 |
|
A European colleague called today. His newspaper is sending him to Washington on Monday just in case "something happens." He wonders what I am hearing about how the US is going to step up security in light of the new UBL video. I scratched my head and thought, "what extra security precautions?" There's only been talk of who's up/who's down politically because of the UBL tape. No sightings of Ridge or Ashcroft as of this morning [Ridge spoke to reporters this afternoon]. I flew yesterday - security was as normal. It turns out that after a brief discussion, the Bush administration has decided not to raise the terror alert level after all, as described in this AP report. But it is pretty interesting how three years after 9/11, UBL videos don't so much raise one's terror level - either individual or governmental - as become a hot topic of political debate. Is the politics of fear eroding?
Update: The Bush campaign gloating that anything that "makes people nervous ... helps Bush" is utterly disgusting. They sound like the Sopranos. Matt Yglesias and Atrios have the story.
More: Knight-Ridder's Jonathan Landay and Hannah Allam point out another difference: that the latest UBL video did not contain an explicit threat:
U.S. counterterrorism experts were struck by the "lack of an explicit threat" and the generally less-warlike tenor of his comments, said a U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity. He said, however, that the release of the tape could be the signal for an attack.