Terrorists Impotent?

E-mail this post

Remember me (?)

All personal information that you provide here will be governed by the Privacy Policy of Blogger.com. More...

Where the heck is WaPo going with this line of thinking?

Yesterday: Nuclear weapons may elude terrorists
Today: Technical hurdles separate terrorists from biowar
(by the way, subscription req'd ... of course)

When I caught yesterday's installment my thought was, "Semi-interesting, but don't let their lack of ability mislead your estimation of their will." Today the same, but with a nagging curiosity regarding what appears to be a systematic downgrading of the threats posed by terrorists. Why do I smell a "We're making them out to be a bigger threat than they are to justify the war on terror" piece coming?

How about commercial jets? Are they eluding the terrorists? And, harbor rafts? Any hurdles there? Trucks laden with C4? No separation on that front I reckon.

Make no mistake: These guys are hell-bent on inflicting horrific destruction on the West in general and the US specifically. While details may currently stand in the way, terrorists are hot for the weapons which will make the biggest splash and inflict the most terror in the minds of their targets.

Like everyone, terrorists face a desensitization problem. While tragic and serious, a car bomb simply doesn't carry the same punch it once did. The Berg beheading was psychologically powerful. But, after several more, even beheadings have lost their ablity to capture prime real estate in the world press.

In summary, I guess my question is: What's your point? Currently I ride a Yamaha because that's what I can afford (and even then, barely). That doesn't mean I'm any less convinced or driven to one day own a Harley.


About me

Previous posts




ATOM 0.3
  • Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs2.5 License.