Argh!! "Terrorist want to affect election" spin getting worse!!

[Sparkly]

Did anybody else just hear Daryn Kagan with (naturally!) a guy from Heritage foundation? They're starting to make the leap. So far it's been unnamed "US officials" expressing "concern" that Al Qaeda wants to affect our elections, without saying how or why. The implication, at least to me, is that these are GOP "officials" floating the idea that terrorists don't want those Big Bushies coming after them, but would like a Peacenick Appeasing Kerry administration...

But they've never said that. They'll leave it to Rush and Hannity and people like this guy from Heritage to draw the logical connection to "A vote for Kerry is a vote for the terrorists..." And they're starting that today. This guy said (paraphrase)"Well we've got a president who's been bold in going after terrorists and a candidate who isn't."

This is ABSURD. How can we fight this stupid campaign theme being reported as 'news?' It is making me CRAZY!!!

[gWbush is Mabus]

boycott cable news

...pass it on

[prodigal_green]

1. Terrorists attack, Chimp loses

Terrorists don't attack, Chimp loses. The first scenario, he's failed miserably in the war on Terra and confirmed everyone's belief that the Iraq war was a mistake. The second scenario, it all just looks like politics of fear.

Regarding their logic: if the polls put Kerry way ahead of Bush, then voting for Bush if there is an attack means the terrorists win, right?

[nostamj]

3. but, if the chimp "THWARTS" an attack...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1668465

[zbdent]

18. Clinton thwarted a huge number of terrorist attacks on US soil

yet all you hear is "ZZZ"s from the news media. (and with all those cameras at the end of the "millenium"; if something happened, it would have been instantaneously broadcast worldwide).

No, not personally, but by his actions, he created the atmosphere where the best the terrorists could come up with was a rubber raft, two guys, and a large number of explosives in an loosely guarded port in Yemen. No hijacked airplanes inside the US.

Bush announces the "threat" of a possible terrorist strike in the summer. Nothing happens (GOOD!). "Bush is a hero!" You'll hear about how some kid who just bought an almanac was arrested because he went to school with somebody who was a friend of somebody who had a pen pal in the middle East. "The PATRIOT Act works! Take that you ahole liberals!"

[utopian]

6. I was just saying the same thing yesterday

Damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't--and he has no one to blame but himself.

[Sparkly]

10. See, I'm afraid they'll use it the other way

Chimp wins with an attack, because "we won't let those damn terrorists influence our election like they did in Spain!"

Chimp wins without an attack, because "he's successfully protected us despite all these threats!"

[Sparkly]

7. I hope you're right but

these people are experts at preying on Fear. They are working this to a campaign advantage for Chimpy, and also to a neat way for BBV to hand it to him and explain later that it was a last-minute "No we won't let those terrorists win!" vote...

Maybe I'm just being paranoid. In any case, it's an unfathomably LOW tactic for them to use "threats" in this way.

[prodigal_green]

16. but that's my point about Kerry's numbers

As long as Kerry's numbers are high, then voting for Bush in the face of an attack means the terrorists have influenced the election. If one sticks to one's voting preference, then Kerry has to win.

I would say it is fathomably low. They are pretty disgusting creatures. They've done it before, they'll do it again.

[jackstraw45]

2. Turn OFF CNN..for good.

Believe me, you WILL feel better.

[tom_paine]

5. Agreed. Turn OFF CNN...for good

If you jones for it, you can just rent old tapes of Soviert Pravda and Isvestia broadcasts.

[Sparkly]

15. Good advice, but

I'm concerned about where this is going in general, on all the news outlets. AP is reporting the same nonsense from "US officials" -- they just aren't coming out with the next logical step (which is, terrorists want Bush out, supposedly).

There also is concern terrorists might try to mount an attack to coincide with the November election. The political fallout from the March 11 train bombings in Spain taught al-Qaida that an attack timed to an election can have a major impact. Spain's former ruling party was ousted in the voting that followed the bombing...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=542&e=1&u=/ap/20040526/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/terror_threat

[tom_paine]

21. That would be too obvious a lie

By now, it's clear to most everyone but the most demented and lost Busheviks that al-Qaeda very much wants the fool Bunnypants* to remain Emperor.

So they slide it in implicitly, where the lie has a better chance of getting past people's conscious defenses and lodging inside them without their knowing it or being able to defend against it.

Marketing 301: Psychomanipulation and Subtlety

Now, I don't think the CNN Reporters think this way, at least those not working for Busbevik Psyops or Strategic Disinformation, etc.

But those folks do, as do the Bushevik Editors and Managers. So any journalist is squeezed from the top (managers, editors) and the bottom (Psyops workers masquerading as Copy Boys and Low-Level Grunts).

Uncle Karl indicates his wishes and his minions act. It is a very lossely-knit, very Amerikan kind of Conspiracy of Lies.

[quispquake]

11. You're right!

My satellite dish went kaput for the last two weeks, and it's amazing the amount of stress that I haven't been feeling now that I haven't watched cable news...

Kill your TV!

[Stew225]

12. Quiting Cable News cold turkey or

quitting those cold turkeys on cable news has been very refreshing to me. Unfortunately, yesterday I was in the waiting room of the doctor's office and Faux News was on. God, I thought I'd go into convulsions. I reasoned that I was at least in the right place if that happened.

As background, I wonder if the crap coming from those news reports has a subliminal effect on the people that have to be in that environment. I observed that most of the other patients in the waiting room just stared at the TV screen. One wonders what they were thinking. Alas, one wonders if they think.

I think, therefore I am not watching the government media.

One qualifier here, hear? Aaron Brown is palatable for now, uh, I think.

Have a swell day!

[gasperc]

4. if terrorists attack shows what a shitty job they are doing

and that should be how we respond, and also what about the responders? are they ready? do they have the equipment and resources they need? where are the billions that have been allocated been spent?

they are so worried about the elections, what about the americans that will die from the attack, what about them?

[Ganja Ninja]

8. The final leap of logic will be ...

when Kerry wins and they declare the election void due to outside influence. These clowns are angling for some way to void the election so they can throw the vote into congress and appoint Bush again.

[RobertSeattle]

9. Frustrates me too

Bush is the best terrorist recruitment in modern history.

I hate to think of the Bizarro scenario where Kerry is up by 10% late in October and then a terrorist attack occurs (LIHOP?) and fearocracy takes over and Bush wins - the Spanish scenario in reverse.

[AP]

13. What's their argument that Kerry hasn't be bold? They guy has gone after

international criminals with the zeal of prosecutor since before he was a politician.

If Kerry gets elected, we'll probably finally make some PRODUCTIVE progress (rather than dropping on bombs on weddings and thus encouraging people to hate us more).

[JHB]

14. If Bush is elected, the TERRORISTS WIN!

After all, for all of his huffing and puffing he's been their biggest pal -- bin Laden wanted to polarize the world in a war of the West/America vs. Islam, and Bush has delivered.

Operation Iraqi Freedom my sweet Anunt Petunia! It's been Operation Al Quesda Recruiting Drive.

[upperleftedge]

17. We must have SECURITY if we are to vote!

Iraqi's can't vote until they are SECURE so neither can Americans, right? If the nation is under attack and terrorist are manipulating the public opinion it is not a "fair" election, right? So, we push back election day in America until January like in Iraq, right? No security, no democracy. Do you feel secure? Well then, no election until you do. Fun, huh?

[napi21]

19. Quit cabel would work if it was ONLY in cabel!

It's not. It's on standard news too. I thought this was another scare ploy as soon as I heard it yesterday! Then I heard several of the announcers say that this SAME thing had been reported several times in the past. Every time there is some big even scheduled, like the Super Bowl, New Years Eve, Christian Holiday, etc.

I've really thought about this...questioned if I was sticking my head in the sand....but I don't think so.

I just heard someone on MSNBC say that the Times is also questioning the facts of this report!

[9215]

20. Why don't they be more specific: The terrorists want to

shut down the elections...."let's hope they are not successful"!! :eyes:

[Sparkly]

24. Maybe that's what it's about

Preventing an election at all? Martial law?

[9215]

29. Problem is that even during the Civil War

elections were held. But, heck, with your average American thinking Armageddon is coming maybe they could be convinced that the terraists' are a more serious prob than the Civil War. Who knows.

[slackmaster]

22. I'm glad to know there are others who see the sham for what it is

It's all so Orwellian, with the color code system that never goes below Yellow Alert and the vague warnings that something might happen somewhere, some time so we must all be super-extra aware of our surroundings.

When they start handing out life jackets without explaining why, THEN I'll start getting worried.

(That was the lead article in edition 3821 of The Onion dated June 5, 2002. I'd link to it but it's now available only to paid subscribers. See http://www.theonion.com/search.php?q=life+jackets+issued )

[blm]

23. A vote for Bush is a vote for Bin Laden. Bush gave Usama what he wanted

already. Bush closed the bases in Saudi Arabia and got rid of Saddam for Bin Laden.

Now, when the rushed elections for Iraq are held the largest constituency will be the Islamic extremists who are sympathetic to Bin Laden.

[BabsSong]

25. and I'll tell you what's even worse----Kerry

The Bush regime has pulled out this "oldie but goodie" to start pumping the propaganda. That's to be expected (did you think they wouldn't??). This a.m. there was a brief on-the-run statement by Kerry. Some reporter managed to get a mike stuck in his face in some dark setting (backstage or at night, whatever). In a hurry Kerry shot off something like: Terrorists won't effect our elections as long as I'm involved in them (or some such thing). Great. Except why the hell wasn't there a formal announcement or press release by him when this news hit saying "I am as determined as President Bush to see that terrorists in no way, shape or form succeed in shutting down the election process,,,blah, blah"----THAT would have been a secret double message to thirsty Dems which said "and I'm not going to let these goddamn, unholy bastards (Bush) pull their crap this time and get by with it". Don't tell me "it's too early" or "he has to remain silent so Bush can destroy himself" and the other 100 excuses. Such a statement from him has absolutely nothing to do with any of those excuses. This is getting absurd....and if you note, Bush is again steadily coming up in the polls (they hate his Iraq policy, etc., but they are sticking with the boy). So it's time to start doing something and something as non-threatening (gasp) to Bush like I mentioned above is not being crazy and wild thinking!!!!!!

[Sparkly]

27. I agree that this must be nipped in the bud

whatever that involves, including clear statements from Democrats and the Kerry campaign in particular, and SOMEbody in the media asking WHO these "unnamed US officials" are and whether their "concern" is from their own thinking or some sort of "intelligence." None of that is clear, and amazingly nobody is asking.

[TrogL]

26. But it didn't!! That's the problem.

I read in a newspaper (and I don't have a copy) that the Spanish public was furious with the Conservative government for dragging it into the Iraq war and the government was already going down long before the bombings.

Even CNN admits it.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/03/14/spain.blasts.election/

Turnout was high at 76 percent with voters seeming to express anger with the government, accusing it of provoking the Madrid attacks by supporting the U.S.-led war in Iraq, which most Spaniards opposed.

[Westegg]

28. It brings up this question: What IS the terrorist mindset?...

Let's accept at face value, for the sake of argument, the notion that terrorists are planning an attack on the U.S. this summer. Not hard for ME to do, becuz they've said they want to attack and, after all, that's what terrorists do. Plus---oh yeah---they attacked with frightening efficiency on 9/11.

My questions are these:
--- How can THEY know, any more than you or I could know, that an attack this summer will impact the '04 election? At this point in time, strong arguments could be made that Kerry OR Bush could win, with OR without an attack.

---How can WE know whether the terrorists would prefer Bush in '04 or Kerry? I mean, if Bush's "war on terrorism" had been more effective to this point, he wouldn't be in the sorry situation he's in now. And that goes for the whole country. Wouldn't we all be better off now (and presumably safer from terrorism) if Bush hadn't listened to the Jesus in his head ond gone off on this ill-founded, it's -all-come-to-worse-than-nothing attempt to "democratize the Middle East starting with Iraq"? Might not the terrorists truly fear a guy who actually knows his ass from his elbow? I.E., Kerry as opposed to Bush.

---Or do the terrorists just think that: It worked in Spain, it will work in the U.S.? That the two countries, and the two election scenarios are similar? If they think that, they're wrong.

Your comments, please?

[robertpaulsen]

30. As I've said before, this looks like a no-win situation.

I use the phrase no-win situation because Bush will be in power for at least another seven months. Seven months of more fuck-ups in Iraq, more restrictions on civil liberties, destruction of the environment etc. ad nauseum. Bush's numbers will continue to go down through the summer as gas prices go through the roof while troops continue to die for Halliburton. The Democratic Convention should give Kerry a commanding lead, then the Republican Convention will narrow the gap. Nothing unusual so far.

But October will be no Surprise for anyone paying attention. The whole month should be one big Orange Alert, occasionally slipping into Red when Bush feels public support waning. Rove will have his eyes and ears all over the polls. If Bush gains a significant lead, then there will be no attack and Bush will be portrayed in the corporate media as having vanquished the threat. If the race is too close to call, they may order an attack to stop the election, or they may just let Diebold install the Thief. If, like Spain, the public reacts adversely and swings in a large majority over to Kerry, then there will be an attack to shut down the election and perpetuate martial law. Say all you want about both candidates being Skull and Bones, Kerry has no ties to the PNAC and THEY cannot allow Kerry to take their base of power away.

When I try to imagine the miracle, that somehow Kerry can overcome the Diebold/BFEE conspiracy and take the election, the only reason I could see that happening is if Bush fucks things up so bad in the Middle East that they want the situation given to Kerry so that his hands are tied. If Iraq is so chaotic that, despite Kerry's begging, the U.N. refuses to send troops, Kerry may end up playing Nixon to Bush's LBJ, using the Vietnam analogy. Perhaps the BFEE is hoping that Kerry will not create his 10 million jobs and that they can paint his foreign policy as ineffectual, like Carter, and put Jeb Bush in position to take back the White House in 2008. I like to hope that a Kerry Administration would be like Clinton's Administration and create hope and prosperity for America.

But maybe that's just wishful thinking.

[KayLaw]

31. I guess this is just how these guys operate

The come up with an idea and and go on TV, radio, and write articles all saying pretty much the same thing . What bothers me is that the media let them do it.