I repeat--you need to study the history a bit more. Though their origin was military, their plans and goals were exactly terrorist, and they would be considered terrorists by todays definition. Their proposed tactics didn't involve suicide bombing, but, they might well have used highjacked airliners.
And none of your response in any way clarifies how "REAL ID" is supposed to help. It is an unacceptable and highly dangerous curtailment of our civil liberties for an totally unjustifiable reason.
>> I repeat—you need to study the history a bit more.
I repeat — condescension is obnoxious.
>> Their proposed tactics didn’t involve suicide bombing, but, they might well have used highjacked airliners.
But they didn’t. Thus — with the absence of suicide bombers and no hijackers using airplanes as weapons against civilian targets ... they’re clearly not the same.
Additionally — you failed to respond to my observation that it remains a poor idea to fight a current conflict with outdated security tactics. Regardless of whether the Islamic terrorists are tactically identical to the Nazis ... you cannot fight a new war with old tactics and expect to win. Enemies adapt to security — so we must continually adapt security to the enemies.
>> It is an unacceptable and highly dangerous curtailment of our civil liberties for an totally unjustifiable reason.
Which civil liberties are curtailed by an ID? This sounds like the phantom curtailment of civil liberties that liberals SWEAR is occurring due to the PATRIOT Act.
H
How does it affect my liberty for me to be able to identify myself, and make it difficult for someone else to identify themselves as me?
Do you consider it an invasion of your privacy when the bank wants ID before you can transact on your account? I suppose so.
Or which affects your freedom to travel more: a.) showing ID to the airline, and flying to your destination, or b.) a collapsed airline industry because the public won’t board planes?