The problem I have with the Kos article is the approach he wants to use does nothing to stop terrorist attacks.
It is like watching a suicide bomber blow up in Israel at a pizzeria and saying "it is tragic, but at least the bomber is dead, carry on with life"
The last time I looked, Israelis were still eating in pizzarias. On this side of the Atlantic, old women no longer can carry their cosmetics aboard a plane. Who wins when our government does really stupid things under the guise of fighting terrorism? Are we safer because old women no longer are allowed their toiletries?
Houston, what would you be saying if the terrorist attack that was foiled over the Atlantic was actually carried out? Lets say that 6 planes blew up, what would you be saying now?
I don't see a value in "what if" scenarios. I expect airlines and governments to work together to make travel reasonably safe. It's regrettable that my government attempts to manipulate peoples fears to achieve political ends. I do not believe flying is safer this week because of the draconian measures instituted after a failed conspiracy was busted. Why did it fail? Because Muslims turned in the names of several of the suspects to the authorities because of their suspicious behavior. So they had those boys under surveillance for almost a year and they outlaw toiletries after they've been busted? If liquids are so dangerous, maybe they should have been outlawed back in '95 when terrorists first tried to use them to blow up a plane.
At present, I'm more afraid of my government than I am of terrorists.
Houston... your new display pic is absolutely gorgeous!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The best.
Posted by: Wenchy | August 26, 2006 at 11:58 AM
Terrorism. It's like playing whack-a-mole (http://www.jebikes.com/java/WhackAMole/
The minute you get one, another one pops up.
Posted by: riannan | August 27, 2006 at 07:25 PM
...agreed.
Posted by: Crys | August 28, 2006 at 01:01 PM
The problem I have with the Kos article is the approach he wants to use does nothing to stop terrorist attacks.
It is like watching a suicide bomber blow up in Israel at a pizzeria and saying "it is tragic, but at least the bomber is dead, carry on with life"
How quick do you think the next attack would be?
Posted by: Baconeatingatheistjew | August 30, 2006 at 06:07 AM
The last time I looked, Israelis were still eating in pizzarias. On this side of the Atlantic, old women no longer can carry their cosmetics aboard a plane. Who wins when our government does really stupid things under the guise of fighting terrorism? Are we safer because old women no longer are allowed their toiletries?
Posted by: Houston | August 30, 2006 at 12:03 PM
Houston, what would you be saying if the terrorist attack that was foiled over the Atlantic was actually carried out? Lets say that 6 planes blew up, what would you be saying now?
Posted by: Baconeatingatheistjew | August 31, 2006 at 10:06 AM
I don't see a value in "what if" scenarios. I expect airlines and governments to work together to make travel reasonably safe. It's regrettable that my government attempts to manipulate peoples fears to achieve political ends. I do not believe flying is safer this week because of the draconian measures instituted after a failed conspiracy was busted. Why did it fail? Because Muslims turned in the names of several of the suspects to the authorities because of their suspicious behavior. So they had those boys under surveillance for almost a year and they outlaw toiletries after they've been busted? If liquids are so dangerous, maybe they should have been outlawed back in '95 when terrorists first tried to use them to blow up a plane.
At present, I'm more afraid of my government than I am of terrorists.
Posted by: Houston | August 31, 2006 at 12:56 PM