You have entirely missed my point. I think that is the difference between your viewpoint and mine. What we see as the most crucial or the crux of the matter differs in a very large way.


>>True, but Gore referred to abuse in the community as well. He insinuated that the abuse is at the city/municipal level around the U.S. He was not referring to in the military at all - or so I understood from his comments and that would explain the police chiefs response.
>
>OK, now I had to follow your links :).
>
>Few things jump out:
>"What possesses a former vice president of the U.S. to travel to the birthplace of Islamist terrorism and denounce his country?" asked the website Investors.com in an editorial.
>
>Does he mean Saudi Arabia, which is a big friend and ally of the USA, and with whose royal house the White House has cordial relations (hand in hand, so to speak)?
>
>After having read all of it... looks like they're shooting the messenger again. As if the Arabs didn't know what's going on. Nowadays, with the Web covering almost all the world, if any one of them is arrested, incarcerated or just "detained" here, we can only guess whether it takes more or less than two hours for their cousins back home to know about it. It seems to be more important that the rest of the US populace knows as little as possible about it.