The reason they keep saying to expect a terror attack before Nov. election

[blm]

Because they will put together a fully produced, HUGE terror plot that will have as its ending a successful thwarting by the alert Bush administration.

Take it to the bank. The warnings now are all pre-production.

[radwriter0555]

1. absolutely.

they're setting up SOMEONE to take a huge fall, and make themselves into heros.

Let's keep an eye on them, and make sure the FBI and CIA are on OUR side.

[jbfam4]

2. I hope you are right.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Strategically speaking, bin Laden wouldn't strike before the November

election. He would strike, as he has in the past, during the early months of the new presidency. So if something happens before November, it probably isn't coming from bin Laden.

[Abe Linkman]

6. "Strategically" speaking, bin Laden is a Patsy. Like Lee Harvey Oswald

The bush Administration said they would produce evidence of bin Laden's guilt in the 9-11 "attacks". They have yet to produce even a shred of evidence. Why? Simple. Because there is no evidence that he ANYTHING to do with 9-11.

[DemonFighterLives]

8. I agree

If it is in the script Binnie will strike again.
If he is to be brought in (doubtful) he will surely be shuffled off to his new palace/island.
Any self respedting terror organisation that hates this administration would not play into their hands.
I hope there are enough good guys watching so they can't pull off another Pearl harbor.

[nodictators]

14. "bin Laden" would strike exactly One Year after a PNAC report said...

...that a "catastrophic attack on the United States" would accelerate their "Rebuilding" schedule.

[Commendatori]

4. Disagree, it's damage control

They know they're not competent enough to stop a major attack, so they're trying to minimize the PR damage in advance.

If you're going to see an event in Bush's favor before the election, it'll be "discovering" WMD in Iraq or "finding" bin Laden. I bet on one or the other, if not both. Whatever's planned (the original poster could be correct as well), it's been planned well in advance.

[sendero]

12. I agree with you on this...

.... the problem with the original theory here is this: a disaster averted is not a disaster at all. Anyone who's ever worked in a large company knows the futility of trying to solve a problem before it is blatantly apparent to the stupidest middle manager that it is indeed a serious problem.

They are a-skeered that there will be another attack and that the public will no longer buy into the "daddy Bush* will protect you" bullsh*t.

[betty_booop]

13. yeah

that makes the most sense. I'm waiting for bin laden to be found right around october. maybe i'm being naive, but i just don't think bush and co. could plan and execute a major attack. its more probable that they can't prevent one.

[blm]

16. That's the point. They'll PERFORM the act of preventing an attack

staged by them.

They'll try to make heroes out of Bush, Rice, Mueller and Ashcroft.

[napi21]

5. Very creative! Possible too.

I'm not sure they could really pull it off though. It would take a lot of people and mericans aren't as good at secrecy as Al Qaeda. I suspect it would have eto include the FBI & CIA. This Admin has already pi**ed them off pretty bad and I'm not sure they'd do it.

[blm]

7. There are enough Bush loyalists in both the FBI and CIA

to pull it off. Fortunately, there are good guys in the intel community working against those loyalists now.

[AlinPA]

9. My worry is that Rove will have it done to get a "rally for our

prezeedent".

[Ready4Change]

10. Hey, maybe the attack will be personally led by bin Laden!

And he'll be personally thwarted at the last second by Bush himself, in a "Kill Bill" (sic) style sword fight set to music, with Red White and Blue fireworks!

You know, if they're going to attempt to pull wool over our eyes, it should at least be entertaining wool.

[nostamj]

11. i've been saying that for months

every time someone asks "will a terror attack hurt or help *"

I say, watch for them to "THWART" an attack. THAT would help him. (god help the rest of us)

on edit:

the other theme the bushies are putting out is "the terrorists want Kerry to win/* to lose" so don't help terrorists. vote for *. stay the course...

[blm]

18. It's the THWARTING of a fake attack that would make them heroes.

Makes me sick because I know this is how they operate.

[jean]

15. over dramatic, I know, but here's hoping George Soros has contacts all

over the place who could help detect such preparations and thwart/expose/stomp them publicly.

[zbdent]

17. Having it both ways - Push the fact that a terrorist attack

would negate their rhetoric about how great a job this administration is doing in protecting this country.

They've been saying "Look how good we're doing! No airplanes have crashed into buildings since 9/11!" Never mind that it will probably be a rented speedboat with a suitcase nuke passing by the Stachoo Liberty (and thereby taking away something French while making an "attack against America!").

[John_H]

19. Maybe. But I always go w/ the most obvious when it comes to rethugs.

It's to suppress turnout.

[Elwood P Dowd]

20. It will probably be staged in one of the swing states

they fear losing. Can you picture the headlines on Faux News? "Brilliant Bush intelligence operation thwarts nuclear destruction of Cleveland."

[PaDUer]

23. PA...Why do you think

he's been here 27times.

[gristy]

21. The way I see it, the ONLY way the BFEE can guarantee Bush's

election is by either thwarting a terror attack OR letting one through. Without one, it's a toss up. So, that being true means that they WILL either thwart a terror attack OR let one through.

No WAY are they going to leave anything to chance.

[Stephanie]

22. No way. They could NEVER pull that off.

Why do people keep imagining these guys are competent? They have fucked up EVERYTHING they've touched. They could NEVER get away with that. They would screw it up.