A few comments:
The level of security on airplanes is something I'm not totally sure about myself. To completely eradicate the danger, you'd have to search each person, and each bag at every point, inconvenience millions of people, and eliminate a lot of privacy. Airport Security in America is among the most lax in the world-largely because we regard the threat as so minor, that anyone would seriously go to the trouble to do an organized hijacking.


We probably will step up security significantly, for better or for worse. Most all the security we have simply acts as a deterrent-with sufficient time and effort, all the obstacles we have in place could be overcome.


My economics prof described it like he does the approach to crime. Taking steps to completely eliminate the possibility would infringe many people's perceived liberties, and cost a society more than it would be likely willing to commit. Too little, and the danger is too great. There's no perfect solution either way. The best steps that can be taken to prevent something of this magnitude from happening again would be more along the lines of improved intelligence.

> >Will we ever get to the point that we realize we will be more secure when
> >the rest of the world isn't living in poverty so we can have nice running shoes?

Sorry, don't buy that. American companies offering jobs to people in other countries doesn't create poverty. Poverty already exists in third world countries. Offering jobs at higher rates of pay then they would get there helps them.

> >In just 8 months, Bush gets the whole world
> >back to hating us again. He
> >withdraws from the Kyoto agreement, walks us
> > out of the Durban conference
> >on racism, insists on restarting the arms
> >race -- you name it, and Baby
> >Bush has blown it all.

Ok, Bush is in agreement with 95 out of 100 US Senators that the Kyoto treaty should not be ratified in its current form, based upon its one-sided call for reduction in emissions. The government of Australia also indicated support by rejecting the treaty. It asks for large emissions reduction by the U.S., based upon some shaky science, with no restrictions placed upon China, or "developing" third world countries.

Withdrawing from the conference on racism? Well, obviously, at least Israel has joined us in that. I could go into the reasons why the conference was misguided and how the propagators were more racists than those they criticized-but I think I'll use up my link space on this one for a particularly good article by Thomas Sowell.

Arms race? Not sure how increasing defensive capabilities gives Moore that idea. If you want to pick on a country for defying the rest of the world, try Iraq, for shelving arms control treaties, getting chemical and nuclear weapons, and kicking out UN weapons inspectors. China's ignored international treaties governing what constitutes international air space... and refused to accept responsibility for a plane crash in which all surviving evidence suggested culpability on their part.

The U.S. isn't perfect. But I have more cause to be proud of our country than not. I can't think of any country in the world I'd prefer. As much as I can find things to complain about-this last week I've thought a lot more about what it means to be an American, and how lucky we are to be in a free country. And I'm with Albright, Clinton, 90% of America, and 75% of England in saying President Bush has done a good job handling this crisis, and deserves our support.

Mark"God Bless America"N