On the level?
In an announcement today, the Home Secretary will outline how the UK is to get it’s own Current Threat Level Advisory System similar to the one they have in the US.
Sad to say, but it looks like we won’t be having a colour-coded version as in America. Which is a shame because it would have given the Government the opportunity to drop a hint as to which piece of bad news is being buried under any changing of the THREAT LEVEL and do away with all the tedious guesswork and conspiracy theorising:
You also have to ask what use the knowledge of the THREAT LEVEL is to the general public. Isn’t it rather like the idea of telling parents if they have a paedophile in their neighbourhood (the other I’m-a-man-of-the-people-me initiative recently refloated by John Reid)? In the face of such intelligence, what are you supposed to do, lock yourself and your kids in the house and get pizzas pushed under the door? It’s just more Reassurance GLA-style.
And there is a genuine risk, especially from this bunch of wrigglers and don’t-look-at-that-look-at-this merchants that the THREAT LEVEL will be manipulated for policital reasons. In fact, the thing seems to have been nicked wholsesale from the Bush Administration.
Update: Chris Dillow and an unnamed “senior security source” talking to the Daily Mirror come to the same conclusion…
Chris:
To see another reason for bias, just imagine what would happen if there’s a terrorist attack after the government announced, say, a “moderate” threat. Every knobhead dead tree will accuse the government of understating the threat, of being complacent. The criticism for appearing to overstate the threat will be much smaller. So there’s another incentive to overstate the danger.
The Mirror:
THE new terror warning system was exposed as a sham last night.
A senior security source told the Mirror it would start at “severe” and was unlikely ever to be changed.
He said: “The threat level is going to stay at this level for years to come. The only way it will be adjusted is upwards.”
If the Government really wants to deter terrorists and reassure the public, there is one surefire thing it could do. Post this on every billboard in the land. Finally, Muslim, Christian, Jew and Athiest would be united. Pissing themselves laughing.
Posted on July 10th, 2006 at 1:18 pm
| See also • Told You! • McClatchy Washington Bureau: Study says violence in Iraq has been underreported • Back again |
Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe By Email • Print This Post • • • |
|
Filed under T.W.A.T., The home front |
This suggestion from b3ta.com gets my backing.
We’re all obviously not scared enough of terrorism. At least not scared enough that a new round of draconion laws can be slipped through to protect us.
Of course, certain events, like say… Elections… Will naturally bring a higher level of threat. This can only benefit a party that bases much of its policy on the threat of terror, at the time it needs it the most.
/Cynical
[...] Via the Peter Gaston in the comments to Justin’s take on the Government’s new ‘threat level’ warnings at Chicken Yoghurt, we come to another piece of Photoshop-ed genius from the imagination of Beau Bo D’or… [...]
This is especially silly, because British government and military installations already have a colour-code of threat, ranging through Black (no threat), Black Special (known threat) to Orange (Known and Immediate Threat) and finally Red (Known Threat, Attack in Progress or believed Imminent). This is useful for soldiers, civil servants and those who concievably have a duty to discharge to protect us. A threat system for the civilian population is both useless scaremongering and a cynical feint to distract the GBP from the fact the ID card system proposal is steadily crumbling under a prolonged assualt by reality.
Right, but republicising an old alert system doesn’t quite have the ‘fear zing’ that a brand spanking new one could bring.
Imagine alerts from:
Meadow Green - Hell has frozen over, or Labour has been voted out of government.
to..
Bloody Crimson - You’re all going to die unless you routinely report suspicious neighbours/friends/family members to the authorities, whilst sending your kids to BlairCamp.
I’m sorta joking, I think
How does it go again from the prophet? (okay I Googled it):
“A choice, right now, between fear and love. The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your doors, buy guns, close yourself off. The eyes of love instead see all of us as one.”
Go back to bed your government has figured it out.
It’s the cold war all over again. Buy yourself bomb shelters, work hard, save your money and trust your government.
You know, it’s just so fucking irritating to sit here and hear all the same Republican National Committee talking points and ideas repeated endlessly by NewLabour; it’s like watching last year’s American TV shows. Can’t they at least come up with some new kind of hellish, totalitarian programme? Where’s that old-fashioned British spirit of innovation?
Is it worth trying to find out how many RNC wonks are on nuLabour’s payroll?
be afraid (and keep voting Labour)…
The government wants to change from the low key system that is useful and actually works to one that is far more flashy and media friendly, but will be of considerably less use than what went before. How very New Labour….
[...] Does the government imagine that this system will be trusted? Do they really think that we will use it for anything other than rueful satire? [...]
[...] I saw the BBC Breakfast news this morning. I really should refrain, it does my blood pressure no good whatsoever. The story today that caught my attention was the vexed problem of energy – in this instance, nuclear power. Now, I’m ambivalent about the issue. Having worked briefly in the industry during the eighties, I was struck by the apparent lack of foresight regarding de-commissioning at the time, but that seems to have risen to the top of the agenda these days. As far as risks go, the matter of them blowing up and polluting the planet is getting somewhat hysterical. The biggest risks will tend to be around waste management and de-commissioning; not to mention some reassurance on build costs. We then had Michael Meacher interviewed for a “no” camp sound-bite. In it, he mentioned terrorism. Oh my fucking god, they always do it, don’t they? Is it possible for a politician these days to make any statement without ranking up the climate of fear and trying to make us live like cowering wrecks waiting for them to rescue us from our nightmares? The likelihood of a terrorist blowing up a reactor is miniscule compared with other real risks such as those mentioned. But, no, we’ve got to get the word “terrorism” in somewhere, haven’t we? [...]
I prefer this scale: http://www.bbdo.co.uk/blog/archives/111#respond
Just don’t watch the news. It’s much easier - if we all ignore them, then maybe they will just go away? Erm..