Then they can wash their hands of it and claim no involvement, all the while continuing with their plans to take us over in different ways.
You know, that’s an interesting thought. Maybe they realize that an outright attack would be such bad PR for islam that it would set them back in their other efforts here, through misusing our legal system and Constitution, by creating a ground swell of opposition to islam that they are trying to forestall it.
You know, the kind of *don’t do anything rash, boys, we have the situation well in hand here and if you act, you’re going to mess it up.*
An attack would definitely interfere with any *progress* they’ve made in this country in changing anti-islamic sentiment by lying to us about what islam is really all about.
An attack would rip the facade away and people would be FAR less tolerant of their efforts for a long time. It would set back the non-violent methods they are using.....
A couple of attempts to take down an airliner or to disrupt flights wouldn’t warrant this sort of statement.
I have to assume it’s meant to provide plausible deniability and cover for domestic Muslims for something rather more spectacular.
I see little evidence of condemnation, of the attacks that have occurred previously. I see tacit approval, excuses that blame others, or silence.
Those few who have dared to speak out in a highly public way have been driven into hiding.
So, you could view this as an assumption of something big looming, and fears of repercussions as a result. That’s how I’m taking it.