Not at all. I'm saying the history should be sufficient cause to keep an open mind until we know more.
I also notice that the last incident on your list occurred in late 2001, which suggests that Bush’s efforts had an impact on their ability to operate.
Absolutely. But Bush is gone now. If they have managed to bring down a plane for the first time in seven years (in this hemisphere), it could be a new method that they plan to use on a bigger scale. Something along those lines could explain why they would keep quiet about it at this stage. It might also explain why officials would be keeping what they know very close to the vest (not all cover-ups are nefarious).
Since this event just occurred, it doesn’t fit the time frame presented by your list, nor does it disproportionately harm Americans or Israelis.
There is no time frame. They've attempted several airline attacks since 9/11 (Richard Reid, Mombasa 2002, the airline terror plot of August 2006), they've just been thwarted.
And there have been many, many attacks by jihadists and other terror groups that have not disproportionately harmed Israelis or Americans. Just look at the number of attacks in the Philippines, in India, the Bali bombings, the London attacks, the Casablanca attacks, etc., etc...
I don’t think the list itself proves that those particular events were terrorist events.
The list isn't intended to prove another other airline disasters were terrorist attacks. It's meant only to show that there's a history of bombings where no credit was claimed, either right away or at all.
Thanks.
I’ll keep an open mind.
If this was a terrorist event, it seems to me that the jihadists would rather have exploded the plane over land where the falling debris could do even more damage rather than waiting until they were well out over water.
The heavy storm and series of electrical failures sent through the automated system do make this event seem weather and/or mechanical related.