Jim,
re: Just how are they doing that?
There were the warnings of the Brooklyn Bridge, the Statue of Liberty, "apartment complexes" last weekend. The warning that a nuclear device will be set off on US soil, it's just a question of when, much more stuff before that. It's a continuous campaign to maintain or raise a level of fear, and that fear has a consequence of more power and money for the administration.
re: As far as warning, they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. The Dems and the press will see to that.
There are warnings, and there are warnings. Admin officials admitted that those warning were not "credible".
Could there be other terrorist attacks? Of course. There have been two in the last 10 years, I suppose there could be more. On the scale of 9/11, probably not. On a smaller scale, probably yes.
We've got 250 million folks spread over a large land mass. What's the chance of an individual American being hurt in a terroist attack? Is this fear realistic? And wouldn't you think a public service administration would be trying to get folks to have a realisitic expectation on terrorism? Unless they had a political motive. That fear sure gives the government a lot more power and money, and it sure moves the economy off the front page.
Where is the "second wave" of attacks. Where are the "100's of terrorist sleeper cells". Remember when millions of Americans built useless bomb shelters in their backyards?
John |
