According to Dick Cheney, because we have not had an attack against America, it is proof the Bush policies worked and any changes to them, which results in an attack, is further proof their policies should be maintained.

I guess from a sound bite point of view that makes sense. If you do X and Z doesn't happen all is well. If you change X to Y and Z happens, then the change from X is the reason Z occurred. Yes, all neat and tidy if life were made in black and white absolutes. The problem with Cheney's formula is that it doesn't take into account factors A through W.

The two attacks on the World Trade Center, I'm counting 9/11 as well as the failed attack under the Clinton Administration, underscore the complexity of an open society and the difficulties in making people absolutely safe. Furthermore, you cannot just shut down the system, throw out the law, and assume this will protect the citizens from attack. It is also naïve to believe changing a policy will be the catalyst for wanton destruction.

More to the point, just because you make a change and nothing happens in a certain amount of time doesn't mean you change is the sole cause for the action not occurring.

I know people who will drink every weekend. They don't drink during the week, but when Friday comes along they get the bottles, drink like dogs, then on Sunday they will go to church and ask forgiveness. They have done this for years and feel because of this it's the reason why they haven't been arrested for drink driving or other alcohol related issues. Now, anyone knows it will just be a matter of time before they are caught, or at the very least the abuse they put on their body will cause harm somewhere down the line, however since nothing has happened to them in the past, they swear by the ritual.

Cheney and others with his opinions feel since the Bush Administration, well, since they decided to shave the Constitution, let's just call it like it is, they argue we have been protected from attacks and should continue the policy. Forget the fact that what they're doing is WRONG, if we have to trample on some freedoms, if some innocents have to be thrown under the bus to give the appearance of being free, then so be it.

Of course, this conveniently ignores the simple matter of a short time frame. The attack of 2001 has been less than 10 years and the factions that attacked the US think in terms of decades and centuries, not months. Just because the draconian lite methods seems to have worked so far doesn't mean they will protect us in the future. Conversely, if in changing those policies, heaven forbid, there is an attack on the US, it doesn't mean we should place a heavier hand on the throat of freedom.

Sadly, by looking at the AIG mess and the reaction politicians and the public have had on this, rational thinking is something we won't do. We will have a knee jerk reaction if an attack happens again, using bloodlust to fuel our reaction and seeking revenge against the gnats and flies as opposed to cleaning up the garbage that attracted and fueled them in the first place.