»» Columnists

To Freak Out Or Not: Whatever Became Of The Terror Alert System?

by Colby Hall | 3:59 pm, December 28th, 2009

» 19 comments

terror_alert_system This holiday weekend featured news of not just one, but two potential terror attacks (though the latter appeared to be no more than just a long stay in the bathroom.) Had this happened during the Bush Administration, we would have had a steady diet of former Department of Homeland Security head Tom Ridge and the ubiquitous color-coded terror alert system. Under President Obama — well, three days later, we finally see him speak. Which leaves us to ask: are we better off with or without the color bars? Or put another way, should we be freaking out right now or not?

When news broke that another disruptive passenger had prompted an alert on another Northwest Airlines flight to Detroit on Sunday, I suddenly experienced a sinking feeling that I had not felt since the days that followed 9/11. In New York City, the sound of helicopters circling overhead no longer sounded like background noise for the cosmopolitan hustle and bustle, but rather a disquieting reminder of how highly valued this city is as a potential target.

Had Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab‘s attempted attack happened in the early to mid-aughts, we would have seen and heard about the color-coded bars of terror alert status on a day-to-day basis, and passed machine gun-toting personnel in midtown — in short, our hearts would have been filled with terror. In this most recent instance, government officials have seemed almost relaxed, as if there were no real need to worry. Or maybe they seemed caught off-guard — which in turn, fills one’s heart with terror.

In truth, the color-coded system is still very much in place, though not really in the news (best evidenced by a Google News search that reveals almost no results. So, its not that the system was done away with. Its just never mentioned by any Government official of real import.

I was never a big believer in the coded color terror alert system. I criticized it privately because I felt it failed to realistically convey a complicated sense of danger and risk. I also felt that it played right into the hands of terrorists, whose real goal is to disrupt normal life through the threat of random acts of violence against innocent civilians.

That said, I now see value in this system where I saw little before. The color coded alert system reminded us that the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, and the FBI were, somehow, on top of it. Perhaps had the Obama administration responded in a more timely and competent manner I wouldn’t be missing the silly colored bars. But Janet Napolitano‘s inadequate back-and-forth on how the system worked “like clockwork,” then “failed miserably,” and President Obama‘s failure to make a statement for days — lead me to question the administration’s core competency moving forward.

New York House Republican Peter King has been a very vocal critic of the President over the past weekend. Speaking in the future tense during an interview with CNN, King branded the “what-if” scenario as “the Christmas Massacre” and spoke at length about what might have been. Was he making these claims to gain political advantage? Absolutely — but that doesn’t completely discredit his message.

Obama should have made an on-camera statement right after news of the failed attack broke, instead of three days later, if only to mollify his critics, and remind everyone else that he’s on top of it. Instead, we were left with the White House press corps filing reports with Waikiki in the background — not great imagery for an administration that so highly values perception.

I never thought I’d see the day that I’d miss those over simplistic color-coded bars. And maybe, its not the bars that I miss. But the bars represent a constant attention to detail and obsession with forces of evil, and that is something that I’m starting to miss.

http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

Okay – Maybe what I’m about to say will anger someone and that is not my intention, but unless I’m missing something, a guy had an explosive device on an airplane. Wasn’t that an almost weekly claim in the early ’70s and did Nixon ever say anything?

It may have been an attack on one airplane, but there’s nothing to indicate that it was coordinated or that it went beyond that one guy on that one airplane, so I’m glad they didn’t raise the general terror alert and I’m happy that every nut with a Bic isn’t going to get an answer from a sitting President.
Jim R

Napolitano should go on her performance alone but I agree with the strategy of not running a parade of officials immediately to the cameras. The previous administration had a bad habit of racing to the cameras and raising the “alert level” at the most inopportune times – for Democrats.

We’ve been working quietly behind the scenes with Yemen instead of running around beating our chests, and treating these perps as anything more than lowly common thugs undeserving of a Presidential appearance would be to continue mistaking the proper way to defeat these guys.
http://s4xton.com/ Aaron Landry

The Terror Alert System is Government Tumblarity.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Adkins/1585417987 Bill Adkins

Obama handled this matter cooly and appropriately, not shrilly and in a panic as did the last administration. We have the ‘jock strap jihadist,’ the ‘fruit of the loon,’ “an Islamist “boxer rebellion,” a terrorist “brotherhood of the traveling pants,” ….,” and a “new Y-front in the war on terror.” Al Qaeda is embarrassed by their incompetence and loons like Peter King would pump up the volume to make AQ seem more of a hazard — a goal with which AQ is in accord.

I prefer Obama’s manner as opposed to the Bush and Peter King model of defecating in one’s pants while screwing the pooch.
Ben Linus

@Jim R and Bill Adkins
What the hell?! Bush sits in a classroom for too long on 9/11 and left wing flip out, but Obama takes three damn days to make a statement about this, and you guys think it’s fantastic.
HA! HA! HAAAAAAAAAAA!
You pathetic hypocrites make me laugh.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Adkins/1585417987 Bill Adkins

Hey- Ben? Are you actually comparing this event to 9/11? Have a big heapin’ bowl of stupid for breakfast this morning, Ben?
disgusted

“Maxwell Smart” – had this system, or better – MUCH Earlier
Snipzor

Good job Ben, you’ve compared an event that killed thousands to a failed attempt that ended up killing nobody just to make a political point. Perhaps you can go just a bit lower and use the Holocaust to make a political point, it shouldn’t be that hard for you.
Jim R

The look on Bush’s face when Andy Card told him of the second plane and that we were under attack was either his help-me-mommy-dumbass look, or perhaps recalling when he told the CIA briefer “Okay, you’ve covered your ass now” at the August 6, 2001 briefing titled “Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.”

I don’t need Obama to reassure me of anything every time one of these religious psycho punks says or does something. We’ll get further by not glorifying them or demonstrating how we’re changing our ideals and lifestyles to accommodate their threats.
Ben Linus

Actually, morons I was comparing the few minutes that Bush sat in a classroom to the THREE DAYS it took for Obama to get off his ass and do anything.
It was the left that tried to turn his sitting in a classroom into political points. Do you guys not remember that?
The Democrats and the left used an event that killed thousands for political points Snipzor dumbass.

I hope you guys aren’t too sore when the Democrats lose everything in 2010. Of course, all that means is the freakin’ Republicans will be back in charge, and really who the hell needs that.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Adkins/1585417987 Bill Adkins

Ben, Ben, Ben — I’m guessing you were about 9 when 9/11 occurred. Too young and too dumb to recognize that the Bush Bums used 9/11 as a marketing tool for their Blunder in Iraq, they sold the Iraq invasion like P&G sells laundry soap, ‘The new and improved Gulf War!!” Sad, but true – the Bush Bums used the still warm corpses of the 9/11 victims as props for their goals. Disgraceful, disgusting and despicable — yet Republican. Reagan would puke.
SWWT

People will try to rationalize the moves of anyone they agree with.

I can understand coolly waiting to give an in-depth presser with a Q&A session with the press. But that? After three days, that’s all that Obama had? Call me underwhelmed. Rationalize it all you want, but it wasn’t exactly reassuring.
Snipzor

I would have essentially pointed out what Bill said, but I was busy at the time. Essentially let me repost what Bill Adkins stated.

The Bush administration used 9/11 to invade Iraq, despite the fact that the two have nothing to do with each other. Pretty much using the 2000+ people who died that day to send even more to die. Whining about the democratic party using 9/11 for political purposes is a worthless venture.

Allow me to repost my own thoughts on this matter, but more explicit so you don’t miss it. Any person who uses this false equivalency of 9/11 and this failed attack (Or the reactions of both presidents) is pretty much the biggest shithead in the room. But I don’t recall the democratic party using 9/11 in a way would result in the deaths of countless people.
kennediesmith

It’s really well managed and well written post. As you written each and every stage starting from initial stage of modeling. And your language is also efficient and easy to understand. Army ration packs
http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

@Ben Linus: Michael Moore used the four minutes for effect in a movie. Though at the actual time of 9/11, I was telling anyone who would listen that a better President (Reagan, Clinton) would’ve found a camera before flying a serpentine pattern to an underground bunker in Louisiana.

Nonetheless, 9/11 was obviously a coordinated attack. Events took place in two cities involving flights from multiple destinations and when the second plane hit in full view of the cameras, there was no doubt of what we faced.

This was one guy on one plane and as others have pointed out, if his actions had been raised to the point that it looked like they were receiving undue attention from the White House, it would’ve been a threat to national security.
RazorsEdge

The arguments on here are all over the place. Which is potentially more harmful? Raising the stupid terror alert status or not? They are not just colors, there are procedures that come with each color.

What’s more damaging to Pres Obama (let alone the public) IF there was another attack and terror alert not been raised. There wasn’t but he/they did not know that or could be completely certain. Assuming that, because he took 3 days to address public. If Obama / WH knew isolated before he addressed public, then why not let the public in on it?

Looks like the WH/Admin/Federal govt DID give high degree of attention following the incident. TSA screening, no bathroom last 1 hour, no blankets, seat GPS screens turned off, no electronics, Janet Napolitano raced to the TV (she did no favors to Pres Obama with her performance), Robert Gibbs to the TV etc.

Sounds like the WH gave it lot’s of attention right away. I’m sure Al Qaeda noticed the attention and reaction that even if it was a lone bomber (i’m betting he had help).

OK, Pres Obama came out 3 days later to address. As it turns out, no other attempts occured before he did. Again, Napolitano did him no favors, had there been another attack before Obama addressed the public, that would be IT for him. He would have been politically hurt. I mean damaged. Why make it so easy for his detractors?

Why take that politcal risk? My bet if another incident were to occur, Obama will be out in front of the public much faster. If he does, you all should remember that you should praise him if you bitched about him taking 3 days and you should bitch about him if you liked his approach.
ImNotBlue

Snipzor says:
December 28, 2009 at 8:44 pm

The event (thankfully) killed nobody… but not due to anything WE did. It was luck… and forgive me (and others) for not being so excited that we got lucky.

Jim R says:
December 28, 2009 at 9:43 pm

The look on Bush’s face when Andy Card told him of the second plane and that we were under attack was either his help-me-mommy-dumbass look…

Yes, Obama’s “I wonder if can sink this putt,” look was much better and reassuring.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Bill-Adkins/1585417987 Bill Adkins

“ImNotBlue says:
December 29, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Snipzor says:
December 28, 2009 at 8:44 pm

The event (thankfully) killed nobody… but not due to anything WE did. It was luck… ”

Using that criteria, so was that we weren’t attacked in the states between 9/11 and Bush’s exit.
ImNotBlue

Bill Adkins says:
December 29, 2009 at 2:25 pm

False. There are a number of examples and released reports on terror plots that were foiled prior to their execution. This plot was “foiled” after its attempted execution… and by faulty equipment and airplane passengers. There’s a difference.