http://www.austin360.com/aas/news/111402/1114hospital.html ASSOCIATED PRESS Thursday, November 14, 2002 HOUSTON (AP) — Hospitals in Houston, San Francisco, Chicago and Washington have been alerted they may be targets of a terrorist threat, the Houston FBI says. FBI agent Bob Doguim said Wednesday that the agency received the uncorroborated information from overseas intelligence sources. He said the threat to hospitals in the four cities was not specific, though it mentioned a time between December and April — and the possibility of anthrax or explosives. The Chicago FBI said such an attack "would take place in reaction to the continued arrest of a Pakistani national by Pakistani authorities," and could come leading up to the holiday season. "We have to let the public and the hospitals know about it," Doguim said. "We're going to err on the side of caution." Doguim warned hospital staff and patients not to overreact. "This stuff is going to continue to go on," he said. "Be confident in the fact we have procedures and systems in place to deal with this kind of information." Erin Fairchild, a spokeswoman for Methodist Hospital in Houston, said the hospital's security staff was talking with members of different departments. "We have alerted different people around the hospital in an attempt to heighten awareness," said Stefanie Asin, a Methodist Hospital spokeswoman. "We are not doing anything extraordinary." Chicago Police Department Officer Carlos Herrera said police were being told to be on the lookout for anything suspicious, and were alerting hospitals of the potential danger. "We've always been on a state of high alert," Herrera said. "That hasn't changed." In San Francisco, a spokeswoman at the regional trauma center, San Francisco General Hospital, said staff received a memo Tuesday outlining the threat, but that no special precautions were put in place. "Our employees believe there's a threat every day," spokeswoman Doreen Meyer said.
I think this whole terror alert thing is a Catch 22. Do you keep quiet about uncoroberrated threats and let the American people live in peace? Or do you bring out threats, whether legitimate or not, that should they happen, would be potentially devastating to the point that the people have to be informed so that they can prepare? Its a fine fine line. After the whole contreversy about the knowledge (albeit limited) our government had about the Sept. 11th attacks before they happened, it would be a P.R. disaster for our goverment to learn of another attack and again, not warn the American public.
I think this whole terror alert thing is a Catch 22. Do you keep quiet about uncoroberrated threats and let the American people live in peace? Or do you bring out threats, whether legitimate or not, that should they happen, would be potentially devastating to the point that the people have to be informed so that they can prepare? Its a fine fine line. After the whole contreversy about the knowledge (albeit limited) our government had about the Sept. 11th attacks before they happened, it would be a P.R. disaster for our goverment to learn of another attack and again, not warn the American public. Good question. At first, I thought the government should report everything it knows. But now, this type of threat warning -- what does it do for us? Is anyone going to change what they do today? Perhaps with something this specific, some people might choose not to visit the hospitals today, but some of the other more vague threat warnings aren't so helpful. If something does happen, will we be any more prepared? (I'm talking the public; the security / safety depts obviously need all of these types of warnings) I'm wondering if we are just tuning these types of warnings out now.
