A Critical Analysis of 'Real Islam'. Its People ... - Bukti dan Saksi

esponses of Israel to repeated gross attacks against her people, we should consider they have seen these
sorts of celebrations after every terrorist act for decades, which are also engraved in the memories of the
people and policy makers in Israel.
Lynch mob mentality has now completely taken over the hearts and minds of these poorly led people.
There is also the correct perception amongst themselves that dissent is even less tolerated, evidenced by
the murder of dozens of their own perceived to have collaborated with the enemy (about five dozen
known as of this writing). So it is that on the Palestinian side, hatred, thirst for revenge, or outright fear of
vigilantes is what is driving the conflict. What is not spoken of in our supposedly balanced media, is the
fact that the evidence of collaboration of their own citizens could be as harmless as a personal phone call
or communiqué with a previous non-Arab friend or associate, or any expression of sympathy toward
Israelis or opposition to violent groups, the same groups who in the end murdered them for being
different. The extremists ensure the lessons are not being lost on average Palestinian families, as they
execute the ‘collaborator’ in the most public way possible for maximum effect. Do not expect to see
anyone with a ‘Martin Luther King’ type message of permanent peace stumping anytime soon, as even a
suggestion of non-support of the policies and practices of their leaders can be in itself a death sentence.
Internally, debate is confined as to where and how to strike Israeli interests next, if a temporary truce
would be helpful, and whether, when, and where to attack American interests.
So how should Israel respond to the scourge of terrorist bombers? Empirical evidence abounds that all
responses to date have been ineffective in stopping the threat and deployment of terrorist bombing
strategies On Oct 5 th , 2003 a female homicide bomber detonated a bomb in a popular Haifa Café killing
19, including several children, and wounded over 60. Israel responded by sending in warplanes to attack
an empty Syrian camp used to train the Hezbollah. Syria’s immediate response was to complain that the
action was an escalation and act of war, which ‘broke the rules of the game’. In case you missed it, these
are the rules of the game, which Syria and other terrorist sponsors want Israel to play by:
• Israel can employ all the security measures it wants and play cat and mouse to try to catch the
minions we send against you, have fun!
• Israel may try to catch the terrorists and factories in military incursions and raids into the west
bank or Gaza, but if you do we have the right to deploy Rule #3.
• If Israelis respond by going into Arab territories, we may shoot at you from behind women and
children, from simple homes, mosques and schools, and you may not respond. We also have the
right to lay claim to such actions as full justification, providing blanket political coverage for both
our initial and all subsequent terrorist envoys we send against you.
• Israel is not allowed to strike at the ‘elected’ ‘democratic’ popular individuals or governments
who hide, support, fund, supply, train, outfit, or transport terrorists.
• Since Israel (like nearly every nation) is demographically at a huge disadvantage in a war of
attrition, Israel must continue the debate of ‘how to respond’ forever, thus allowing causalities at
approximately current or better ratios. The principal of ‘proportionate response’ must be strictly
adhered to.
First, we need to demystify suicide terrorism and see it for what it is. It’s not about the beliefs or
personality of the fanatic carrying the bomb, rather it’s all about the people behind him, the true terrorists.
Therefore suicide terrorists are not some other breed of men, unsusceptible to the usual tools of war and
statecraft. Those responsible are still alive, reachable, and perhaps even teachable. The first thing that
needs to change is that all democracies, including Israel, need to strictly institute policies to deny the
handlers their hoped for political prizes and concessions. If we make sure that suicide terrorism does not
pay, it will surely begin to lose much of its luster. Offering autonomy or eventual statehood in response to
terrorism is a huge mistake and feeds grass roots support of terrorist methods. But to simply deny the true
terrorists, the handlers and supporters their spoils, does not go nearly far enough. Indeed it would require
withstanding a number of years of attacks without the previous rewards to educate the instigators and
convince them to choose another path. That is not a politically survivable option for endangered
democracies (i.e. to only change our response to terrorist acts by hanging tough and waiting long enough