Don't you think this is a just *slightly* distorted historical account? Sure the Taliban might have eliminated opium poppy cultivation. But Knuckles, the also were putting any male WITHOUT A BEARD IN JAIL until his beard grew out. And other minor things like eliminating school for females and beating any woman not wearing a BURKA. You should try wearing a burka for a day, Knuckles...preferably in Arizona in July...like Kandahar in July (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kandahar#Climate)

Suggesting that the Taliban were a good government for Afghanistan is little like any one of the following. You pick:

• Mussolini brought civilization to Ethiopia (using mustard gas even....)
• Hitler prevented people from being taken advantage of by Jewish business people...(A tour of Auschwitz might be in order)
• Stalin made everyone equal....(Look up the word Kulak....)

There is a problem with your reading materials being used in a criminal case against you as evidence you actually planned a crime. This kind of circumstantial evidence can be used to convict ANYONE. Check out this case (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peggy_Hettrick_murder_case) where there wasn't ANY direct evidence available that pointed to the suspect. Violent writings, drawings, some porn and a knife collection were used to convict a high school sophomore of the murder of a 37 year old woman, 11 years after the crime. DNA evidence and indications of unethical conduct by the police and prosecution were used to free the guy after 9 YEARS IN JAIL. If you think this is just an isolated incident, maybe you should look at this: http://wrongful-convictions.blogspot.com./

And check out dgatewood's post below as well.

This isn't insightful, it's naive. Do you really think that the actions you take when interacting with the screeners who actually do the scans and searches will have ANY EFFECT on those who make policy? Do you really think the policy makers even talk to the rank and file? The policy makers concern is to be visibly doing something, so that when (not if) there is another air terrorism event, they can point to things full body scans as evidence that they are doing everything than can to prevent such events./p>

It's not a matter of cowardice, it's a matter of picking battles that matter. This is like being nasty to a waitress because you don't like the prices or the menu. The only way things will change if people take your "stance" is if enough of you get treated really badly to make news or some TSA screener goes postal and shoots you, causing an outcry.

The next time someone is nasty to you because of something your employer did, which you had no connection to, remember your "stance.

Regarding the 4th Amendment, it remains to be seen whether a full body scan required to participate in a voluntary activity (traveling on a plane) is unreasonable. If you stop someone on the street and subject them to a full body scan, then it is unreasonable. If someone chooses to do something where a full body scan is required to participate, then maybe it isn't. Maybe we should be asking TSA to prove that fully body scans make flying safer.

I agree that American is meant to be a free country, rather than a safe country, but forget the Texan with a pistol. Remember Flight 93.

Before 9/11, the accepted way for passengers to deal with a hijacking in the U.S. was to do nothing, because historically that had resulted in the fewest people getting hurt. Post 9/11, the accepted way for passengers to deal with hijackers is to take them down, regardless of the cost.

Ironically, before 9/11, there was a spate of news articles about flight attendants' concerns about unruly passengers and "air rage". Post 9/11, anyone who starts acting up is likely to find the flight attendant has lots of volunteer deputies. Look at this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rage and note the dates of the referenced news accounts.

Except it doesn't prove the parent's point...Here's why:

With the exception of Mitt Romney, Fox now has deals with every major potential Republican presidential candidate not currently in elected office. In other words, they work for him...

Murdoch has contributed 1.25 million dollars to the Republican governor's assocation, and 1 million the the U.S. "Chamber of Commerce". All this money is going into campaign contributions to buy influence.

Anyone in their right mind should be concerned about the impact of donations of this size on the right OR the left. When donors give this much money, they have undue influence on the recipients of their donations. Even if you don't mind that Murdoch gives this much money to the candidates he gives it to, you might not be as happy when George Soros does the same. Or vice-versa.

Not an irrational concern at all, IMO

This thing was pretty hard to find....It's interesting to me that the PRESS RELEASE (which doesn't reflect the report very well) generated 290 comments. Here's a link to download the actual report:

Rebound: unintended consequences of transport policy and technology innovations

But Sparky, the restaurants, theaters and shops you patronize ALL pay a portion of their gross revenue to the state to support highways, education, courts and prisons, state parks, etc. Microsoft has basically claimed that all that software you build is being manufactured and sold from Nevada because Nevada's tax structure is more advantageous than Washington's for this particular activity. Living in western Washington is part of the Microsoft employment package - how would you feel if everything at work was the same, but you were located in Elko or Tonopah, Nevada? No ocean, no rainforest, mostly no trees, hardly any water, no skiing, and very sparse entertainment possibilities (besides possibly gambling away your salary). Oh, and legalized prostitution....

Microsoft is gaming the rules in a way very similar those who move their investment money to Switzerland in order to avoid paying income taxes. It's dishonest. Microsoft has this wonderful Windows Genuine Advantage (sic) program to keep me playing by their rules, but they don't want to play by mine (I WAS a Washington resident)? I don't think so. How can a business legitimately argue against software piracy when it cheats on it's taxes.

Oh, and to provide full disclosure, I've been a Microsoft stockholder for 20+ years. How much longer is questionable....

Grishnakh, I know something about business. I worked for Boeing for 11 years. And I had software development and contracting businesses in Washington for 6 years. You would think that what you're saying would be true, but it didn't seem like it in Washington. You see, Washington doesn't have an income tax on corporations OR individuals. They have sales taxes, but not that much more than Oregon and certainly less than California. They have property taxes too, but lots less than in Texas or California. The thing you didn't mention about profit taxes is what a windfalll it is for accountants who get to classify this or that boondoggle as "expenses". A gross revenue tax at a reasonable rate is simple (although there are some deductions) and it works for Washington. Are you really arguing for more dependence on the U.S. Federal Tax Code? Most states piggyback of the feds and then make their own modifications. Have you ever (if you had a business, owned business property or sold investments) been absolutely positive that your federal income tax return was absolutely correct? If so, you're in the minority. Look at the size of the section for accountants in the Yellow Pages for proof.

You obviously know nothing about Washington's B&O Tax. The rate is different BY INDUSTRY. You pay a different rate if you create software than if you build airplanes and yet another rate if you grow lentils or make wine. And if you don't think Boeing has influence on the rate it pays, you're smoking something. Here is a list of the rates: http://dor.wa.gov/Content/FindTaxesAndRates/BAndOTax/BandOrates.aspx. Please notice the manufacturing rate of .00484 and the "Manufacturing of Commercial Airplanes, Components, or Aerospace Tooling" rate of .002904. In the list, I count 4 classifications specific to Boeing business and 1 specific to PACCAR (Kenworth, Peterbuilt, etc).