[BillyJack]

I don't like the way this sounds.

"In fact, he says martial law in some cities or states is a real possibility if attacks get out of hand. And he believes most Americans will accept it in exchange for a promise of security – though he says that kind of dramatic response would be used as a last resort because it would hamper business and commerce, making the fragile U.S. economy even more volatile."

[meenie]

He makes the case that the government can do a better job of protecting the citizen than the citizen himself can do. Martial law can impose restrictions on the citizen but does nothing to increase the manpower needed to catch the terrorist. With a nation under siege, martial law would be the worst thing a government could do. Don't remind me that government usually does what is not sensible. We have some interesting times ahead of us.