It's so vague that it's completely meaningless.
There are some intriguing quotes in that article...
The U.S. is “not, not, not” advising Americans to delay or cancel visits to Europe, Kennedy said. Instead they should take “common-sense precautions,”
I wonder what the 'common sense precautions' entail exactly? Helmets? Body armour?
Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs said it is “closely monitoring the situation in Europe,” and urged its citizens to “be aware of their surroundings.”
When travelling in Europe, are Canadians usually unaware of their surroundings?
Basically they're telling people to worry, but in a strangely non specific way.
The alert is set to expire at the end of January.
Does that mean that common sense and awareness can be relaxed in February?
Exactly! It's completely bonkers. And worse than that, it's ridiculously alarmist.
Usually, things like this will be based on 'intelligence' about the activities of various groups who pose a threat. If those activities suggest that there may be a real danger in the near future then it is surely better to warn the public to remind them of the need to be alert and help gather more intelligence by having anything suspicious reported.
Obviously the point of official intelligence gathering is to find out as much as possible without letting on how much is known, so they can't really give out specific details about how much they know, otherwise the activists (whoever they may be) would know it's because of their actions and take measures to change things, which would actually pose more of a thread because there wouldn't be any intelligence about that.
So, it's about balance; the balance between being open with the public and warning them to be vigilant and not giving away too much information so as to be able to close in and deal with the groups.
Yes, in a sense the warnings do seem like scaremongering, or even as if they are raising terror in the public (the point of terrorism to some extent), but IMHO I would rather be warned to be 'a little extra vigilant at this time' than to be completely kept in the dark.
All Love and Reiki Hugs
Weather warnings
At first I thought "What on earth is this heavy thread doing on this site?" - but I guess why not.
To go back to original "why issue the warnings" post, I think it was issued for the same reason we get a lot of extreme weather warnings these days. I know we get a lot of extreme weather (another thread?) but there is a greater increase in warnings than extreme weather, I believe.
Why the weather warnings? They don't like people to say "where was the warning? Why aren't you doing your job properly!" It has nothing whatsoever do do with changing the weather!
You cannot give the powers that be black marks for predicting extreme weather that didn't quite come to pass - they are just be helpfully cautious it could be said, trying to save lives potentially. With terrorism it is even more clear cut - if nothing happens there is an implication they took steps to prevent it, if something happens they were clever enough to predict it. A win-win (for the government, anyway).
Conversely, if the government says nothing - it pans out more like a lose-lose for them, with no outcome making them look competent.
We depend on foreign tourists quite a bit too, so you have my sympathy. So does the government (did I really say that?)
I wonder what the 'common sense precautions' entail exactly? Helmets? Body armour?
Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs said it is “closely monitoring the situation in Europe,” and urged its citizens to “be aware of their surroundings.”
When travelling in Europe, are Canadians usually unaware of their surroundings?
Every year, I sit through a security briefing that includes a reminder of 'common sense precautions' when traveling. A few lesser-know pointers... But I agree that urging people to be aware of their surrounds in a generally non-specific way seems meaningless.
The alert is set to expire at the end of January.
Does that mean that common sense and awareness can be relaxed in February?
No, it just means that whatever intelligence prompted the warning will expire. Intelligence does have a "sell-by" date you know. 🙂 But common sense and awareness never does - unfortunately.
As someone who depends on foreign tourists for a living, I am really annoyed that the media has seen fit to warn everyone of new terrorist threats to tourist destinations in Europe but especially in London. Great! So now all the tourists will sit at home and I'll be without work next year. My point is what earthly good does it do to issue these warnings? Doesn't it just raise the fear levels? Mind you, I suppose that if we are all vigilant and we catch some terrorists in the act then it will have been worth it. But really I deplore this methodology. Blanket warnings like this are surely pointless. After all everyone still has to go to work in these hotspot locations. How will it make them feel?:mad:
xxx
I've not been following news too much or had chance to over this. But I get the general gist. I may be behind on news; last I heard there was one arrest, just one - but what really struck me was that a number of others "are being kept under surveillance". I did have to do a double take: what is the point of TELLING terrorists they are known and under surveillance, even if names are not in this case given? :confused:
It's certainly a different culture we now live in, in the UK. The IRA were never tipped off like this, either, that their plans were known? It seems to be that someone is trying to strike a balance between legalistic warnings - and it is IMHO for legal reasons - and not telling terrorists too much. (Oh and yes, given my other threads, of course I believe in real terrorists.)
In IRA days I lived in London, where I lived most of my adult life. With anyone I knew, there was NEVER any fear - or in other cities. Just being precautious. In fact I used to visit Belfast when bombs were going off nearby. TBH people often did there have shell-shock, but in Belfast it was understandable. When a bomb went off in my London street, we didn't run away or scream - we went to check it OUT and see if anyone needed help. There was zero fear.
I'm getting to the point of this post. :rolleyes: Last I saw on the news, because of the warning - and I realise this will hit many people like Sunanda - it's caused the USA to take the typically ridiculous step of telling tourists from the USA to consider not coming to Europe, or to constantly be on alert. The very last I heard was something like; "If you travel to Europe as tourists, avoid crowded tourist venues".
Er - duh! So if anyone believes this, why would they come. I'm always astonished at the utter insularity and fear of American travellers. They fear to set foot where some of us go every single day, we feeling calm and at peace about it. So the US announcement IMHO was simply bonkers. There's no such thing as a totally safe world. Visit the sites I say, and enjoy the fact you have a 0.00001% chance of being a casualty. The chances, per hour or day or week, are just so minute for each individual.
This is a "war" so-called that will go on for a long time. As with the IRA, we have to just carry on as normal - Americans too, or should we mutually not visit New York or Washington? :confused: Of course, that's crazy.
V
I've got a lot of mixed opinions on this, but basically think that a warning is futile. Short of literally staying in your own home - and ending up having one of those random accidents you hear of where someone has fallen and died putting their socks on - there's not much you can physically do to prevent, for example, a suicide bomber.
And people get really silly about it. I overheard a bunch of young men - late teens - talking about how scared they had been sitting next to a muslim man on the tube who was carrying a rucksack. Apparently, he had the full beard, hat and long shirt. My question is: What does a terrorist look like? Do we report every man dressed in 'muslim' clothes who has a rucksack to security?
I'm pretty sure that between 2 and 3 thousand people die in road traffic accidents every year. I've known a few people to be killed in this way, yet we somehow accept this threat as an everyday part of life, but it really shouldn't be. We take the threat of terrorism far more seriously than the threat of using a mobile phone at the wheel, yet that is far more widespread and we are at more risk from that.
Unfortunately this will cripple the tourist industry for a while, dealing yet another blow to our crippled economy. I imagine the terrorists will wait for it all to die down. No point turning up at a deserted Eiffel Tower.
I did have to do a double take: what is the point of TELLING terrorists they are known and under surveillance, even if names are not in this case given? :confused:
Because the terrorists know - and have always known -that they are under surveillance. Now the public knows too. So NOBODY is in the dark.
The very last I heard was something like; "If you travel to Europe as tourists, avoid crowded tourist venues".
I generally avoid crowded tourist venues anyway. Not out of any kind of fear, mind, but because I enjoy taking in a site in peace and solitude.
I'm always astonished at the utter insularity and fear of American travellers. They fear to set foot where some of us go every single day, we feeling calm and at peace about it.
Grow up in that environment and you'll never be "astonished". I'm not.
No point turning up at a deserted Eiffel Tower.
Why? That's the perfect time to go! No queues!
I imagine the terrorists will wait for it all to die down. No point turning up at a deserted Eiffel Tower.
Why? That's the perfect time to go! No queues!
I may have read this wrong, but doesn't Tigerlily mean that there's no point in the terrorists turning up at a deserted Eiffel Tower?
And, Scott, I appreciate your disdain of the tourist hordes, but spare a thought for those of us whose bread and butter they are!
xxx
I may have read this wrong, but doesn't Tigerlily mean that there's no point in the terrorists turning up at a deserted Eiffel Tower?
I agree with you in interpreting Tigerlily's words. But that does not invalidate what I said - for me!... :p
And, Scott, I appreciate your disdain of the tourist hordes, but spare a thought for those of us whose bread and butter they are!
xxx
You treat hordes? 😮 Wow... Even the best therapist I know only has a few hundred clients at most. 🙂
You treat hordes? 😮 Wow... Even the best therapist I know only has a few hundred clients at most. 🙂
:rolleyes: Sunanda probably does offer tourist-therapy to more than a few hundred annually. (Correct, Sunanda?) She's a trained tour guide of much experience, as I've sampled myself.... :rolleyes:
V
The American media makes its money via sensationalism. Generating a headline which will cause interest because it has been sensationalized is more important than reporting facts and real news. Americans, in general, are addicted to fear.
There is a new political movement afoot in America, which addresses this fear mongering and addiction. There will be a large march on Washington, D.C. October 30th. Two rallies will be held concurrently: The Rally to Restore Sanity! and The March to Keep Fear Alive! It started off as a lark, but it has gained momentum. People from all over the US are expected to attend.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/297682#ixzz0znPXNNLl
There is a new political movement afoot in America, which addresses this fear mongering and addiction. There will be a large march on Washington, D.C. October 30th. Two rallies will be held concurrently: The Rally to Restore Sanity! and The March to Keep Fear Alive! It started off as a lark, but it has gained momentum. People from all over the US are expected to attend.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/297682#ixzz0znPXNNLl
LOL, reading the link, it seems a healthy and humorous outlet. But not too serious, and only a few thousand going (for fun maybe)?
A chuckle to read of, though.
V
:rolleyes: Sunanda probably does offer tourist-therapy to more than a few hundred annually. (Correct, Sunanda?) She's a trained tour guide of much experience, as I've sampled myself.... :rolleyes:
V
Ahhh, tour guide. I mis-read. My apologies...
The American media makes its money via sensationalism. Generating a headline which will cause interest because it has been sensationalized is more important than reporting facts and real news.
While I don't disagree with this critique of American media, it is a tad disingenuous to imply the phenomenon is unique to American media, given that the UK is the home of tabloid journalism...
Edit: Ah, I just noticed that dogwoman is in the U.S.
bad news is worth a lot of money!