Every couple of months the Economist magazine hosts an Oxford Union-style debate on a proposition, with a moderator, proponent, and opponent. They make opening statements and rebuttals, and the reading public can comment and can vote for or against the proposition. The new debate that started today is Airport security: This house believes that the changes made to airport security since 9/11 have done more harm than good The proponent supporting the measure is Bruce Schneier; the opponent is Kip Hawley. At the moment the vote is 89% for the proposal and 11% against the proposal, which is a good thing. Thus far the quality of the comments is reasonably good, as I would expect from the Economist readership (revealing my bias ...). The debate continues through 30 March, so I encourage you all to read their arguments and take part in the debate.