Topic: What?

[Nichi]

This is rather bewildering.

US may issue warning on public places in Europe
             .
By Matthew Lee And Eileen Sullivan, Associated Press Writers – 12 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration is considering a broad warning for U.S. citizens to avoid public places in Europe due to new al-Qaida threats, U.S. and European officials told The Associated Press on Saturday.

Such a move could have significant implications for European tourism.

The State Department may issue a travel warning as early as Sunday advising Americans to stay away from European tourist sites, transportation hubs and other facilities because of fresh threat information, U.S. officials told the AP.

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley declined to comment on the matter. But he said the administration remains focused on al-Qaida threats to U.S. interests and will take appropriate steps to protect Americans.

A European official briefed on the talks said the language in the U.S. alert is expected to be vague. It won't address a specific country or specific landmarks, the official said.

European and U.S. officials have not identified any specific targets that tefforists might be considering, the official said. Officials have called the threat credible but not specific.

The U.S. has told European leaders that the State Department alert would be intended to raise the warning level to match the information about the would-be attack that surfaced last week, the European official said.

The European official said there had not been strong opposition to the proposed alert from European leaders.

Intelligence officials believe Osama bin Laden is behind the terror plots to attack several European cities. If this is true, this would be the most operational role that bin Laden has played in plotting attacks since Sept. 11, 2001.

Eight Germans and two British brothers are at the heart of an al-Qaida-linked terror plot against European cities, but the plan is still in its early stages, with the suspects calling acquaintances in Europe to plan logistics, a Pakistani intelligence official said Thursday.

One of the Britons died in a recent CIA missile strike, he said. The Pakistani official said the suspects are hiding in North Waziristan, a Pakistani tribal region where militancy is rife and where the U.S. has focused many of its drone-fired missile strikes.

"We remain focused on al-Qaida's interest in attacking us and attacking our allies," Crowley said. "We will do everything possible to thwart them and will take steps as appropriate."

The implications of a blanket "travel warning" for all of Europe could be big. There are hundreds of thousands of Americans in Europe at any one time, including tourists, students and businesspeople.

While the government cannot stop people from traveling there or force them to return home, a warning could result in canceled airline and hotel bookings as well as deter non-U.S. travelers from going to Europe. In addition, many U.S. college and university study-abroad programs will not send students to countries for which a warning is in place for insurance and liability reasons.

For that reason, officials said, there was internal debate over how strong to make the warning. The State Department has several grades of travel notice, ranging from low-threat advisories to more severe alerts and a formal "travel warning." There is also a "worldwide caution" in place that warns Americans of ongoing global tefforist threats.

Some U.S. allies in Europe have expressed concern about the proposed warning, saying it is an overreaction to the threat information, a position shared by some in the administration, the officials said.

The French Foreign Ministry, Interior Ministry, the national police and the Paris police all declined immediate comment. Calls to the Paris tourism office and the French government's tourist office in the United States went unanswered Saturday and there was no immediate response to e-mail requests for comment.

A spokeswoman for the German Foreign Office in Berlin declined comment

Under a "no double standard" rule adopted after the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the government is obliged to share threat information that it has given diplomats and other officials with the general public.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101002/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/europe_terror_threat
___

That's a bit generic, "American" travelers (to would-be murderers, that is.) I don't get it.  Likewise with "public places."

[Jahn]

Al Qaida - a (I) Am. construction.

[Nichi]

When I'm scratching my head, I often look at the misunderstood-item with this question: what is the gain and for whom? I can't apply that question here, because I don't even grok the skeleton of the thing: are they intimating they don't want Americans to travel? And if so, what is the gain?

It seems that if fear-mongering is the goal, then they would be "intimating" that "Americans" are not safe in their own home. That would be far scarier than this bizarre sniping at which they're hinting..

If they've received intelligence that tourist-sites in Europe are the object of some scheme, well surely more than "Americans" are at risk, and such warnings should be international, not just national.. In other words, "Americans" are not the only tourists in "Europe".

Unless... that's precisely what has happened, that they've gotten word that some events are about to take place, and this lame article is the best they can do in putting out a warning.

It's all very confusing.

Al Qaida - a (I) Am. construction.

I'd consider the possibility that this is just a way of keeping all that going - which puts it into fear-mongering. But the rest of it still doesn't make sense. "Europe" is a big place, eh?

[Muffin]

When I'm scratching my head, I often look at the misunderstood-item with this question: what is the gain and for whom? I can't apply that question here, because I don't even grok the skeleton of the thing: are they intimating they don't want Americans to travel? And if so, what is the gain?

It seems that if fear-mongering is the goal, then they would be "intimating" that "Americans" are not safe in their own home. That would be far scarier than this bizarre sniping at which they're hinting..

If they've received intelligence that tourist-sites in Europe are the object of some scheme, well surely more than "Americans" are at risk, and such warnings should be international, not just national.. In other words, "Americans" are not the only tourists in "Europe".

Unless... that's precisely what has happened, that they've gotten word that some events are about to take place, and this lame article is the best they can do in putting out a warning.

It's all very confusing.

I'd consider the possibility that this is just a way of keeping all that going - which puts it into fear-mongering. But the rest of it still doesn't make sense. "Europe" is a big place, eh?

I'm also scratching my head. I did not understand a single paragraph from that article.
 

European and U.S. officials have not identified any specific targets that tefforists might be considering, the official said. Officials have called the threat credible but not specific.

If there are no specific targets then what use the warning is? It's like saying that Europeans shouldn't travel to the US because of terrorist threat. I think the US is more of a target terrorism-wise then Europe.

I will continue to feel safer over here.

[Builder]

When I'm scratching my head, I often look at the misunderstood-item with this question: what is the gain and for whom? I can't apply that question here, because I don't even grok the skeleton of the thing: are they intimating they don't want Americans to travel? And if so, what is the gain?

It seems that if fear-mongering is the goal, then they would be "intimating" that "Americans" are not safe in their own home. That would be far scarier than this bizarre sniping at which they're hinting..

If they've received intelligence that tourist-sites in Europe are the object of some scheme, well surely more than "Americans" are at risk, and such warnings should be international, not just national.. In other words, "Americans" are not the only tourists in "Europe".

Unless... that's precisely what has happened, that they've gotten word that some events are about to take place, and this lame article is the best they can do in putting out a warning.

Well, the US is utterly ego-centric country and its first and foremost concern is to protect Americans. The US State Department has put such travel recommendations up constantly (http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_1764.html). It is a common practice in all foreign ministries of developed countries. The issue here is that never has any of them been that sweeping and imprecise. But then again, there are 15 million Muslims in Europe and among them there are quite a few radicals. What this article shows, is the existence of specific information on particular plot on the backdrop of growing fear of radicalisation in Europe.

It's all very confusing.

I'd consider the possibility that this is just a way of keeping all that going - which puts it into fear-mongering. But the rest of it still doesn't make sense. "Europe" is a big place, eh?

I suspect Jahn simply has little if any knowledge about Al-Qaeda. He says it is American invention. Alright, he does not trust the US sources, but there are independent Russian sources on Al-Qaeda and those from other countries. Of these he knows nothing. So Al-Qaeda is not an American invention, but something very real and not innocent at all.

[Nichi]

More of the same...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101003/ap_on_bi_ge/europe_terror_threat

Again, "Europe" and "public places" is pretty darned vague. Who travels and doesn't go to public places?

This passge would seem to indicate that "American" and "European" "officials", whoever they are, agree, if not collude, that it would-be-bad-for-business if the word got out too strongly (just like in the Gulf of Mexico right now):

While the government cannot stop people from traveling there or force them to return home, a formal travel warning could result in canceled airline and hotel bookings as well as deter non-U.S. travelers from going to Europe. In addition, many U.S. college and university study-abroad programs will not send students to countries for which a warning is in place for insurance and liability reasons.

Well, shouldn't "non-US travelers" be deterred? It would be a bad thing were everyone's lives, not just US lives, considered? Argh.

[Nichi]

~Vent~

This seems to be all around the new philosophy: the US started to implement it right after Katrina when they tried to censor the weather information, and it's all over the Gulf situation, and now it goes International. "What is bad for business?" is the only question being asked.
"If you have that information, which might cause you to change plans and perhaps save your life, then money will be lost." It's a cut-throat policy and I'm sick of it.

</vent>

[Builder]

More of the same...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101003/ap_on_bi_ge/europe_terror_threat

Again, "Europe" and "public places" is pretty darned vague. Who travels and doesn't go to public places?

This passge would seem to indicate that "American" and "European" "officials", whoever they are, agree, if not collude, that it would-be-bad-for-business if the word got out too strongly (just like in the Gulf of Mexico right now):
 

Well, shouldn't "non-US travelers" be deterred? It would be a bad thing were everyone's lives, not just US lives, considered? Argh.

Bad for business? Of course, the idea of the warning is to save lives/minimise casualities (the idea is also that the warning reaches potential perpetrators showing them that their objective is now harder to achieve and thereby deterring them from doing it in the first place), but not at the extensive cost to normal economic and social transactions (i.e. because of that threat we will not cave in or hide in the bunkers).

It is hard for a bystander to comprehend these aspects.

Thus, I recommend an exercise: put yourself into a position of the US/European government official (remember there have been acts of terror 3/11 in Madrid, 7/7 in London, etc., i.e. bad guys mean killing business) and try to warn people so as to raise their awareness of potential threat and prevent casualties. How would you warn them if you had a rather general, but reliable information on potential plot? How would you word the message?

[Michael]

I am not following this much - did hear something about this from Julie, who reads papers more than me.

I do have this image, of those who monitor communications across the globe, of what do they do when they see heightened degree of communications about impending 'attack'?

If they say nothing, when there is insufficient direct targeted evidence, then they are accused violently after said event transpires.

If they say something, albeit vague, then they are accused of scaremongering, and political manipulations.

... just a thought.

[Nichi]

Juhani and Michael, your points are taken.  Don't mind me, I'm just experiencing The Vagueness left and right, and it's no doubt an issue of mine - I need to blow it off. 

[Nichi]

Must have been about this --

"France's terror alert level is at Reinforced Red, the second-highest level below Scarlette Red [GALLO/GETTY]

Saudi intelligence services have warned of an al-Qaeda plot to target Europe, and France in particular, a French minister has said.

"Several days ago the Saudi services alerted their European counterparts that there was a tefforist threat on the continent, notably in France, coming from al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP)," Brice Hortefeux, the French interior minister, told RTL Radio in an interview on Sunday." "

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2010/10/2010101721529396444.html