A Painful Look at Homeland Security

The terror-threat level is being reset on the Michael Chertoff Bodily Functions Sensor System.

Last spring, as the national designated worrier, the agency director reported acute gut feelings about an imminent attack, but his scare-response scale has now been lowered to chronic insomnia.

In an interview, Chertoff reports he is not sleeping any better than last year but not any worse over the possibility of an "earth-shattering" event such as "a nuclear or a dirty bomb attack or a nuclear or biological attack."

Last year's biological disclosure brought Chertoff a stern rebuke from the Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, Rep. Bennie G. Thompson:

"What color code in the Homeland Security Advisory System is associated with a 'gut feeling?' What sectors should be on alert as a result of your 'gut feeling?' What cities should be asking their law enforcement to work double shifts because of your 'gut feeling?'”

Such warnings, the Chairman pointed out, could result in communities depleting scarce homeland security resources and subverting "a risk-based approach to homeland security."

But that may be unfair to a director whose agency last year was cited by Congress for failing to fill a quarter of its top leadership posts as a result of "over-politicization of the top rank of Department management" and whose employees reported the lowest job satisfaction among 36 federal agencies.

With all these handicaps, perhaps Chertoff should be commended for finding unorthodox methods of assessing threats and keeping the public informed. The man obviously takes his job to heart.

Stephen Colbert Sues FEMA

A court order is being sought by the Stephen Colbert presidential campaign to enjoin the Federal Emergency Management Agency from issuing any further fake news in California.

The campaign claims that FEMA's actions in having employees pose as reporters at press conferences is "infringing on Mr. Colbert's trademark performance as a faux journalist over many years" and "if allowed to continue, would do irreparable harm to his activities as such in seeking the presidency."

Colbert stressed that having pseudo-reporters ask FEMA deputy administrator Harvey Johnson "sappy questions" was making a mockery of his finely honed journalistic impersonations. "No fake newsman worth his salt," he scoffed, "would ask 'Are you happy with FEMA's response so far?'"

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who has authority over FEMA, called the incident "inexcusable and offensive." There are reports that he will apologize to Mr. Colbert personally and consider endorsing his candidacy.

"Freakonomics" Tumult Over Terrorists

Until the New York Times stops making readers pay for “Select” content, which may happen soon, you will have to take my word for this.

In a new blog on the Times web site, Steven D. Levitt, the quirky economist who co-wrote the best seller, “Freakonomics,” asked: “If You Were a Terrorist, How Would You Attack?”

The post, which cited random sniper shootings as a nifty method, generated almost 600 responses, some with ingenious ideas for mayhem, many with questions and comments about Levitt’s sanity.

Yesterday Levitt responded: “(Y)ou have to believe that terrorists are total idiots if it never occurred to them after the Washington, D.C., sniper shootings that maybe a sniper plot wasn’t a bad idea. The point is this: there is a virtually infinite array of incredibly simple strategies available to terrorists.”

With due respect to Levitt, that’s not the point. It’s one thing to flash your brilliance at a dinner party and quite another to show off in public. The problem is not giving new ideas to terrorists but stirring up the fears we all have to live with since 9/11 for no useful reason.

Levitt’s obtuseness is insignificant compared to that of Michael Chertoff, our Homeland Security honcho, who keeps telling us his gut feelings about imminent attacks while covering his butt and taking bows for the great job he has been doing.

It may be time to amend the old adage, “discretion is the better part of valor” by adding “and vanity as well.”

Yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater never was a great idea.

The Wes Craven School of Journalism

After consulting his gut last month about future terror attacks, Michael Chertoff is now trying to wrench ours.

The voluble Homeland Security Chief teamed up last night with ABC News, the new locus of wet-their-pants journalism, to deliver his latest irrelevant scare story about a year-old threat and his magnificent working in thwarting it.

"I think that the plot, in terms of its intent, was looking at devastation on a scale that would have rivaled 9/11," Chertoff told ABC, commenting on plans discovered by British Intelligence to detonate gel-based explosives on U.S.-bound flights from London last August.

"If they had succeeded in bringing liquid explosives on seven or eight aircraft, there could have been thousands of lives lost and an enormous economic impact with devastating consequences for international air travel."

ABC of late has been juicing up its evening news with such items as a terrorist graduation video supplied by a “Pakistani journalist” and an enthusiastic but pointless report on the resurgence of bank-robbing in the U.S. emphasizing how few perps get caught.

Chertoff’s puffery is a natural fit for this new kind of enterprise journalism to get viewers’ attention at all costs. He prattled for the camera about a “heightened risk” but not “mathematical certainty” of attack based on his reading of news reports from Pakistan and Europe.

If Homeland Security has something to tell Americans that they should do to help avert attacks, let’s hear it by all means. Meanwhile, they and the too-eager media might want cut down on the color-coded self-promotion.

Will Terrorists Pick Our Next President?

In the terrorism-expert business, there is no profit in forecasting there won’t be an attack on the Homeland “soon.” No one will remember a negative and give you credit, and, on the other hand, the definition of “soon” is expandable.

So it’s no surprise that not only do the N.I.E. researchers, Homeland Security Director Chertoff and other less sensitive-gutted authorities on the government payroll but the all rented experts on TV agree about the imminence of an attack in this country. Where’s the news in not predicting one?

The more interesting question is what the terrorists may be thinking. Assuming a modicum of brains to go with their mad hatred, if the object is to sow fear and confusion in our society, what political outcome in ’08 best suits their purposes? And what could they do to help bring it about?

Since 9/11, George W. Bush has been collaborating with Osama bin Laden in destroying the traditional trust Americans have had in their government and in one another. Would Al Qaeda like more of the same?

If so, Giuliani is their man. His campaign, based on images of Rudy in the rubble, is following Karl Rove’s game plan for 2004. Any attack that rekindles 9/11 fears would help America’s Mayor get to the White House.

But if terrorists prefer, for whatever reasons, to see Clinton or Obama in the Oval Office, holding off on homeland attacks would help. It may all depend on their reaction to the Republican gas bags. If they take them at all seriously, Al Qaeda leaders might prefer a Democratic President who wouldn’t break American laws to get at them.

On the other hand, if they find hard-line campaign rhetoric laughable, another Republican to extend Bush’s incompetence and impotence to hurt them might just be the ticket for bin Laden et al.

The terrorists no doubt will go about their business their own way for their own reasons, but what they do in the next year will nonetheless have a profound effect on our elections.

That may be the saddest commentary of all on our post-9/11 world.

Chertoff's Squirrel Spies

Now that the Iranians have blown their cover, the story of our rodent black ops can be told.

Last week, in a desperate last-ditch attempt to preserve their covert status, Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff attributed information about imminent terrorist activities to his “gut feeling.”

Now it can be revealed that he was relying on the work of the Squirrel Intelligence Corps, whose existence was unknown until a number of agents were ferreted out and detained by the Islamic Republic’s Secret Police.

"In recent weeks, intelligence operatives have arrested 14 squirrels within Iran's borders," the state-sponsored news agency IRNA reported. "The squirrels were carrying spy gear of foreign agencies, and were stopped before they could act, thanks to the alertness of our intelligence services."

Our secret squirrels were trained by the Harvard Division of Engineering and Applied Sciences, which concealed its efforts by leaking data about allegedly jocular experiments in “squirrel fishing.”

A critical element of the Iranian operation was timing. According to the journal Scholarly Squirrel, although males of the species “are notorious for chasing females...between July and August, female squirrels are ready to mate only one day out of each season.” Islamic agents apparently took advantage of our operatives’ distraction in anticipating the crucial date.

In keeping with security procedures, Director Chertoff would not comment, but a spokesperson reflected Homeland Security’s disappointment by an off-the-record reference to the observation of Sarah Jessica Parker, “You can't be friends with a squirrel. A squirrel is just a rat with a cuter outfit.”

Color the Congressman Rage-Red

The Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security had a few words today for the Homeland Security Secretary. Rep. Bennie G. Thompson sent Michael Chertoff a letter about his gut-feeling forecast (see below) of terrorist attacks on the U.S. this summer. Here is part of what he wrote:

Words have power, Mr. Secretary. You must choose them wisely--especially when they relate to the lives and security of the American public. What color code in the Homeland Security Advisory System is associated with a “gut feeling?” What sectors should be on alert as a result of your “gut feeling?” What cities should be asking their law enforcement to work double shifts because of your “gut feeling?” Are the American people supposed to purchase duct tape and plastic sheeting because of your “gut feeling?”

The Committee on Homeland Security has repeatedly emphasized the importance of getting specific, actionable information to our first preventers in law enforcement and other emergency response providers. I urge you to follow up on your “gut feeling” and share whatever information our nation’s first preventers need to be on alert and prepared. Otherwise, we run the risk of communities taking it upon themselves to mobilize for every possible threat. This not only would result in communities depleting their scarce homeland security resources but runs contrary to your efforts to move toward a risk-based approach to homeland security.

This kind of rebuke may be devastating for a person of Mr. Chertoff’s sensitivity. One can only hope that he doesn’t take the Chairman’s reaction personally.

Chertoff's Gutsy Forecast

In addition to those color-coded threat levels, the nation now has a new indicator of the imminence of a terrorist attack--the intestinal state of U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff

Briefing the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune, Chertoff reported a “gut feeling” that the U.S. would be attacked soon. "Summertime seems to be appealing to them," he said, referring to Al Qaeda.

Chertoff’s stomach and keen insight into terrorist tastes should be enough to compensate for the fact that his Department has been politicized to the point of the lowest morale of all federal agencies with one-quarter of its top positions unfilled.

In this new era of vulnerability, we have to rely on non-traditional intelligence-gathering such as, perhaps, the Homeland Security head watching CNN coverage of the attempted attacks in Britain.

Chertoff is to be commended for his leadership daring but he may never reach the level of Sen. Joe Lieberman’s achievement in re-seating Democrats and Republicans of his Homeland Security Committee in boy-girl dinner party arrangement instead of opposite sides of the table to let citizens see them side by side as they “work together to make our nation more secure.”

In matters of such gravity, little things can be important. Chertoff’s guts and Lieberman’s sensitivity may help keep us safe.