Hey, guys: I've paid for Salon Premium membership from the very beginning because I supported your independent journalistic voice. This bit of Slackware doesn't qualify as journalism: it's simply a puff piece. It could have been written by Ken Ham's PR agency. Where's the analysis, the context-setting, the critical thinking? If this is the best you can do, don't bother to renew my subscription.

Quoth BillOwen

I also asked him about Hanjours magic carpet ride and got the truth that it "might not be as hard as you think". I have to bow to his superiour knowledge there, but Jesus, I would still have to put it in the hmmm, I don't know about that category.

This argument from incredulity is really wearing thin. Instead of going "hmmmm", pop over to ITVV and pick up one of their excellent in-flight airliner videos. Watch it a couple of times. Pay close attention to the description of the relevant autopilot modes, especially LNAV and VNAV. Also note the procedure for inserting a waypoint into the flight plan. Visit any FBO, pick up the latest IFR Enroute High Altitude maps, and jot down the NAVAIDS nearest your targets.

You now have enough information to be a 9/11 hijacker. And no, I'm not revealing arcane secrets: millions of people know all about this stuff. (Most don't wear tinfoil beanies, though.)

As for all that blather about "3 buildings" and other nonsense, go find yourself an "ask the civil engineer" column.

I enjoyed this review, Laura, but please fix one little glitch: Rebecca Goldstein is at Trinity College in Hartford, CT, not Trinity College, Cambridge! See http://www.trincoll.edu/~rgoldste/teaching.htm

I know that Cary's an American, from the culture of "don't apologize, don't explain", but in this case he needs to explain himself. I agree with many of the people who have responded here: there are many, many legitimate reasons for the host to reimburse the boyfriend's money, and no good reason to refuse that reimbursement.

However I don't understand why the writer's parents should ever have been told of the matter. It's really nothing to do with them. The way it's presented here strongly suggests that the writer herself told her father about the incident; if true, this is really dumb.

So, Cary: where did your blunt, culturally insensitive judgement come from?

Read An Unquiet Mind first, then Touched by Fire and Exuberance.

Excellent analysis, as always. As I commented in my blog (geoffarnold.com) we've reached the point where if a bunch of people are going to die a violent death, we want to watch it on live TV. Gruesome, but undeniable.

I recently travelled to India for the first time, and took several intercity flights on various airlines. What struck me was the speed and efficiency of the security process. Yes, there were US-style metal-detectors, but they were switched off. (I wonder if they simply turn them on when US government officials are watching.) Each passenger stood on a box and was swiftly "wanded" and patted down. There was a separate line for women, whose inspection was done behind a curtain. Nobody removed shoes, belts, or watches. All checked baggage was x-rayed and sealed; all carry-on's were x-rayed, tagged, and matched against boarding pass. The process was at least twice as fast as, say, at the UAL terminal at Logan. (My home away from home.) And no, it wasn't labour-intensive: there were fewer Indian inspectors than TSA staff.

Of course the Indian airports themselves are horrible - see http://geoffarnold.com/?p=766 - but that's another subject.