The first is a New York Magazine article from Mark Green in August 2011 chronicling how he lost the 2001 election Mike Bloomberg.
The second is a link to the NY Daily News and a little bit of the story:
The terrorist threat that forced the closure of 22 embassies in the Middle East was “the most serious in the last several years” and eerily reminiscent of the leadup to 9/11, top U.S. lawmakers said Sunday.Many questions remain about the nature of the threat, adding to the alarm that extends from Washington to embassies in the Middle East and Africa, 19 of which will be closed through Saturday.
...
Rep. Peter King (R-L.I.) said intelligence officials had heard possible dates of the attack.
“The threat was specific as to how enormous it was going to be and also that certain dates were given,” King said on ABC’s “This Week,” adding that the most serious threats came out of Yemen.
The assumption is that [the attack is] most likely to happen in the Middle East at one of the embassies but there’s no guarantee at all,” King said. “It could be Europe, the United States. It could be a series of combined attacks ... We have to ready for everything.”
Just something to keep an eye on as we get closer to Primary Day.
Had 9/11 not occurred, it is probable Bloomberg would have lost the election and we might never have heard from him again.
Of course the attacks did occur and one of the consequences was that Bloomberg won the election.
You can bet the Lhota campaign is looking very closely at these terror alerts.
It is a long shot for a Republican to win the mayor's race this, but one of the ways they could win is if they get to use the politics of terrorism once again to persuade citizens that only they can keep New Yorkers safe.
I would think with these alerts being issued - the most serious alerts since the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks two years ago - the politics of terrorism will be on the GOP campaign short list of topics to come up during the November campaign.
Lord knows, I've gotten very cynical around terror alerts, especially after Bush wrapped himelf in the whole thing in 2004, but I am also aware that the Boston bombings put a slightly different gloss on these alerts this weekend.
Boston is fresh in people's memories and terror alerts can still strike fear in people's hearts when something like Boston is so close in the past.
Just something to keep an eye on as the campaign goes on - how and when the GOP uses the terrorism issue.
They will use it, it's something they like to use, and you can be sure Giuliani, Lhota's old boss, will get trotted out for just that kind of messaging to the public.
Maybe it won't mean much this time around.
But it is something to keep in mind.
Yes, but Dems (like Obamastapo) can also use this to deflect attention from all of his scandals, which have already seemed to be fading into the public rearview due to the kiss ass main stream media.
ReplyDeleteRemember when Bush was Prez, and the Dems would always make fun of his terror warnings as public manipulation? Where is that cynicism with Obamastapo's boys? Where is all of the so called,liberal outrage on Obamstapo's NSA , and IRS debacles? Though not a GOP supporter either, the duplicity and hypocrisy of Dem supporters when a Dem is in office, compared to the constant whining and hand wringing when the Repub. holds court, is laughable....if it wasn't so dangerous.
I'm with you on all of that. I think the IRS stuff wasn't the scandal it was cracked up to be on FOX News, but the NSA scandal is really, really bad and ought to have liberals up in arms. Same goes with the drone bomb killings. Or reatment of Bradley Manning. Or the crackdown on whistleblowers.
DeleteBut, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY."
ReplyDelete--Goering at the Nuremberg Trials
Thanks for reminding me of those words.
DeleteThat blueprint is still in effect, isn't it?
No matter how smart we think we are, how developed and advanced, the truth is, we remain tribal, superstitious and easily manipulated at base.
The powers that be continue to exploit that, don't they?
All treats should be taken seriously. PERIOD!!
ReplyDeleteWhile I am not jumping on Obama and Hillary the same way the Right wing are, what happened in Libya should never happen again. Better to err on the side of caution.
Funny how the Republicans jump on terrorism but don't want to cut funds for anti-terrorist plans for cities like NY.
Ah, but are the threats really threats? Please remember all the threats the Bushies issued in the 2004-2006 years as political bludgeons and/or disruptors to distract people from other things going on.
DeleteAlso, how often do our own foreign and economic policies cause these so-called threats to begin with? Why are we even in Libya? Or Syria? Or Iraq? How much blowback to do we cause by being there? How much blowback do we cause with our drone bombings? With the old rendition program? With keeping all these people in Gitmo for perpetuity without charges or trials?
Believe me, I do not want to see another 9/11 or Boston, but I know the powers that be have used terrorism and the politics around the alerts to manipulate people in this country for their own ends and I do not like that.
I also wonder what constitutes a real threat and what constitutes manipulation.
In quite a few cases, from the shoe bomber to the Times Square bomber to the Boston bombers, the gov't knew nothing about the coming attempts.
It calls into question how often these alerts really are about real threats or just the people in power looking to cover themselves.