As U.S. Special Forces conduct raids into Afghanistan, the front line of the "war on terrorism" has also drawn in a less dramatic uniformed agency: the postal service. With two postal workers dead, possibly from sorting anthrax-laced letters, and thousands more urged to take antibiotics as a precaution, surveys find six in 10 Americans consider further biological or chemical attacks to be the most likely next move for terrorists. Yet even as more anthrax exposures are reported daily, the number of people who admit that they are hoarding antibiotics or buying gas masks remains in the single digits, and isn't growing.

In many areas, survey results have been remarkably stable since the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11. All surveys continue to show nine in 10 Americans support military action, and about three-quarters are afraid of further terrorist attacks. Two-thirds say they're worried the "war on terrorism" might become what al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden claims it is: a conflict between the West and Islam.

But survey responses on specific proposals do change with time and events. Most Americans readily admit that they don't know a lot about international affairs. In addition, the Sept. 11 attacks are still highly personal events to most people. Twenty percent of the public told the Pew Research Center either they or their family and friends know someone among the dead, missing or injured (and that rises to a staggering 59 percent in a survey of New York City residents). But shock fades, and knowledge can be gained, and when that happens attitudes may change as well.

The Anthrax Scare: While surveys show the American people are worried about biological warfare, there is no polling data at this time to support the belief that there is widespread panic, or that panic is spreading.

As the news broke about an anthrax exposure at NBC News, Newsweek researchers on Oct. 11-12 asked if people had personally taken any steps to protect themselves "such as trying to buy a gas mask or obtain antibiotics." Six percent said yes. When Newsweek asked the same question a week later (Oct. 18-19), the result was still 6 percent. Other surveys fielded last week found even smaller numbers: the ABC News/Washington Post poll found 5 percent had spoken to a doctor about anthrax and 2 percent said they had actually bought antibiotics. Gallup found only 3 percent who had tried to get a prescription.

Of course, if even 2 percent of the public simultaneously decided to seek prescriptions for any specific drug, it would cause a strain on pharmacies and provide the anecdotal evidence seen in news reports. More than half (56 percent) told Fox News that news coverage of anthrax was "overhyped."

People are certainly afraid of terrorism in general - in fact, a Gallup survey found for the first time that more people say they "frequently" worry about terrorism (47 percent) than about street crime. As Gallup points out, the odds of actually falling victim to street crime are still much greater. But most surveys have found that while there is reluctance to fly on commercial airliners, few say they're avoiding public events or taking other precautions.

Still, 21 percent in the Oct. 18-19 Newsweek poll said they thought it was "very" or "somewhat" likely that they or their family would be exposed to a bioterrorist attack. Fox News, with a similar question in a survey a day earlier (Oct. 17-18), found 46 percent "very" or "somewhat worried" they would be exposed. It may also be significant that in the Newsweek poll, only one-third thought those who were getting antibiotics were overreacting, and about half were "sympathetic toward them and understanding of their fear." Given a week of intense news coverage on a new and unknown hazard, public opinion should be considered in flux. After all, while the ABC/Washington Post poll found only 2 percent had bought antibiotics, another 10 percent admitted they were considering it, and 40 percent said they would "exercise caution" when opening their mail. So shifts in attitudes on bioterrorism are entirely possible, depending on events.

While the FBI is still being cautious about the source and motive behind the anthrax letters, Newsweek found 63 percent of those surveyed said Osama bin Laden is to blame. Almost the same number, 62 percent, told Fox News that a biological or chemical attack is the biggest terrorist threat right now, and 78 percent consider the anthrax cases "very" or "somewhat" serious.

There has been criticism of the government response to the anthrax cases, but 67 percent told Newsweek they were at least somewhat confident the government is prepared to deal with a biochemical attack, and 71 percent said the government is releasing enough reliable information to the public. But about half said the Senate was right to stay in session after anthrax was found in congressional office buildings, compared with 34 percent who said the House did the right thing by going into recess.

Attacks in Afghanistan: Public support for military action has been high and unwavering in polling since the Sept. 11 attacks, when the first surveys found a massive 88 percent of Americans said the U.S. should take military action against those responsible. Polls conducted after the bombing of Afghanistan began by Gallup, ABC News/Washington Post, CBS/The New York Times, Fox News and Newsweek all show approval ratings by roughly nine in 10 Americans. Only 14 percent told the ABC/Washington Post poll on Oct. 7 that the U.S. should have done more to find a diplomatic solution. Most (72 percent in the Gallup survey) think the U.S. waited the right amount of time before acting.

For most Americans, the primary virtue of a military response is deterrence. Before the air campaign, the Pew Research Center found 88 percent believed military action would both deter future attacks and punish those responsible. When those people were asked to choose which goal is more important, 57 percent said deterring future attacks, vs. 22 percent for punishing the terrorists. Some 65 percent told the ABC/Washington Post survey that not taking military action would increase the risk of more terror attacks.

Surveys over the past month, both before and after the air strikes, have shown that none of the potential drawbacks deters the public, with two-thirds or more of people in favor of military action even in the event of a lengthy conflict, a recession, or further terror attacks. In the overnight surveys after the bombing began, 77 percent told Gallup they would still favor attacks if ground forces were involved, and 65 percent in favor if Afghan civilians were killed.

But surveys have also suggested some nuance in public attitudes on a military response. When Newsweek researchers asked in September what would be "most effective" in preventing further attacks in the U.S., most people opted to play defense: three-quarters said tighter airport security and air marshals would be the most effective strategies, compared with 49 percent for military strikes and 44 percent for assassinating terrorist leaders. Seventy-five percent said cutting off terrorists' funding would be the most effective strategy. Some 83 percent told initially told Newsweek that capturing or killing Osama bin Laden would also be effective in preventing terrorism, yet 48 percent also say seizing him risks turning bin Laden into a martyr who would inspire more terrorism.

The View of Islam Abroad. . . One issue that does concern Americans is the possibility that the "war on terrorism" will broaden, pitting Islamic and Arab nations against the U.S. and its allies. Sixty-six percent of Americans told the ABC/Washington Post poll that they're worried "somewhat" or "a great deal" that will happen. Both domestic and international critics argue that U.S. policies, such as support for Israel and sanctions against Iraq, helped spur extremism in the Middle East, and there have been protests in many Islamic nations against the air campaign.

Some 55 percent of Americans told the ABC/Washington Post poll they believed most Arabs and Muslims had a negative view of the U.S., and cited support for Israel (68 percent), the spread of Western culture (64 percent) and the presence of U.S. forces in the Mideast (63 percent) as the reasons. Yet Americans don't necessarily want to change those policies: only 29 percent told Newsweek that "the U.S. should reduce its ties to Israel in order to lessen the acts of terrorism against us." In late September, 70 percent in a Pew survey rejected the idea that the Sept. 11 attacks came about because "the U.S. has been unfair in its dealings with other countries."

Even before Sept. 11, while more Americans sympathized with the Israelis than the Palestinians, three-quarters believed the U.S. should not take a side. That distinction still holds for the public: In the ABC/Washington Post poll, 68 percent said the U.S. should continue to support Israel, but 55 percent also favored recognizing the Palestinians as an independent nation.

At least initially, surveys show that Americans believe the United States is doing the right things to persuade Muslims to support the anti-terrorist coalition. Seven in 10 told the ABC/Washington Post survey that the U.S. is "doing enough" to win the support of Muslims and 77 percent support the $320 million aid package proposed for Afghanistan.

. . . And the View of Islam at home: There have been reports of hate crimes around the country against Arabs, Muslims and other ethnic groups who might be mistaken for them, such as Sikhs and Hindus. Survey results over many years indicate that most Americans believe in tolerance, but at the moment are still wrestling with deep fear and frustration.

In two recent Public Agenda surveys, one on religion and public life and another on the values parents want to teach their children, we found Americans voiced a firm belief in religious and social tolerance. Most parents, for example, consider intolerance the mark of a bad citizen. Yet we also found that only 7 percent of Americans say they understand Islam well - perhaps not surprising since Muslims only make up 2 percent of the U.S. population.

Surveys have shown tolerance bending under the emotional strain of the past month. About 35 percent of those surveyed the week of Sept. 11 said they had less trust in Arab-Americans since the attack. Several questions show the public's fear and frustration right after the trade center attack, with 58 percent saying Arabs should undergo special security checks before boarding planes and 49 percent saying they should carry special identification.

The CBS/New York Times survey found the numbers who admit to "negative feelings" about Arabs is declining, from 24 percent in a survey conducted Sept. 20-23 to 15 percent in the overnight poll conducted Oct. 8. Overnight polls are somewhat more prone to error than those conducted over several days, but ABC News also found a slight drop in those who said they were "personally suspicious" of Arabs, from 43 percent on Sept. 13 to 38 percent on Oct. 8-9. Surveys should be watched carefully to see if this develops into a trend. In another sign of public uncertainty, differently worded questions get different results. A Newsweek question that specifically mentioned the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II found 62 percent who said it would be a mistake to target any national group.

When terrifying events test deeply held values, Public Agenda has found it takes time for people to work through their views (see our essay on the Seven Stages of Public Opinion.) People's knee-jerk reactions on Arabs and Muslims may well be tempered by time, sober second thoughts and by their better selves.

Trust in Government: Not surprisingly, the approval ratings for President Bush and Congress continue to be high in all surveys. Americans consistently join ranks behind their leaders in the initial stages of a crisis. More surprising are survey results about trust in government in general, which fell during the years of Vietnam and Watergate and never recovered, regardless of how popular a particular president happened to be. The ABC News/Washington Post survey found 64 percent said they trust the government to do the right thing "most of the time" or "just about always," the highest rating since the 1960s. While this high trust level almost certainly reflects the sense of unity in the country, it would still be unique and should be watched carefully. Even during the Gulf War, when approval ratings for both the war and for President Bush's father were at high levels, the trust in government rating never exceeded 45 percent.

Immigration and Civil Liberties: The Bush administration says it needs additional police powers to fight terrorism, and has proposed expanded powers to detain legal immigrants, along with expanded wiretapping and Internet surveillance. Critics worry that the public may be willing to trade cherished civil liberties in name of national security.

About 79 percent of Americans told the CBS/New York Times poll that people will have to give up some personal freedoms to make the country safe from terrorist attacks. But in many surveys the public's strongest instincts are for tangible actions, such as metal detectors in public buildings and tighter airport security. Only a third want increased electronic eavesdropping and even fewer support random searches by police. The Harris Poll found more than seven in 10 Americans who had "high" or "moderate concern" that judges would authorize surveillance too easily (79 percent); there would be broad use of racial profiling (77 percent); or that non-violent government critics would be put under surveillance (71 percent).

Public Agenda's research has found that people usually support civil liberties in the abstract, but haven't spent much time thinking about the implications or precedents that may be set by government actions. The public also has relatively little knowledge of the technical issues and debates surrounding the Internet, such as the debate over encryption technology. (See our Red Flags section on Internet Free Speech and Privacy).

Another test of civil liberties is how the public responds to anyone who opposes military action or other government policies during the crisis. Surveys consistently show that the public typically rallies to support the president in a crisis, and that some forms of protest, such as burning the flag, provoke overwhelming hostile reactions. Yet the public may disapprove of protests without wanting them banned. Gallup found the public evenly split in a Sept. 21-22 poll: 49 percent said people have the right to protest a military action, and another 49 percent said people should "rally around the country." Yet 71 percent told Newsweek that the government should permit anti-war protests to continue.

There is evidence of a spike in opposition to immigration since Sept. 11, with 58 percent of the public telling Gallup researchers last week that immigration should be decreased - a 20 point change since a year ago. This could be a short-term reaction, since support for immigration had generally been increasing since 1995. Historically, the public has mixed views on immigration, but usually makes a clear distinction between legal and illegal immigrants - with a far tougher stance on illegal immigrants. (See our Red Flags on Immigration).

The Economy: Most Americans are at least somewhat worried the terrorist attacks will hurt the economy. Gallup found 79 percent support federal financial aid to the airlines, which have laid off tens of thousands of employees. In addition, 17 percent of those surveyed told Gallup their company had already been hurt financially by the attacks, and another 29 percent believed their company would be hurt in the future. Newsweek found only 26 percent who said the terror attacks would cause a long recession, but 58 percent who said it would bring about a brief one.

Public Agenda, based in New York, joins with all Americans in expressing our deepest sympathy to the victims and their families.

Read previous editions of our running analysis of public reaction to the attacks.

• Gallup survey
  
• Los Angeles Times
• Newsweek poll
  
• Pew Research Center survey