Attacks could "rival or exceed" 9/11--why do we need to know that?

[NicoleM]

"The information we have indicates that extremists abroad are anticipating near-term attacks that they believe will either rival or exceed" the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, Ridge had said in announcing the upgraded alert status on Sunday. link

What was the point of saying that? Is it not enough to tell America you're raising the terror alert level based on current intelligence? Did Ridge bring up 9/11 so that we would really pay attention to this one, or are they trying to scare us more?

Every single thing they do is calculated for their political benefit, so they told Ridge to say that for a reason. I don't think that scaring the Murkin people into staying home, out of the airport and the mall, is politically beneficial to them. Unless 1) there really is a big attack coming or 2) they're looking to cover something worse than poor holiday sales.

Am I making any sense? Am I over-analyzing?

[bpilgrim]

1. to keep EVERYONE SCARED and CONSUMMING like it's WWIII

of course. :evilgrin:

peace

[bearfartinthewoods]

28. i don't see any indication of people being scared.

in fact that's probably why they are being so explicit. this is, what, like the fifth time they have gone orange and nothing has happened. how are they supposed to get the message across sone people seem pretty blase about the whole thing?

and i really don't get the connection to consumption. if anything, terror alerts would be bad for business.

[bpilgrim]

51. the boy who cried wolf syndrom applies in this case, imo

fear is used in marketing to get people to consume and is why i threw it in there though i realize it actually may have the opposite effect and i love the irony. ;->

i think it serves as a distraction mainly and reminds people that they better be careful... or else something BAD might happen which keeps people quite and in a wait and see mode not to mention justify their RADICAL policies.

:hi:

peace

[Atman]

2. Am I over-analyzing?

No, just off to a slow start!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=948890#948923

[NicoleM]

7. I think it's a different question.

I'm not wondering why they raised the alert level, but why they specifically said it could be worse than 9/11.

(I'm really tired right now, so there could be something about that in that thread that I missed.)

[bpilgrim]

22. or it could actually be the TERRORIST issuing a crank call...

they really got us by the short-hairs since they - the 'terrorist' - don't really have to carry out any future attacks for years until we stop responding to their 'crank calls' for a while and only then... :nuke:

well, that is if you believe in terrorist.

i know there are a LOT of pissed off people 'over there' and growing daily but do they actually have the potential to hit us here?

i don't think so or they would have already, unless they are still in 'crank-call' mode though it would be even more effective if they actually did cause some 'terrorism' here every now and then doesn't need to be largescale like 911 just a bomb goin off here or there every few months or so.

so i don't think there are actually any over here, unless we want them to be here, like the 911 killers, but i wonder how long before folks who aren't terrorist now but as our brutallity abroad increases and our freedoms become fewer and fewer before we start seeing a crop of HOME GROWN terrorist.

probally not much longer, especially when they got everyone thinging we are in the middle of wwIII.

the terrible consequense is that this plays right into their - neoCONs - hands. they don't need to be directly involved with any of these acts if they do occur to take advantage of them when they do.

i am sure that there are psyc models that probably can perdict based on certain environmental factors what increase you can expect in crimminal/terrorist activity.

so if you wanna be a dictator and take over the world FEAR and VIOLENCE just plays right into your diabolical plan and i am sure they are WELL AWARE of these consequences of their actions and though they can be claimed to be random events their is no denying that one could not only take advantage of such events but actively apply preasure to certain broad enviromental varibles to help induce such a state, no?

i've read way too many of those cloak-N-dager novels ;-)

peace

( hope that rambling above makes sense, just stream of consiouness bs and i am too sick to proof read it... probably no one will read it anyways - good thing ;-> )

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NicoleM]

5. Who is "you guys"?

[Bridget Burke]

10. We're the "Liberal elite"

I thought you knew that!

[NicoleM]

14. I did.

I just wanted to see what Kobe would come up with for a response. ;)

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NicoleM]

12. I'm not a nut, and if I'm a conspiracy theorist

it's only because the liars in the Bush administration have made me into one. But thanks for playing!

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[F.Gordon]

18. Welcome to DU Kobe98

The timing and nature of this new "terror alert" is completely irresponsible.

If they give too much information, their sources may be found out

Do you really believe this? Haven't they already divulged their "sources" by stating the severity of the the pending doom and gloom? This implies specific knowledge.

Oh, and Gift Certificate sales are not counted as an accural. They are not accounts receivable. They are cash transactions. Never mind the Holiday Shopping numbers. Bush* and Company know that the coming Economic data is going down, down, down. Not that Bush* would ever put out a bogus terror alert to cover for this. Nope, not that standup guy. (it's called sarcasm)

I happen to agree with the "nuts" that believe the Bush* used this bogus fucking terror alert to cover for not only poor holiday sales, but other negative economic data that is on its way. Many people still believe that the poor economy is because of 9/11. It wouldn't take much to convince those same people that more doom and gloom and our "war" on terror is still doing damage to the economy.

What's your take Mr. Retail Expert?

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProfessorGAC]

26. That's Incorrect!

The sale is made. The accounting accrual is made to the assets and inventory. The sale is counted as a sale. The difference is there is no offsetting debit on the reduction of assets. Those are accrued.

THAT is Accounting 101.
The Professor

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProfessorGAC]

39. Still Wrong

You can play these games all you wish. The revenues are included at time of receipt. How they are termed is the only difference. As i said in another post, you're making a distinction without a difference to validate a point that's wrong.
The Professor

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bearfartinthewoods]

41. not according to my tax guy..

it's not revenue till it's turned in.

[htuttle]

27. GAAP accounting....

Why, how quaint!

I don't think any publicly traded corporation uses that stuff anymore. Don't be surprised when you find out that they book the gift certificates as revenue as they are sold. That's essentially what players like Enron were doing with advance sales revenue, and were ultimately told by Bush's SEC that it was okay to do so.

Smaller and mid-sized businesses, however, probably account for them as you describe (as unearned revenue with a future offsetting liability). I think that we do where I work.

on edit:

I'll defer to the Professor above on the finer points. I'm no accountant, but sometimes have to write their software...(and I ask an accountant for lots of advice when I have to do so).

[ProfessorGAC]

30. I Don't Think So, Tuttle

GAAP accounting requires the income to be booked. The accrual is then done as an offsetting debit against the inventory.

I just checked with an accounting professor (by phone) and with two cost accountants here at work. They all said they can't imagine a retail firm not booking the sale of a gift certificate.

The Professor

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProfessorGAC]

37. That's Not What The Accountants Tell Me

The accruals are included in the revenue figures. You're making a distinction without a difference.

The revenues are still booked as received.

So, in the figures at Christmas, the retailers are including the dollars used to purchase gift bonds.

Sorry, but you're wrong.
The Professor

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Walt Starr]

38. Don't most publically traded corporations use a different accounting

method?

Nevermind, question answered in a post below.

[htuttle]

40. I think there's a terminology gap at play here

Here's what we do with gift certificates:

When the sale is made, we book the revenue as income. Then we put the redemption value of the certificate on the debit side of the books. There's a separate line on the balance sheet for it, since there's no sales inventory involved in our business -- we do transportation, so it's services.

I'm not actually sure how the debit is ultimately balanced out. I know we track the certificates as they come in, so they may be literally credited against the debit one by one. On the other hand, I also know that we expect a fair amount of them to never come back. I don't honestly know whether we eventually write some amount of unclaimed certificates off periodically, or whether the liability is disposed of some other way.

[Walt Starr]

42. ahhhh, so the certificate would show up in the bottom line

sales figures right now because of the credit, and the debit would be offset on the bottom line of income at the point of redemption.

Makes sense to me.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[htuttle]

47. We're a service-oriented business, there's no cost of goods

As such, we have fixed costs that rarely vary no matter how much business we do, and non-fixed costs that grow in proportion to the amount of business we do, but not in any one-to-one correspondence.

We have to roll over assets and liabilities from one year to the next on a regular basis. It's never going to come out even on June 30. Sometimes the costs DO appear in a later accounting period than the revenue generated by them (and sometimes vice versa -- like capital purchases, eh?).

We actually do pay a professional accounting firm to figure out all these processes (and a fairly large one at that) -- we didn't make them up off the cuff!

Even in an inventory-centered business that sells actual goods, there are going to be a reasonable share of gift certificates (or warranties) that never get redeemed. You can't always assume the revenue is going to correspond one-to-one with the costs incurred (though it would be nice if it were so!).

Well, maybe you can on paper, in a class, but I can't see that working for very long outside that environment.

[jshep]

56. Why would you sell gift certificates?

And you do have DIRECT COSTS associated with your services. In a service org, you can reasonably estimate these costs based on labor and statistical data.

Assets and Liabilities ALWAYS roll over, expenses and revenues do not.
and if you have large amounts of costs showing up in the wrong year and they are material in nature, your statements should be corrected.


Warrantees and GCs that expire are recognized as revenue, with no costs, on that date. Revenue and Costs are a 1:1 ratio it's the MATCHING PRINCIPLE

[F.Gordon]

54. Really?

This is going off subject for this thread. Are you an accountant? Are you in retail?

How does a company count the revenue of a Gift Certificate? If the revenue goes into the daily receipts, that is a cash sale. It's not UNEARNED REVENUE. That's "Making Up Accounting Bullshit 101" When a Gift Certificate is used, that revenue is applied to daily receipts because the Business has already received that income.

Gift certificates are INCOME used against undetermined inventory or services. So, using your "expert" analysis a Gift Certificate that is never used remains a Liability for the business? Sure. Whatever. So, a business doesn't have to pay income tax on Gift Certificate revenues until they are used? Sure. Whatever. I'll be sure to tell the IRS that my Certificate income is a liability because someone on an internet forum told me. The only thing that is deferred by a Gift Certificate is the Sales Tax if it is applicable.

Regarding the "intel" BS. I see you are singing the Bush* administration propaganda line. "They know stuff that we don't know, but they know that they may not know what they know because they just don't know that they know." Give me a break.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Walt Starr]

20. Since you're new to DU, you should probably read the rules

Calling another DUer a "nut" is a personal attack and against the rules.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Walt Starr]

29. You specifically referred to the poster who began this thread

as a nut. That was a personal attack on an individual DUer.

[HereSince1628]

35. true, but hit alert and let the moderators deal with it.

[Walt Starr]

36. I rarely alert

If a new poster learns the rules quickly, they can stick around and contribute something.

[HereSince1628]

31. ok

[leftofthedial]

19. call it a conspiracy theory if you wish

but there is a clear, unbroken pattern of the Bush GOPNAC Cabal using terror alerts as distractions whenever other news, unpleasant to them, comes out.

Fatherland Security has become an utter joke. how anyone could believe these guys after all the crying of "wolf!" is beyond me. It's political propaganda. Period.

Maybe you could test one of these conspiracy theories and seal yourself in your basement with plastic and duct tape until this all blows over.

[Fleshdancer]

4. psychological terrorism at its best.

The boogie men don't have to do a damn thing...this country is paralized in fear so who exactly is winning the war on terror again???

[grannylib]

6. They needed to keep the focus off the news that the Kurds really got

Saddam and then made a deal with the Americans to come and get him.

[bpilgrim]

8. DISTRACTED - so you CAN'T THINK

shoot, you don't even WANT TO think.

it is a popular method of population control when the leaders got BIG PLANS for the present and the future and they CAN NOT tolerate being QUESTIONED about them.

peace

[LoneStarLiberal]

9. Particularly Germane Considering...

What a f#$%^d up message that was.

We have heightened reason to believe a catastrophic terror attack might take place but please go on about your normal business and enjoy your Christmas holiday.

Eh?!?!?

I dunno, but those two goals certainly don't seem compatible to me.

[meti57b]

13. We've spent $200B and we're no more secure than we were two years ago!

I wonder when the general public is going to understand this. And in fact, we are less secure now because we have less money to spend on so-called "homeland" security and we have made a lot more folks inclined to attack us.

[bpilgrim]

17. guess how much of our total military $$$ (4B) goes to private contractors?

$300 Billion

peace

[theHandpuppet]

16. Why, you ask?

"Why of course the people don’t want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? . . . it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship… All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

— Hermann Goering (Hitler’s deputy, convicted of war crimes at Nuremberg)

[Norquist Nemesis]

21. When the threat level goes down again

and if there has not been an attack, will they tell us exactly what and how they subverted?

It puts lingering fear in me and then almost at the same time I think, wonder what else is going on? This administration plays "look over there!" so much it's next to impossible to rake through the murk of news to get to the real issues and truth!

Basically, they throw shit on the wall, see what sticks and then decide what they want to scrape because it doesn't smell pretty.

[Toucano]

24. It really hurts their credibility.

On the one hand they say, al qaeda has been cut by 1/2 to 2/3 and the war on "terra" is going great.

Now they say al qaeda is capable of an attack that's MORE destructive than 911.

So is al qaeda stronger or weaker? If they're weaker, how can they do more than they did before? I guess 911 wasn't their best effort.:crazy:

[pansypoo53219]

33. so we can be

afWaid, veWy afWaid.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NicoleM]

48. Why not?

I don't know about you, but I've learned never to take anything the Bush Cabal says at face value.

[cosmicdot]

49. if not real ... if nothing happens ... * saved us ... see how that works

... must have been conquering 2 weak countries and having gotten Saddam ...



if real, and something happens ... the intelligence has improved; your tax dollars at work ... although there might be some fallout re being safer (but, Oh'Really and Matthews and Rush et al will help control the spin)



why don't they just say:

until further notice, we will be on "orange" for a 2-week period surrounding the following holidays:

December 25 - Dec. 1
Thanksgiving
4th of July
etc.

the super rich traveling to St. Moritz and other destinations for holidaying 1% prolly contact their Senators/House members, and flood the White House with their plans, and they want some added feeling of security --- so, roll out Ridge to do his customary holiday ritual

[rman]

50. it suggests they know something about a pendig attack

Not just that one is likely to take place, but about the scale of the attack. Which implies they have intel info about the attack from sources relatively close to planners of the attack.

It wouldn't be "could" as in "anything is possible", right? I mean, that would not be worthy of a government press release, would it.

It's very strange they are not saying anything about efforts to track down the planners and prevent the attack. Not even something simple and non-revealing like "we'r doing our best to get them before they strike".

Aside from that, it's plain old scare mongering. They need the people to be afraid of an external threat, or they'd create internal problems for this administration.

Just because it's appropriate, a quote from political philosopher Leo Strauss, teacher of Wolfowitz:
"A political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat, if no external threat exists, then one has to be manufactured."

It used to be just loonies who say such things, now the loonies run the place.

[GreenPartyVoter]

52. "Mushroom Cloud! Mushroom Cloud!"

The neocons don't hesitate to use excessively strong language when keeping the masses cowed.

[waywest]

53. To rival or exceed would mean

we would have to sit on our hands again during such events. I guess we haven't yet put together everything we have "learned" about 911.

(but give us a few more and maybe we'll eventually get it right)


DVD players $9.95!!!!

[Speed8098]

57. Fear is the word of the weak

Like another poster said, this is to cover for the poor economic news that's coming. Fear can work wonders