So you're saying the vulnerability of an open society is obvious to
ALL the people of the world?


Well, I'm saying it's pretty obvious to anybody who has lived in an open
society and has taken some time to think about it. It's also obvous to anyone
who has thought about how to attack an open society.


If the vulnerability had been obvious, one would think that [...]
government [...] would have taken steps to prevent...


It did. It missed one. Total security is not possible in an open society,
much as "the people" might want to be led otherwise. Airports are vulnerable,
no matter how many fences we put up and no matter how many locks we have to put
on our aircraft. Cities are vulnerable to air attack no matter how many TFRs
go up, unless all aircraft are dismantled and pounded into the ground.


You have failed to convince me that the US did not lose a lot of
stature in the eyes of the world as a result of the attacks.


I wasn't trying to. I wasn't even addressing "stature". I was addressing the
point that the 9/11 attacks somehow revealed something to us.


[Nowhere did I use the words "opening our eyes" as you have.


in message id: you
(Larry Dighera
Date: 10/27/03 9:33 AM Eastern Standard Time) said:
(after quoting people)

I blame Osama only for opening the eyes of the American people and the
world to the vulnerability to significant hostile attack of our
historically strategically isolated nation.


I agree with your sentiment, and go further.

Osama and his gang is responsible for killing thousands of people and
destroying parts of lower Manhattan.
WE are responsible for our reaction to it:

Jose



--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)