Terrorism At The End Of A Ledger

"Business as usual." In times of crisis, it's all you hear. It's all I hear anyway. Another example here, as those who will benefit tell the rest of us to keep our heads down:

Responding to events globally, Sir Philip [Green] said there were "some pressures in the economy" in the wake of the current financial turmoil gripping share markets across the world.

But he said business in general was currently "not too bad", and warned: "if we keep frightening everybody and terrorising everybody it will feed on itself."

Is all this in fact an example of economic terrorism? Was Brown absolutely spot on the other day when he used anti-terrorism legislation to freeze Icelandic assets? Should we go further? Are we being held to ransom and, if so, should we act accordingly?

Those who would destroy economies, livelihoods, real jobs, real lives and real homes at the end of a rifle would face the highest penalties. Why not, therefore, when at the end of a ledger, used blindly - and entirely self-interestedly - to batter an entire civilisation? The destruction is just as real, the consequences and damage done just as tangible.

A new figure in law? Why not?