Check Here:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm
2007-03-12 06:22:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by Akkakk the befuddled 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Too many to count. But check FBI statistics, they'll be able to give a ballpark estimate.
Then again, if you look at history, the US has been directly hit by a foreign terrorist attack approximately every 7-8 years, since the 1960s. Regardless of which party was in office, and regardless of what we've done.
So, unless we don't suffer any foreign terrorist attacks between now and well after 2010, the lack of recent attacks is nothing special -- just following the same decades-old pattern.
2007-03-12 06:22:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I might be wrong but I think the point of this question is not to point out that these have neccessarily increased since George Bush took office but perhaps maybe these are things we could have taken a harder look at instead of spending the billions on Iraq that we are.
2007-03-12 07:32:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Pats Fan 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
what share circumstances will you ask this question? Or do you in straight forward terms ask it while your drugs runs out? specific, there have been no terror assaults on US soil interior the previous 6 years. yet on condition that there have been no terrorist assaults on US soil for extra beneficial than seven years under Clinton, you will possibly might desire to assert he additionally saved us secure, stunning? and because you won't be able to somewhat element to something Bush has carried out to maintain us secure, you ought to probable provide up asserting this, stunning? 9 million properly-paying jobs? Care to define properly-paying, please? And an identical unemployment fee as we had under Clinton is in a roundabout way a triumph for Bush how, precisely? I do agree that he has restored the respect and dignity that the White domicile used to have. regrettably, that's the respect and dignity of the Nixon White domicile.
2016-10-18 04:54:57
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You might also ask how many terrorist attacks took place on US soil between March, 2003 and January 20, 2001, not counting the categories you listed.
BTW, Norm DeGuere calling any question pointless is laughable.
2007-03-12 08:19:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you're speaking of what would "normally" be deemed a terrorist attack, I think none of any consquence.
Those other things you mention are either classified as freedom of speech (digusting as they are) or actual crimes.
I despise the KKK/Neo Nazis and basically any hate group. But they have their right to opinion, assembly and association just like any group in the US. As long as they keep things legal (e.g. not attacking people etc.) they're entitled to their stupidity.
2007-03-12 06:29:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by dapixelator 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes. George W. Bush is responsible for every single negative thing that has EVER happened on US soil since his installment into office.
None of those things has EVER happened under Clinton's watch!
**rolling my eyes.**
2007-03-12 06:23:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Bush doesn't care. Look at how poor people in Southern America are and what happened after all those floods.
2007-03-12 06:20:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
great question..I see acts of terrorism every weekend at abortion clinics - the fanatics from operation rescue and other extreme right terror groups (focus on the family, christian coalition, etc) are out there commiting acts of terrorism and treason almost on a daily basis....
2007-03-12 06:27:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Less than there were before 9/11.
2007-03-12 06:21:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by wizjp 7
·
0⤊
3⤋