I proudly voted for the President and respect him greatly.  However, I don't always understand everything he does.   It is easy to question and second guess however when there are no real consequences to our decisions and opinions.  We can  insist that if he had just done what we think is right, everything would be coming up roses. 

In doing so however, I think we are looking at everything as individual incidents.  President does not strike me as one who acts that way.  I like to think he has an overall strategy and he views individual events in light of that overall strategy and responds appropriately.

Like a chess master, his individual moves don't always seem to make sense, but in the end, we see how each individual move was part of the whole strategy for the better or worse.

I hope and pray I am correct, and the overall strategy is the right one.  Unfortunately we won't know the answer for a while.

It is a worthwhile movie.

I have read a few reviews complaining about what it is not and a few praising it for being more than I think it is.

It is one snapshot of a world changing day.  Of a life changing day.

It is about a small group of people.

It is about "running into a burning building."

It is about being trapped in the rubble.

It is about gathering as a family and waiting for word.

It is about the confusion of the day.

It is about people near and far responding to the overwhelming need to do something.

It is about hope and fear and love and loss and mourning and celebrating and life.

It is a movie well worth seeing.

I read today that Dan Rather was given the extra security once-over at an airport gate recently.  You have likely read previously that Al Gore has gone through the process as well.  I am sure also that we have all seen old women and children wanded because we have to watch everyone, and in reaction to such stories, we have heard cries for letting the old ladies and kids through and concentrating on middle eastern looking men in their 20's.  It is said we need to profile better and concentrate on the real threats.

So which is it?  Do we screen everybody or do we profile?  Well, if we think the terrorists are serious, I say the answer to this either/or question is both.

It is obvious that most of the successful and unsuccessful perpetrators of terrorists attacks have been young men fron the middle east.  I think we all need to recognize that, given these facts, we do need to profile a bit, and give those matching this profile a second glance, if not a full look.

But if we truly believe the terrorists are serious, and most of us do, we need to recognize that as soon as we exclude a group from the potential of extra scrutiny, those who wish to do us harm will make every effort to exploit that exclusion.   Not to mention the problems in determining the precise parameters of the exclusion.  To use the "old lady" scenerio, at what age is a woman an "old lady?"  How will we determine how we determine who qualifies for our security exclusion?  Is it age?  Percentage of gray hair?  Number of pictures of grandchildren?  Color of hat?  Simply the presence of a hat?  As for kids, at what point will we move them from the "safe" column to the suspect column? 

I have not heard a lot about who was arrested in London, but I have heard that they are not all men and not all middle eastern.

I have been subject to additional scrutiny when boarding a plane and it is not an overly intusive experience so I have no problem with it.  I like that my safety is being taken seriously.  I also like that the person sitting near me in the terminal, looking for security breaches, is not seeing obvious exclusions to exploit.