On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 06:19:13AM +0530, ss wrote: > "The US had a brief period when terrorist attacks seemed to become frequent.
The US had never any serious (as compared to other sources of mortality) terrorist attacks, period. http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2002/msg02096.html > But the US security agencies clamped down so effectively on the weak spots Do you have any evidence for this claim? > that were open to misuse by terrorists that the US made itself relatively > immune to terrorist attacks. Is there a physical law somehow preventing me from detonating a homebuilt 10+ kT nuclear device in Manhattan? Why, there is none. > This is in contrast to the weak, corrupt and ineficient response of the > Indian > government and security agencies who have not been able to prevent terror > attacks in India." > > In short - checking shampoo bottles and profiling random designated "others" > works well. It's just that people don't like those methods much because Let's say I build a Samsonite luggage replica from a metal/oxidizer explosive with no nitrogen content and zero vapor pressure. How is going to checking shampoo bottles going to help? > the "index of suspicion" of who might be a terrorist is increased. Freedom > to "be free" and the freedom to terrorise are one and the same. Allowing one > allows the other. Actually, there is no way of preventing terrorism. Absolutely none, not in any human society we're likely to live in, including several decades in the future.
