawe]

I'm sure they get all kinds of "chatter" all the time. It's just really suspect when the decide that they need to trot it out, it always coincides with bad news for Bush. I don't see any issue with informing officials about "hot" info, but what the hell does telling everyone about it do, other than hyping anxiety? What is Bill Stockpick in NYC supposed to do, let alone, Joe bob Sixpack in Memphis? If you happen to look at the polls this weekend(take my word, I don't have a source it was on CNN earlier) Kerry had a bump presumably from the convention. The bump disappeared when Tom Ridge came out and played the fear card.

Kerry didn't get a bump from the CNN/Gallup poll, He actually went down in the poll

USAToday: So why did Bush, not Kerry, get the bounce?

we do have new and unusually specific information about where al-Qaeda would like to attack.

EDIT: Its a mix of old and new information, the old information is worrying because of Qaeda's method of planning for years, and now this guy has some scary bloodlines, so I rather be safe than not connect the dots. I said he was the "computer geek" but this is a different guy it looks like.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35371-2004Aug2?language=printer

Officials described Aruchi as a nephew of Khalid Sheik Mohammad, the chief planner of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, who was arrested in the Pakistani city of Rawalpindi in March 2003. Like Mohammad, Aruchi was born in Pakistan's Baluchistan province, but his parents later moved to Kuwait and subsequently to other Persian Gulf states.

Officials said Aruchi was also a cousin of Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, who planned and carried out an attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 and is serving a life sentence in the United States.

The arrest of a senior al Qaeda operative in June and his subsequent interrogation enabled U.S. and Pakistani intelligence agents to gather documents, e-mail addresses and cell-phone text messages that suggested al Qaeda planned to strike targets in New York and Washington, according to Pakistani intelligence officials.

 

[MIMIC]

Kerry didn't get a bump from the CNN/Gallup poll, He actually went down in the poll

Drensch made no mention of the CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. He said that he saw the report on CNN.

Moreover, in the polls taking during the very end/after the convention, Kerry leads Bush in four polls (ABC News/Washington Post Poll; American Research Group Poll; CBS News/New York Times Poll; and Newsweek Poll). More specifically, in the Newsweek Poll, Kerry leads Bush 52 to 44.

Its a mix of old and new information, the old information is worrying because of Qaeda's method of planning for years, and now this "computer geek" has some scary bloodlines, so I rather be safe than not connect the dots.

Why did we have to find out about this revelation on the Internet? Why didn't Ridge point out that the bulk of this information is old during his conference? He left us all with the impression that this intelligence was brand spankin' new.

 

[Diablos]

I'm sure they get all kinds of "chatter" all the time. It's just really suspect when the decide that they need to trot it out, it always coincides with bad news for Bush. I don't see any issue with informing officials about "hot" info, but what the hell does telling everyone about it do, other than hyping anxiety? What is Bill Stockpick in NYC supposed to do, let alone, Joe bob Sixpack in Memphis? If you happen to look at the polls this weekend(take my word, I don't have a source it was on CNN earlier) Kerry had a bump presumably from the convention. The bump disappeared when Tom Ridge came out and played the fear card.

Indeed. The Bush administration is clearly breaking the law (what else is new) and controlling people with fear. This alone makes me furious. They are taking advantage of 9/11, a tragedy, and pissing on it with their manipulative bullshit lies. They should be ASHAMED of themselves, telling people to "never forget" 9/11 and then using that as an excuse to have resolve for threats that simply AREN'T TRUE or OUTDATED.

I swear to god, if I was old enough, rich enough and had the opportunity, I would probably move to Canada or Europe. I hate what this administration has done to this country, and I am just as disturbed when it comes to how brainwashed at least half of our people are when it comes to listening to this administration and what it has to say. It saddens me that our society has become so hopeless, and sickens me that so many people have already spent so much time strongly believing in what they have to say, defending what they're doing, and trying to explain it to other people. People get all pissed off because Bill Clinton (and I know he is not the most decent man in the world, now get off my back) got some head in the White House, and perhaps didn't pay attention to terrorism like he should have. But hell, ANY president pre 9/11, unless it was during the time period in which George W. Bush did not pay serious attention to new threats presented to the government, probably wouldn't have.

So let's get this straight, guys: it's just AWFUL that the president had a PERSONAL PROBLEM with a fucking INTERN who was OLD ENOUGH to realize what she was doing, but it's ACCEPTABLE that every day, kids my age are getting killed over a LIE. I know cheating on your wife is a terrible thing, but shit, so is indirectly murdering thousands of troops because you lied about what's going on in other countries. Clinton cheated, and it was a very personal affair only to be inflated by the media. Bush is a killer. Which one is more worse to YOU? Of course, I guess this is no big deal, after all most Americans seem to think this way when it comes to anything. For example, I can see dead bodies and shootings on programs like CSI, but god forbid if I see a girl flashing her tit for half a second on a reality TV show. Nope, that'll be censored. But we can show a raped girl's dead bruised cut up body on Cold Case or some shit. Yeah, that sends a really good message to the youth. Fucking hell.

Why am I going off on such a little rant? Because it directly relates to what has happened today with this threat. People believe what is being said about our security, they never give it a second thought. But if people didn't believe Clinton when he said "I didn't get any in the White House, honest" a siren goes off in everyone's head. There is a serious, deep-rooted problem within the heads of more than half the "adults" in this country.

I'm sorry, but I only grow more sickened by this administration, every day almost.

 

[MetatronM]

So they used 3 - 4 year old information to raise the terror level IMMEDIATELY following the Democratic National Convention?

Why, that's not suspicious in the slightest bit.

 

[Mercury Fred]

Moreover, in the polls taking during the very end/after the convention, Kerry leads Bush in four polls (ABC News/Washington Post Poll; American Research Group Poll; CBS News/New York Times Poll; and Newsweek Poll). More specifically, in the Newsweek Poll, Kerry leads Bush 52 to 44.

The aformentioned polls

 

[MIMIC]

This story is going to hit hard come Tuesday morning.

 

[Diablos]

This story is going to hit hard come Tuesday morning.

Don't get your hopes up, son. And hell, like I said in my previous post... you realize half the country are brainwashed lambs, anyway. Cheney himself could probably say "ok ok, we're full of shit more than half the time," and as long as Bush said "nuh-uh, our nation is strong and we're gonna smoke 'em outta their holes so help me God, Dick Cheney isn't a true patriot," everything would be a-ok with the public.

 

[MIMIC]

Don't get your hopes up, son.

Mom, I'm telling you, yes it is!

 

[Diablos]

See my edited post for further reasoning.

Fuckin' lambs, I'm telling you.

 

[MIMIC]

9/11 was a Godsend for the Bush Administration. They can use its psychologically gripping nature and contort it to please all of their agendas.

 

[Ripclawe]

Drensch made no mention of the CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. He said that he saw the report on CNN.

CNN reports on their own poll which is the gallup poll.

Moreover, in the polls taking during the very end/after the convention, Kerry leads Bush in four polls (ABC News/Washington Post Poll; American Research Group Poll; CBS News/New York Times Poll; and Newsweek Poll). More specifically, in the Newsweek Poll, Kerry leads Bush 52 to 44.

ARG says its a stat tie, no bump
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/presballot/

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/Vote2004/kerry_bounce_poll_040802.html
The WashPost/ABCnews poll has Kerry 50% to Bush's 44% with registered voters, the better sampling which is likely voters has Kerry 49% to Bush's 47%, which is worse because Kerry had a 6 point edge before the convention and lost 4 points afterwards, plus even ABCnews pointed out this unusual movement

There was some movement in political party identification in this poll: Among registered voters, 39 percent say they're Democrats, 29 percent Republicans and 26 percent independents (among likely voters, who account for 55 percent of adults in this poll, it's 40 percent-32 percent-24 percent). That's more Democratic, and less Republican, than usual;

So even using the CBSnews/NYTIMES poll and Newsweek polls(2 polls that are generally dismissed because they oversample one group over the other) Kerry did not get a bounce out of the convention.

Bill Scheider on Wolf Blitzer's late edition show said that it looked like Republicans came out of the convention more energized.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0408/01/le.00.html

BLITZER: And is that because the country basically had already made up their mind? There wasn't a whole lot of room for undecideds? That's what the Democrats keep saying.

SCHNEIDER: And it looks like the Democrats had a point.

What we're showing is that before the convention, the Democrats were hugely enthusiastic about voting. Over three-quarters of them said they were more enthusiastic than usual. After this convention, the number of Democrats who said they were enthusiastic went up only slightly. They were already rallied. They already had their bounce.

But what really changed is that the Republicans, the Bush voters went way up in enthusiasm. They gained eight points.

So it looks like, yes, the convention rallied voters but it rallied Republicans more than Democrats. The only good news here for Democrats is Democrats are still more enthusiastic about voting than Republicans are.

Even The Rasmussen poll had Kerry not get a bounce and losing ground.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm

Date Bush Kerry
Today 46 47
Aug 1 45 49
July 31 46 47

The bounce is just not there.

 

[Azih]

The information is old (pre 9/11 even) but the U.S gov't only got it very recently. However it still doesn't quite make sense to raise the terror alert. I mean you find out about five year old preliminary scouting information on a few buildings and you raise terror alert to Orange. Does that mean that the country should have been on heightened alert for the past 5 years? And how long should the current high alert be maintained?

 

[MIMIC]

Patriot Act? Why?

To prevent another 9/11.

Attack on Iraq? Why?

To prevent another 9/11.

Color-coded alert system. Why?

To prevent another 9/11.

And to this....prior to 9/11, NONE of these things were necessary and we STILL had an abundance of information that pointed to a horrific terrorist attack on the United States.

 

[Diablos]

You out of all people should be able to smell the BS, Azih. Don't question them, simply realize they cannot be trusted when it comes to just about anything.

Fun Fact to fuel the hatred for Bush in this thread: Flipping burgers is now considered a "manufacturing" job, if you haven't read this already, now you know.

 

[Ripclawe]

The information is old (pre 9/11 even) but the U.S gov't only got it very recently. However it still doesn't quite make sense to raise the terror alert. I mean you find out about five year old preliminary scouting information on a few buildings and you raise terror alert to Orange. Does that mean that the country should have been on heightened alert for the past 5 years? And how long should the current high alert be maintained?

There is more information than just the pre 9/11 stuff as the washington post pointed out.

 

[Slurpy]

Don't get your hopes up, son. And hell, like I said in my previous post... you realize half the country are brainwashed lambs, anyway. Cheney himself could probably say "ok ok, we're full of shit more than half the time," and as long as Bush said "nuh-uh, our nation is strong and we're gonna smoke 'em outta their holes so help me God, Dick Cheney isn't a true patriot," everything would be a-ok with the public.

Nothing could be truer.

I just came back from the states where I was for a few days. Had the opportunity and privelege to catch alot of Fox news, and I don't really have words. I also watched a recorded Bush speech from a couple days ago, in which everything he says ( and which he gets a standing ovation for) he has done the utter opposite the last 4 years. I just couldn't get my head around it. I just wanted to know what those people around him are thinking, how they can possibly nod and clap. Fucking bullshit. I mean.. dear God.

 

[Drensch]

In regards to what I saw on CNN I can't talle you what it was, other than it had Kerry up 5 additional points, and then it had disappeared as of the announcement. I will say that :

CNN reports on their own poll which is the gallup poll.

isn't necessarily true. I see Cnn cite 3-5 polls a day on Inside Politics alone.

 

[Matrix]

LOL @ Diablos

 

[Eminem]

I want to see the reaction of this place if Bush gets re-elected. It will be like Sega calling it quits X 100

 

[Matrix]

I want to see the reaction of this place if Bush gets re-elected. It will be like Sega calling it quits X 100

Attack of the Liberals.

 

[Slurpy]

I want to see the reaction of this place if Bush gets re-elected. It will be like Sega calling it quits X 100

He won't. And if he does, there really is a grave problem with the american people.

 

[FortNinety]

Jesus, these schmucks will stop at nothing. Don't be surprised if they actually blow something up in an effort to "win" the election.

I've been saying the same damn thing.

 

[Mercury Fred]

I want to see the reaction of this place if Bush gets re-elected.

ahem--He was installed the first time around, not elected.

Attack of the Liberals.

At this point, it would be more like Attack of the Anyone with Half a Fucking Brain Left.

 

[MetatronM]

He won't. And if he does, there really is a grave problem with the american people.

There is a VERY good chance Bush gets re-elected, which is a terrifying thought to me. And yes, there IS something very wrong with the American people. The biggest problem being that if it can't be said within one small soundbite, the people won't hear it/pay it any attention.

There's a very good chance that most people either won't hear that the latest terror threat is largely based on information that is years old or they will simply brush it off entirely.

 

[mashoutposse]

I wouldn't be surprised if we mysteriously managed to finally catch Osama/recover his dead body in mid-October.

 

[Eminem]

not to mention, Kerry isn't really a strong opponent. I will not vote for Bush, but Kerry isn't all that appealing on his own.

 

[Dan]

not to mention, Kerry isn't really a strong opponent. I will not vote for Bush, but Kerry isn't all that appealing on his own.

Truth be told, Bush is his own opponent. We're voting yes or no, there just happen to be a few different ways of saying no. Until Kerry and Edwards come out and really take firm stances on important issues and provide a real glimpse at what they'd do if elected, they're basically irrelevant.

 

[FightyF]

I wouldn't be surprised that a "National State of Emergency" would be put in place by the Bush Admin to delay the elections for an undetermined amount of time (aka, until the polls start swaying in their favour).

 

[Mustang]

Is this the worst government ever, or am I just old enough to notice things more now?

Jimmy Carter.

Oh wait, he is a democrat.

My bad.

I wouldn't be surprised that a "National State of Emergency" would be put in place by the Bush Admin to delay the elections for an undetermined amount of time (aka, until the polls start swaying in their favour).

 

[Baron Aloha]

Ripclawe... Kerry did get a slight bounce out of the convention. Approximately 2-4% from the polls I've been keeping track of. Prior to the convention Kerry was basically tied with Bush and now he's just a little ahead.

Historically, when a challenger comes out their convention they would have gotten a 15% bounce. Kerry didn't get a big bounce for 2 reasons.

Reason #1: The networks don't cover the conventions the way they used to.
Reason #2: The county is so polarized that only 11% of people are undecided and everyone else is basically locked. Realistically, 4% of that 11% is leaning one way or another. So they aren't completely undecided. So that leaves you with just 7% of voters who just have no clue who they will vote for. So really, theres nothing there to bounce.

Having said that, a 2-4% bounce is pretty good. It's not great. But given what he's got to work with its good. You will see the same thing with Bush come the RNC.

I think we will both agree that his is going to be a very close election. There are still 3 months until the election and anything could happen until then (Bush could roll out Bin Laden in October like people have been saying). If I had to bet on who would win today, based on what we know, I'd have to say Kerry will win.

I'm going to go out on a limb and disagree with the pundits and pollsters. The undecided people will not be the ones determining the outcome of this election. Its all gonna be about the democratic and republican bases and which one is more motivated and mobilized. Historically, republicans are more motivated but after the 2000 "selection" I think you will see a record turnout for democrats especially in places like Florida.

 

[Catchpenny]

Yeah, Bush isn't going to get a large bounce either. He might actually end up worse than Kerry, considering:

-the aforementioned de-emphasis on convention coverage
-he's the incumbant, and incumbants typically get a smaller bounce
-protests are likely to be much larger in NYC and will garner more media attention
-questions about whether the RNC is trying to capitalize on 9/11 for political gain by holding the convention there

The one caveat here is that Bush could actually gain from the protests if the protesters can be painted as ultra-left, 'unamerican' types causing violence. Seems unlikely to work, considering that police and fire unions are going to be picketing.

 

[Makura]

I believe there were two major finds that led the the latest warnings. One was the old data and the other was recent intelligence that drew a line between the two.

Would you rather have prudent action in case something does occur, or self conscious anal retentive fact checking to avoid political criticism? This is national security - peoples lives, not a popularity contest.