Chertoff wants us to worry

[NorthSideSox72]

So, Mr. Michael Chertoff, director of DHS, has said we need to be extra-vigilant this summer due to an increased threat of a terrorist attack. His evidence for such an attack?

 

His “gut feeling”

 

No wonder GWB put this guy in charge of Homeland Security – they sure do love their gut feelings. No need for evidence, facts or patterns here. No sir, no room for analysis of intelligence.

 

Amazing.

[Soxy]

Maybe he should take a Pepto Bismal?

[BigSqwert]

I have a gut feeling that this guy has no clue.

[Jenksismyhero]

*sigh

 

Don't do enough, do too much, don't do enough, do too much. You people are hard to please.

[Soxy]

*sigh

 

Don't do enough, do too much, don't do enough, do too much. You people are hard to please.

What are we supposed to do? He's just saying he feels like we're going to get attacked soon. I thought if we lived in fear the terrorists had won?

 

And in all honesty he isn't DOING anything about it. Just saying he thinks another attack is imminent. How is that productive?

[FlaSoxxJim]

*sigh

 

Don't do enough, do too much, don't do enough, do too much. You people are hard to please.

 

Do too much?? Chertoff basically just said we should all be vigilant because DHS has no clue how to predict or stop anything that might happen here. Yeah, doing too much is exactly how I'd qualify it.

[NorthSideSox72]

*sigh

 

Don't do enough, do too much, don't do enough, do too much. You people are hard to please.

This has zero to do with too much or too little. Its just plain idiocy.

[Soxy]

This has zero to do with too much or too little. Its just plain idiocy.

Now, if Sylvia Browne said she had a gut feeling about us getting attacked--hunker down! Maybe she should be the new DHS head. . .

[Jenksismyhero]

This has zero to do with too much or too little. Its just plain idiocy.

 

Because the guy feels like something is going to happen? Don't detectives often just get a hunch about things? Isn't there enough crap going around the world right now that would lead top security officials to say 'hmm, perhaps we will be attacked?'

 

Maybe it's not a 'too much, too little' thing. What I was trying to convey was that no matter what these people do, they'll never be right. He's connected to Bush so you automatically deem him a moron. It's gotten ridiculous.

[Soxy]

Because the guy feels like something is going to happen? Don't detectives often just get a hunch about things? Isn't there enough crap going around the world right now that would lead top security officials to say 'hmm, perhaps we will be attacked?'

 

Maybe it's not a 'too much, too little' thing. What I was trying to convey was that no matter what these people do, they'll never be right. He's connected to Bush so you automatically deem him a moron. It's gotten ridiculous.

Detectives who have a hunch about something don't bring it to the national media--instead they go out and investigate to see if their feeling is credible. Once they have evidence of a credible lead, they bring it to the DA or public or whatever. What this guy should have done was taken his feeling talked to the CIA, FBI or other countries intelligence services and see if there is a credible threat.

 

I think we all know there's a possibility of a terrorist attack, we're not morons. The recent attacks on Glasgow and attempts on London reminded us of that--but damn gina, support your claims. You're a lawyer--would you accept a case because the police had a gut feeling about something?

[kapkomet]

I'm sure that they could release a lot of stuff that would verify his "gut feeling", but then, everyone would say it's "saber rattling" by the Bushies to take the attention off of Iraq.

 

It's true, no matter how you slice it, they're wrong no matter what they say or do.

 

BTW, he was answering a question from the media - and the comments are taken out of context. But remember, he's an idiot.

[BigSqwert]

From the Trib

 

For whatever "gut feeling'' Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has about a potential terrorist attack against the United States this summer, the White House said today that there is "no credible intelligence'' to support that fear.

 

"There continues to be no credible intelligence to suggest that there is an imminent threat to the homeland,'' said Tony Fratto, deputy press secretary at the White House, a day after Chertoff told the editorial board of the Tribune of his "gut feeling'' about a possible attack this summer.

 

"We're always mindful of terrorist activity. There is exceptional vigilance… obviously, following the events in London and Glasgow, continued vigilance,'' he said, but "there have not been emergency meetings'' and a meeting planned in the Situation Room tomorrow is "routine'' – part of a series of meetings to assess terrorism that are held at the White House.

 

"Obviously, we have had meetings to gauge the activity in London and Glasgow,'' Fratto said. "We have routine meetings in the Situation Room… but there was no emergency meeting in the Situation Room, as some have reported… There is a meeting tomorrow, and it's a regular meeting.''

[kapkomet]

Again... he was asked a question in an interview, and he said as much. The whole comment was taken out of context.

 

Mountain out of molehill.

[BigSqwert]

Again... he was asked a question in an interview, and he said as much. The whole comment was taken out of context.

 

Mountain out of molehill.

Damn Kap....you prepping to be Tony Snow's replacement?

[Jenksismyhero]

Detectives who have a hunch about something don't bring it to the national media--instead they go out and investigate to see if their feeling is credible. Once they have evidence of a credible lead, they bring it to the DA or public or whatever. What this guy should have done was taken his feeling talked to the CIA, FBI or other countries intelligence services and see if there is a credible threat.

 

I think we all know there's a possibility of a terrorist attack, we're not morons. The recent attacks on Glasgow and attempts on London reminded us of that--but damn gina, support your claims. You're a lawyer--would you accept a case because the police had a gut feeling about something?

 

I guess that's my point though. Obviously we're all thinking it's a possibility we'll be attacked. Obviously it wasn't the smartest move to say something like that to the media. But it's not THAT big of a deal. He said something that's obvious. He said he's got a feeling about something. Who cares? Do we really need this sort of reaction:

 

No wonder GWB put this guy in charge of Homeland Security – they sure do love their gut feelings. No need for evidence, facts or patterns here. No sir, no room for analysis of intelligence.

 

Amazing.

 

I just hope this negative criticism of every thing these people ever do (oh my god he's riding in a car! he's wasting gas! he's the devil!) goes away in 08.

[kapkomet]

Maybe.

 

Seriously, it irks me when stuff like this comes up. A media outlet asks him a question - "what do you think the threat level is right now?"...

 

and he says - (paraphrasing)...

 

Al Queda has been known to plan attacks in the summer, and given what just happened over in London and Glaskgow, my gut feeling says that there's a hightened risk right now and we're more vunerable for an attack.

 

WTF is wrong with that? But no,... he's just a stupid, ignorant Bush f***up.

 

THIS is what I'm talking about when talking about "bias" toward anything Bush. This is absolutely not even worth talking about, yet the common theme here from people who can't stand Bush is what a moron Cheurtoff is.

 

He may be a moron, but not for this statement.

[NorthSideSox72]

Maybe.

 

Seriously, it irks me when stuff like this comes up. A media outlet asks him a question - "what do you think the threat level is right now?"...

 

and he says - (paraphrasing)...

 

Al Queda has been known to plan attacks in the summer, and given what just happened over in London and Glaskgow, my gut feeling says that there's a hightened risk right now and we're more vunerable for an attack.

 

WTF is wrong with that? But no,... he's just a stupid, ignorant Bush f***up.

 

THIS is what I'm talking about when talking about "bias" toward anything Bush. This is absolutely not even worth talking about, yet the common theme here from people who can't stand Bush is what a moron Cheurtoff is.

 

He may be a moron, but not for this statement.

Your paraphrasing makes it different than what he said.

 

And Soxy had it right - detectives don't take their gut feelings, and tell the whole department to find suspect X based on it and arrest him. No, they find evidence and try to piece things together.

 

When Chertoff tells the public about a threat, he has a responsibility for the consequences of those statements. A serious, difficult responsibility. And to make the country shift its behavior based on his gut feeling is utter B.S.

 

So I am sorry, but in this case, this is not just some poor quote taken out of context. This is another in the line of "leaders" that BUsh has chosen, whose methods would be laughed away from the table in any serious private business enterprise. No plan, no facts, nothing to stand on but "gut feelings". We saw the same B.S. from Brownie and others. Bush picks people who think like him - which is really, really unfortunate.

[kapkomet]

Your paraphrasing makes it different than what he said.

 

And Soxy had it right - detectives don't take their gut feelings, and tell the whole department to find suspect X based on it and arrest him. No, they find evidence and try to piece things together.

 

When Chertoff tells the public about a threat, he has a responsibility for the consequences of those statements. A serious, difficult responsibility. And to make the country shift its behavior based on his gut feeling is utter B.S.

 

So I am sorry, but in this case, this is not just some poor quote taken out of context. This is another in the line of "leaders" that BUsh has chosen, whose methods would be laughed away from the table in any serious private business enterprise. No plan, no facts, nothing to stand on but "gut feelings". We saw the same B.S. from Brownie and others. Bush picks people who think like him - which is really, really unfortunate.

He DID NOT tell "the public about a threat". He was asked a question, and he answered it. Now, everyone is racing around saying "the sky is falling...", when he NEVER SAID THAT. He was asked HIS OPINION, not throwing things out there as "FACT" like you all are trying to say.

 

There's a BIG difference.

 

Again, he may be a moron, but not on this particular subject.

[NorthSideSox72]

He DID NOT tell "the public about a threat". He was asked a question, and he answered it. Now, everyone is racing around saying "the sky is falling...", when he NEVER SAID THAT. He was asked HIS OPINION, not throwing things out there as "FACT" like you all are trying to say.

 

There's a BIG difference.

 

Again, he may be a moron, but not on this particular subject.

I just disagree. Whether he was asked or not is not relevant to the words he chose to use. This wasn't him talking to his buddy over dinner - it was a public statement.

[kapkomet]

And if he wouldn't have answered their HYPOTHETICAL question (with what was CLEARLY his opinion, and he even said it was HIS OPINION), or said "no comment", then people would be reading into that as well.

 

To take it one more step, if something happened, and he had "no comment", he'd get crucified for not telling people his thoughts.

 

It doesn't matter. There's never a right answer for anything anyone says that's a part of the Bush administration, no matter how you cut it where most people are concerned, right or wrong.

[NorthSideSox72]

And if he wouldn't have answered their HYPOTHETICAL question (with what was CLEARLY his opinion, and he even said it was HIS OPINION), or said "no comment", then people would be reading into that as well.

 

To take it one more step, if something happened, and he had "no comment", he'd get crucified for not telling people his thoughts.

 

It doesn't matter. There's never a right answer for anything anyone says that's a part of the Bush administration, no matter how you cut it where most people are concerned, right or wrong.

You know, its interesting, I started a thread last year (I think) asking for people to post the positive accomplishments of this administration. I myself had 2 or 3. Others had some as well. But two things stood out to me... one, there weren't very many things listed. And two, it was in many cases the "liberals" who were posting them.

 

Back to the point directly, if he had said "no comment" or something like "there is of course an ongoing level of threat here", or something like that... I wouldn't have said boo.

[kapkomet]

I can list three things directly.

 

I the ongoing war on terror

II judicial nominations

III tax cuts and economic stimulus

 

I can list things that I think he's dead wrong on too:

 

I immigration

II reigning in spending (therefore growing the government)

III lack of communication on the war - the message is NOT getting out on what should be accomplished

[BigSqwert]

David Heyman, Homeland Security Program Director at the Center for International and Strategic Studies:

 

It is being widely reported that Secretary Chertoff has a “gut feeling”—not intelligence reports—about a potential terrorist attack against the United States this summer. The historical data do not substantiate the Secretary’s comments.

 

It’s important that we base our threat assessments and analysis on available intelligence and other information, not guesswork or ‘gutwork’. Of the 33 or so Al Qaeda inspired or linked attacks since the 1993 First World Trade Center bombing, most (20 out of 33 or 60%) occurred in the fall or spring, not the summer (see attached chart).

 

It's also very odd for Chertoff who is so disciplined with language and so pronounced on 'risk' based security to comment publicly this way. While there are strategic and tactical reasons why al Qaeda may pose a greater threat in the near term, it is troubling that the government is informing the public and raising concerns (and fears) based on the Secretary’s feelings, as opposed to intelligence. Public confidence in the government and skepticism over threat warnings is already low. If there’s intelligence, the Secretary should make that clear. Guesswork or ‘gutwork’ does very little to bolster confidence of an already threat-weary public.

[kapkomet]

For Cripes sake...

 

HE GOT ASKED A QUESTION and offered his OPINION when asked what HE (not the government) thought about the threat right now.

 

There's more bulls*** being spilled over this then a cow with a poop blowout.

[NorthSideSox72]

There's more bulls*** being spilled over this then a cow with a poop blowout.

I sure do loves me some oratory. Nice imagery, Kap.