With a cooler head . . .

. . . I address the previous post.

The denials are still flying (with the appropriate amount of prevaricating), but it all still breaks down to this: there was a tape in the possession of al-Qaeda. Footage of Las Vegas was on it. FBI experts deemed it was a surveillance tape, rather than a vacation footage tape to hide "real" target information, based on shots of entrances, valet parking, and certain interiors. A warning from the FBI in Detroit can be traced to our local FBI, and two Metro officers viewed the tape. A warning was not given to the public, though this tape proved Las Vegas to be an al-Qaeda target.

Still, the mayor claims this information never got to his office at City Hall. Goodman said he would like to confront the prosecutor. "I'd like to call him a liar," the mayor said. "They're making it up. If there were danger, you can bet I'd be screaming it all over the media."

Gee, Oscar. In your own subtle way, you did just call the guy a liar. I think you're protesting a wee bit too much. The FBI thinks you did know the tape existed and brushed it off as having a "deleterious effect on tourism." And isn't "deleterious" a nice, lawyerly word? But go ahead. Saying "they're making it up" is much better than having to admit you 1) knew and chose to remain ignorant; 2) knew, weren't ignorant, but put financial concerns over public safety; or 3) never knew because you're deemed unfit to be in the loop.

Aside from that, if you took this knowledge (I know - if you had it) and screamed it all over the media, that would seem like a panicky and unmeasured response. I would hope, as the number one public official in Las Vegas, you would consult with others. Perhaps you'd work with the FBI to decide whether the threat was general or acute, try to discover the nature of the threat (car bomb? suicide bomber? hijacked small plane or helicopter?) and make an appropriate warning after you had more to go on.

Maybe I'm being a bit unfair: I can understand that the nature of the threat is rarely clear. Just as I've understood since September 12th that I live in a targeted city - the very nature of Las Vegas is an abomination to Islamo-fascists. But if the words "surveillance tape" were even whispered in my general direction, I'd want to know more. Damn tourism or civil liability.

If something here really does "go boom," regardless of the scale, our economy will be crushed. We live and die by tourism. If the tourists don't think we're safe, they won't come.

Now comes the interesting part, and I'd love to see research on this one. Let's get a focus group together and ask: "Knowing Las Vegas officials ignored or refused to view evidence that the city was under credible terror threat, would you be more likely or less likely to visit?"

I wonder.