And the attack on 9/11 was associated with what political event? I think that all the article demonstrates is that terrorists attacks can take place before and after elections, before and after installations and before and after inaugurations or pretty much anytime.

Human beings seek to detect patterns since it useful to do so. I don't know if this still exists but there was quite a profit in selling people numbers that would be likely to win the lottery even though the winning numbers were selected at random. The editor of my local newspaper seems concerned about 'chemtrails' as proof of a conspiracy to do something or other that the black helicopters haven't.

I am not a terrorist but it seems to me that the impact of a terrorist act is magnified when it is perceived as random. Random in the choice of target - it could be anywhere, random in the choice of who it targeted - it could be anyone, and random in choice of time - it could happen anytime. Committing terrorist acts according to a pattern chances that the pattern will be discovered and anticipated.

One way a community can be terrorized--and paralyzed-- by random violence was illustrated in the Washington, DC, area a couple of years ago when two snipers with a single high powered rifle randomly killed individuals from the back of a car fit out with a sniper hole in the trunk. The victims were shot filling up their car at a gas station, coming out of a restaurant, entering a bus, waiting to get picked up at a mall--totally random as to victim, time or location. No one could figure out how it was done, what to look for. With the deaths of about 4-6 innocents, people in our community of 4 million were afraid to leave the house for weeks, until the perpetrators were finally caught. Randomness is the weapon of the terrorist.

ccblend: I am not a terrorist but it seems to me that the impact of a terrorist act is magnified when it is perceived as random

Luke Snag: Randomness is the weapon of the terrorist

I am not a terrorist either and I agree with both of you.

Please don’t take offense but for an “editors choice” I had much higher expectations when entering this thread. Yet, thanks for the chemtrail information. I had never heard of that before so I looked it up. I liked this particular quote from my source.

From Wikipedia: Patrick Minnis, an atmospheric scientist with NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, is quoted in USA Today as saying that logic is not exactly a real selling point for most chemtrail proponents. "If you try to pin these people down and refute things, it's, 'Well, you're just part of the conspiracy'", he said.

I have complete empathy with Mr. Minnis.