those are not appropriate examples........the real issue is whether the government essentially can supend certain Amendments in the pursuit of a miliatary action.  So, should the gov't be givern a free pass of probable cause for ARREST.  That is a far more significant question as to whether the governemtn can search your carry-ons before getting on a plane. Similarly, should the government be allowed to get a sentence of death with a secret trial and a less than unanimous verdict?  I think not.  Again, a far cry from the unmatched bag scenario. Should the government be allowed to use secret warrants to find out what books and videos you have read and seen?   Wojtek Sokolowski <sokol@jhu.edu> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">At 02:34 PM 6/14/2002 +0000, justin wrote: >All I was saying >>that in the aftermath of 9/11 we need to re-evaluate or views on civil >>liberties and search for a reasonable compromise between liberty and security. >> >>wojtek > >You have yet to give a single resaon to believe that this is true. jks Because we are being attacked by fascist goons whose tactic of choice is killing civilians. I do not know about you, but I travel a bit and it feels good when, say, the pilot of a British Airways aircraft announces that the flight is delayed for about 20 minutes to remove "unmatched" luggage (something that the US carriers are yet to implement) or that security guards at the Schiphol airport interview every passenger boarding an overseas flight. I do not think that these practices make the UK or the <! BR! >Netherlands "police states." There was an old saying "better red than dead." I think it has not lost its relevance. wojtek </BLOCKQUOTE> <hr size=1>Do You Yahoo!? <a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/welcome/*http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/fc/en/spl">Sign-up for Video Highlights</a> of 2002 FIFA World Cup