Europe full of cowards
#421
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> an effort in that department.
US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
started.
It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
caused the failures.
The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> an effort in that department.
US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
started.
It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
caused the failures.
The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
#422
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>
> > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > an effort in that department.
>
> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> started.
I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
a bus or train, with minimal security.
> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> caused the failures.
>
> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
Peter
> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>
> > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > an effort in that department.
>
> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> started.
I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
a bus or train, with minimal security.
> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> caused the failures.
>
> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
Peter
#423
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>
> > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > an effort in that department.
>
> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> started.
I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
a bus or train, with minimal security.
> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> caused the failures.
>
> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
Peter
> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>
> > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > an effort in that department.
>
> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> started.
I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
a bus or train, with minimal security.
> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> caused the failures.
>
> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
Peter
#424
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>
> > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > an effort in that department.
>
> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> started.
I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
a bus or train, with minimal security.
> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> caused the failures.
>
> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
Peter
> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>
> > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > an effort in that department.
>
> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> started.
I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
a bus or train, with minimal security.
> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> caused the failures.
>
> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
Peter
#425
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>
> > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > an effort in that department.
>
> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> started.
I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
a bus or train, with minimal security.
> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> caused the failures.
>
> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
Peter
> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>
> > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > an effort in that department.
>
> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> started.
I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
a bus or train, with minimal security.
> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> caused the failures.
>
> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
Peter
#426
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
Peter Hayes wrote:
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
>> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>>
>>> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have
>>> made an effort in that department.
>>
>> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in
>> the early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and
>> knives was started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping
> on a bus or train, with minimal security.
>
Not, Airport security was always more stringent than hopping on a bus or a
train, but obviously not stringent enough.
>> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out
>> what the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as
>> with any disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a
>> unexpectedly severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from
>> it and fix the problems that lead not only to the end result but to
>> the things that caused the failures.
>>
>> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling
>> to take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view
>> of the rest of the world and from that information decide what it
>> needs to change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to
>> say that the US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do
>> anything about it. Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to
>> be smart and wise, drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has
>> created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will
> displace the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Steven Wright
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
>> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>>
>>> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have
>>> made an effort in that department.
>>
>> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in
>> the early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and
>> knives was started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping
> on a bus or train, with minimal security.
>
Not, Airport security was always more stringent than hopping on a bus or a
train, but obviously not stringent enough.
>> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out
>> what the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as
>> with any disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a
>> unexpectedly severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from
>> it and fix the problems that lead not only to the end result but to
>> the things that caused the failures.
>>
>> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling
>> to take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view
>> of the rest of the world and from that information decide what it
>> needs to change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to
>> say that the US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do
>> anything about it. Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to
>> be smart and wise, drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has
>> created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will
> displace the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Steven Wright
#427
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
Peter Hayes wrote:
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
>> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>>
>>> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have
>>> made an effort in that department.
>>
>> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in
>> the early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and
>> knives was started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping
> on a bus or train, with minimal security.
>
Not, Airport security was always more stringent than hopping on a bus or a
train, but obviously not stringent enough.
>> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out
>> what the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as
>> with any disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a
>> unexpectedly severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from
>> it and fix the problems that lead not only to the end result but to
>> the things that caused the failures.
>>
>> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling
>> to take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view
>> of the rest of the world and from that information decide what it
>> needs to change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to
>> say that the US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do
>> anything about it. Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to
>> be smart and wise, drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has
>> created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will
> displace the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Steven Wright
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
>> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>>
>>> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have
>>> made an effort in that department.
>>
>> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in
>> the early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and
>> knives was started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping
> on a bus or train, with minimal security.
>
Not, Airport security was always more stringent than hopping on a bus or a
train, but obviously not stringent enough.
>> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out
>> what the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as
>> with any disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a
>> unexpectedly severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from
>> it and fix the problems that lead not only to the end result but to
>> the things that caused the failures.
>>
>> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling
>> to take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view
>> of the rest of the world and from that information decide what it
>> needs to change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to
>> say that the US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do
>> anything about it. Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to
>> be smart and wise, drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has
>> created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will
> displace the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Steven Wright
#428
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
Peter Hayes wrote:
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
>> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>>
>>> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have
>>> made an effort in that department.
>>
>> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in
>> the early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and
>> knives was started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping
> on a bus or train, with minimal security.
>
Not, Airport security was always more stringent than hopping on a bus or a
train, but obviously not stringent enough.
>> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out
>> what the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as
>> with any disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a
>> unexpectedly severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from
>> it and fix the problems that lead not only to the end result but to
>> the things that caused the failures.
>>
>> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling
>> to take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view
>> of the rest of the world and from that information decide what it
>> needs to change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to
>> say that the US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do
>> anything about it. Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to
>> be smart and wise, drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has
>> created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will
> displace the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Steven Wright
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
>> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>>
>>> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have
>>> made an effort in that department.
>>
>> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in
>> the early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and
>> knives was started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping
> on a bus or train, with minimal security.
>
Not, Airport security was always more stringent than hopping on a bus or a
train, but obviously not stringent enough.
>> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out
>> what the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as
>> with any disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a
>> unexpectedly severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from
>> it and fix the problems that lead not only to the end result but to
>> the things that caused the failures.
>>
>> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling
>> to take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view
>> of the rest of the world and from that information decide what it
>> needs to change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to
>> say that the US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do
>> anything about it. Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to
>> be smart and wise, drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has
>> created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will
> displace the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Steven Wright
#429
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
Peter Hayes wrote:
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
>> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>>
>>> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have
>>> made an effort in that department.
>>
>> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in
>> the early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and
>> knives was started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping
> on a bus or train, with minimal security.
>
Not, Airport security was always more stringent than hopping on a bus or a
train, but obviously not stringent enough.
>> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out
>> what the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as
>> with any disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a
>> unexpectedly severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from
>> it and fix the problems that lead not only to the end result but to
>> the things that caused the failures.
>>
>> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling
>> to take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view
>> of the rest of the world and from that information decide what it
>> needs to change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to
>> say that the US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do
>> anything about it. Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to
>> be smart and wise, drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has
>> created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will
> displace the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Steven Wright
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
>> peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>>
>>> US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have
>>> made an effort in that department.
>>
>> US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in
>> the early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and
>> knives was started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping
> on a bus or train, with minimal security.
>
Not, Airport security was always more stringent than hopping on a bus or a
train, but obviously not stringent enough.
>> It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out
>> what the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as
>> with any disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a
>> unexpectedly severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from
>> it and fix the problems that lead not only to the end result but to
>> the things that caused the failures.
>>
>> The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling
>> to take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view
>> of the rest of the world and from that information decide what it
>> needs to change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to
>> say that the US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do
>> anything about it. Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to
>> be smart and wise, drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has
>> created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will
> displace the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
--
I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
Steven Wright
#430
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Europe full of cowards
In article <1gcrpd9.1yivbf81lbq737N%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> > peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
> >
> > > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > > an effort in that department.
> >
> > US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> > early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> > started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
> a bus or train, with minimal security.
If you tried to bring a knife or firearm into the secure area of an
airport, you'd get arrested. An acquaintance of mine *asked* a policeman
on duty whether a letter-opener she had was a problem, and he promptly
arrested her and put her in jail. She was perfectly happy to leave it
with a friend who had seen her off, but she spent the night in jail.
This was in the late '70s or early '80s. Tell her that airport security
was "minimal."
> > It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> > the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> > disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> > severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> > problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> > caused the failures.
> >
> > The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> > take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> > rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> > change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> > US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> > Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> > drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
> the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
I certainly hope so.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
> Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1gcrjp3.6uggc3i56dmtN%peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk >,
> > peter@seahaze.demon.co.uk (Peter Hayes) wrote:
> >
> > > US airport security was non-existent before 9/11. They might have made
> > > an effort in that department.
> >
> > US airport security was nonexistent before a rash of hijackings in the
> > early 1970s. That's when the whole screening for weapons and knives was
> > started.
>
> I thought that taking an internal US flight pre 9/11 was like hopping on
> a bus or train, with minimal security.
If you tried to bring a knife or firearm into the secure area of an
airport, you'd get arrested. An acquaintance of mine *asked* a policeman
on duty whether a letter-opener she had was a problem, and he promptly
arrested her and put her in jail. She was perfectly happy to leave it
with a friend who had seen her off, but she spent the night in jail.
This was in the late '70s or early '80s. Tell her that airport security
was "minimal."
> > It's terribly easy to lock back with 20/20 hindsight and point out what
> > the problems were. But few people saw them at the time. It's as with any
> > disaster: an unexpected chain of small failures has a unexpectedly
> > severe result. The only thing we can do is learn from it and fix the
> > problems that lead not only to the end result but to the things that
> > caused the failures.
> >
> > The biggest problem I see is that the US is, by and large, unwilling to
> > take a humble and unbiased look at itself from the point of view of the
> > rest of the world and from that information decide what it needs to
> > change. That's not anti-American. Anti-American would be to say that the
> > US is too stupid to recognize its arrogance or do anything about it.
> > Pro-American is this: The US has the potential to be smart and wise,
> > drop its arrogance, and fix the problems it has created for itself.
>
> Maybe if Kerry wins in November these more rational ideas will displace
> the current 'Pax Americana' approach.
I certainly hope so.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html