No precedent for the awesome Sept. 11 catastrophe exists in the history of terrorism. The numbers killed, the use of passenger planes as bombs and the vast universal outrage make it unique. Still, the event has many parallels, which can teach us what to expect and what to avoid. But my focus here is on one simple, rather obvious, parallel.

All unprovoked surprise attacks stimulate indiscriminate vicious outrage.

Those identifying with the victims of an assault are overcome with a senseless rage to destroy everything and everyone connected with the atrocity. Because they expect this development, terrorists always hope the counter-atrocities stimulated will work to their own advantage. The process is visible on both international and domestic levels, but our focus here is the domestic scene.

When the FLN in Algeria blew up cafés Europeans frequented in the 1950s, enraged Europeans organized "Arab hunts." In Northern Ireland in the '60s, Protestants would go "Paddy-bopping" to avenge IRA atrocities. Counter-atrocities always help to swell support for terrorist elements, a result the enraged do not intend to produce and one reason, incidentally, that "the politics of atrocity" is an apt name for terrorism.

American history has its own special parallels. Anarchist bombs in the World War I aftermath led to the notorious Palmer Raids, named after the attorney general who initiated them. Some 2,000 people were rounded up, and many shipped back to Europe, though no court could find evidence of complicity. The "Red Scare" continued for years. One consequence was the first Wall Street Bombing (Sept. 1920), where more were killed than in any other domestic terrorist attack until the Oklahoma City assault 75 years later.

The surprise, unprovoked Pearl Harbor bombing, which occasioned probably one-third the deaths of Sept. 11, led to an unjust and painful internment of a loyal West Coast Japanese-American population for some four years, a permanent blow to American self-respect and honor.

What will happen in the wake of this attack? Have we learned anything from our history? Early evidence suggests that we have.

For one thing, the American government is responding differently. Earlier, the nation's leaders launched the Palmer Raids and initiated internment. This time, our government has tried to restrain passions on the domestic scene. The head of the Arab-American Institute said that he was not "just gratified, but overwhelmed" by government statements and actions. Public authorities are investigating some 250 incidents of physical and verbal threat, vandalism and at least two murders. The incidents seem to be individual actions against institutions and individuals thought to be Muslim. A major "key" to identifying those to be attacked is skin color, clothes and hairstyles. Thus, Sikhs have been targets, but they are not Muslims. Their turbans and beards are misidentified as Islamic attire. So far, these ugly incidents against "Muslim targets" are not as numerous as one might expect.

Still, the passions are not likely to diminish, and we still aren't sure how organized groups like the militia elements will react. The crucial element will probably be the effect of our international responses. Will the government display the same intelligence and discrimination that it has on the domestic scene?

Will it remember that it can unwittingly endanger the student next to you or the falafel stand down the street?