Replies

I'm having some trouble believeing this is anything more than grandstanding by some anonymous bureaucrat.

The terrorists would have given us their BEST and STRONGEST attack first, when it would have the most impact. Thats just what they did. Not now when the chances of pulling it off are greatly diminished.

I sadly beg to differ. I do NOT believe the terrorists gave us their worst first.

I believe they triggered and will be triggering various intensities, mostly dreadfully awful of different types and they and Russia and China will analyze our responses very carefully to better calibrate Russia invading on the east coast and China on the west coast in the coming WWIII--then the terrorists will soften us up with nukes along with a few "accidental" ones from a Russkie sub off the east coast.

At least that's the very convincing sort of scenario 100's of people have dreamed and had unsought visions of over the last several years.

And THEY are being manipulated to do that in order to insure that the clammer for peace at any price global gov is intensely emphatic for an extended time--as well as insuring 1/3-2/3 less people in the world--all the easier to manage.

I think you are absolutely right. And it wouldn't surprise me to learn that this type of heightened awareness tack, is and will continue to be, used as a means to keep the faithful engaged and in full support of any measures believed needed to aid our cause.

While you might be right from a tactical point of view, I think you are wrong from a strategic point of view. Why not make an even worse attack after you foe steps up his defenses just to invoke more terror; "See your government has done all this and still can't protect you."?