No need for a brain donor, I'm quite happy with my IQ, which is quite high.
Perhaps you are having problems with English. I did not actually intend to "accuse" you of anything in the first or second post, other than being a loud mouth, over-reacting person, stating as fact information he couldn't possibly REALLY know in order to make an anti-U.S. point. You may have seen the word "threat" as an accusation, but I only use the term might likely be used by security-minded people to define someone or something that could need to be looked into further; just like language choice seems to have established Frank Moulet as a threat.
So, to clear up the difference between what I wrote and your misunderstanding of what I meant: The first sentence in my initial post contains the phrase, "I think", clearly identifying it as a statement of OPINION, not of fact; and includes the word "maybe", which is similar to the word "possibly", but also implies "possibly NOT".
The second sentence asks a question that you've answered. The reason you "know" how efficient terrorists think is a presumption based on very reasonable logic, at which even a small child could arrive. You don't actually know anything about what trained terrorists think. You THINK you know what a trained terrorist would think, I don't.
The third sentence begins with the word "Either", which means I'll be presenting more than one potential point of view; and the "or" included in that sentence means I've included both of the points of view that I think pertain.
I do have another question for you though, if you'd answer it. You wrote...
How are "efficient" terrorists trained to react if they become concerned that light has already been shed on them, and they want to deflect the attention in order to attempt to continue the mission to completion? You don't know that. Just like you don't know what you THINK you knew before. A very well though out, very logical guess is still a guess, not knowledge.Terrorists do not "shed light on themselves", a child over 3 of age would understand that, or is that specific to european children ?
Lastly, I apologize for pointing out, once again, that the French are indebted to hundreds of thousands of U.S. servicemen for the fact that they are not slaves in a German state.
It is no secret that there is a strong, self-righteous, anti-American streak in France, particularly in the younger generations, and I admit it makes me mad. I know the slang word "Riccan" or "Riccain", and I know that when it is used in France it is used as a derogatory term more often than not. This I learned from a young, French skater, with whom I worked for several months, after he had realized how unfairly generalizing he'd been in his opinion of people from the U.S.A.
Tell us this, etienne, when was the first time you used the word "Riccan" as a label for people specifically from the U.S., and did you really intend it as a friendly or neutral term?