riverman wrote:
"Larry Cable" wrote in message
...

I find this superfical at best. Looking at opinion polls going into
the
election, moral issues were not the deciding factor for most
voters, the
economy was number one followed by national security issues.
Fear of terrorism isn't irrational, Osama blew up the World Trade
Center
and we
all watched on TV. Whether you feel that Bush's response was
adequete,
proper
or
justified is another question, but being concerned about recurring
acts in
just
being reasonable and rational.


3000 people died in a country of 250,000,000. And this was an attack
that
was off the scales of impact. If its rational to be afraid that you
will
actually be harmed in a repeat terrorist attack, then you must live
in
absolute constant paralysis of being killed in a car wreck.

The actual risk of being harmed in a terrorist attack is miniscule,
but not
the percieved risk. Bush milked that percieved risk for all he could
get out
it, which included a second term.

Talk to me about actual vs percieved risk. I was a river guide for 15
years,
and live in Kinshasa. People who voted their own personal safety WERE
duped.

--riverman

I might agree if this had been the act of a single mad man. But this
was the act of an organization that had lead multiple and increasingly
deadly attacks against the US across the world, remember the USS Cole,
the embassy in Kenya, and evidence suggests that Al Queda trained and
masterminded the response in Somolia that you can read about in
"Blackhawk Down". They have since been claimed responsiblity for a
number of deadly attacks around the world. While I don't live in
constant fear of terror attacks, it seems pretty obvious that it is
something that we need to take damn serious.

National Security and personal safety are two related, but seperate
issues. While I am reasonably sure that I am personally safe from
terrorist attacks, I believe that it is just a matter of time before
the US suffers from such an attack again. If I lived and worked in New
York, Chicago or Washington, I probably would be more concerned.

Am event that caused the US entry into WWII caused less casualties than
the World Trade Center.