> what would the politically correct response be?
It seems to me (though I am not an expert on terrorism) that this "war on terrorism" is not basically of a different nature from the way governments have always fought terrorists: infiltrate the groups involved and round 'em up.
If the US gov't and its allies can recruit enough Muslim agents to do the infiltration (which has been difficult up to now, but now that the CIA etc. are really on the case, they should be more successful in the future), they should be able to reduce the number of terrorist incidents to a tolerable level. It is something of a mystery to me, however, that there haven't been more incidents inside the US; either the gov't has been extremely successful in keeping the terrorists out, or they haven't really been trying very hard.
The "Dad" who wrote this letter is obviously typical of all too many USers who have raised their blood pressure to dangerous levels over the war-on-terrorism hype. It seems to me that they are basically the kind of people who are always spoiling for a fight; they get their rocks off by fantasizing a lethal threat to the good ol' US of A, which is wiped out by our noble armed forces. They also get the psychic benefit of working off their anxieties by raging about "traitors," "liberals," etc. Though note that this "Dad" is careful not to call the liberals "traitors" -- just misguided folks who don't understand the seriousness of the struggle. (I.e., folks who don't get their rocks off the same way he does.)
What "Dad" really needs is not a politically correct response, but a whole lot of counseling, which unfortunately he and those who think like him are not likely to get.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ A sympathetic Scot summed it all up very neatly in the remark, 'You should make a point of trying every experience once, excepting incest and folk-dancing.' -- Sir Arnold Bax