Hospital threat called dubious; FBI scolded
I'm all for increased security and awareness, but I have to wonder whether the general public has to be apprised of every picayune little threat. If the latest warning issued to hospitals is any indication, I think the answer is clearly no.
WASHINGTON -- White House officials chastised the FBI on Thursday for releasing "very low credibility" information that forecast imminent terrorist attacks against hospitals in Houston and three other cities.
With the creation of a Homeland Security Department at the top of President Bush's agenda, White House officials were eager to distance themselves from what is now being characterized as the clumsy release of relatively useless intelligence chatter.
At some point, all of us have to understand that life in our post-9.11 world is inherently a much riskier proposition. Honestly, I believe most thinking people DO understand. There is a difference, though, between understanding that fact and living in constant and varying fear. Part of the responsibility of the fine folks in charge of Homeland Security should be the triaging of information. How credible is the risk? How imminent? How deadly? Yes, at some point the public needs to be made aware of what risks they face, but do we need to be checking between the pages of our morning paper because someone somewhere made a vague threat against newspaper publishers?
Adding to the general level of fear and irrationality in this country serves no purpose save to make it look as if our police and security forces are on top of their game. I'm not sure that's always the case, but then budgets have to be justified, right?.
