Have we ever NOT been at Homeland Security Threat Level Orange?

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by goof2

If charts scare you what happens when you see a powerpoint, a complete loss of bladder control?

No, that's reserved for the unexpected appearance of ex-wives, and snakes.

Originally Posted by goof2

Part of the reason for the threat level is for the public. It is designed to drive situational awareness among the public. The public has not responded as hoped. It is also designed to cover the government's collective ass. If an attack happens they can point to the threat level as evidence that they tried to warn the public. On both these fronts I don't think it has been particularly effective.

We would seem to be in agreement here.

Originally Posted by goof2

It is also designed to be the civilian agency equivalent of the DEFCON system for the military. Government agencies are supposed to set their preparation, readiness, and security procedures based upon the threat level. The military has different procedures based upon different defense readiness conditions. Civilian governmental agencies are supposed to do the same based upon the different threat levels. I don't know how successful that has been.

I don't know either. Maybe we need a chart...

Originally Posted by goof2

As I said above, part of the reason for the threat level was to drive situational awareness in the public. It hasn't worked. Is that a failing of the system or the public? I would say both.

Ok, so if it hasn't worked, why are we still using it? That, I think, is the whole point of the conversation. Perhaps we should stop wasting our money on charts, and try something else.

JC

[Low]

Personally I don't believe the TL will ever drop below Yellow. and if it does for some reason.. Be sure to stock up and grab your ankles cuz it's going to hit the fan for sure....!

[Amber Lamps]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

I don't need a better plan, we already have one. It's been five or so years since the 9/11 commission finished it's report, yet we have yet to implement some of their most basic recommendations, (I'm not typing it all out for you, go look it up).

If you think a chart is the "best thing we have to work with right now", you are woefully uninformed.

JC

This is why I've always demanded that these type of threads stay in the "War Room". I don't even want to see them.

I'm not saying that a "chart" is the best we have, I'm saying the DHS is the best we have. As far as implementation of the 911 commission's reports goes, well considering the opposition to everything that the Bush administration has implemented so far. Like someone else said, "damned if you do, damned if you don't"

To answer the question about "sacrifice", there are more ways to "sacrifice" than just blood. These people work 24/7 trying to keep us safe.

[Amber Lamps]

Originally Posted by Low

Personally I don't believe the TL will ever drop below Yellow. and if it does for some reason.. Be sure to stock up and grab your ankles cuz it's going to hit the fan for sure....!

I think that the threat level should be gauged by you sig.... Jeez talk about creepy!

[Particle Man]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Ok, so if it hasn't worked, why are we still using it? That, I think, is the whole point of the conversation. Perhaps we should stop wasting our money on charts, and try something else.

JC

Because "the public, " in our society of fast food and movies on demand, wants to see a "product" to be assured that the government is doing something about potential threats.

BUT, we can't show them what the real product should be (a terrorist's head on a freakin' pike) because "that would be inhumane." So instead, we print up signs and talk about threat levels because that's all the public can handle.

Sad.

[Amber Lamps]

Originally Posted by Particle Man

Because "the public, " in our society of fast food and movies on demand, wants to see a "product" to be assured that the government is doing something about potential threats.

BUT, we can't show them what the real product should be (a terrorist's head on a freakin' pike) because "that would be inhumane." So instead, we print up signs and talk about threat levels because that's all the public can handle.

Sad.

I tried to say this but as usual, I don't come across as well as some of you guys. The public has to be told something, I'm not sure what else could be done. Maybe we could bring back the old Civil Defense system from WWII.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

No, that's reserved for the unexpected appearance of ex-wives, and snakes.

Understandable and expected.

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

We would seem to be in agreement here.

Cool.

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

I don't know either. Maybe we need a chart...

The DEFCON chart has been around for decades, but I suspect you know that.

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Ok, so if it hasn't worked, why are we still using it? That, I think, is the whole point of the conversation. Perhaps we should stop wasting our money on charts, and try something else.

JC

It hasn't worked with the public, but I don't know if it has or hasn't worked with governmental agencies. Their alert system is apparently based on the threat level and if it is working why would we junk the system only to have to waste money to create another similar system? Essentially the same system has worked effectively for the military for decades. Just because it doesn't work with the public doesn't mean it doesn't work at all or have any value.

[TommyHotWheel]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

Seriously.

I've flown over 100 times since 9/11, and I can't remember it ever being anything BUT orange.

What's the point of having a "threat level" if the level always stays the same?

Talk in the Middle East of an Oompa Loompa attack on U.S. strategic candy stockpiles. The European Marzipan Cooperative was crippled by a gang of singing, surly little people a few short...(Pah dum) weeks ago....

[Homeslice]

Ownage, in the latest issue of Wired:

Why Color-Coded Terror Alerts Have Made Us Less Safe

By Gary Wolf October 19, 2009 | 3:00 pm | Wired Nov 2009

It only hurt when you paid attention. As you stood in the airport security line, itchy with impatience and boredom, it became harder to block out the announcement that played over the PA system again and again: The terror alert level was set to orange. Still. What a joke.

Today, our national mood ring is under review by a fresh set of bureaucrats. A formal announcement of changes is expected this fall. But to understand how the color-coded terror alert system was ever considered a good idea, you have to think back to the spring of 2002. With the 9/11 attacks barely six months in the past, nerves were frayed. The topics of the day were weaponized anthrax, uninspected shipping containers, suitcase nukes. Federal officials, especially new homeland security czar Tom Ridge, felt a need to keep the nation vigilant, but they had few specifics to offer.

It was frustrating, Ridge recalls in a memoir published this fall, to keep passing on confusing news about vague threats from unknown enemies against unspecified targets.

The secretary tried to solve the problem with a simple and convenient public relations tool. It would have five colors: green (for low risk), blue (guarded), yellow (elevated), orange (high), and red (severe). It was an immediate failure.

Comedians were merciless. “The lowest level is condition off-white, followed by cream, putty, bone, and finally, natural,” said Darrell Hammond, playing Tom Ridge on Saturday Night Live. “It is essential that every American learns to recognize and distinguish these colors. Failure to do so could cost you your life. For those who may have questions, an excellent guide can be found on page 74 of the spring J.Crew catalog.”

After a cabinet-level debate that was resolved personally by President Bush, the system was launched at its midpoint: yellow. It cycled between yellow and orange five times during the first two years of its existence, and almost every time it changed, presidential approval ratings bumped up slightly, raising suspicions of partisan manipulation. But eventually the colors stopped changing and, over time, Americans gave it their ultimate disrespect: They ignored the system completely. Nobody knew what it meant, and even federal officials stopped using it. The press conferences ceased, the announcements disappeared. The national level has been kept at yellow since 2004. The threat level in airports (presumably at greater risk of attack) hasn’t changed since 2006. Every few minutes for the past 1,200-some days, all around the nation, travelers have been dutifully warned that we are, as always, on the brink of disaster: The terror alert level is at orange.

Such systems are stuck on stupid by their very nature. Broad national warnings are almost impossible to issue until they are too late to matter. And bureaucrats have every incentive never to touch them. Raise the level and you risk disturbing everybody’s day with a message that will cause great disruption and expense and may well prove, in the end, to be a false alarm. Lower the alert level and you make yourself vulnerable to charges that you’ve let down your guard, that the country somehow doesn’t need to worry about the host of threats that almost certainly loom.

Meanwhile, we have the technology and manpower to do it right. We live in a world of automatic traffic alerts, air-quality notifications, tsunami sirens, and seismic reporting. We’ve got crime-watch RSS feeds and automatic fire and burglar alarms that send out text messages.

The complexities of transmitting secure and reliable warnings through these systems are not trivial. There are more than 1 million police officers and another million private security guards in the US, many of whom are carrying radios that are closed to external transmissions and cell phones that will turn into bricks when the cell towers are overloaded with voice traffic. As we try to wrap our heads around these real challenges, anything that conveys a false sense of centralized control — that includes warnings without specific content and alert levels set by officials far from the scene — is mere noise, and harmful. Motivated by bureaucratic embarrassment and conceived to serve the needs of officialdom, the Department of Homeland Security’s color-coded threat alerts were a broadcast signal for a networked age, and we are safer without them.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

Ownage, in the latest issue of Wired:

Why Color-Coded Terror Alerts Have Made Us Less Safe

I don't see much "ownage" there. The author doesn't like the system. He makes that dislike clear in the article with little reasoning. His logic amounts to "We are less safe cuz I say so bitches!".