NYTIMES Editorial....information for alert is three or four years old

[spanone]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/03/opinion/03tue1.html snip-- But it's unfortunate that it is necessary to fight suspicions of political timing, suspicions the administration has sown by misleading the public on security. The Times reports today that much of the information that led to the heightened alert is actually three or four years old and that authorities had found no concrete evidence that a terror plot was actually under way. This news does nothing to bolster the confidence Americans need that the administration is not using intelligence for political gain.

[hedda_foil]

1. Very interesting. Very interesting indeed.

There are a variety of credible ways to construct the job, whether in the cabinet or not, but what Mr. Bush proposed is not one of them. His intelligence director would be in the worst of all worlds: cut out of the president's inner circle and lacking any real power. Andrew Card Jr., Mr. Bush's chief of staff, said the post would not carry real authority over the intelligence agencies' budgets or intelligence jobs in the Pentagon, the Justice Department and other agencies. The decision bore the unmistakable stamp of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who was never going to willingly give up control of appointments or his share of the intelligence budget: $32 billion of the overall $40 billion.

Mr. Bush did embrace the 9/11 commission's suggestion - one that did not challenge his turf - that Congress stop supervising intelligence and homeland security through scores of committees and instead have one committee in each house to oversee intelligence and one for homeland security. And he went beyond the 9/11 panel in one way by proposing a post to coordinate intelligence on weapons of mass destruction. That sounds like a bad idea, especially with the administration's record of fanciful interpretations of that intelligence on Iraq.

Mr. Bush's bureaucratic dodge on the intelligence director's job is the same one he used on the job of director of homeland security. Then he was forced to reverse field, endorse a new cabinet department and claim it as his own idea. We don't care who gets credit. What's important is that Congress reject what Mr. Bush came up with yesterday and do the job right when it returns in September.

[pansypoo53219]

2. um

do they think nobody is paying attention? i hope when the wolf does come around it comes for them and nobody will listen.

i think it is time for us to praise Dean.

[Armstead]

3. If the Times says this...

It may yet get into the Establishment.

I am fed up with the media having a Terroristic orgasm whever the administration decides to amp up the fear.

It's good to hear a big media outlet saying what most of us rae thinking.

[buycitgo]

5. unless some dems have the SPINE to take this and run, it WON'T

think of all the stories that have been very important, yet get a day or twos' worth of play in the Post or the Times, or 60 Minutes--ask your friends if the know who Sibel Edmonds is....will ONE person know--then, the story ALWAYS dies

even the plame thing, the AWOL story, take your pick, they ALWAYS go away

where's the outrage about the energy papers?

NOBODY pursues these things with a HUNDREDTH the zeal someody like Gerth or Schmidt went after Clinton

or Connolly or her pal at the NYT went after Gore

wish I wasn't so pessimo, but, there it is

[RandomKoolzip]

4. Hah! I knew it.

Can somebody tell Eloriel to stop freaking out now?

[Hamlette]

6. Oliphant said this could be a diving moment for Bush

if this terror alert turns out to be nothing it will look like it is all politically motivated.

This one was different than the vague "the sky is falling" stuff they have been doing. Now they know targets etc so I think they suckered more people in. If it doesn't work, if it turns out to be another false alarm, it could back fire BIG time.