This thread is complex. A lot of talk about bin Laden but not about the brains of the outfit, Zawahiri.

We are not approaching the situation in a new way. We are resorting to old tactics. Bombing Afghanistan may appease the anger of some.

Here's what I think needs to be done. We need an International Police Force hopefully through the UN. We need to apply the rule of international law to this situation and try the guilty parties at the Hague.

How do we protect ourselves in the meantime? Strenghten the resolve of other countries to join us in routing the criminals. The Muslim community must speak out more firmly on this issue and denounce the radicalized fundamentalists and not let the issue of Israel stop them.

We need to look at who we support as allies. Wahhabism is rampant in one of our chief allies, Saudi Arabia and the seeds for this radicalization is planted there and financed by rich sheiks.

We need to stop our dependence on oil. Alternative energy sources should be a high priority for our government.

War is not inherent in our social makeup. We resort to it out of impotence and not because it really accomplishes very much. We are embarking on a road toward WW III. Is this why we fought WW II?

One of the big problems is anger. Hot-headedness keeps our country from seeing alternative solutions. They are there but we're so used to thinking in a box. War is seen as the easiest solution. But is it really the most effective?

There is no reality in the theory that war is inherent in the human social condition. Was slavery inherent? Hasn't most of the world to some extent evolved from that recourse?

No, we are a social species because war is not inherent in our makeup. This is why we have survived, because there is the kind of intelligence out there that knows that war doesn't ultimately work for survival. Societies that practice it for any length of time do not survive.

A measured response is what's needed, not simplistic low-context, hot headed responses espousing "patriotism" and simple-minded "good guys and bad guys". The story of the Samurai warrior who will not brandish his weapon unless he is free from anger has some relevance here.

A high-context attitude in which all parts of the puzzle are considered, such as our involvement in what has happened to us and how we can keep it from happening again is in order. Inasmuch as Bush seeks the world community for support, this is good, but as we act unilaterally, we are not being responsible.

How do you neutralize the negative force of those who would destroy us? First, by not becoming like them.

Second, to appeal to the highest principles of people rather than the lowest "let's nuke 'em" attitude.

Third, to listen to what's being said and rather than reacting angrilly and out-of-control, give it weight and consideration.

Fourth, forget all of the generalizations that are made in this situation about what action we take. They will not work any more. This is uncharted waters. We need help and consultation from the whole world and it's in their best interest to help us lest the next goal of these fanatics would be the destruction of the Eiffel Tower, the Hermitage, The great wall of China, Tel Aviv, American embassies in every country of the world, the Parliament in London, and even Mecca itself. (Muslims ought to be very worried about this.)

I believe that there is a kind of insanity that doesn't hear voices or hallucinate. It's the kind that believes that the destruction of this world is rewarded in a paradise. A worldwide mental health is in order. Lets not become crazy ourselves.

Frank