Since the institution of the color-coded terror warning system (the very notion of which is, in itself, is a weapon of terror), there have been only FOUR times we've been bumped up into Code Orange. Four times.

Three of those times were in the three months leading up to the invasion of Iraq. The government would raise the level, whip us all into a frenzy of fear, then lower it again. Then, a few weeks later, bump it up again. All this, while the President was desperately trying to gain popular support to go to war.

And while he never actually said that Saddam was responsible for 9-11, he invoked his name in the same sentence The general tone was "Saddam is happy that Al Qaida and Osama Bin Laden perpetrated the events of September 11." If you weren't paying really close attention (and who really does?) you get that "subliminable" message: Saddam = Osama = Al Qaida = Evil Doers. They must be stopped before they strike again!!

The result: a large percentage of Americans believed (and still believe) that Saddam had a major part in 9-11; and that fresh attacks were imminent. And before long, the White House had us right where they wanted us: terrorized (not by Al Qaida, but by the White House, itself!) and begging our Fearless Leader to save us from the crazed Moslem Hordes.

And boy, did it work! Off we marched to war, and we watched CNN, transfixed, as our soldiers marched into Bagdad to "win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people." (And we see how well THAT'S working!)

The fourth time the code was raised...anyone remember?? Hands? Anyone? Anyone?? Was just a few months ago, when John Kerry and the Dems were getting great press from the Democratic Convention. Kerry and the Clintons and Barack Obama. Oh, how the media loved them!

This was something the White House could simply not allow. How to regain control of the media? Hmmm... let me think... I know! We'll raise the terror alert to orange again! Divert people's attention. Focus it back on us and what a "great job" we're doing protecting our country.

Remember the "evidence?" Certain buildings were going to be attacked? Here in New York, there were cops everywhere. You couldn't get anywhere near the Citicorp building (which, I might mention, has a fairly major subway station beneath it, and which caused serious transportation hassles for thousands.)

And then, a few days later, once the smoke from the convention had cleared, the truth finally came out. The information was over three years old. There was absolutely nothing imminent about the danger nor were we in any more peril then than we are on any other day.

Let us ask ourselves, what REALLY is the point of the color system? If there is, indeed, credible information that an attack is imminent or possible, or that known terrorists or WMD have entered the country, why not merely alert those in a position to do something about it (i.e. the police, the National Guard, the Coast Guard, etc.) After all, what can we, as citizens do, except cower in fear, stay inside, refuse to go to work or ride public transportation or fly.

Who REALLY controls us by terror? Osama Bin Laden (who is either dead or perhaps even in American hands, waiting to trotted out as the "October Surprise") or George Bush?

To wit:

On August 11, John Kerry criticized the Bush Administration for blocking a bipartisan plan to give seniors access to lower-priced prescription drugs from Canada. With almost 80 percent of Medicare recipients supporting Kerry's position, the Bush campaign was faced with the prospect of defending a politically unpopular position.

That same day, in an interview with the Associated Press, FDA Acting Commissioner Lester Crawford said terrorist "cues from chatter" led him to believe Al Qaeda may try to attack Americans by contaminating imported prescription drugs. Crawford refused to provide any details to substantiate his claims. -- Legum & Sirota (read full article)

Next time you hear of a terror alert, ask yourself who benefits from keeping your frightened, cowed and in line?