These discussion forums are the record of our generation, much as newspapers and hardcopy letters were the record of the previous few generations. Preserve it (even with the 'insignificant snippets') or lose the record of how we got to where we are and who we will be. I.

Geocities should be only the start of this preservation effort, if support can be found. About.com, by their behavior over the past few years, has shown that they have no regard for the past, even what they label as 'archives.' About.com is owned and operated by the New York Times, but their policies are anything but newsworthy or literary. When a new "guide" takes over a topic site, they wipe out all previous comments, and when they discontinue a site it's either wiped from the forum's archives or the topic forum is removed from their index entirely. Clearly, this ignorant behavior disregards the history, contributions, and cultural snapshots of the deleted posts. In the spirit of Orwell's 1984, we appear to be rewriting history as we go, by deleting the contributions of previous posters and discontinued forums - not just on About.com, but on many discussion forums. Would the National Archives or the Computer History Museum be interested in supporting such a data-recovery program? Historians make a big deal about the letters of previous generations. These discussion board posts are our generation's history. I.

In the ABC News interview with a man and a woman from this family (Saturday morning), a few things were apparent: - They are intelligent, professional people. - They consider themselves 'mainstream Americans.' - A combination of their Middle-Eastern-style traditional dress and their self-reported conversation about "safest places on a plane if it crashes" while boarding the plane, attracted the concern of other passengers. - Acknowledgment in the interview that airport signs and other messages encourage passengers to "report suspicious activity," thereby suggesting that mind-set to passengers. So ... One would assume that college-educated Americans of any background would be aware of the intense security-awareness and sensitivity of public perceptions. The interview comments included "we are just regular people," but did not support the general security concern or claim any patriotism or common cause with other Americans. Are they just visiting the US, or are they members of the community? For people who claim citizenship and "rights" (and from an informed basis, as one of them is an attorney), this passive, push-it-to-the-limit style of confrontation is suspect in itself. Should everyone with a confrontational, skeptical attitude be kicked off airplanes? Of course not, but if one were looking for security risks (or dupes, or mules) it might be a good starting point. As the Veteran with service in Afghanistan pointed out, physical appearances are significant, and have different significance in different cultures. Any educated "mainstream" American should know by now what choices in clothing and grooming will attract security concern on aircraft or any public transportation. Choices. Idealists would say we should look for the quality inside each person and ignore external appearances, but as an old guy with a variety of experience, I can assure you that Americans do "tell books by their covers" every day in every way. Educated, professional people should not have expected anything different. But think about it - a lawyer, pushing Middle-Eastern appearance to the limit and talking in an airplane about crashes and safety. He didn't expect a reaction? Was he probing for one? Is all this fuss just to give him the opportunity for a lawsuit? Put aside your prejudices and predispositions for a moment, and consider why a smart American lawyer would put himself in this situation. How do we find out? If he does sue, there's a process called "discovery." So, just who in this case is "extending the war on terror," perhaps for self-serving reasons? He has obtained his publicity. Watch carefully, what he does next. Just thinking ... I.