Yup. Here they go.
(from Final Phase forum)
Why are people taking these threats as pro-Bush? These terrorists are determined to kill us. They don't care WHO we vote for!
Election warning causes anxiety
Thu Oct 7, 8:08 AM ET
By Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY
The U.S. government's warnings that terrorists want to disrupt the Nov. 2 elections have created confusion, anxiety and skepticism among state and local election officials.
One Indiana county has moved some polling places from schools, Minnesota precinct judges have been urged to watch for suicide bombers, and some officials are questioning whether voters are being alarmed needlessly.
Since April, election officials across the nation have debated how to respond to the Bush administration's warnings that al-Qaeda wanted to launch "large scale" attacks to disrupt the presidential campaign.
The administration has said it is concerned about an attack similar to the bombings in Madrid in March that killed 191 people and widely were credited with leading Spanish voters to oust the ruling party from power. But because the warnings have been vague and have not identified specific plots or targets, the reactions have varied among officials who oversee the USA's 193,000 polling places:
• In Tippecanoe County, Ind., chief election official Linda Phillips says she will move an undisclosed number of the county's 81 polling places out of elementary schools to "less vulnerable" sites. She acknowledges that Lafayette, Ind., "may not appear on any terrorist's road map," but she says that "it occurred to me that terrorists could get a double hit if they wanted to strike the election by taking out a school."
• Minnesota Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer sent fliers to precinct judges that urged them to watch for suspicious people at the polls who could be suicide bombers. Kiffmeyer, who says "our priorities are to protect life and secure the ballot box," says officials have discussed moving polling places out of schools.
• In Massachusetts and in many other jurisdictions, election officials have been meeting with law enforcement agencies to plan responses to a catastrophic attack. Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin says that state law requires one law enforcement officer to be assigned to each of the state's 2,000 polling places. But like election officials elsewhere, he says there is no plan to increase the number of armed guards or other security personnel at precincts.
Meanwhile, some Democratic election officials are questioning whether there is a political angle to the Bush administration's repeated terrorism warnings.
Rebecca Vigil-Giron, a Democrat who is New Mexico's top election official, says she wonders whether the warnings amount to a veiled Republican effort to suppress voter turnout. Historically, heavy turnout in U.S. elections has favored Democrats.
Attorney General John Ashcroft, who on Sept. 24 ordered the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies to assign what could be hundreds of agents to help deal with any threats to the elections - this week rejected the notion that the Republican White House has hyped the threat to discourage voting. Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo says it is "absolutely absurd that we would seek to depress the vote."
Still, there is skepticism.
Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita, a Republican, says he was "flabbergasted" at the reaction last month when he sent letters to local election clerks urging them to develop plans to respond to "an immediate and present danger." Some local officials accused Rokita of trying to intimidate voters. "Given the concern about terrorism," he says, "I felt somebody ought to be out ... making sure we were talking to each other."
news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=...sesanxiety