This essay by Mueller in "Foreign Affairs" argues that the terrorist "threat" wsn't much of one really.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060901facomment85501/john-mueller/is-there-still-a-terrorist-threat.html

I would imagine that the 3,000 dead on Sept. 11th believed "the hype".  But we can never be positive since they're dead and all.

Can't believe I screwed that up?

Why no more attacks on the US? Simple. Because the sponsoring governments now understand that they could well get invaded, and could end up in a bolt hole with the other roaches or being chased around for the rest of their lives, however long or short they may be. There are now consequences to be faced. (Other than the threat of Janet Reno impaneling a grand jury. No doubt that scared the dung out of OBL.)

Imperfect policy, you bet, flawed, yes, but all the more intimidating for being utterly unpredictable. How many remember Qaddafi being blown out of his tent by Reagan? And supposedly having a family member killed. That settled him down nicely.

If you think there are no government terrorist sponsors, try to remember way back to the Cold War and the way the Soviets were behind so many acts (including the shooting of JPII) and how "the useful idiots" in the West scoffed at the idea. Until the Kremlin fell and the documentation was found and reported on by....wait for it...wait..NPR.

I think we can be pretty positive they were dead before the hype.  Obviously, they must have believed it, because they were psychic enough to know in advance.  Just not psychic enough to sleep in that day.

Sheesh.  Let's see if we can come up with something equally irrelevant - I know what you'd like!!  It was the airplanes that did it, let's destroy all the airplanes and put Boeing in jail.

but have you ever considered the possibilty that WTC 0911 was a gazillion-to-one roll of the dice on the part of the Islamofascists and they simply will not be in a position to even approach, let lone duplicate, that act?

Analogy needs work -- the Soviets consistently denied involvement in all those acts to whih you allude, while the maniacal mohammedans trumpet their involvement from the top of evry minaret they can ascend?

But you're right, time will tell.  I suspect neither of us will be vlose to the truth.

Xiaoming,

This was there second attack on the WTC.  Six were killed and hundereds injured the first time.  Does that count when you scientifically calculated your "gazillion to one" calculation.

The UK just uncovered the plot to blow up several jets.  Hundreds or possibly thiousands would have been killed if they succeeded.  Hundreds have been killed on the trains on the UK, Spain, and India.

You need to get your head out of the sand.  The shit is really happening and it won't be wished away.

Had any flashbacks recently?  Just put on some Neil Young and we'll talk you down, man.

I think the analogy is fine because like the Sovs denied, so did/does Syria, Iraq, Iran, the Sauds, the Paks. Yet all these governments supported Islamic terrorists to one degree or another. Only the screwballs in Afghanistan bragged. If you recall 9/11, some Arab people were shown dancing, yes, but most others were outraged that anyone suggested involvment by Islamofascists until the tape showing OBL bragging at a dinner party turned up. (Dinner party=sitting on the floor eating hummus with their fingers, then combing it out of their beards.)

the first time could have been a surprise.  The 2nd time, the system was blinking red, and Dubya still couldn't figure it out.  Too busy trying to figure out why Billy could get blowjobs, and he couldn't.

and sign up?   Or send the CJCS your donation?

Are you gonna enlist as Bob Parr, or BlameAmerica?  Eight Ball might be a better name.

And you're crying about surveillence of terrorists.  You are so full of shit.

Tell me something Jack? I have never heard of anyone boasting about their service more than you have.  Were you as much of a joke in the military as you are on this board? I'm guessing yes. You are a living, breathing example of why there are no more drafts.

why do you always wet your pants whenever I say something like, "sign up or shut up"?