Ohio State University Political Science Professor John Mueller comments on why hasn't al Qaeda hit the US again an article "Is There Still a Terrorist Threat" in the September/October 2006 edition of Foreign Affairs Magazine. Mueller quotes the DHS's founding manifesto that "today's terrorists can strike at any place, at any time, with virtuall any weapon." He suggests, "one reasonable explanation is that almost no terrorists exist in the United States and few have the means or inclination to strike from aboard." He presents another arguement that "the threat posed by homegrown or imported terroists...has been massively exagerated."
Mueller with in the essay dubunks the common misconceptions that immediate protective measures put in place following 9/11, the Afganistan invasion or al Qaeda biding time have enhanced our security. He theorizes and concludes with empherical data "the evidence so far suggests that fears of the omnipotent terrorists may have been overblown, the threat to the United States greatly exagerated." Since according to Muellar, we have an equal chance about 1 in 80,000 of getting struck by a comet than dying in a terrorist attack and since 9/11 about the same amount people in the US met death as they drowned in bathtubs than in terrorists attacks outside our war zones.
This essay was the most realist based examination of the terrorist threat, I have read since the awarness of political based violence entered many lives. The essay concluded "the massive and expensive homeland security apparatus erected since 9/11 may be persecuting some, spying on many, inconveniencing most, and taxing all to the defend the United States against an enemy that scarcely exists." Finally, someone examined the threat of terrorism not from an emotional but realistic point of view.