Eliyahu says that when people commit such deeds (terrorist attacks), they "take their claims off the table. We no longer are we required to consider what they want, or what impels them, only how to stop them," which would be a credible position if he applied it equally to the US-UK-Israel war on Iraq and to the Israeli occupation. But these are geese that he does not want cooked with the same sauce. Verbiage such as "Pure evil" is exactly what it is" is 'for Jews only," etc). Even pure-evil Osama asked rhetorically "Why don't we attack ...Sweden?" (I do not mean to give the Mossad any ideas here though) More heated rhetoric like"one no more negotiates with pure evil than does a doctor negotiate with cancer" inevitably calls to mind similar rhetoric about the israeli settlements being l;ike a cancer so where does that leave us? With nothing "pure," that's certain.
from the article: A world path not followed