# Do you think that a government would allow a terrorist attack to occur? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 1, 2016, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551 "2016-12-01T19:21:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ambivalid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a5b964/32.png) [@Ambivalid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambivalid)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/21 "2016-12-02T02:45:40Z")
> [@femmejean](#): > > I know many dopers view on conspiracies but I promise you…this isn’t going to be one. Neither am I a conspiracy theorist. > > For me, the only plausible terrorist attack scenarios are those where someone in a high branch of government allows a terror group to carry out an attack on citizens. I can’t imagine them ever planning something like 9/11; not because a government would never kill it’s own citizens but how they would be certain of getting away with it. However is it outside the realm of possibility that some knew hijackers were training for suicide missions and may have lowered defenses? > > So my question is, do you believe that a Western country allow terrorists to strike in order to make vast social, economic, and security changes provided it could get away with it? This OP is all over the place. You begin by reassuring us that you are no conspiracy theorist, then proceed to lay out a conspiracy theory. You also say you believe the only scenario in which a terror attack occurs is when the government is complicit. Then, in the very next sentence, you say that you could not see the US government being complicit in 9/11. Um, wha? I’ll just ignore the rest and just respond to the last sentence of the OP; no. ---
**Author:** ![usedtobe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ec9cab/32.png) [@usedtobe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/usedtobe)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/22 "2016-12-02T02:47:15Z")
Oh yes: the “Government went along with it” theory requires that the “Government” knew about it. Before everything went into computers, and the computers are now online, making a permanent audit trail: If I can’t put together a plan without alerting the Government about it, I am a damned fool. Stories of “After the shooting, police examined his computer and phone and found that he bought the gun from X on May17th, took at train on the 21st and took an Uber ride from the station house to the Plaza” show that, with enough coordination and active searches of simply everything, i would have been possible to prevent the shooting. It is a huge jump from “with tremendous surveillance of everybody at every time, could have known” to "did know, and therefore must have been complicit. That is where your CT falls down. Until about 2005, the electronic snooping was not even possible. As of the date 9/11/01 there was no internet surveillance. 11/22/63 had no idea. ---
**Author:** ![rbroome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/838e76/32.png) [@rbroome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rbroome)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/23 "2016-12-02T02:57:35Z")
> [@femmejean](#): > > I know many dopers view on conspiracies but I promise you…this isn’t going to be one. Neither am I a conspiracy theorist. > > For me, the only plausible terrorist attack scenarios are those where someone in a high branch of government allows a terror group to carry out an attack on citizens. that is a ridiculous statement. There are literally millions of plausible attacks that don’t require Government acquiescence. Frankly this is about as close to trolling as I see on the Dope. To answer the OP: No. Not only no but hell no. ---
**Author:** ![dofe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ba0ec/32.png) [@dofe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dofe)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/24 "2016-12-02T03:46:57Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Several highly influential advisors to the president have connections to defense contractors. Sacrifice a few civilians in a staged terrorist attack, using willing martyrs. Spend the next 15 years throwing a trillion or so at defense contractors. Destroy the headquarters of the main rivals of your spending beneficiaries. Leave an unguarded pallet of $100 bills on the tarmac in the middle east, which conveniently disappears. Eliminate somebody’s political rival in the middle east. Tell prospective voters that you defended their freedom. Everybody goes home happy. Nice movie plot! ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/25 "2016-12-02T03:52:05Z")
The government", no. A few key individuals, quite possibly. The difficulty of keeping a secret rapidly expands with the number of people involved; which is one of the (many) reasons why something like “the government blew up the Twin Towers” is so implausible. That would have required a large number of people, and _somebody_ would have leaked the secret. But one or a handful of guys staying passively quiet and letting something happen? Sure, that’s possible. Also nearly impossible to verify unless one of them decides to blurt it out years later, for the same reason it’s workable; _doing nothing_ doesn’t leave evidence. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/26 "2016-12-02T04:04:42Z")
Depends on what the OP means. George W. Bush ignored a warning about the 9/11 attacks. By doing nothing he allowed the attacks to occur. Does that sound too distant from what the OP is asking? Consider also that his excuse for doing nothing was that he thought it was about some more conventional terrorist attack like an airplane hijacking. Is that allowing a terrorist attack to occur? How far would he have to go to satisfy the OP? Would the terrorists have to call him and get his permission first? ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/27 "2016-12-02T06:20:06Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > One would presume that FBI agents, or perhaps similar counterparts in other agencies, would be the ones to discover whatever terrorist plot there may be against the United States. So these agents, firmly in the middle class professional sector of the country, report up to these plutocrats who are now running the government in your opinion, that something is afoot. > > And these plutocrats twist their handlebar mustaches while dollar signs ring up in their eyeballs and say, “Agent Jones, drop that case and go focus on oppressing liberals for a while!” Then these moneybags types go out and buy tons of stock in Lockheed or whatever. > > In your view of things, what keeps these FBI agents silent for years or even decades after they discovered the plots but were told to keep quiet? Were they bought off? Threatened? Did they just forget that they could have stopped mass murders but a political appointee told them not to? Exactly. But in the scenario I described, there was no terrorist plot for the FBI to discover, so they were out of the loop. Except for the one that was highly classified, so they wouldn’t have know about that. There are people who know exactly what is going in Area 51. What keeps them silent for decades? How much is the budget for the NSA in Fort Meade? How many employees? Everyone who knows is “told to keep quiet” – and they do. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/28 "2016-12-02T07:30:27Z")
I doubt most Western governments would. However, it isn’t far-fetched at all. It depends on what the attack is and who would be carrying it out. If a government is trying to rally support for a xenophobic anti-immigration, anti-refugee policy, then I could certainly envision it looking the other way if it found out that a cell of Syrian, Somali or other such refugees were planning an attack, etc. Similarly, if a government is in favor of gun control, then it might certainly allow a mass shooting to happen, to rally support against guns. Or if it is pro-choice, then maybe an attack on an abortion clinic is just what it needs to win over public opinion. And I think there are some conservatives who feel not-so-subtle joy when there is an Islamic attack on America. The _incentive is certainly there_, although I think most leaders are still better than that. ---
**Author:** ![Dereknocue67](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/6de8d8/32.png) [@Dereknocue67](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dereknocue67)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 8:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/29 "2016-12-02T08:39:45Z")
Allow it to happen? Probably not. Take advantage of it? What do you think?. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/30 "2016-12-02T08:44:05Z")
If one believes that President Felipe González truly didn’t know his Minister of the Interior was [organizing a terrorist group](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/141720.stm), then one believes he’s an idiot. If one believes that he did know it, then one believes he’s a son of a bitch. No matter what one believes, the Spanish government didn’t just allow but organize terrorist attacks. And they weren’t even good at it. ETA: kindly disregard the sideline with the dates. Whomever wrote it had his head so far up his ass he could smell his own stomach. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 9:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/31 "2016-12-02T09:22:49Z")
usedtobe writes: \> Almost all elected officials at the Federal level are rich! i don’t know what you define “rich” to be. First, I assume you do know that the term “elected officials at the Federal level” encompasses exactly 537 people: the President, the Vice-President, the 100 Senators, and the 435 Representatives. I’ve just looked at some websites about the net worth of the current Congress. Most estimates say that somewhat more than half of them have a net worth of more than a million dollars. Is a million dollars of net worth (note: of net worth, not annual income) enough to be considered rich? Is it even very well off for people of their background, given that most people in Congress are at least middle-aged and well educated? ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 10:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/32 "2016-12-02T10:23:19Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > I doubt most Western governments would. However, it isn’t far-fetched at all. It depends on what the attack is and who would be carrying it out. If a government is trying to rally support for a xenophobic anti-immigration, anti-refugee policy, then I could certainly envision it looking the other way if it found out that a cell of Syrian, Somali or other such refugees were planning an attack, etc. > > Similarly, if a government is in favor of gun control, then it might certainly allow a mass shooting to happen, to rally support against guns. Or if it is pro-choice, then maybe an attack on an abortion clinic is just what it needs to win over public opinion. And I think there are some conservatives who feel not-so-subtle joy when there is an Islamic attack on America. > > The _incentive is certainly there_, although I think most leaders are still better than that. Western Government? :rolleyes: I doubt any Government would tolerate a terrorist attack on its soil, a government which loses the monopoly of force on its territory is no longer a Government. The only exception I can think of is tactical, a Government might not swoop in immdietly or permit an attack on a defended installation in the hope of capturing or killing more. ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/33 "2016-12-02T13:48:04Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > It’s a pretty good bet most of the ill-named PATRIOT Act had been written years before 2001 and was sitting on a shelf on 9/11. That does NOT mean the government (or rogue elements within the government) created an excuse to enact it. By acts of either deliberate commission or deliberate omission. > > It simply means the US has a thorough planning department. This. People were aghast in 2002 when it was revealed (or merely asserted) that the government already had a plan for invading Iraq, during the very early stages of saber-rattling. Big deal. I hope (and expect) that they did have a pre-written plan; I hope they have a plan drawn up for attacking just about every country in the world. You don’t start arming/training your military on the day that you send them into battle, and you don’t ask your strategists for a battle plan the day before. Plans should be drawn up well in advance, and then as current events unfold only minor adjustments need to be made in the months leading up to their actual implementation. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/34 "2016-12-02T13:57:08Z")
A reminder that Evil Defense Contractors and Evil Government Officials want to protect their own lives and those of their families and friends, so the idea of a conspiracy to allow terrorist attacks that might kill or maim them is idiotic. Happily making money from preparations to prevent/repel such attacks is another matter. This conspiracy angle makes as much sense as the commonly heard meme about Big Pharma and scientist stooges conspiring to prevent cancer cures from coming to market and suppressing cheap natural cures. Pharma Conspirators are just as susceptible to cancer as everyone else (not to mention the fabulous sums that could be made from a huge treatment breakthrough). ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/35 "2016-12-02T14:16:54Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Exactly. But in the scenario I described, there was no terrorist plot for the FBI to discover, so they were out of the loop. Except for the one that was highly classified, so they wouldn’t have know about that. Uh, you’re saying that defense contractors may be planning, or did plan, terrorist attacks on the United States in order to increase profits? > [@](#): > > There are people who know exactly what is going in Area 51. What keeps them silent for decades? How much is the budget for the NSA in Fort Meade? How many employees? Everyone who knows is “told to keep quiet” – and they do. The public may not know the exact details of what happens at Area 51, but it is generally known that it is a secret test range for aircraft. There’s been plenty of books written about the NSA for decades, even setting aside Snowden, including ones by James Bamford that surely address your last two questions. The reason more isn’t disclosed about those types of secrets is that people who work on them are screened and investigated to try to make sure that they believe our national security depends on keeping quiet about what they work on. This system works most of the time, but not perfectly. People are not screened to keep quiet about government-sponsored plots to murder fellow Americans (including fellow national security professionals working at the Pentagon on 9/11, for example). There’s no reason to expect that people would be generally motivated to keep secrets about government plots to murder Americans in order to increase corporate profits. That’s batshit crazy talk. > [@Jackmannii](#): > > A reminder that Evil Defense Contractors and Evil Government Officials want to protect their own lives and those of their families and friends, so the idea of a conspiracy to allow terrorist attacks that might kill or maim them is idiotic. More specifically, the wife of the then-Solicitor General of the United States was killed on 9/11. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/36 "2016-12-02T14:42:55Z")
I think it’s possible that some people suppressed stuff concerning the strange dudes at flight schools that local FBI offices were reporting to HQ. If so, the plan wasn’t to allow 9/11 to happen as it did. They might have thought that it was smaller scale, they’d prevent it as it was going on, etc. But it didn’t end up like that. It’s really odd that the response the local FBI guys got was to stop wasting time on the flight school stuff. Really odd. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/37 "2016-12-02T16:22:36Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Western Government? :rolleyes: > I doubt any Government would tolerate a terrorist attack on its soil, a government which loses the monopoly of force on its territory is no longer a Government. The only exception I can think of is tactical, a Government might not swoop in immdietly or permit an attack on a defended installation in the hope of capturing or killing more. If Hitler went so far as to stage a false-flag attack on the Reichstag, I can certainly envision some governments learning about an upcoming attack being plotted by “undesirable” peoples and thinking, “This is just what we need, to better stir up furor against undesirable population X.” ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/38 "2016-12-02T17:24:36Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > If Hitler went so far as to stage a false-flag attack on the Reichstag, I can certainly envision some governments learning about an upcoming attack being plotted by “undesirable” peoples and thinking, “This is just what we need, to better stir up furor against undesirable population X.” _Some_ governments? Which ones did you have in mind? Which ones do you think have the flow of information so tightly controlled that the decision-makers have absolute confidence in the foreverafter silence of all of those under them who might know of their conspiracy? We’re not talking about a conspiracy that starts at the top and spreads only to a trusted cadre of co-conspirators. This is about random field agents learning of an imminent attack, passing the info up the chain of command, and later (after the attack) noticing that nothing was ever done about it. The higher-ups would have to believe that _nobody_ in that entire chain would testify before congress that they had prior information about the attack. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/39 "2016-12-02T19:29:09Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Uh, you’re saying that defense contractors may be planning, or did plan, terrorist attacks on the United States in order to increase profits? > . No. I was asked to suggest a “plausible mechanism”, and I did. ---
**Author:** ![Me\_Billy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e480ec/32.png) [@Me\_Billy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Me_Billy)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2016, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551/40 "2016-12-02T19:52:57Z")
YES! Many politicians are “bought and paid for” by large corporations. Those corporations can include military contractors. So to these folks, getting into a war could be a big money maker for their companies. And they would show their appreciation to any politicians who “play along”. Once the politician is out of office, these corporations invite them to speak and pay them QUITE well. Foreign countries do this as well. This is the way our world works. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-that-a-government-would-allow-a-terrorist-attack-to-occur/773551.md?page=3)