"John R. Yamamoto- Wilson" wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> > > By all means, the authorities should be
> > > targetting very specifically the people behind the attacks. But they
> have to
> > > be *very* careful not to attack whole communities or ethnic groups. That
> > > path leads to large scale alienation and escalation of the problem.
>
> Kevin Wayne Williams commented:
>
> > It should worry you for the opposite reason. The logical reaction of
> > terrorists is to brainwash 83 year-old Belgian grandmothers and 8
> > year-old Chinese kids into carrying bombs. The logical reaction of
> > Ashcroft's henchmen is to step up the security another notch, and gain
> > the power to throw anyone into jail at anytime for any reason without
> > scrutiny.
>
> Yes, of course. Once rights start to get eroded at one end of the spectrum
> the same thing is likely to happen at the other end. Legislation created
> ostensibly to protect society from terrorism may at first impinge on people
> perceived to be of the same "type" (racial, cultural, whatever) as the
> terrorists, but will ultimately affect *everyone*.

It was pointed out quite early that the country with the highest population of
Muslims was not in the Middle East. And the world has already seen how rebels,
militants and radicals can come from all regions of the world. The US has their
own home grown terror organizations which have nothing to do with the Middle
East. As a matter of fact, more government regulation and stricter security in
the US will probably create greater distrust among white militias. If there is
another act of terror in the US, even killing hundreds of people or more, it
could as likely be the act of a militia or former members, as the act of some
radical Muslims or foreigners.