Why Have We Not Been Hearing This For, Like, Years?

GT12 has been saying for years that W's claim of preventing another attack on the US is ground in the false belief that an attack would acutally have happened sometime after 9/11/01.

Remember, there were 8 years between the WTC bombing and alQaeda's big day;

Ron Susskind and Howard Fineman visited Matthews yesterday:

SUSKIND: I don‘t think [Bush] has a point. Here‘s why.
What the president knows, from his own intelligence briefing, is that al Qaeda has not been in an attack mode in the United States. There were attacks that have been called off. And they have said, we will be patient. The next attack will be bigger than 9/11. Bush knows that from his own briefings. To say the country has been safe, we haven‘t been attacked...

MATTHEWS: Well, wait a minute. Let‘s go back here.

SUSKIND: No, no.

MATTHEWS: Back to August of 2001, he got a memo that said bin Laden to attack inside the United States. He didn‘t act on that. And look what happened.

SUSKIND: Well, I‘m just saying, no one should be patting themselves on the back that al Qaeda has not reattacked the United States. Bush knows that. He knows the al Qaeda playbook.

MATTHEWS: Why haven‘t—why haven‘t they attacked again?

SUSKIND: Because al Qaeda has said and we have picked up on signal intelligence they are going to wait until they can get a bigger WMD attack in the United States. They have called off attacks in the U.S.

This is the—something the president and the vice president knows. My point is that to say we haven‘t been attacked and that‘s a mark of victory, Bush himself knows, is not coherent.

MATTHEWS: Howard?

FINEMAN: Well, I think it‘s politically potent, however. Let‘s be frank here. Let‘s be frank here.

If he goes out of Washington, if he leaves Washington for Dallas, Texas, on the 20th, and he‘s going to say, there‘s been no attack, there was no attack on the homeland, a term that came to burden us...