Terror Alert Systems Keeping You Sedated?

I am relatively new here so something to this nature may have been posted here before --if so please excuse my ignorance. What I have to say is only speculation and all I intend to do is open the floor for discussion. Discussion, not flaming or personal arguments. If you want to argue save it for u2u's.

Now then, I generally feel that the Homeland Security Advisory System (which I will call H.A.S.D. from now on) was put in place as a way to keep the public under control. The specifications for what constitutes a particular threat level on the H.A.S.D. are vague, if known at all. Also, when a threat level is increased the reasons behind it and the source of the information which was the determinant factor are vague, if once again given at all. This is where my speculation can be further explained:

What we now have is a system that is changed for unknown reasons most of the time. When this system does make an increase in color the administrative powers which control is seem to make a big to-do about it in the news. Have you noticed that people are becoming less and less concerned with each passing threat level increase? It is becoming a situation of 'boy crying wolf'.

As the everyday citizen pays less and less attention to the threat increases they are more likely to go about their business as normal when a high level of warning is announced. This would make it possible for the powers that be to carry out an action that could be blamed on "terrorism" or another red herring. They could then use the safety blanket of "we initiated a higher warning level...people simply didn't listen" to hide under.

This is, once again, speculative thinking that presupposes more speculative thinking (primarily the 'who and why' of 9/11).

I invite you to agree, disagree, add-to or reject what I have put forward. I do not, however, invite you to flame me or any other posters (and if someone disagrees with your point do not flame back at them). It's fine to disagree as long as we aren't children about it.

Hello and welcome to ATS. Thanks for sharing your theory. I agree that there's a lot of hand-waving behind the curtain on what constitutes which level we should be at. But if the system was put in place to control us, it's a total failure. I personally believe the majority of U.S. citizens aren't even paying attention to it.

i don't watch the news anymore. (on tv) it's the same stuff week after week. although i do believe that there is a large percent of people, most likely centered within the mid-west regions of the US that this type of propaganda does work. -- when 911 went down, all of my relatives in nebraska were uber paranoid and thought the terrorists were going to breach mid western soil. many were preparing all kinds of effort to be "prepared".

i do think it's 'conditioning', but i don't think it's been put in place in a "cry wolf" scenario where the public gets tired of hearing about it and less alarmed. i think that's just 'what happens' after repeated scenario.

i'd actually lean the other way and say that gov. would WANT people to still buy into the levels of threat. they've got a hell of a campaign thus far on it.
-b

The alert system basically has no effect on me at all anymore.
Having flown several times in the last year, all it means to me is more noise and inconvenience at the airport.

If something happens, it is just part of life now.

Originally posted by Valhall
Hello and welcome to ATS. Thanks for sharing your theory.

First off I would like to say thank you for the welcome. Thank you kindly.

Now, onto one thing I would like to clear up.

Originally posted by Valhall
I personally believe the majority of U.S. citizens aren't even paying attention to it.

That was the point I was trying to make. US citizens are not paying attention to it --the whole 'cry wolf' metaphore-- and that is why it may be a tool by which to cover some ground in the publics eye if another incident were to happen.

It could be as simple as saying "but it could not have been us, why would we have attempted to warn you if it was us?" when in reality the constant raising of the levels in such a public matter, although we are unclear as to what constitutes these raises, is a way in which to "sedate" us to the warning.

I guess I didn't explain it clear in the initial post and I am not sure that I am putting my thoughts into words effectively in this reply.

Eh, I tried.

Originally posted by smirkley
The alert system basically has no effect on me at all anymore.
Having flown several times in the last year, all it means to me is more noise and inconvenience at the airport.

If something happens, it is just part of life now.

Which is the desired and anticipated outcome of this "Terror Alert Conditioning", in my opinion anyway. I explain why in the initial post and then again in the post above this if you are interested in reading it again or are confused as to my meaning.

Originally posted by zooplancton
i do think it's 'conditioning', but i don't think it's been put in place in a "cry wolf" scenario where the public gets tired of hearing about it and less alarmed. i think that's just 'what happens' after repeated scenario.

You make a valid point (or at least one that gives the powers that be a less "sinister agenda"

It reminds me of the tsunami warnings in Hawaii. Back when the last devestating series of waves hit the peoples payed little to no attention to the warning sirens and many went to the beach to watch the water come in...

Originally posted by zooplancton i'd actually lean the other way and say that gov. would WANT people to still buy into the levels of threat. they've got a hell of a campaign thus far on it.
-b

Good point for discussion. Would you care to elaborate upon it.

Originally posted by spines
Which is the desired and anticipated outcome of this "Terror Alert Conditioning", in my opinion anyway. I explain why in the initial post and then again in the post above this if you are interested in reading it again or are confused as to my meaning.

You conveyed your suggestion well. I do understand.

And yes, I am resigned to continue with my life regardless. How ironic.

Chicago O'hare,.. two weeks ago,.. "The DoHS has now raised the Advisory Level to Orange...", blared repetitively over the PA system while I was waiting in the TSA line. I was under the immediate impression this was something that just happened. But no, it was weeks old news.

Anyway, I have no choice but to continue with life. What other choice do I have?






[edit on 4-11-2006 by smirkley]

Originally posted by smirkley
Anyway, I have no choice but to continue with life. What other choice do I have?

Touche. Although I would say one could continue to live their life but keep an open mind.

Like I said, this is purley speculation and I am glad that I could at least explain it well enough to have it in your mind somewhere.

Food for thought never hurt anyone.