Terror Alerts are Manipulation!

[deep]

The timing of these alerts have been suspicious. When W's ratings were slipping or there was bad news Ashcroft played these like a violin.

Here is an article that supports what many of us already know.

October 26, 2004

Every terror warning raises Bush's approval rating 3 percentage points: study

SYRACUSE, N.Y. (AP) - When the U.S. government issues a terror warning, President George W. Bush's approval rating increases an average of nearly three percentage points, a Cornell University sociologist said.

"The social theories predict it and anecdotally we know it to be true. Now we have statistical science to confirm it," said Robb Willer, assistant director of Cornell's Sociology and Small Groups Laboratory.

On average, a terror warning prompted a 2.75-percentage-point increase in Bush's approval rating the following week, said Willer, who published his study in Current Research in Social Psychology, a peer-reviewed online journal.

Robert Greene, a professor of history and communication at Cazenovia College, said he did not doubt the correlation but considered the small increase barely noteworthy.

"And I would think any benefit would be very temporary. Americans like crises to be solved," said Greene.

Willer said he took up his study in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks after watching Bush's approval rating soar from 51 per cent Sept. 10 to 86 per cent five days later.

Willer tracked the 26 times a U.S. government agency reported an increased threat of terrorist activity - not just changes in the alert level - between February 2001 and May 2004. He compared that with the 131 Gallup Polls conducted during the same period.

"From the perspective of social identity theory, threats of attacks from foreigners increase solidarity and in-group identification among Americans, including feelings of stronger solidarity with their leadership," he said.

Terror warnings increased presidential approval ratings "consistently," Willer said.

However, he said he was unable to measure how long the increase lasted.

 

[Jamila]

thank you, deep, for raising this issue.

The issue is one of integrity, of honesty, of fairness and of possible manipulation of the American people's votes by scaring them into undue worry over a "possible attack" on the USA with these meaningless "terror alerts".

The sky is not ready to fall on the USA, but the present administration's willingness to exploit these "terror alerts" for votes is despicable.

It shows their basic lack of respect for the American Public.

Very sad.

 

[A_Wanderer]

The terror alerts are a lame attempt to cover their arses when the big one hits - they can tell the people that they were warned but the attack couldnt be averted.

 

[nbcrusader]

I love how the conspiracy becomes fact if the same circle keeps repeating the same idea. The public asked for terror alerts and they got them.

 

[Ft. Worth Frog]

How else is the public to be warned if something is up? It's not as if terrorism is made up by Bush. Apparently he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

 

[LarryMullen's POPAngel]

I'm sorry but coming out and telling us that an attack is imminent at convinient times during the election is just crap.

One good thing if Kerry wins, he has said he will do away with the color coding system.

 

[sharky]

I don't understand why they are warning us about the election now. They did that in June -- coincidentally, two days after John Edwards was named veep running mate. It took them three months to figure out that if Spain was attacked before an election, we could be attacked too? And it they forgot about their June warning until now? I don't buy it.

 

[nbcrusader]

I think there is a difference between warnings based on readily recognizable events (like an election) and warnings based on intelligence.

 

[DaveC]

The color coding system is ridiculous.

If there's a terror alert, just tell the people. There's no need for a blanket "color" over the entire country if there's only a threat on Washington DC.

It just serves to scare the general public and send weak-minded folks into a panic, and to raise Bush's numbers.

How much you wanna bet the DofHS is going to raise the threat level this weekend to Orange for the country because of the election?

 

[deep]

Brought to you by Karl Rove Productions

ABCNEWS HOLDS TERROR WARNING TAPE

**Exclusive**

In the last week before the election, ABCNEWS is holding a videotaped message from a purported al Qaeda terrorist warning of a new attack on America, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The terrorist claims on tape the next attack will dwarf 9/11. "The streets will run with blood," and "America will mourn in silence" because they will be unable to count the number of the dead. Further claims: America has brought this on itself for electing George Bush who has made war on Islam by destroying the Taliban and making war on Al Qaeda.

ABCNEWS strongly denies holding the tape back from broadcast over political concerns during the last days of the election.

The CIA is analyzing the tape, a top federal source tells the DRUDGE REPORT.

ABCNEWS obtained the tape from a source in Waziristan, Pakistan over the weekend, sources tells DRUDGE.

"We have been working 24 hours a day trying to authenticate [the tape]," a senior ABCNEWS source said Wednesday morning, dismissing a claim that ABC was planning to air portions of the video during Monday's WORLD NEWS TONIGHT.

The terrorist's face is concealed by a head dress, and he speaks in an American accent, making it difficult to identify the individual.

US intelligence officials believe the man on tape may be Adam Gadhan - aka Adam Pearlman, a California native who was highlighted by the FBI in May as an individual most likely to be involved in or have knowledge of the next al Qaeda attacks.

According to the FBI, Gadahn, 25, attended al-Qaida training camps and served as an al-Qaida translator.

The disturbing tape runs an hour -- the man simply identifies himself as 'Assam the American.'

 

[nbcrusader]

The color coding system is ridiculous.

If there's a terror alert, just tell the people. There's no need for a blanket "color" over the entire country if there's only a threat on Washington DC.

DaveC,

How would you design an alert system that meets the public's expectation of advance warning, but also is immune to accusations of political manipulation?

 

[LarryMullen's POPAngel]

All I'm waiting for now is Osama's head on a platter Nov. 1st.

 

[DaveC]

DaveC,

How would you design an alert system that meets the public's expectation of advance warning, but also is immune to accusations of political manipulation?

Certainly not with a blanket system that covers the entire country based on a threat on one single city.

Warn the people in the city, okay. That's perfectly understandable.

But I don't see why Bubba and Mary Sue Peters in Dicktown, Alabama need to go board up their house and buy crates of duct tape if the threat is of a truck bombing in NYC.

It's pure manipulation. The more scared people are, the more they'll rally 'round the flag, and the leader by default.

 

[nbcrusader]

I know there is a political argument to attack the existing system. I'd like to hear more about your ideas for a system.

Do you have anymore detail on your proposed idea?

 

[DaveC]

Citywide warnings for specific attacks are all you need.

Broadcast them on radio, TV, newspapers, whatever.

But don't go saying that the entire nation is threatened if it's really not.

 

[deep]

All I'm waiting for now is Osama's head on a platter Nov. 1st.

Won't happen.

Why kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

 

[nbcrusader]

What happens if the intelligence does not help identify a particular target, but makes it clear that a strike is imminent? Do you withhold the info to prevent panic? Do you use cautionary language? Do you make a blanket "someone is gonna die" statement?

The realities of terrorist planning and intelligence gathering make this a difficult proposition.

 

[speedracer]

I think it's worth noting that the terror alerts and jumps in ratings correlate only because the public generally believes that Bush is fighting a competent campaign against terrorism. If the public thought that Bush was doing a lousy job, I'd expect the ratings to drop every time there was a terror alert.

 

[DaveC]

No, it's not a matter of Bush fighting a competent campaign.

It's a matter of the weak-minded getting scared off their asses that they're going to be killed by the big bad terrorists, and rallying 'round the leader while panicked.

Mass hysteria at its finest.

 

[deep]

I think it's worth noting that the terror alerts and jumps in ratings correlate only because the public generally believes that Bush is fighting a competent campaign against terrorism.

I agree.


And they believed him when he said they had evidence that Saddam was trying to import "yellow cake" nuclear materials from Niger. Long enough to get the Iraq War launched.

We all know the evidence was fake and planted in Italy and reported in British reports to scare America to War.

Who forged it?

Whose purposes did it serve?

Why is there no serious effort to find out where this came from?



What current War would not have gotten public support without lies and misrepresentation?



This election is being manipulated by the lowest form of operatives to ever occupy the Whitehouse.

 

[kobayashi]

from an august thread addressing this topic,

not sure if this has been updated. but i guess there hasnt been another warning. lots of campaigning may have improved the approval rating in the meantime, but then again lots of campaigning against him may have hurt it.

on topic, i dont know if anyone is doing a chi square on these numbers to see if there is a statistical correlation, but it certainly looks like terror warnings happen at a particular time.

 

[nbcrusader]

No, it's not a matter of Bush fighting a competent campaign.

It's a matter of the weak-minded getting scared off their asses that they're going to be killed by the big bad terrorists, and rallying 'round the leader while panicked.

Mass hysteria at its finest.

What is your evidence of mass hysteria?

And how can you prove or disprove the improvement in security from terrorists?

 

[kobayashi]

Certainly not with a blanket system that covers the entire country based on a threat on one single city.

nbc, i believe the terror warning associated with edwards being named vp candidate was fairly specific to not only certain cities but specific employers and buildings. thus it is a perfect candidate for the much more efficient framework dave c. suggests.

warning the 47 or 48 other states and hundreds of millions not directly involved is nothing short of exploitative.

surely those people would have found out as media attention would have gone unchanged, but im sure you see the difference.

 

[nbcrusader]

So, some of the terror warnings are given for specific areas? I thought DaveC was arguing that we do not get such information so folks in rural areas flee to their basements.

 

[sharky]

the problem is, as mentioned, the terror alerts make the public scared. Here in NYC, we've been orange since that stupid alert system started. kob-- the specific threats you mentioned were not new -- the stock exchange, for example, did not heighten security that much when the alert came out. You have to remember that they have been operating at a heightened alert level since 9/12/01. this is why I was so suspicious of Tom Ridge's announcement for that -- that he was moving the stock exchange and other NYC buildings to an orange alert level. they are ALWAYS at an orange alert level but of course, someone in Kansas may not be aware of that.

As for an alternative, the government needs to work with local agencies more to let them know of possible threats instead of getting the general public freaked. I can tell you when NYC has received a credible threat not because of an increased terror level but because I see more cops in the subways or high-traffic areas. As someone said, why does some farmer in Kansas need to freak out and buy duct tape because NYC got another threat on its subway?

 

[deep]

Reuters Poll: Bush Leads Kerry by 1 Point

Oct 27, 7:03 AM (ET)




By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush leads Democratic rival John Kerry by 1 point with six days left in a tight race for the White House, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

Bush led Kerry 48-47 percent in the latest three-day national tracking poll, as the Massachusetts senator gained 2 points on Bush in a day. Bush led Kerry 49-46 percent on Tuesday.

Bush's lead was well within the poll's margin of error, leaving the White House rivals in a statistical dead heat heading into the stretch run.

"Today was a big day for Kerry," pollster John Zogby said.

Kerry has consolidated his base support just as Bush did early in the race, taking a 2-to-1 lead among Hispanics, 90 percent of blacks, 84 percent of Democrats, 55 percent of union voters and 65 percent of singles.

Only 4 percent of likely voters remain undecided.

At this stage of the 2000 election, Bush led Democrat Al Gore by 5 points in the daily tracking poll.



Time to ratchet up the terror alert!

 

[Flying FuManchu]

I think terror alerts are great. Since no one here believes in them no skin of your backs. For the "weak minded," who choose to believe in them, its great for them b/c they fell something is being done or they feel like they are being sufficently warned. Great system. It appeals to everyone.

 

[speedracer]

from an august thread addressing this topic,

not sure if this has been updated. but i guess there hasnt been another warning. lots of campaigning may have improved the approval rating in the meantime, but then again lots of campaigning against him may have hurt it.

on topic, i dont know if anyone is doing a chi square on these numbers to see if there is a statistical correlation, but it certainly looks like terror warnings happen at a particular time.

Hmm.

I think you'd have to throw out the orange alerts that were issued at the time the Iraq war started and at the time Saddam was captured, because these events are very plausible explanations for the jumps in approval rating.

Once you do that, the average jump per terror alert is a bit less impressive.