In all seriousness, why has DHS not raised the terrorist threat level?

[JBoy]

You can't tell me that the potential for an attack is not now "High".

[Zenlitened]

1. Ugh. Unrec. - n/t

[arcane1]

2. Because the "threat level" was never based on actual "threats"

it was a purely political PR tool

[DJ13]

3. You really want to continue the Bush terrorism scares?

Really?

[Zoeisright]

4. I think you're right.

The threat level from domestic terrorism is now very high, thanks to the wacko teabaggers and the immoral, violent repuke party.

[orion007]

5. Very very expensive to do, n/t

[BlooInBloo]

6. Because it's not possible for white folks to be terrorists.

[Cleita]

7. It's different when Democrats are the target.

We aren't important and our Congress critters apparently aren't either.

[fascisthunter]

8. this is an inside job

this government is extremely divided... I think many in government are in support of these GOP extremists.

[kestrel91316]

15. IMHO many in LE, especially the FBI, fully support the RW terrorists.

[Newest Reality]

9. I get your point.

Yet, I agree with the point made about the political manipulation involved in the threat'o'meter.

Look just how the word "terrorism" has been inserted and infused into modern thinking when many of us see how it's use has been to create fear and machinate political and financial victories for the Military/Industrial State.

With that in mind, your point has been made, and I'm sure we could move away from the tools and memes used to manipulate us to this brink.

What does that leave us with? Well, "traitors" and patriotism are awash in obscure relationships and meanings now and we can expect that jargon to be used by the simple-minded and troubled fringe.

Maybe we should stick with something close to politically-based criminal intent? I know that won't catch on, but it seems to portray something more reasonably akin to the activities of the frothing, rapid, boil overs out there.

[Echo In Light]

10. Because the WoT is phony, as is its various machinations, such as that color code

[SoCalDem]

11. New updated terror warning

[JBoy]

12. LOL.

[pitohui]

13. it's already at orange in the affected areas (has been since jan 2004)

it's been at "orange" since at least january 2004 for airports, and it has been "orange" for some time at specific places such as ports, some financial buildings, some federal gov't buildings and so on

the states would be bankrupt if we had universal "orange" level, hence, some time ago they begged for relief, and the DHS went to this system where you can be "orange" for some places (the airport) while relaxing the security restrictions at some other places (major resort hotels in vegas hasn't done "orange" in years, it has been a long while since someone put a mirror under my vehicle before i drove into a casino resort parking garage)

the answer to your question is MONEY

this country can't afford to implement the full range of "orange" requirements, it is a severe restraint of trade, half the country would be employed as security guards, hell, prob. there aren't enough people in the country who could pass the security screening to do all the security required for full-bore "orange" nation-wide outside of major airports and financial districts

[kestrel91316]

14. Um, because RWers are by definition above the law so nothing they

do can ever be construed as a threat to anyone?