The New York Times, in its "Freakonomics" section, has run a blog posing the question,

" If You Were A Terrorist, How Would You Attack?"

Mind you, this is not a question being pondered at a Joint Chiefs of
Staff meeting or in a smoky backroom at the Pentagon (as if smoking
were even permitted there nowadays), this is a public forum on the
website of one of the world's most frequently viewed publications. Now,
I don't think Steven Levitt is as dumb as he looks (although he looks
pretty dumb glibly gleaming over this blog forum), but I do think this
blog is as irresponsible as it appears. Consider this blog free market
research for al-Qaeda & Co. By going straight to the horses' mouths
to see what forms of terrorism would strike the most fear into
Americans, the Times is taking the guesswork out of terrorism for their
Islamic cohorts. But all of this is not much of a surprise from the
publication that turns over the U.S. military playbook to our enemies
in practically every military engagement the U.S. gets itself embroiled
in. So, in the spirit of utter amusement that Levitt relishes when
thinking of how American deaths can benefit the Democrats' chances of
gaining more power in the next bout of elections, let us play advocatus diaboli
and pose a realistic reply:

If
I were a terrorist, and being one implying that I am a weak horse in
comparison to my enemy, I would paralyze my enemy with fear by using
psychological warfare, attacking in a way much safer and easier than
assailing with direct force. Since my enemy, the United States, loves
liberty and free speech and diversity and toleration, I would voice my
hatred and propaganda for all things American by using the
sensationalistic U.S. media as my bitch. Since the 1970s journalism in
the U.S. has been less about providing information to an educated
public than selling headlines like so many bumper stickers at a bazaar
(one doesn't have to see Network to
figure out the "If It Bleeds, It Leads" mentality of the drive-by
media). Basically, the Western media would be my free PR front for all
my propaganda, since their attempts at being "fair" usually implies
giving free reign to enemies of the U.S., especially if the President
is a Republican. By being an enemy of the U.S., and by preaching to
those adverse to the U.S.'s success during a Republican administration,
the Democrats and the media become my natural ally. If the Democrats
are in power, the administration will bend over backwards to kiss the
ass of all Muslims; subsidizing them, educating them, providing
political asylum, allowing open entry at the borders, mandating foot
washes at every airport, paid time off for Ramadan, native foods for
every Arabic and Persian cultural proclivity, the options are literally
endless under a Democrat regime. Thus I would exploit the political
polarization of the U.S. regardless of the party in control. With the
Republicans I would cry foul for every "abuse" in a war or
confrontation; I would prey on the conspiracy-theory mentality of the
baby boomers who believe the greatest threat to America is the
military-industrial complex; with the Democrats I would exploit their
tolerance and diversity to set up shop in the U.S., attempt to convert
"disenfranchised" minorities like Blacks and Hispanics by offering them
a more vigorous alternative to pious, pacifist Christianity and
mainstream Anglo-Saxon culture, and use mosques as a cover to preach my
pan-Islamic view of the world, implying the demise of the Great Satan
and the world as we know it.