Dr. Alexander:    And just as a footnote, I mean to come to his question.  I think you’re absolutely right when you said that terrorism is going to be with us as long as we have human beings, unless we change human nature and so on but I think when you said that the only way to deal with this is to bring it under manageable levels that we can live there the same way we live with all crime and so on.  But to come back to your question and I see where you’re coming from and honestly one can go to that particular metric or route.  If you measure the incidence in the country as you indicated Ed, and if you have let’s say, less number of incidence is the success.  But I would like to submit to you that the key is not only the number of incidence it goes back to the question of perception that Ed was talking about is really the question of the impact.  The impact of the incident, the impact on the government, the political impact, the economic impact.  One incident 9/11, and that is right I mean the United States obviously it wasn’t a question of survival but we were in our knees in the United States because of the perception that – look what happened 19 people were able to, not able to able in battlefield to defend the U.S of course, they couldn’t but they were able to destroy the symbols of American power and economy and all that.  But you know the economic cost was enormous of the 9/11.  We still feel it today.  That’s one of the reasons – contributing reasons that we have the crisis today that goes all the way back.  How much we invest let’s say in security?  So you have the political impact and consequences, you have the economic, you have the strategic.  I mean, look the United States went to war to Afghanistan because of this Al-Qaida, then Iraq rightly or wrongly and all that.  And now we have problem in Pakistan, now we have a problem in Yemen and we have a problem in the [IB] and so on and so forth.  So what we are trying to tell you there are strategic consequences to that and Ed was talking about states [IB] of terrorism.  Like the role of Iran for example or the role of Syria or whatever it is.  We’re talking about the substates groups.  So they’re able to challenge us which is a novelty in the history of humanity that small groups are able to challenge let’s say super power like the Unites States.  So you look at the political, you look at the economic, you look at the strategic.  To me, where I come from, the most important impact is the psychological, on the minds of people.  If you and I and the public, the civil society loses the confidence and the capability of the government to protect them, we’re turning the clock back to the so-called middle ages to the private police forces and all that.  You cannot trust the government that they are going to do the job.  And that’s why there are many people who have doubts about the so-called success.  Let’s say in Iraq, or in Afghanistan and Pakistan, so we’re talking about humanity and how humanity feels about that kind of threat.  More people are being killed as the indicator on the road of course.  But you know we take it part of modern life but you can see that the terrorist have some instruments that can affect the minds.  So what I’m suggesting is the response to that must come from the civic society.  For example what he was trying to do from, I’m talking about the Rumi Forum what I read and so on.  Your part of the solution, not part of the problem.  To get what we call the diasporas communities involved.  And to say look we were on the same boat, we have the same blood, we have the same threats.  So I would like to look at the challenges but as the Chinese said you know danger is also an opportunity.  So what are the opportunities that you think we should take in order to minimize the risk of terrorism and bring it to some level that we can live with?