Do you think that there would be any reason for the government to lie about whether the Minnesota bridge was?

a terrorist attack or not? Any chance that homeland security policy dictates to downplay the terrorism card to keep social control and prevent widespread panic? The reason I ask is because the bridge that collapsed doesn't look like it was just one section, but several sections, which makes me say hmmmmmmmmmm? This is going to sound loopy, but what are the odds the bridge was a trial run of something else at a later date? Thoughts?