It is good to look for more than one angle, more than one potential attack. Possibly two or more, and being caught between them, the "sweetest" of the two or more "will still be bitter".
Also, they are like a dog with a bone at times. They latch onto an idea for an attack and will not let go of it for years (which is why you've got to put the dirty dog down).
The 12 plane Bojinka plot didn't fly in early 1995, so they try again in the summer of 2006.
In 1993, they couldn't destabilize the supporting columns of one of the WTC towers with the explosion in the underground parking garage - - supposedly hitting the key columns needed to topple one tower onto another and bring them both down instantly (with possibly up to 50,000 dead).
So in 2001, they take the old Bojinka plot, make sure the planes are transcontinental flights fully loaded with fuel, so when they rammed them into the towers, the burning fuel would cook the steel and collapse the towers from above, instead of from below as they tried in 1993.
One of the reasons they failed in 1993 was that they didn't use enough explosives, but in a way, they also used too much.
Most people forget (or don't even know) that 1993 had a "backup" component in case the towers didn't fall - - the 1993 WTC bombing was also a crude chemical attack. If the towers didn't immediately fall like dominoes, they were supposed to fill with gas as in the Tokyo subway two years later.
But the explosives burnt off the gas in the van - - the *cyanide* gas.
We have to think multi-dimensionally with these individuals and their sponsors. With a major WMD attack, there will likely be more than one approach within the attack. They will likely see the chaos as an opportunity for follow-up.
If Bojinka was tried again this summer, and they came back at the WTC 8 years later, it stands to reason that they'll try a gas attack again. Just as they will one day go back to bio (like anthrax).
And if the "Dragonfire" stories of October/November 2001 were even close to reality, they will pursue that avenue of attack once again.
With them it is always "both-and", not "either-or".
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Isaiah 5:20
{He is the one who has let free the two bodies of flowing water, one sweet and palatable, and the other salty and bitter. And He has made between them a barrier and a forbidding partition.} (Qur'an 25:53)
***
I did know about the cyanide in 1993, but you're right, not many people are aware of that fact.
I do wonder now, if there are other instances in their messages where they've quoted each other verbatim.
I remember pausing reading that line when UBL's tape came out. Now add "Manhattan" and the mysterious sweet odor that still wafts through the city on occasion. By now, the people of Manhattan are used to the sweet scent, probably not even calling it in to law enforcement anymore.
While looking up "sweet" "bitter" and UBL, I ran across Bin Laden and his honey enterprise. Something I hadn't known. Sharing it here in case others aren't aware of it either:
Bitter uses of honey in Bin Laden's network
http://www.google.com/search?q=sweet+bitter+zawahri&hl=en&lr=&start=20&sa=N
>>>And if the "Dragonfire" stories of October/November 2001 were even close to reality, they will pursue that avenue of attack once again.
Yes, they will try. Probably from the water.