Senior government officials, business executives - many of them specialists in security and terrorism, and mainstream media have been coming up with a stream of dire predictions all through the last five years that a terrorist attack is most likely to occur anytime.

In the wake of 9/11 terrorists attacks, the United States created a huge and massively funded Department of Homeland Security. Its founding manifesto proclaims, "Today's terrorists can strike at any place, at any time, and with virtually any weapon."

"But if it is so easy to pull off an attack and if terrorists are so demonically competent, why they not done it?" questions John Mueller, Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University, quoted above.

Mueller then goes on to discount the explanations offered for the lack of terrorist incidents. We deal with some of these in this article. Such as the absence of terrorist strikes is due to the protective measures put in place after 9/11. But this argument does not hold waters since five years before 9/11, when the U.S. was much less protected, there were no terrorist incidents. It takes one or two persons with an explosive device to terrorize a vast number of people, and only an almost perfect system would thwart all such plans. This explanation also seems far-fetched in view of the government's inept response to Hurricane Katrina, and the debacle of its FBI security agencies to upgrade their systems.

Another argument is that it is difficult for terrorists to get in now. But thousands of visitors and immigrants -legal and illegal - enter the U.S. making it almost impossible for this to work effectively. Moreover, for decades now, the relevant government agencies have been unable to intercept or even detect the large quantities of illicit substances in their "war on drugs." Terrorists do not require a large force for their work, and those determined could thus easily sneak into the country.

An argument offered by President Bush in support of the war in Iraq is that the terrorists were being killed there, and thus America is saved. But terrorists with possible al Qaeda links managed attacks in other places, indicating that not every potential bomb thrower joined the insurgents in Iraq. 

Another popular explanation is that the invasion of Afghanistan disrupted Al Qaeda and its operations. But those involved in bombings in Madrid and London never went to Afghanistan or to any of the Al Qaeda training camps.

Mueller concludes: "If al Qaeda operatives are as determined and inventive as assumed, they should be here by now. If they are not yet here, they must not be trying very hard or must be far less dedicated, diabolical, and competent than the common image would suggest." 

Obviously, a major reason, although not much acknowledged by the administration officials, is that Muslim community in the United States, unlike their European counterparts is well off, well educated, and well integrated into the American society. It is also very alert to all incidents of terrorism, and does not allow its manipulation by any jihadist group. It is important the media take note of this, and instead of succumbing to hate promoted by certain interest groups, develop an understanding and appreciation of American Muslims.

The case of American Muslims is further vindicated by a 2005 secret FBI report noting that although they arrested a few here and there, but could not identify a single true al Qaeda sleeper cell anywhere in the United States. 

Furthermore, thousands of overseas communications have been monitored under a controversial surveillance system without any warrant. Despite this, fewer than ten U.S. citizens or residents per year aroused enough suspicion to induce the spying agencies to also seek warrants authorizing them surveillance of their domestic communications. However, none of these has led to indictment on a charge. 

Also every year, in response to some 30,000 "national security letters" issued without judicial review, businesses and other institutions provide confidential information about their customers without them knowing. It has led nowhere.

In addition, some 80,000 Arab and Muslim immigrants have been fingerprinted and registered, another 8,000 called for interview with the FBI, and over 5,000 foreign national imprisoned all in the name of national security. Yet this encroachment of civil liberties has not resulted in a single conviction, notes David Cole, Law Professor at Georgetown University. In reality, only a small number of those picked up - always with a great official fanfare - have been convicted at all. And almost all of these are for other petty infractions, such as immigration visa violation.