Sec. Svc: Threats not higher for Obama

[sabra]

Source: MSNBC

From NBC's Mike Viqueira
A factoid coming out of the gate-crashers hearing...

Secret Service Director Sullivan says that contrary to reports that he has heard in the media, the threat level to this president is no greater than for other presidents.

He says it is the "same level it has been for the last two presidents."

Read more: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/12/03/2141729.aspx

[TheWraith]

1. I think we're seeing some language parsing.

The "threat level" isn't any higher, but he didn't say that there aren't more threats.

[sofa king]

5. Concur.

The very mission of the Secret Service is to maintain the highest level of security for the President at all times. So that isn't going to change.

If procedures and practices have to be changed due to the volume of threats, that's another matter entirely.

[Igel]

8. That fails the coherence test.

'Secret Service Director Sullivan says that contrary to reports that he has heard in the media, the threat level to this president is no greater than for other presidents.'


There are some problems. Let's say that Obama's still worse off and that somehow he's not saying what the press seem to want us to infer he's saying.

One, how do you define threat level? Is it the number of threats or some sort of weighted average of the severity of the threats? If we try to say the number is up but the threat level hasn't changed, then the severity must be higher for Obama. What, more people wanted to dunk * in lukewarm water? This is a question of definitions. It's not an unreasonable one.

Two, is there a difference between threat level and security level? So if the SS really beefed up security, does that = a higher threat level? So the best way to reduce the threat level is to abolish the SS? This is another question of definitions, but one that has a clear logical absurdity as a consequence of the definition required to hold "our" POV. Logic fail.

Three, "contrary to reports . . . in the media." The only reports I've heard concerning anything like an increased "threat level" is precisely an increase in the number of threats. So he's making a statement that's contrary to no reports. This violates constraints on pragmatic inferencing and cohesion in English. In other words, we're claiming that to hold to our beliefs he must be babbling and he's incoherent, but we don't call for his immediate dismissal and examination by a competent psychologist.


However, "tree" requires that we pull his text to pieces and act as though there is no cohesion. I've seen it down in some rather eisegetical, shoddy scholarship, but let's not go there. He left enough information for intelligent people of good will to understand what he meant. In fact, assuming a stance of ill-will so as to claim he's parsing his words carefully gets you back to (3). We're left with saying he's incoherent or simply wrong, but with no grounds apart from our beliefs for our conclusion.

[sofa king]

11. Holy crap! "Eisegetical" is a nifty term.

Thanks for dropping that ten-cent word for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisegesis

However, in this case, I'm neither intelligent enough nor of enough good will to trust what this guy says. I figure the very last thing a Secret Service person wants is people who wish to do ill knowing the actual security status, whatever it is. I wouldn't want anyone to know my security was improved in hopes of sweeping up the bad guy while coverage is best. And I surely wouldn't want them to know that security has been relaxed.

So what I'd say is something vague, noncommittal, and generally positive and confident. Which is what he said.

And, as I suggested above, like the maintenance crew of Air Force One, the aim of the Secret Service is to provide perfect protection at all times--effectively the highest standard of excellence. If that's the level of which he speaks, then it's no surprise at all that it hasn't changed.

[Tempest]

2. I don't buy that

There's been too many reports from local law enforcement agencies from around the country, and from the Secret Service itself which contradict Sullivan.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. Why is this govt beginning to resemble the previous ones, in terms of

parsing, and word games?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

4. the right wing hated bill so i am not surprised and bush well i mean his approval level was at 30%

i am sure he wasnt well loved. it is possible that the threats are similar if not the same

[atreides1]

6. Would this be the same Secret Service

that let uninvited guests into the WH?

[OnyxCollie]

7. The same Secret Service

that gave orders to local law enforcement to stop searching people at an Obama appearance in Dallas.

[kpominville]

9. WTF? He is contradicting the SS's own report

It was their own report that said threats were up 400%!!!

[damntexdem]

10. Well, we've recently seen how effective the Secret Service is when faced with gate crashers.

So we must really trust them on this -- right? ;-)