Agree with your thoughts for the most part... Not completely convinced we can call 9/11 an outlier, as we have no other successful attacks on America to compare it to. Clearly 93 had the same massive motives. The Millennium attacks were also poised to be very large in scale. America simply does not have the pool of eligible Muslim extremists (right now) that most of the other places we have seen attacks do. If you can pull off small attacks every 6 months to a year, why not go with 4 backpack bombs that kill as many as one well placed truck bomb?
I don't think they are in a similar position regarding the U.S., unless there are really thousands of sleepers waiting for activation... a claim I wonder about at this point. If the upper management can only gather resources to pull off an attack/s once every few years here, it seems they would have much greater interest in 9/11 style, rather than London style, planning.
Note: The following post is an exact quote:
---
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1497443/posts/
Senate Supports Interrogation Limits (90-9 vote to protect terrorist detainees)
Washington Post ^ | Oct. 6, 2005 | Charles Babington and Shailagh Murray
Posted on 10/05/2005 8:08:18 PM PDT by FairOpinion
The Senate defied the White House yesterday and voted to set new limits on interrogating detainees in Iraq and elsewhere, underscoring Congress's growing concerns about reports of abuse of suspected terrorists and others in military custody.
Forty-six Republicans joined 43 Democrats and one independent in voting to define and limit interrogation techniques that U.S. troops may use against terrorism suspects, the latest sign that alarm over treatment of prisoners in the Middle East and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is widespread in both parties. The White House had fought to prevent the restrictions, with Vice President Cheney visiting key Republicans in July and a spokesman yesterday repeating President Bush's threat to veto the larger bill that the language is now attached to -- a $440 billion military spending measure.
But last night, 89 senators sided with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a former prisoner of war in Vietnam who led the fight for the interrogation restrictions.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...