Better late than . . .

[Michael Tee]

http://hbdbooks.com/2009/09/why-is-there-no-terrorism/

Here is an article from last year that I just found, the essential theme of which is that the "War on Terror" is a hoax.  Not only is the article very good in itself, but it links to an even better article by Paul Craig Roberts from February of last year on pretty much the same thing.

It asks the unanswerable question, if the "terrorists" are such a constant threat, how is it that they haven't been able to pull off any major attacks since the WTC attacks?  Roberts doesn't question so much the absence of another master-stroke like the WTC attack, but even smaller-scale attacks on relatively soft targets.  Given the abilities of even high-school kids to massacre their own classmates and die, it does seem passing strange that highly trained killer teams from the Wild East don't score any hits in years.  I strongly recommend the article and the linked Roberts article.

The hoax serves multiple interests - - for the opponents of a free society, it allows the government increasingly repressive powers of surveillance and detention; for the military-industrial complex, a continuing sales bonanza that survived the end of the Cold War; for the geopolitical strategists of American world hegemony, it provides the rationale for ongoing invasions, occupations and aggressions of various kinds; and for the ZioNazis and Likudniks, cover for the continuing ethnic cleansing of the West Bank.

[BT]

It asks the unanswerable question, if the "terrorists" are such a constant threat, how is it that they haven't been able to pull off any major attacks since the WTC attacks?

Probably for the same reasons there has not been another Holocaust. You know, heightened awareness and sensitivity.

So your unanswerable question is not so unanswerable after all.

[sirs]

Speaking of unanswerable, though off on a completely different tangent, recall how our resident communist apparenty is unable to fester enough mental reserve to answer direct questions sirs poses, all based on the bogus notion that sirs supposedly keeps calling on his less than truthful proclaimations.  Notice also how the vast plethora of posts that sirs poses in response to Tee rarely have an allegation to lying

I'm sure most everyone else notices as well     

[Michael Tee]

<<Probably for the same reasons there has not been another Holocaust. You know, heightened awareness and sensitivity.>>

Yeah, that must be it.  And of course the reason why all those "terrorists" are able to pull off one hit after another in Pakistan and Iraq is - - wait for it ! ! ! - - - LOWERED awareness and sensitivity.  Now if only those dumb Pakis and Iraqis would wake up to the seriousness of the threat, why they'd have peace and quiet all the rest of their days, just like the U.S.A. does.

<<So your unanswerable question is not so unanswerable after all.>>

No, of course not.  Not to one of your knowledge and sophistication, o Great One.

[Plane]

The question is not unanswerable , only he true answer is unbearable to the questioner.

Bush did right.

Was right .

Was effective.

If America shows weakness and uncertainty, the world will drift toward tragedy. That will not happen on my watch.
George W. Bush

http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/George_W._Bush

America has never been united by blood or birth or soil. We are bound by ideals that move us beyond our backgrounds, lift us above our interests and teach us what it means to be citizens.
George W. Bush,

Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.
George W. Bush, September 20, 2001
Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.
George W. Bush

We have learned that terrorist attacks are not caused by the use of strength; they are invited by the perception of weakness. And the surest way to avoid attacks on our own people is to engage the enemy where he lives and plans. We are fighting that enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan today so that we do not meet him again on our own streets, in our own cities.
George W. Bush, September 7, 2003

[Michael Tee]

Bush did right.

Was right .

Was effective.

============================================

That is hilarious. 

So what they can't get right in Pakistan, Iraq or Afghanistan, they got right in the U.S.A.  Neutralized a threat in a free, open and highly mobile "democracy" of three hundred million people, which they can't neutralize in countries of one-tenth that size or less, even under a military occupation of hundreds of thousands of troops, where people are routinely shot for not stopping at checkpoints, or arrested, tortured and murdered daily by the occupiers and their puppet forces of state security.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Although they can stop trained hit squads of suicide killers from striking anywhere in a vast nation of 300 million people for nine straight years, yet they still haven't figured out how to stop high-school kids, college students or disgruntled workers from the periodic mass shootings breaking out at least three or four times a year now. 

Rubbish.  What total rubbish.  I hope you actually READ the article by Paul Craig Roberts.  The article that I linked to, links to his.  Anyone who can read that article and still believe in the Great War on Terror has to be willfully blind to the facts

[BT]

It's a matter of control.

We don't control Pakistan and Iraq.

And terrorist have struck in the US , the Dr. at FT. Hood and the guy who blew off his dick over Detroit.

[Michael Tee]

<<It's a matter of control.

<<We don't control Pakistan and Iraq.>>

Please.  The Pakistan Army has a lot more control over Lahore or Karachi than the Federal Government has over New York or LA.  There are raids, kidnappings, assassinations, drone raids in the remoter parts of the country, etc.  In Iraq you or your puppet army have had power over the people for years - - power to arrest arbitrarily in the middle of the night, to kill, to kidnap, to torture, to set up checkpoints and kill whole families for not stopping.  In countries many times smaller than the USA in both area and population, you have held awesome power and never been able even now to stop determined killers and assassins from striking.

You have much LESS power in your own country, which is huge in comparison to the victims of your aggression, both in area and in population, and dozens of times more mobile.  It is ludicrous to assert that it is the "success" of Bush's operations that would prevent determined, suicidal squads of hit-men or lone assassins from striking anywhere in nine long years over the length and breadth of your country.  As Paul Craig Roberts has noted, in all that time, not a single neocon figure has been hit.  Go figure.  There is no "terror threat" except as manufactured for public consumption by the interests which depend on there being one.

<<And terrorist have struck in the US , the Dr. at FT. Hood and the guy who blew off his dick over Detroit. >>

Don't make me laugh.  The guy in Detroit was a government set-up, he was waved through passport control by a U.S. government agent, kept under tight surveillance and "overpowered" by "passengers" before any harm could be done.  Yeah right.  Too bad that Detroit lawyer overheard those morons setting the whole thing up and spilled the beans.  The Ft. Hood gunman was a Muslim soldier who went postal.  He wasn't a part of any vast Muslim conspiracy, just another in a long series of U.S. military men going bonkers and taking it out on those around him.  Live by the sword, die by the sword.  As long as the U.S. sheeple are bamboozled into maintaining a huge force of psycho thugs to try to keep the rest of the world in line, don't be surprised when the thugs go off-leash without orders and start killing at random back home in the U.S.A.  Goes with the territory.  He wasn't the first and he sure as hell won't be the last. THAT you can take to the bank.  That he happened to be a Muslim was a BONUS, played right into the hands of the hoaxers.

[BT]

The Pakistan Army has a lot more control over Lahore or Karachi than the Federal Government has over New York or LA.

Typical top down thinking. The difference is in the US the people have little tolerance for terrorist acts.

[Michael Tee]

<<Typical top down thinking.>>

I think we all have to agree, that what happens at the top has SOME trickle-down influence on what happens in the rest of the country.

<<The difference is in the US the people have little tolerance for terrorist acts.>>

In which case, the spying on and surveillance of the American people, far from being evidence of how effective Bush has been, as claimed by plane, was actually a huge waste of time and effort.  Interesting.

As September 11 should have demonstrated, what counts is not how "little tolerance" the American people may have for "terrorist acts" (apart from the actions of their own government, of course) but how determined the "terrorists" are to do their thing on U.S. soil. 

For a vast Muslim terrorist conspiracy to operate for nine whole years in and around a country of 300 million people occupying one of the largest unitary-state land areas in the world without scoring a single hit on any public figure, institution or structure is proof, not  of the efficiency of Bush's methods, but of the non-existence of the conspiracy.

[sirs]

Or more realistically, the effectiveness to which such attacks are prevented upon "the Great Satan"

[BT]

You shift the goal posts.

The fact is terrorist attacks have taken place in the US since 9-11. Most notably after Bush left office.

[Michael Tee]

<<You shift the goal posts.

<<The fact is terrorist attacks have taken place in the US since 9-11. Most notably after Bush left office. >>

Actually, YOU are the one who just shifted the goal posts.  The issue was never whether or not there would be individuals going postal and committing or attempting to commit mass killings in the U.S.A.  Given the state of your gun-control laws or lack thereof, and given the huge "defence" forces that your country maintains, that's a given.  There will always be Colombines of one kind or another, there will always be servicemen running amok with their weapons and we've all gotta live with it.  This kinda shit even happens in Canada, although rarely if ever from our military.

The "terrorist attacks" that you refer to have always been around, before the first neocon even dreamed of fabricating the "War on Terror."  To seize on the latest ones as proof that there is a vast terrorist conspiracy out there is beyond ludicrous.  The Detroit bomber was an obvious set-up and the Ft. Hood guy was just one more deranged soldier acting on his own, as per well-established precedent.

Roberts (you really SHOULD read his article) referred specifically to the obviously conspiratorial or political efforts that one would expect to see in a real "terrorist" war, such as the assassination of neocons or other public figures who would be obviously anathema to any bona fide "terrorist" conspirator.  Nothing at all like this has happened in nine long years.  Yet these enemies were sophisticated enough and bold enough to organize 9-11 and pull it off.  Now you tell me that they're still busting their ass 24/7 to score once more against the US, but only the genius of Bush has shut down every effort they made, large or small, for nine long years? 

Get real.

[BT]

No.

Roberts hypothesis was that here have been no terrorist attacks on the US since 9-11 and therefore 9-11 must have been a conspiracy by the Bush Admin and or Neo-Cons acting on their own..

His hypothesis is incorrect because there have been attacks since then.

The lone gunman theory is trite. The attacks were made by individuals in contact with known terrorist organizations.

[Michael Tee]

<<Roberts hypothesis was that here have been no terrorist attacks on the US since 9-11 and therefore 9-11 must have been a conspiracy by the Bush Admin and or Neo-Cons acting on their own.>>

No.  That is pure fiction.  I revisited the Roberts link and he didn't even mention 9-11, let alone claim that it was a Bush conspiracy.  Maybe that was YOUR hypothesis, but it sure as hell ain't Roberts'.

<<His hypothesis is incorrect because there have been attacks since then.>>

I will assume at this point that you are talking about Roberts' real hypothesis, not the one you just fabricated for him.  There was no credible attack since 9-11 that could be attributed to a "terrorist" organization.  There is no evidence that anyone but the Ft. Hood gunman planned, organized or participated in the execution of his rampage.  No other individual has been charged or indicted in that crime.  None was named as unindicted co-conspirator. 

The "lone gunman" theory may indeed strain credibility in the attacks on JFK, MLK, RFK and others, but there are such things as lone gunmen, just as there are soldiers who go nuts and start shooting and you have absolutely ZERO evidence that shadowy figures unknown and unnamed were responsible in whole or in part for the crime; "contacts with" is just a particularly cheesy form of guilt by association.  In this internet age, everyone has contacts with everyone; "known terrorist organizations" is really trite too, they're whatever the ZioNazis in Tel Aviv tell their US Congresscritters to put on the list, anyone who shows the slightest ability to impede their ethnic cleansing of the West Bank is suddenly a "known terrorist organization." 

The Detroit bomber apparently had contacts with powerful unnamed US figures of very shadowy backgrounds who were able to walk him onto the US-bound plane without going through passport control, which indicates to me that the kid was set up by the US government to fabricate yet another threat, foiled yet again, so they could keep the whole scam going.  Expect more.  Expect more phony "attacks" that never actually hurt anybody, expect more "escaped by the skin of our teeth" thrillers in which Muslim "attackers" ALMOST get away with it.  Wow.  From the folks who brought you the Gulf of Tonkin Incident!  from the folks who brought you Saddam's Deadly WMD and The Mushroom Cloud We Can't Afford to Wait For! 

It's hilarious, I don't know what's funnier, the kooky crap they come up with or the apparently unending ability of the American sheeple to swallow that crap whole.