Differentials

The NYPD and local law enforcement agencies around the New York City metro area are taking the threat of terror in the subway system seriously. The DHS and the senior senator from New York, Charles Schumer (D-NY), downplay the seriousness, claiming that the threat isn't particularly serious.

Why the disconnect. Simple. It's because the threat can't be corroborated but it was specific as to time, place, and manner. We've had alerts in the past because we had corroborated evidence that an attack was planned or imminent, but they lacked specificity. Here, we have evidence that isn't corroborated, but has specificity as to when, where, and how an attack would be conducted.

The source of the information? Terrorists captured in Iraq and interrogated by a joint terror task force of CIA and FBI agents.

So how did my ride into NYC go? Uneventful, though a few minutes late for some reason (weather perhaps?). Mrs. Lawhawk's commute was also uneventful, and her trip through the Port Authority was no different than usual. That doesn't mean that there wasn't security, just nothing that seemed all that different from the usual security levels - which are pretty high to begin with in NYC.

Most New Yorkers go on without any real concern about this kind of thing, and they're right to do so. A typical New Yorker is more likely to get into an accident with a messenger biker than be involved in a terrorist incident, but that doesn't stop folks from jaywalking or crossing streets at busy intersections. Besides, the Israelis have lived with a constant and incessant terrorist threat for more than 50 years and that hasn't stopped the business of living there.

Meanwhile, President Bush's speech yesterday included an interesting tidbit about national security. That tidbit was that the US and coalition partners have thwarted at least 10 major terror operations, including three on the US since 9/11. The three US focused threats were the Jose Padilla bombing campaign, and two separate plots to fly jetplanes into skyscrapers (one on each coast).

And that brings me back to security and why the NYPD thinks this is a serious and credible threat, but the DHS doesn't. They're both reacting to the same information, but in different ways. That's both troubling and comforting. On the one hand, the NYPD is acting with prudent caution - after all - it's their job to patrol locally and hopefully intercept the terrorists before they can act. On the other, DHS is pointing out that there is incomplete data on which to operate and that they're cautioning acting when there isn't sufficient evidence.

The intel community isn't a monolithic organization and dissenting views are allowed and encouraged. That's a good thing generally, though it can be quite confusing to the listener (and the general public). We want the intel agencies to be able to draw their own conclusions and do so without the political fallout which has appeared to hamper intel gathering and analysis previously.

What is fascinating is that the CIA and FBI appear to have worked together in procuring this data initially, though later reports have sanitized that fact. That shows that we may have learned some of the lessons from 9/11.

Technorati: NYC, terror threat, subway.