Is terrorism a possible threat to society? Of course. Right now, we're seeing some carefully organized terrorism from Muslim fanatics. Raphael Israeli explains the nature of it and has some recommendations.



I find this topic interesting, given that I feel that there is plenty at stake. The United States and Europe are Western democracies that are relatively free and rich. We have plenty of strength as well as plenty we can lose. The Arabs have a huge amount of land and resources, so they have plenty to lose as well. By the way, Israel is small and has rather little land or resources, so it has less at stake, but it is threatened as well.



The author chooses the term "Islamikaze" rather than "suicide bomber." He explains that suicidal people plan to take their own lives and carry out their own plans to do that. On the contrary, Islamikazes follow the plans of others to kill a perceived enemy. In any case, I see their actions as manifestly counterproductive and therefore I think they merit serious study.



Israeli starts by sampling Muslim reactions to the horrors of 9/11/2001. These reactions are clearly a cause for concern. The author is suspicious of the long-term loyalty of Muslim immigrants to Western nations. While I am not quite so concerned about loyalty of Muslims in general, I do think we need to separate the sheep from the goats here. I take sedition seriously. And the author does demonstrate that there is a serious cultural intent on the part of many Muslims not to cooperate with the West but to wreck it.



Reading this book, I could see from the wild misrepresentations of the West and of Zionism that the Enemy of Islamist fantasies is very different than real-life Westerners and Zionists. That is not a good sign. Now, what about our views of the terrorists? Do they really seek to impose an arbitrary tyranny on everyone? Israeli shows that for the most part, that's exactly their plan.



Israeli shows that just as the Germans used extravagant libels, incitement, and aggression against the Jews to start their attacks on their neighbors, Muslim fanatics are using libels, incitement, and aggression against Jews to start similar attacks on the West. I can see that support for such libels and incitement have become a litmus test of sorts for some terrorist sympathizers. But Israeli turns that litmus test around, quite properly in my opinion. He shows that once we refuse to support the antizionist libels and taunts, we've taken a decisive step towards opposing the Islamikazes.



Well, what is to be done about the Islamikaze attacks on the West? The author recommends truth and reciprocity. His specific recommendations include:



* Forming an alliance of Western and Democratic States (AWADS)

* Having AWADS adopt an iron-clad definition of terror

* Importing books and culture to the West from Muslim nations only to the extent that these nations allow free flow of similar Western assets into their lands

* Forbidding by law the dissemination of hate and acting upon that law

* Accepting support from Saudi Arabia in building mosques in the West only if there is parallel permission from Saudi Arabia to build churches and synagogues in Saudi Arabia without incitement or hatred there

* Stopping transfer of military supplies from AWADS nations to non-AWADS nations

* Basing economic aid to non-AWADS states on human rights in those states

* Controlling immigration of anti-Western immigrants to non-AWADS states



Do these ideas sound politically incorrect or extreme? Well, so does a big war! I think these are ideas we need to consider now, when we have a chance to reflect on them somewhat dispassionately.