Somehow you managed to either misunderstand or get wrong nearly all the important points you tried to make.
The A & B example I showed wasn't an illustration of terrorism but of the effect of different levels of information and how they could influence choices of action. How did you both miss and misuse that?
The information about terrorist groups changing communications methods has been in the news on multiple occasions. It wasn't "made up on the spot," you are simply uninformed. And for some reason the logic does not occur to you than when the media says the intelligence agencies watch X that terrorists and others might avoid X. I don't see how you can do that.
What we know from reliable sources is that only the highest levels of the terrorist hierarchy, the senior commanders, that provide high level guidance have generally been protected by the more advanced and labor intensive methods, but the lower levels that actually have to get things done according to some sort of schedule not so much. The lower levels have been much more vulnerable to having their communications intercepted, but Snowden has been tutoring them through the media on the things to avoid.
Snowden's leaks only show technical capability for intercepting communications, what they don't show is the machinery of repression and mass active monitoring that 1984 would require.