Why haven't there been any terror attacks in the US since 9/11?

[smartass]

It's not as if our borders are secure or we've spent enough money on homeland defense. Which begs the question, why haven't we had any terror attacks since 9/11?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

1. anthrax

and I don't mean coulter.

[radwriter0555]

5. that was a domestic 'attack' engineered by the republicans...

that's clear as day.

[Virginian]

23. If it hadn't been, the perp would have been caught by now.

Steven Hatfill sure was a target for Ashcroft. Why was he targeted? What transgression against Bush had he committed?

[Bandit]

27. It is still terrorism

Or is terrorism limited to only Arabs?

[radwriter0555]

31. the anthrax case wasn't terrorism; no statement was made, no targets

were specified other than enemies of the GOP.

If you really want to call it terrorism, then point your sites at the republicans and CALL them TERRORISTS.

[laruemtt]

2. because the

* cabal has not decided it's politically expedient for them to produce one yet....

[liberalhistorian]

3. Just wait until around

mid-October of this year, especially is Shrub is behind or neck-and-neck with Kerry!

[radwriter0555]

12. actually the only thing that will work is for the bush regime to PREVENT

an attack...

For one to be staged, and for george to play hero and protect us and save the world.

For this to happen, covert ops will have to align with some REAL terrorists and enable their development of a plot. How anyone would FALL for such a silly idea is beyond me, but you can bet that MK Ultra will play a role.

Then george's minions will fly in on a wing and a prayer and save us all from death and destruction.

George will be a hero and everyone will vote for him for being so fearless, wise and cunning.

[shooga]

because S&B realized ..

.. that reaction to 9x11 (and 3x11) did not go as planned and almost spun totally out of control .. it is all about CONTROL!!

[radwriter0555]

4. TWO 'successful' foreign terrorist attacks on US soil in 230+ years.

Not exactly a RASH of attacks now, is it?

Oh and BOTH on the same target ...

[Sanity]

6. Um the Pentagon was attacked too

Just FYI

[mike1963]

18. Rad is referring to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor

counting 9/11 as one event.

edit: or maybe not, I missed the "same target" line...

[radwriter0555]

19. er no, the TWO attacks on the WTC; the one in '93 and the one in 01..

The attack on pearl harbor was a genuine, state-sponsored act of war, not a terrorist attack by some religious fanatics.

[radwriter0555]

20. it was all a single endeavor orchestrated simultaneously and considered

one single wide ranging event.

[onehandle]

7. Bush's Dumb Luck.

He ignored the problem for months in the hope that an attack would give him a blank check. He got his wish and started a war with the Bush family's favorite target and corporate gravy train.

Meanwhile the terrorists are setting up shop in a training ground of Bush's creation. Using our troops as practice dummies.

Bush gave the terrorists exactly what they wanted, so they are laying off the "homeland" for a while.

[proud patriot]

8. ummmmmmmm

We have had them but just not on the scale of 9/11

Shoe Bomber

Plane crash within a week of Sept 11th

Anthrax

Texan Resident found to have "bombs" but he was a right
winger so it is not reported Nationally

DC Sniper

Ohio sniper

580 Sniper here in California

I'm sure there are more subtle things
that have been overlooked by the media
and myself .

[peekaloo]

15. I was gonna throw out that plane crash in Queens (?)

so quickly dismissed but :tinfoilhat: was abuzz.

[Sanity]

16. It was within two months

n/t

[zbdent]

25. All homegrown. No proof yet otherwise

And all of the terrorist attacks on US soil between March of 1993 (WTC the first - if 9/11 counts as Clinton's fault, then WTC 1 counts as Bush41's fault) and September 11 were by homegrowners.

Including the Atlanta 1996 Olympics (suspect cleared, no evidence of a foreigner doing the bombing).

Oklahoma City

Plane crash into the White House while Clinton was away.

Guy firing gun toward the White House

Church fires in the south

more

[jpak]

39. You forgot the ricin attacks against the WH in December 2003

During the "non-terrorist" ricin non-incident against Sen. Frist's office, ChimpCo let slip that a similar ricin-in-the-mail attack was carried out against the WH in December 2003.

No attacks in 28 months???

Fucking smartass liars...

[daveskilt]

9. it takes time to plan anything big

after 9/11 I would guess the strategy for the perpetrators was to dig in and weather the storm of the response. They have done this and survived and in fact grown thanks to * making their propaganda come true by occupying an oil rich arab nation. They are undoubtedly planning now based on the new reality they could not possibly have predicted. If bush had said ok we give up no more border patrols please come and get us it STILL would have taken a big chunk of time for the guys who did this to regroup from the plans they had made to dig in after striking.

[Beetwasher]

10. Because the Chimp is Such A

Brave and glorious leader that no one would dare attack AGAIN on his watch. Everyone knows that! :eyes:

[supernova]

11. Good question

but Al Quaida have been found out. We know much more about their reach, scope and goals. They could hardly operate here without our knowledge anymore.

Having said that, it's likely they or another group not on the public radar are planning something. Like you said, our physical security is not that much greater than on Sept 10.

I forget who said this, and I'm paraphrasing: "To stop terrorist attacks, we have to be right every time. The terrorist only has to be right once."

[aprilgirl]

13. Simple, they haven't attempted any. They can kill enough of us in Iraq!

If you think that we are safe from being attacked at home again, you are dreaming.

[Brotherjohn]

14. Al Qaeda has lots of enemies, and we have had them pre-occupied...

... in Afghanistan for a while.

But they have regrouped. Witness major bombings in Riyadh, Morocco, Spain and Bali. All worse than any Al Qaeda attacks before 9-11.

As Clarke put it last night on Charlie Rose, they have morphed into a hydra-like (many-headed) creature. We gave them that chance. He said it used to be Bin Laden personally approved all major attacks. No more.

Call them partisan words all you want, but the fact is these are the words of a registered Republican and Bush voter in 2000, Bush's own anti-terror czar, and someone who had been in similar positions throughout the Reagan, Bush I and Clinton administrations.

[mainer]

17. They're attacking Americans all the time now..

In Iraq! Why bother to launch an attack on American soil when they've got Americans as sitting ducks in Baghdad? The victims have come to THEM.

[Jack_Dawson]

21. John Ashcroft

I'm sure mixed in with all the innocent people he has detained, are a few terrorists. I think J.A. deserves part of the credit.

[goddess40]

24. Lack of attacks

Do you remember the twin towers were bombed during Clinton's presidency in the early '90's? They caught the guys and they are in prison. Am I right in saying there were no more attacks in the US until 9/11? That's almost 10 years without an attack. We've gone less than 3 years since 9/11.

[Jack_Dawson]

37. Well, there was that whole Oklahoma City bombing thing...

In 95 I think.

[aprilgirl]

22. Is the Democratic party missing in action?

I don't hear any of the information I see on the DU being mentioned by Democratic spokesmen.

[catmandu57]

26. I don't know

Maybe it doesn't suit their purpose to attack the great Satan at the present time. Maybe because OBL got what he was after, the american military out of Saudi Arabia, out of the holy land, or, that it is much easier killing Americans in Iraq now.
It does give a leg up to the mihop theory, it doesn't suit the power behind the moron* to have another attack now. As previously stated the best thing for the chimp* is not to have any attacks or to thwart one.

[lectrobyte]

29. a thwarted attack or assassination attempt

would sure help * in the polls this fall, I suspect...

[lectrobyte]

28. some combination of luck, security measures, Taliban fall

But that's not to consider that in a certain sense, they got what they wanted -- a religious war. This works for several possible values of "they", too. Maybe the terrorists, whoever they are, can't think of anything to top 911.

[pansypoo53219]

30. who needs to do all that work

when george is destroying america all by himself?

[troublemaker]

32. Simple scary answer

Al Qeada was so eager that we invade Iraq that they didn't want to "tip the applecart."

[kentuck]

33. Why didn't we have any foreign terrorists attacks from 1993-2001 ??

Is it because Clinton was doing such a good job? what's the difference in your question?

[radwriter0555]

35. Clinton's administration STOPPED at least 3 terrorist attacks that were

made public....

Think MILLENIUM and the thugs stopped at the Washington/Canadian border, one in chicago and one in Los Angeles.

Bush didn't prevent jack SHIT.

[GumboYaYa]

34. Because Middle Easterners have a tendency to think

of history in terms of centuries an not news cycles or presdiential election cycles. Three years without an attack is a mere blip in the grand scheme of history. Besides, there have been attacks since 9/11 in the U.S. and outside the U.S.

One thing is sure, the damn color-coded warnings aren't the reason for no attacks.

[kentuck]

36. Also, I guess anthrax is not considered a "terrorist" attack??

If so, then we have been attacked since 9/11..

[Demoiselle]

38. Just remember they've been real busy elsewhere....

In the two years since 911, there have been major terrorist attacks by in Turkey, Indonesia, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Spain. It hasn't exactly been quiet out there, and I can't remember another 2 year period that's had so many really big events in such a diverse mix of places.

[DrWeird]

40. Obviously because George Bush is doing a wonderful job.

:eyes:

Of course if he hadn't stolen the election, the twin towers would still be standing.