FlyAAway,

I make no assessment of you as a person other than to the extent that I can read your words. I never said otherwise.

First let me point out that I edited my post to remove the word "coward" for two reasons. The first is that I felt it would be seen by many here merely (as you say) as name-calling (though I stand by my opinion that the argument you make is in fact foolish). The second reason is that I felt that you would not be able to understand that whether or not a person is or is not a coward is based on far more criteria than whether or not one is "a decorated combat veteran".

While I in no way belittle your contributions, military service is not the ultimate "measure of a man". That you feel a need to bring attention to your "documented bravery" suggests an unbelievable insecurity about something on your part. This really isn't a pissing contest.

My initial response based on your words were that you were a coward because rather than lay the blame for 9/11 and the events that took the life of your friend where they rightfully belong (with the individuals that actually committed those acts) you none to subtly suggest that the world would be a better place by "taking [me] out" and that my "liberal" views somehow contributed to what happened. I felt that you were being cowardly because rather than face the real enemy you turn your fear and hatred towards me. Regardless of my views and opinions I had nothing whatsoever to do with the loss of your friend or the events of 9/11 and to suggest otherwise is quite simply cowardly.

Those in my life that I have lost and the particular circumstances that surround those losses quite frankly are none of your business and I see no need to share any of this with you. That you chose to do so is your prerogative.

I do not "sit on the sidelines" of this fight against terrorism. I wholeheartedly support the efforts of our government to bring those responsible to justice and prevent similar occurrences from happening in the future. As I am over twenty-eight I am ineligible for military service, which appears to be your only benchmark for either having or being allowed to express an opinion on this matter.

To bring up the notion of a "perfect" anything is again a childish argument in that no rational adult believes that anything can be perfect. I submit that there is room somewhere between the unachievable "perfect" solution and the censoring of ones reading material and confiscation of nail clippers.

No one, myself included ever suggested that we "fly without any restrictions whatsoever". This is a rather weak use of hyperbole on your part IMHO. What others and myself here have clearly said is that the choice in ones reading material is of absolutely no threat whatsoever and it was more than a simple over-reaction to prevent this individual from flying because of that. That others and yourself actually believe that this and many other recently imposed and equally feckless "security measures" protect anything is at the very least interesting




[This message has been edited by anrkitec (edited 10-24-2001).]