Ok, I think Harry Browne has made some excellent points. Yet Andrea Harris and many like her continue to see this as "weasel behavior". What will it take for these people to realize that discussing the role of America's long standing, faulty foreign policy in perpetuating terrorism does NOT mean that the writer is, "being a coward who secretly admires thugs like Usama bin Laden. After all, doesn't he have a legitimate grievance?"
WTF? How does "The difference between relatively harmless thugs and truly dangerous thugs is the real grievances the dangerous ones can play upon. They are still thugs, but they gain the support of honest, peace-loving people who have been pushed to the limit." become admiration for bin Laden, the truly dangerous thug?
