Why Do You Think We Haven't Been Attacked By Al Qaeda Again?

[DistressedAmerican]

I've heard a lot of righties claim that all of the measures BushCo. has taken has prevented another major attack on the US. This is one argument. I've been pondering what else may be at play.

I see several possible options:
1) Patriot Act, War on Terror, Etc. are actually being effective
2) They have chosen not to attack again for reasons of their own
3) They prefer to attack us in Bush's "central Front", Iraq
4) The American public has become too vigilant or suspicious to make operating here feasable
5) They figure, "Hey we got the ball rolling. They have their hands full now."
6) We were attacked (anthrax for example) but it was covered up

Certainly there are possibilities that I am forgetting. So what do you think. Why no more planes, trains, of automobile bombs? Is is possible that all of these Draconian measure ARE effective?

DA
http://www.seedsofdoubt.com/distressedamerican/main.htm

[Roon]

1. Because they are going to hit us hard

and it will make 9-11 look like a picnic. That is what I fear anyway...

[chicagojoe]

26. This is where I stand.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[devinsgram]

51. I'm in with rest of you.

It will make 9-11 pale in comparison.

[donheld]

83. I'm afraid you may be right

It's not going to be pretty.

[DistressedAmerican]

84. Still Not Keeping America Safe!

Old graphic. But still as true today as the day I made it:

[NC_Nurse]

2. Bush is running the country down the drain

all by himself - they don't need to attack us. They can just sit by and laugh while Bush bankrupts us and tunrs this country into another fascist/theocracy - just what they wanted! :eyes:

[0007]

42. Exactly, what more could Al Qaeda want as long as junior

is doing the work for the terrorist?

We are self destructing.

[DistressedAmerican]

45. In that regard the terrorists definitely ARE winning.

[Tigress DEM]

64. We are the Al Queda Comedy Network somewhere.

[marcologico]

3. Because we're spending 1 billion $/day giving them a turkey shoot in Iraq.

So they can kill all the Americans they want without leaving home.

[bemildred]

11. Yep. #2 and #3. nt

[Kahuna]

4. Al Qaeda is on their schedule. Not ours. There were 8 years between

the first Tower attacks and the second. They are disciplined and patient.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[July]

I think you're right.

And it's good to remind the right of that when they start their bull about how Bush is "keeping us safe." As far as we know, the things he hasn't done to keep us safe are more obvious than the things he has done. And, to turn their not-very-deep argument on its head, if 3 years of no AQ attacks mean that Bush is keeping us safe, how about those eight years Clinton kept us safe -- till after he left office -- hmm, a few months of Bush and we get an attack -- I think we can freak out a few red sheep with that notion!

[FreedomAngel82]

50. Very good points!

And very true. I'll have to remember that more often in debating with Bushie's. I think something will happen in the future. So many Iraqi people are being hurt and probably will want revenge in the future. So who could they go to? Al-Quada. They have experience with hitting us and getting away (thanks to Bush). :grr:

[DistressedAmerican]

46. While I think it may be a mix of factors,

if I had to pick one, this would be it.

[borg5575]

58. They don't need to attack us now

Why bother to attack us again? With Bush as president the whole country is screwed up anyway. How could things be worse? So they don't need to attack us again because we are going down the tubes anyway even without an attack.

[MiniMe]

5. They have chosen not to attack........yet

It is coming, make no mistake about it. Homeland security is a joke, we have open borders, open ports, inadequate screening of cargo, the list goes on and on. But they did manage to get Cat Stevens before he landed, LOL.

[Sydnie]

6. Because fear is better than bombs

They have a pResident that instills fear with every statement. What more could they do to us? Kill us? What would they have to gain? The world would not tolerate that for long, and they know that. But scare us to death? Yeah, that works. It's cheap (a few video tapes now and then) and it keeps us all unstable and divided. Actually, it's a very effective weapon, don't you think?


They don't need to actually DO anything as long as we fear that they will.

[LittleClarkie]

14. Good point -- remember right after 9/11

when we said we wouldn't let them effect or daily lives or they will have won. Well guess what. They're probably doing a victory dance every day. They even effected the next election.


I do think, nevertheless, that terrorism is real. Sometimes I wonder if folks think that if we would just leave these places, they'd stop being terrorists.

I submit our own Religious Right as a group that doesn't stop. I don't imagine our American Taliban is much different from theirs. So I have no doubts that there are groups out there who can't be reasoned with, who are essentially nuts, much like our neocons. That's one thing I learned being a Kerry supporter and reading his book on terrorism. It's more like a crime syndicate, really. So when they derided him on the Republican side for wanting to treat the problem as crime rather than a war, I think that showed the principal misunderstanding of the problem that the Bush admin has, or pretends to be obtuse enough to have.

Of course, I'm not sure Bush wants to fight terror so much as to use it as an excuse to fight nice, money-generating wars. Meanwhile there are things that could be done to make us safer that aren't being done. Non-violent things like taking these people's money sources away, like the drug trade in Afghanistan. But nooo, that might actually be effective, but not lucrative, so we don't do it.

[DistressedAmerican]

21. Here's my suggestion for the last issue you mentioned

The "War on Drugs" creates the very blackmarket that funds our enemies in the "War on Terror". It is totally counter intuitive.

[LittleClarkie]

24. Ah, but what war on drugs exactly? I don't think Afghanistan

is being restrained hardly at all. The opium trade is booming out of there.

Sorry. I'm not going to condone legalizing heroin and other opiates.

[DistressedAmerican]

30. Allow me to explain my thinking:

People using these substances are ADDICTS not criminals.

Continuing to lock them in prison does not fix the problem. It is both costly AND totally ineffective as a means to combat consumption of these drugs.

If we were to legalize the two and others and make it available with a doctor's prescription (with an eye to getting them off) it would go a long way to reorienting our society's paradigm toward the addiction as a disease model and away from addict as weak, immoral, criminal.

Keeping these substances illegal does three things:
1) It creates the previously mentioned black market which drives international crime.

2) It drives the cost of the drug up for people with addictive disease. That drives street level crime (violent and property). Addicts will steal, murder etc, to get what their body demands. They are not in control of these behaviors.

and

3)It forces addicts to seek drugs on the street of questionable source and quality contributing to overdose deaths.

Continued prohibition has proven totally ineffective at curbing the consumption of these substances, it has merely changes the economics of the situation. Prohibition makes a regulate-able and taxable social problem into an out of control bonanza for the "evil doers". It threatens at the individual level (drug crime) and the macro level(terrorism, international drug smuggling).

Legalization would allow government control of the production of these sources. It could be taxed to support drug treatment. And it immediately takes the black incentives out of the situation that fuel our worst enemies from street gangs (recently highlighted by Bush in the SOTU) to Pablo Escobar to Bin Laden. We can end the importation of these substances overnight.

Prohibition has never worked it takes a bad problem and makes it worse. That is why we need to legalize.

That being said do you have a good reason why they SHOULD be treated as contraband?

[mordarlar]

32. I have observed MUCH CRIMINAL behavior from addicts, personally.

I am STRONGLY opposed to legalization.

[DistressedAmerican]

33. Was it criminal activity driven buy the need to get money for their fix?

If so, I'd argue that the economic motivation for such crime can immediately be removed. Much of the crime would go with it.

[mordarlar]

34. No it was not

[DistressedAmerican]

35. Follow this discussion on a new thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1571565

[Toots]

37. Been doing it your way for over sixty years now... How we doing?

Look around at the rest of the world and see how we compare. Look at Holland for instance. The definition of insanity is to repeat the same thing over and over and expect a different result. Why do you feel results are going to be different if we continue on the way we are now? I fell if you want different results you must try different tactics. JMHO

[FreedomAngel82]

52. And with those video tapes

BushCo can play them any time and can "mistranslate" them to getting their way. Like with the video before the election. They only showed one part of the video where he talks about Bush and Kerry. Of course the Bushie or fencing people freaked out and voted for Bush more then likely. Because of how he mentioned Kerry's name probably even though if they read the transcript they'd know what he said. Who knows how long they've had that video. And if you go to the website Review 911 (just google for it) and they have a section on the last OBL video that we saw as a nation.

[itzamirakul]

7. Collusion between the suicide pilots and

the neocons. They have to be careful not to be discovered...right now it is considered a conspiracy theory.

[liberalmuse]

8. 9-11 was likely a Black Op, an inside job.

So, I'm crazy because I'm pretty much convinced that this operation couldn't have happened if there wasn't inside help, or at least parts of our government that allowed it to happen.

These days, I'm prone to believe that Al Qaeda is funded by the CIA and other such agencies around the world. OBL answers to and is working for them. His videotapes sure do come at the most convenient times for Bush. And look how much money and power 9-11 has put in the pockets of a certain segment of our population, mainly corporate America and the military industrial complex, and all those who have been sucking off that teat for decades, like the Bushes, Cheney, Rice, etc. Americans now support pre-emptive war and practially accept torture. My god. It's been the most successful Black Op ever.

[No Exit]

18. Exactly! You are right!! n/t

[NotNInch]

29. Absolutely,

and we continue to stir the pot in Iraq via Black ops. We are not done privatizing all of the Iraqi resources and taking total control of the country.

At a minimum we were responsible for the first beheading and who knows how many since. These and other travisties are used to reinforce the American public's belief in the need to eliminate the "terrorists".

[Al-CIAda]

41. We have a winner! -eom

[LittleClarkie]

10. Because these things never happened with incredible frequency

anyway.

I think it takes time to plan really large attacks.

Meanwhile, there are all those new recruits to train. And we've probably made ourselves a focal point over in the M.E.

Come to think of it, if it is indeed Al Queda in Iraq attacking our soldiers, then how come they don't count in the "we haven't been attacked again" sweepstakes. By the time we're done, will the amount of casualties match the Twin Towers.

They sure do, several times over, on the Iraqu side.

[chelsea0011]

12. They are just picking the easy targets overseas right now

it takes years to plan anything here and they are probably working on something completely different. Terrorists can't be ever be completely stopped. Look how much effort Israel puts into protecting from terrorism and look how much still happens. The only thing you really try to do is protect from the huge acts of destruction. Something Bush Co. didn't want to deal with.

[BlueManDude]

13. Because they are not as powerful as you think they are

It took them years to pull off 9/11. They can't just hit us at will. Their prowess is being overstated by those who seek to keep us in a constant state of "alert". Plus they know that our response to 9/11 is killing our country more than any act of violence on their part could ever achieve.

BushCo is doing much more damage to America and it's ideals than OBL could ever hope to do.

[Quixote1818]

40. I think you are absolutly right.

[bowens43]

15. We have been attacked, many times in many places.

Attacks in the US are few and far between. Remember that during the Clinton years there was only one within the US borders and it occurred only 30 days after Clinton took office. The actions taken by the bush administration have had no effect on Al Qaeda but have had a devastating effect on our freedom.

[No Exit]

16. Because Bush got re-elected and is making headway...

The 9/11 attack was the means his supporters chose to make Bush from a weak (remember, back then EVERYONE knew he'd been selected, not elected) "leader" into a nationalist hero (retch, barf).

I do not believe the official story of 9/11. Cui bono? Answer: Bush. It was not a coincidence. It was a plan.

Unocal wants a pipeline through Afghanistan. How improbable is it that at that very moment, we realize that a man who "killed 3000 Americans" is hiding in... Afghanistan?

If Bush ever really takes a big political fall, expect another "attack". Except, this time, those who cause the attack may get caught red-handed. As awful as an attack would be, I look forward to seeing the real perpetrators of one getting caught. If only neocon forces could get caught doing this, I would then look forward to their trials--if the population didn't hunt them down and kill them first. As awful as it is, if Kristol (and the rest of the cabal) ended up as Mussolini ended up, it would at least be justice.

Meanwhile, "Operation Northwoods" continues apace, aided by the hysteria of idiot freeper types. If you don't believe they are hysterical, just check out the thousand-post "Terror Matrix" that they run on that foul site. It's largely a bunch of freeper women who blame literally every plane crash, every chemical plant flaw, almost every street crime, on "terrorism".

[DistressedAmerican]

23. Had to look up operation northwoods...

Here's what I found:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html

-Snip-
OPERATION NORTHWOODS:
US PLANNED FAKE TERROR ATTACKS ON CITIZENS
TO CREATE SUPPORT FOR CUBAN WAR

From BODY OF SECRETS, James Bamford, Doubleday, 2001, p.82 and following.
Scanned and edited by NY Transfer News.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



...In Lemnitzer's view, the country would be far better off if the generals could take over.
For those military officers who were sitting on the fence, the Kennedy administration's botched Bay of Pigs invasion was the last straw. "The Bay of Pigs fiasco broke the dike," said one report at the time. "President Kennedy was pilloried by the super patriots as a 'no-win' chief . . . The Far Right became a fount of proposals born of frustration and put forward in the name of anti-Communism. . . Active-duty commanders played host to anti-Communist seminars on their bases and attended or addressed Right-wing meetings elsewhere."

Although no one in Congress could have known it at the time, Lemnitzer and the Joint Chiefs had quietly slipped over the edge.

According to secret and long-hidden documents obtained for Body of Secrets, the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government. In the name of antiCommunism, they proposed launching a secret and bloody war of terrorism against their own country in order to trick the American public into supporting an ill-conceived war they intended to launch against Cuba.
-End Snip-

[No Exit]

62. That's right, my friend!

It was a real plan!

You know, I guess to try to understand what is happening today, it would help if we looked at a continuum of what the CIA has been doing, at least for the last 50 years. Not to mention, what the military (in its more secret depths) has been up to!

When Oklahoma City happened, someone idly said to me, "Our government could've been the ones who did that." I completely rejected that idea, of course. But what he meant was not "our government", but "some forces within our government". There are factions within our government, and many of them long outlast presidential terms.

And let's not forget the deep CIA connections to George H.W. Bush and, by extension, to his rotten family.

Operation Northwoods is finally being enacted. Isn't that wonderful... not!

[dogman]

17. Because the neo-cons are not ready to enter the next phase.

When they have freed up our forces from the Iraq War and are ready to move on the next target of oppourtunity, the strike will come and we'll espond again.

[No Exit]

19. Exactly! Operation Northwoods continues... n/t

[Mend]

20. They want bush and the repukes in power

because they know the repuke agenda will spell total death to our country more completely than any attack. I have believed this since 911, which happened when it was clear that bush's presidency was a disaster and that an attack would impower the right wing.

[gulliver]

22. Exactly. Bin Laden's endorsement of Bush WAS an attack.

Damned cheap one too. Bush will continue to do massive damage to the United States, and all Bin Laden had to do was make a videotape.

Why should they attack us with bombs when they are still realizing the benefit of the WTC attacks? As has been said so often, "When your enemy is destroying himself, don't get in the way."

[CelticWinter]

25. It's because BushCo.'s check bounced

But it will happen when its the most opportune time for this administration. They have to keep the fear factor high and people on edge...disoriented sheeple are much easier to control.
So many possibilities could bring on another attack.
1. BuchCo. doesnt get it's way with SS, so an attack is made and people are more concerned about safety then their future.
2. BushCo. wants more control in ME and what country stands between Iraq and Afghanistan? Iran. An attack could be blamed on Iran.
The possibilities are endless and with this crew nothing is impossible or too far fetched.
If someone were to say to me five years ago we would be were we are today I would have told them to put their hat away and take a pill, not now, there are no more surprises, everything is possible with this bunch.

[Mend]

28. Someone with balls

a real pollster, should take a legimate poll in this country: "who is more dangerous to the U.S., bush or bin laden?" The results should be announced and published in all the MSM. As you can tell, I have no doubt how many Americans will vote.

[mordarlar]

31. Osama says he did not attack us. That our own government...

is where we should look?


http://www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html


>>>October 16, 2001-- An interview with Osama bin Laden was published in a Karachi-based Pakistani daily newspaper, Ummat, on September 28, 2001. In this interview, bin Laden says of the September 11 attacks in the US:

"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. <<<

>>>Whoever committed the act of 11 September are not the friends of the American people. I have already said that we are against the American system, not against its people, whereas in these attacks, the common American people have been killed. According to my information, the death toll is much higher than what the U.S. Government has stated. But the Bush Administration does not want the panic to spread. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; the people who are a part of the U.S. system, but are dissenting against it. <<<

>>>Then there are intelligence agencies in the U.S., which require billions of dollars worth of funds from the Congress and the government every year. This was not a big problem till the existence of the former Soviet Union but after that the budget of these agencies has been in danger. They needed an enemy. So, they first started propaganda against Usama and Taleban and then this incident happened. You see, the Bush Administration approved a budget of 40 billion dollars. Where will this huge amount go? It will be provided to the same agencies, which need huge funds and want to exert their importance. Now they will spend the money for their expansion and for increasing their importance. I will give you an example. Drug smugglers from all over the world are in contact with the U.S. secret agencies. These agencies do not want to eradicate narcotics cultivation and trafficking because their importance will be diminished. The people in the U.S. Drug Enforcement Department are encouraging drug trade so that they could show performance and get millions of dollars worth of budget. General Noriega was made a drug baron by the CIA and, in need, he was made a scapegoat. In the same way, whether it is President Bush or any other U.S. President, they cannot bring Israel to justice for its human rights abuses or to hold it accountable for such crimes. What is this? Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks.<<<


http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_12_01/What_Does_Bin_Laden_Really_Wan/what_does_bin_laden_really_wan.html

This article is an interesting read now that we all know what we do about the powers that be here. I am very confused about the whole thing. But i will say i trust bush LESS THAN ANYONE.

[FreedomAngel82]

53. Interesting

I know a little bit about Buddist (used to be on a list with one) and they don't believe in killing anything (even ants) so if Muslims are similiar to their religion it could be true. And I do remember reading how one of the suspected person's was still a live. They were a college student and a year or so before they had their identity stolen and reported it but nothing ever happened. You should check out the site Review 911. Just google for it. You should send that info to them if they don't know about it. But interesting.

[No Exit]

63. Certain factions--

certain parts of Israeli military, and/or Mossad, are absolute masters of "false flag" operations.

I am not blaming all of 9/11 on Israelis; I am saying that they, along with our own spooks (CIA), along with a few really brainwashed or stupid arabs, may have concocted the whole thing.

The manifesto of the Project for a New American Century clearly says, "America needs a new Pearl Harbor". That's as close to a confession as you can get. Yet no one seems to notice!

[ailsagirl]

88. Nothing is too rotten and evil for those guys... (the * crew)

Nothing would surprise me. Nothing.

[DemDogs]

36. Last time it was 1993 to 2001. (n/t)

[AntiCoup2K4]

38. Because "Al Qaeda" does not exist.

There is no such thing as a large nebulous world wide terrorist group.Except for Mossad, the CIA, and the Bush Criminal Empire, that is.

Terrorists exist, but they act locally, and are generally concerned with local issues. Think about it...

Did the Irish Republican Army give a flying fuck if Britain occupied the Falkland Islands or anywhere else on the planet, as long as they got out of Northern Ireland?

Has Hamas (whose own origins come straight from Mossad headquarters) ever attacked anyone other than Israel?

Aren't the Iraqi "insurgents" really just pissed off people who want an occupying army out of their country, and wouldn't any country under foreign occupation be likely to see the same results? (see the 80's cheeseball classic "Red Dawn", for example.... WOLVERINES!!!!!)

Now what do these three groups have in common? Not a whole hell of a lot, except for the willingness to use violence to reach a certain goal.

The idea that they're part of some worldwide network is fucking insane The idea that such people pulled off a meticulously planned operation that required the standing down of US air defenses and the complicity of both the US federal and NYC municipal governments - now that's even more ludicrous.

[blonndee]

60. Thank you! nt

[LSK]

79. i agree

If there was some huge worldwide terror group, it would be so easy for them to blow up whatever they want. Do you really see tight security in your city???? I dont see it in mine...

[Quixote1818]

39. They know they have to do something spectacular or else they will look

like they have been marginalized. If they do a few car bombings in New York or Chicago Bush could say that they have been weakened and we are winning the war on terror but if they do something spectacular again which is how they like to operate then people would take them seriously. Anything too small will seem anti climactic after 9/11.

[Al-CIAda]

43. When a draft becomes needed, we will be attacked.

PNAC wants more bodies. The Congress has just passed the doomsday plan.

It could be any day now.

[LunaC]

44. But it won't be Al-Qaeda doing the attacking

You're right.....it will be a PNAC operation. Anyone who doubts this should read the link in my sig line.

[FreedomAngel82]

54. Of course they'll blame

it on Ossama Bin Laden or someone from Iraq or Iran so they can fullfill their plans. Remember how when we went to war with Iraq so many people signed up to "get revenge" for 9/11 even though they had nothing to do with it?

[mattclearing]

47. Bushes not desperate enough yet.

Stay tuned...

[Disturbed]

48. MIHOP?

Seems that there are a few MIHOP believers that post on DU. How did he 19 suicide squad get talked into doing this?

[Pastiche423]

65. Where did you hear that number?

Who told you there were 19 "hijackers"?

Has any proof and/or evidence been brought forth that there were 19 "hijackers"?

[Pork Chop]

49. If they were smart

If they were smart, they would wait until they acquire nucular weapons, and then nuke DC, NYC, LA, etc. But, it's obvious that we've put a dent in their organization - how much of a dent is a matter of debate.

[AngryAmish]

55. Because they did not do it the first time

Al Qaeda per se does not exist. They are CIA plants.

[amazona]

56. I go with we were but it was covered up

I am satisfied that the anthrax attack was a local operation but AA 587 looks like a terror operation to me. I think anything smaller scale than 9/11 now gets white-washed. We had Muslim guys shoot up airports in Los Angeles and New Orleans, and it was pretty much buried, such that I have only really heard rumors that other airports had shootings as well -- couldn't cover up in LAX and MSY because there were deaths.

People bee-yatch about the security at the airport but I do think the large and visible security presence there has discouraged "copycats" of 9/11. You can't stop all killing but you can make the job of mass murder a lot tougher.

As far as dirty bombs, I think such attacks would just be covered up and probably for the very sensible reason that the people exposed have only a slightly elevated chance of getting cancer, in what, 30 years so why put the fear on them and destroy the property values of the city or cities attacked? I'm confident if a dirty bomb or radiological attack occurs, it simply won't be acknowledged unless there is a large conventional explosion as well. And I actually think it's just as well. Why give the bad guys more publicity than you have to.

Biological attacks (anthrax) and chemical or radiological attacks simply aren't going to be as dramatic as 9/11 and thus are easily covered up when they occur.

Don't forget the Egypt Air suicide co-pilot who took down the plane in Washington and it wasn't acknowledged for years that he did this intentionally. TWA 800 is still in the, uh, we are not going to admit it was shot down by rocket launchers territory.

I don't think it is all bad to refuse terrorists publicity but I am confident that terror attacks or at least harassment do continue.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[cestpaspossible]

57. Because it would hurt Bush

[bush_is_wacko]

59. How about the BIG attack takes time, money and VERY secure planning?

Some spy techniques have limited their ability to conspire, however, I'm not convinced they aren't planning something or that they are truly afraid to do it. Am I afraid? Not really, I think it will happen when it happens and where it happens and I don't think there will be much we can do to stop it. Of course there is always the other thing that keeps popping into my head... 911 may have been an inside job, so to speak. I have not found enough evidence to support either theory. Maybe I just don't want to admit to myself the very real possibility that there are no "real" terrorists outside this country.

Where is Osama bin Laden? Who is Zarqawi? Why did Saddam Hussein REALLY need to be removed at THIS time in history. Why does it seem we are ONLY targeting Muslim tyranny? Why is the administration seemingly supporting the rise of the Euro OVER the dollar? How can these weirdo's make people believe they are religious, when everything they do is ANTI-Christian? Why and how have so many from Nixon administration resurfaced and how did they get where they are? Have we ever really been told the truth?

I was never much of a conspiracy theorist before I started looking into these questions, but there is a great deal that just doesn't add up about 911, Iraq, GWB, GHWB, Cheney, Rumsfeld, New World Orders, the deaths of so many national and international leaders, scientists, whistle-blowers, biographers, etc., etc. Something just doesn't feel right about this situation and some people feel it more profoundly than others do.

[Javaman]

61. Frankly, I think you are all missing the big picture...

Moron* is doing the road work for Al Qaeda and I think the US gov't is finally waking up to that reality.

Anytime Bin Laden coughed, farted or sneezed, the gov't would freak out, stocks would slide, planes would be grounded, etc. Drip drip drip, until the gov't came to a panicked halt.

Notice that there are no more of those fucked up public announcements of the terror levels?

Notice that even when Bin Laden releases a video, it gets scant attention?

Why is that?

Because they woke up, a little late, to the fact that the next terror attack was happening all around us, only thing was, our own gov't was fully cooperating with the terrorists plan and didn't know it.

With that said, I do believe that something else is planned by Al Qaeda and the tactics to have America become paranoid was part of it.

The concept of what will happen next will, in my opinion, be something very simple, something that will fall under the radar, something that until we see it all around us, we will never notice it until then.

With the paranoia level in this country at an all time high, the various agencies are looking for some sort of grand statement.

I don't believe it will be anything like that. Like a famous writer, whose name escapes me at the moment, once said, "the devil comes in on kitten paws".

[MAlibdem]

66. Threat of nuclear retaliation on Mecca and Medina.

I know it's a conspiracy theory, but it's genius. Seriously props to the CIA/Pentagon/whoever runs this country if it's true for the sheer ingenuity, simplicity, and elegance of such a threat.

Not that I'm passing a value judgement on it, just as a political tool, very effective.

[JHBowden]

67. They set the bar too high.

If they slaughter 50 people at a shopping mall, instead of fear, many will think -- al qaeda has been reduced to this?

[ComerPerro]

68. Because, before 9/11 they hit us here in the US how many times?

None?

Once again, Bush is proving why his should be remembered as the Presidency of Lowered Expectations.

Its Bush's job to make sure we aren't attacked. He failed on 9/11/01.

Bottom line.

[Guaranteed]

69. Derrr it must be cuz we attacked Irack! nt

[Capn Sunshine]

70. They couldn't get the same cooperation from our Gov't they got before

Let's leave aside the basic fact that these were all Saudis except two or three. And that there ISN'T a shadowy network of evil like in a James Bond movie.

The 9-11 attacks required either a confluence of stupid ass dumb luck and hugely incompetent punk ass idiot ignorance and coincidence.

OR actual help from folks on high in our government, each unaware of the magnitude of what they were doing, because these assclowns were neocon true believers who thought maybe a couple of planeloads of people wwere going down to further their cause of a "Second Pearl Harbor" ( see PNAC documents)

"BIn Laden determiined to attack in the United States"?
I mean really how do you ignore THAT? Seriously.

[MrSlayer]

71. Because the PNAC hasn't needed another attack.

"Al Qaeda" is a bogeyman employed by the Neo-Cons to scare people. At the very least they allowed 9/11 to happen at worst they did it themselves.

[Pastiche423]

72. Might PNAC need one

prior to our invasion of Iran?

It appears that nationalism, as well as new enlists is waning a bit since the occupation of Iraq.

We need more canon fodder!

[LSK]

78. no, its too risky to do again and not needed

All the talking heads have to do is say 9/11 9/11 and everyone is back in line.

I can see some network tv 9/11 movie coming out thou prior to Iran invasion.

[MrSlayer]

80. Yes, they might if they want a draft.

I wouldn't put anything past these guys, they don't care about anything but their own power. What are a few thousand more deaths to those who have caused so many?

[ultraist]

73. Predictions on: when, where & how

I predict a dirty suitcase bomb will be detonated in DC. This will cause an evacuation of ALL lawmakers, including vacating the White House. Much looting will occur and it will be anarchy in the streets for days until it radiation levels can be determined and marshal law is put in place to restore order.

[grumpy old fart]

74. lol...hardly. Look, they are one, two hit wonders......

What have they really done? Compared to the thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of people * and company have and will kill, they are pikers. They were a "law enforcement" scale problem to the U.S. until Bush decided to elevate their status, and help their recruiting. Al Qaeda doesn't scare me near as much as the Talibush.

[scbluevoter]

75. BETTER YET. . .

WHY HAVE WE NOT SEEN ANY MORE OBL VIDEOS LIKE WE DID ON THE EVE OF THE ELECTION!!! WE ARE LIVING IN STRANGE TIMES!!!

[LSK]

76. 7. because the threat is blown way out of proportion

[leesa]

77. They never attacked us? That's my guess. I think BushCo did it.

[DistressedAmerican]

82. I'm afraid I do think they are real and they are planning and waiting.

Meanwhile Bush does little to protect us.

Old graphic but if the shoe fits...

[leftofthedial]

81. because we weren't attacked by "al Qaeda" in the first place?

maybe

[Niche]

85. Ummm...because Bushco was complicit in 911...?

and the followers are still following - no need to let terrorists slip through the cracks... for the moment...

[Kazak]

86. Hate to admit, I have wondered...

We haven't been attacked once, since the war started, and there've been suicide bombers galor over there. What's to stop some crazy bastard from coming over here and blowing themselves up at a concert or something?

:shrug:

[solinvictus]

87. Al Qaeda is an overstated threat...

They took years to make the Sep. 11 attacks and, due to international effort, any effective operations and command networks outside the Middle East have been broken up. As for myself, I believe that Saddam Hussein and OBL are both our Emmanuel Goldsteins; fake bogeymen to keep the people afraid.