posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 10:59 AM
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
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.