The author expressed the opinion that terrorism was an aggressive act that contradicts the values of humanity. Therefore international society should consolidate to stop such aggression and to punish those who commit it. He observed that it was also a crime to accuse a nation, a group or a civilization of being terrorists, because one of them is accused of having committed a terrorist crime. He added that there was a fabricated action to hurl Islam, religion and civilization, into a struggle with each other, particularly with Christianity.
When the Serbian Army slaughtered the Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina, then in Kosovo, the USA took the initiative in leading NATO to take military and political action to stop the aggressors and to punish those who committed these acts. President Milosovitch is still on trial in the international court of The Hague, accused of committing crimes against humanity.
It is true that the victims of the Serbian slaughters were Muslims, but these acts of aggression were not against Islam, as there were other similar slaughters of Christian and Catholic Croatians.
There were also similar slaughters of Serbian Orthodox people, hence the role of NATO was not to defend Islam, but to defend the security of Europe, besides which it was a defense of the rules and of international treaties.
Also, when Iraq conquered Kuwait, the USA hastened towards a military policy, with an international alliance, including NATO, to make such a conquest fail and to liberate Kuwait. The USA defended the Islamic Kuwait against the Islamic Iraq, but it did this to defend those same international treaties. In both cases, and for sure it was defending its private vital strategic interests in Europe and in the Arabian Gulf.
But, as the collective crimes committed by the Serbian forces were not a Christian aggression, hence the terrorist attacks on the USA on September 11 were not an Islamic aggression. Nor was the NATO reaction to the Serbian forces an anti-Islamic reaction nor a defense of Islam. The American reaction to September 11 is neither a Christian reaction nor a defense of Christianity.
In both cases, as well as in all the other terrorist operations, there is an aggressive act that contradicts the values of humanity, with its international rules and the values of heavenly laws. Therefore international society should consolidate to stop such aggression and to punish those who commit it, in front of an international court, characterized by justice, towards all accused persons. It is a mistake for any country to tarry in participating in this action to combat terrorism. It is also a mistake, and even a crime to accuse a nation, a group or a civilization of being terrorists, because one of them is accused of having committed a terrorist crime. A collective conviction is one of the most horrible [forms of] racism, so how could such a conviction be transformed into collective punishment, aimed against the innocent, and chaotically aimed at those who proclaim and act against terrorism.
The American President George Bush is not a symbol of Christianity or acting on its behalf in declaring a new crusade, nor is Usama Bin Laden a symbol of Islam or acting on its behalf to declare jihad against this crusade.
Yet it is clear that there is a fabricated action to hurl Islam, religion and civilization, into a struggle with each other, particularly with Christianity. A matter that necessitates the posing of the following question: Who benefits from such an action? To answer this question, we should indicate that throughout the cold war between the USA and the Soviet Union, between the Warsaw Pact and NATO, Israel held the front trench in the Middle East, defending American and Western interests. It was transformed into a leading military arsenal. It was offered all kinds of help to enable it to play this role. It performed the required role excellently, but after the decline of communism, the breaking down of the Soviet Union and the termination of the cold war, Israel had to search for another spot in the American and Western strategy to guarantee continued support from the USA and the European Community.
Thus came the concept of replacing communism with Islam as an enemy of Western civilization, which categorized Israel as a part of it (the new Jewish-Christian civilization). To enable this concept to be considered in Western political decisions, it was necessary to create conflicts between the West and Islam, and between Israel and Islam. In respect to conflicts between Israel and Islam, it was easy to start through the challenging visit of General Sharon to the Aqsa Mosque, then by laying the foundation stone of the third Jewish altar, which they are now building on the debris of the Aqsa Mosque.
The conflicts between the West and Islam were not difficult, by using irretrievable elements of the Muslim minority in Europe, particularly in London, Paris and Berlin, by provoking them, and programming their operations, so that they could serve the long term Israeli motive. Although numerous abominable accidents took place, they were limited with little effect, any negative effects being assimilated. Until the horrible crime happened in the USA, where there is a probability that the criminal used Arab elements for its execution, taking advantage of the latter’s emotions and ignorance, thus Israel can picture its confrontation against "Hamas, the Islamic Jihad in Palestine, and Hizbullah, in Lebanon, as if it was in the same camp as the USA against the same enemy, which is Islam. In this way Israel can regain its position and its strategic importance to America in the post cold war period, like it was during fifty years of the cold war. In criminology, when the one who profits from a crime is identified, the criminal is automatically identified.