No new threat info sez Dept. of Homeland Security

"An official with the Department of Homeland Security said the agency remains concerned about the general al Qaeda threat but had no new specific information.

"We are not aware of any new highly credible intelligence indicating a planned attack in the U.S. this summer," the official said. She added: "Nothing in the current intelligence is exceptionally specific."

So is someone just not feeding the right info to Mr. Ridge, is he out of the loop or what? At least this would explain exactly why we are still at Bert, with no plans for Ernie levels of alert.

Assuming that an attack is planned, the article states that an attack might occur during the summer to affect the fall elections. The question is this: would a US terror attack a) show how faulty Mr. Bush's war on terror is, and exactly how UNsafe we've all become, or b) would people rally behind Bush (much like after 9/11) and become too scared to "change horses in the middle of the stream" ?

Because I'm a pessimist, I think b) is a more likely scenario (Bob, I already know you're an optimist, so you'll be going with plan a.) I'm thinking plan b most likely because it would require the least amount of thought to individual voters. A terrorist attack on US soil would guarantee Bush's reelection.

Is Al-Qaeda pro-Bush?