While trying to root out a hidden enemy without in any way treating people connected to the other side differently requires treating everyone as a potential enemy and thus expanding police powers over everyone equally, as the case of airport security shows, the specifics the article discusses don’t advance that case.

The author gives just two examples of such expanded exercise of state powers: (1) “Hundreds of people have been taken into custody. The government still refuses to reveal their names or the charges against them”; and (2) “the Attorney General announced he is lifting the limitations imposed on domestic spying by the FBI.” However, both of these sets of powers have been used or are intended to be used, not in a “non-discriminatory” manner against the whole population as in the case of airport security, but specifically against likely Muslim suspects. For example, the limitations on domestic spying that are being lifted include such things as the rule that the government cannot do surveillance on a person absent proof that he is involved in a terrorist organization or has committed terrorist acts. It was this rule that FBI Headquarters felt it was following last August when it refused authorization to examine Moussaoui’s computer and papers. The expansion of police powers in this area should be welcomed, since it will increase the government’s ability to get intelligence on likely terrorists. I don’t see how it could be used against nuns in wheelchairs.

Therefore, while it may be true that the American people face a general loss of liberty as a result of the belief in equality and non-discrimination, this article does not lend support to that idea.