The anti-terror policies seem to have been successful thus far, if the following are accurate:
1. West Coast airliner plot: In 2002 the United States disrupted a plot to use shoe bombs to hijack a commercial airliner to attack the tallest building in Los Angeles. The plot was "set in motion" by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the September 11 attacks.
"Rather than use Arab hijackers, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed sought out young men from Southeast Asia whom he believed would not arouse as much suspicion," Bush said.
2. East Coast airliner plot: In mid-2003 the United States and a partner disrupted a plot to use hijacked commercial airplanes to attack targets on the East Coast of the United States.
3. The Jose Padilla plot: In May 2002 the United States disrupted a plot that involved blowing up apartment buildings in the United States. One of the alleged plotters, Jose Padilla, allegedly discussed the possibility of using a "dirty bomb" inside the United States. Bush has designated him an "enemy combatant."
4. 2004 British urban targets plot: In mid-2004 the United States and partners disrupted a plot to bomb urban targets in Britain.
5. 2003 Karachi plot: In spring 2003 the United States and a partner disrupted a plot to attack westerners at several targets in Karachi, Pakistan.
6. Heathrow Airport plot: In 2003 the United States and several partners disrupted a plot to attack London's Heathrow Airport using hijacked commercial airliners. The planning for this alleged attack was undertaken by a major operational figure in the September 11, 2001, attacks.
7. 2004 Britain plot: In the spring of 2004 the United States and partners, using a combination of law enforcement and intelligence resources, disrupted a plot to conduct large-scale bombings in Britain.
8. 2002 Persian Gulf shipping plot: In late 2002 and 2003 the United States and a partner nation disrupted a plot by al Qaeda operatives to attack ships in the Persian Gulf.
9. 2002 Strait of Hormuz plot: In 2002 the United States and partners disrupted a plot to attack ships in the Strait of Hormuz, the entrance to the Persian Gulf from the Indian Ocean.
10. 2003 tourist site plot: In 2003 the United States and a partner nation disrupted a plot to attack a tourist site outside the United States. The White House did not list what site that was.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/09/whitehouse.plots/index.html
Also, there was the 2002 Brooklyn Bridge plot (to bring down the bridge), and the 2007 JFK bomb plot, to blow up fuel storage tanks and pipelines at John F. Kennedy International Airport, setting the place on fire and a good part of Queens.
Some of these plots have been ridiculed by the media, being described essentially as just silly attempts by inexperienced "terrorists" with no real skills, but delusions of grandeur. And maybe they are. But maybe they aren't. The government could foil one-hundred plots that would never work, but all it takes is one to do some major damage.
Imagine if, say, 9/11 had been stopped in its early stages...I could picture the media not making a huge deal about it and shrugging it off ("Like anyone could
really hijack airliners and coordinate such an attack...") If you had said in 2000, "You know, this country is ripe open for a terrorist attack," you would have been shrugged off most likely. But one happened.
Such grand-sounding plots to hit a skyscraper in Los Angelos, or set fire to JFK airport, or bring down the Brooklyn Bridge, are only laughed at until they actually happen and take everyone by surprise.
The great trouble of protecting the United States from these attacks is that when you're successful at it, most people are completely unaware that any such threat ever existed, especially when you foil such plots early on, then no one can know for sure if they ever would have succeeded or not. And people will criticize your efforts. But what if President Bush had enacted no such surveillance plans, and taken no steps, and something else really bad did happen, God forbid?
It's a touchy subject, and I get the whole, "Those who prefer security over freedom deserve neither freedom nor security" bit too. But from what I can tell, the President was criticized for 9/11 happening under his watch, and has thus taken the necessary steps, within the law, to make sure such a thing does not happen again.
The ACLU, in order to challenge the whole thing, had to go and get a judge named Anna Diggs Taylor, a Carter appointee and very Leftist judge, to rule against it, and her ruling was then overturned by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
