October 6
...serving up your daily dish.
News broke during this evening's rush hour of a "specific threat" against the New York City subways. Commuters, what did you see on the way home? And what do you plan to do tomorrow?
October 6, 2005 in Paranoia Beat | Permalink
How about a poll on whether:
A. Judith Miller was protecting her source.
B. Judith Miller was protecting The New York Times from the embarrasment of towing the line for the White House neocons just like Fox News but without a Roger Ailes GOP strategist running the paper.
Or a poll on whether an unmarried celibate should be allowed to serve on the Supreme Court where she can make decisions that have a lasting impact on millions of copulative Americans.
a. Yes.
b. Yes, she would recuse herself.
c. Yes, no different than the Pope.
d. Yes, she probably is hiding the truth from her evangelical friends.
e. No.
f. No. Time to dust off more terrorism and avian flu speeches.
Posted by: LetThemEatWords | Oct 6, 2005 9:38:10 PM
Here's what I did as I noticed all the cops riding the 7 train from Grand Central to Times Square last night: Marvelled at how this terror threat came on the exact day that President Bush gave a speech on how we're in Iraq to fight terror. Today, the Dept. of Homeland Security seems to be trying to distance itself from this threat, but I remain deeply skeptical. But just in cse, I'm steering clear of anyone with babystrollers.
Posted by: Mary | Oct 7, 2005 8:31:38 AM
Hmmm...let's see...the stock market is tanking again, theres's a horrible (yet christian evangelical friend of the Prez) nominee for the Supreme Court, Plame indictments possibly coming down, Rove's in trouble, DeLay's in trouble...
Nothin' a little dose of fear won't fix.
Posted by: Peter | Oct 7, 2005 9:03:07 AM
Peter,
I believe you are right on target with what you say.
Posted by: late | Oct 7, 2005 9:07:34 AM
"But just in case, I'm steering clear of anyone with babystrollers."
I ALWAYS steer clear of those. :-)
Yeah, I noticed more police and K-9 presence in and around the subways. I kinda like to walk anyway rather than cram myself like a proverbial sardine into a sweaty subway car.
Posted by: Lustmord | Oct 7, 2005 9:07:47 AM
They made a big deal of the threat being specific as to time & place.
According to ABC News last night, turns out the specific time is "in the coming days" & specific place is "the subway." Hardly specific at all. So why are officials harping on that term?
Source of the threat is one or three captured insurgents in Iraq. Exactly what is it that gives them any credibility?
Posted by: crank | Oct 7, 2005 9:16:51 AM
Sources in Washington state that the tips are of "doubtful credibility." Could this be Bloomberg's attempt to appear decisive and in charge during an election year?
Posted by: Krys | Oct 7, 2005 9:25:17 AM
Bloomberg also blew off the debate the other night. This makes it look like he had a damn good reason.
Posted by: Peter | Oct 7, 2005 9:33:02 AM
Peter, I'm with you. They're wagging the dog again.
Posted by: Eileen Kelly-McGeever | Oct 7, 2005 9:38:38 AM
What I think is funny is that the media reports these terror alerts with complete straight faced seriousness and "URGENCY", while most of the American public sees them for their true rediculousness. It's complete news saturation instantly while intelligent people realize that today is no different than yesterday as far as your chances of being blown up on a subway. It is also interesting to note that New Yorkers and NY commuters are mostly unaffected while suburbia freaks out and starts panicking about the woman rolling the baby carriage into daycare the next morning. (Also demonstrated by the fact that know one I know really was even talking about this yesterday, but a friend living in Pa who is coming to NYC this weekend said she was reconsidering her plans.)
Two last points... anyone who thinks these announcements seem to always have a convenient timing is on to something (and why not? They work! Ask how many average Americans STILL think Iraq had something to do with 9/11.)
And.. anyone in law enforcement can tell you (if they are being honest) that the "response" to the "alert" is a complete farce. Putting a police cruiser at a subway entrance with its revolving red lights going does not accomplish anything other than provide the appearance of safety (and a reminder that we are supposed to be "afraid" of something.)
Posted by: Drob | Oct 7, 2005 9:48:29 AM
Glad to hear some new voices, especially those with whom I agree. I believe our local TV news stations all seem to have discovered that the best way to sell advertising is to try and put fear into our hearts. Channel 2's ongoing series about "Eat Here and Die" comes to mind. (The anchors must have to go to Pennsylvania for dinner.) Anytime there is the remotest possiblity that one case of West Nile or Avian Flu has been found, the headlines scream "Gotham Doomed."
But with Terrorism -- that colorless, odorless, tasteless concept -- not only have the media reached new bottoms, politicians only have to mention the word to immediately move to the fat end of the moral seesaw.
Somebody must be buying it because everyone is trying to sell it.
Posted by: Conan the Grammarian | Oct 7, 2005 10:44:38 AM
