X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS  	autolearn=ham version=3.2.0-r372567
Sender: -2.6 (spamval) -- NONE
Return-Path: <improvetheworld-errors &AElig umich.edu>
Received: from newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) 	by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k7EJrgnw029894 	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) 	for <dreeves &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>; Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:53:43 -0400
Received: from ghostbusters.mr.itd.umich.edu (ghostbusters.mr.itd.umich.edu [141.211.93.144]) 	by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k7EJrfm1000407; 	Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:53:41 -0400
Received: FROM edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu (edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.27]) 	BY ghostbusters.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 44E0D4C1.ED9F9.16145 ;  	14 Aug 2006 15:53:38 -0400
Received: from edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu (localhost.eecs.umich.edu [127.0.0.1]) 	by edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.1/8.12.9) with ESMTP id k7EJrhnC015197 	for <improvetheworld &AElig umich.edu>; Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:53:45 -0400
Received: from localhost (jmickens &AElig localhost) 	by edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) with ESMTP id k7EJrZ5m015134 	for <improvetheworld &AElig umich.edu>; Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:53:35 -0400
In-Reply-To: <3CE327AF-BB1E-466D-95C9-3F9E6E0F3D89 &AElig umich.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608141516160.23977 &AElig edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608131415030.30087 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>   <44DF6DE6.1010203 &AElig umich.edu> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608131725200.20709 &AElig edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608132232260.18836 &AElig columbus.eecs.umich.edu>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608140446510.18991 &AElig edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608141055400.30087 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608141132160.25532 &AElig edinburgh.eecs.umich.edu>  <3CE327AF-BB1E-466D-95C9-3F9E6E0F3D89 &AElig umich.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.0-r372567 (2006-01-26) on  	newman.eecs.umich.edu
X-Virus-Scan: : UVSCAN at UoM/EECS
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 15:53:34 -0400 (EDT)
To: improvetheworld &AElig umich.edu
From: James W Mickens <jmickens &AElig eecs.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: stupid feel-good "no liquids" rule
Status: O
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 690

> Back to Nate and Danny's ideas. I for one would rather not
> have security in airports whatsoever. I would be plenty happy
> to take my chances. I don't think that every plane would
> suddenly start blowing up.

I strongly disagree. By your own analysis, "there are lots of people who 
hate the U.S." and will do organizations like Hamas "a favor by harming 
the evil U.S." If this is true, it couldn't possibly be the case that our 
airplanes would be reasonably safe with no security at our airports. In 
fact, we can almost be certain that there would be a huge upswing in 
terrorists attacks, if only because Bin Laden is on the record as saying 
that he *wants* to hit us again. Every one of the Bin Laden tapes contains 
ominous warnings about future attacks. He is not being sarcastic. In 
conjunction with addressing the root causes of terrorism, we have to 
protect ourselves against the people who already hate us now. We must be 
realistic about the dangers that face us. The British, American, and 
Pakistani intelligence agencies just broke up a major terrorist plot 
against airliners. This is the context for the entire conversation that 
we're having now. The threat is real.

~j