[Snowy]

Kinda like "Double Secret Probation", isn't it?

I just wish the warnings had some sort of seriousness grade attached to them. Don't they have something like that for the military? "Defcon 1 through 5", or something like that (I don't know exactly what 'Defcon' is). Sort of like, a terrorist warning of 5 would mean that we are reasonably sure they are going to pull something, etc.

[concerned about politics]

Or they could come up with a place or a "weapon" to be used. If they got the name and date, why not more? Half the story really doesn't do much tward prevention. That's the part of the alerts I don't like.

[Focault's Pendulum]

(I don't know exactly what 'Defcon' is

It means Defense Condition. 5 being the lowest and 1 meaning war is imminent. The US military is usually set at 4, I don't believe the government has ever officially acknowledged a Defcon 1, Pretty sure during the Cuban missile criis we were at 2....although I could be incorrect about that.

[monkeyshine]

"Defcon 1 through 5"

"I'd p*ss on a spark plug if I thought it'd do any good."

"I don't trust them any further than I can throw them"

"Take us to defcon 2, scramble the fighters."

[zog]

--I'd be just as happy with information on the "nature" of the threat, could put my own priority label on it then. "we have seekrit info that a truck containing xxxxwhatever was hijacked and missing now, and it might be used in an attack, sources indicate possibly in xxx city". Something more along those lines. if it doesn't happen, if the warning that gets to the public makes them abort their "mission" so much the better. But these extremely vague 'threat warnings" are not conducive for anything other than to get people all paranoid and keep demanding 'government do something", which is a threat in and of itself in a lot of cases.