Ignoramus11056 wrote:

http://www.reuters.com/article/world...4AQ52120081127

``Security specialists say the attack was probably months in the
planning and appears to have been finely tuned in its execution, but
it ultimately relied on only an estimated 25 gunmen lightly armed with
assault rifles and hand-grenades.''

What they forgot to say that it relied also on the fact that the
Indian citizens who were attacked, were not armed. Somehow, I have
hard times visualizing this attack happening in, say, Oklahoma City.



I'm red faced to have to admit that the first "lesson" I learned several
hours into the TV coverage of that horrible mess was that Mumbai is the
post-colonial name for the city I grew up knowing as Bombay.

I kept asking the thirteen or so folks we were over for a Thanksgiving
Day lunch feast, "How come I never heard of Mumbai, India?", and none of
the others were familiar that place name either.

I guess maybe because the two names are so close phonetically, We'd all
been hearing "Bombay" when someone said "Mumbai" and it was only when
text kept appearing on the Fox News TV coverage that we started wondering.

Anyone else care to fess up to the same chauvinistic failure in being up
to date?

Happy Holidays,

Jeff

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.98*10^14 fathoms per fortnight.