Israel is at the front cusp of their third intifada. This one thus far could be labeled the brick, rock, block and fire bottle intifada since the attacks are being implemented using large rocks, bricks, cinderblocks, and gasoline filled bottles including a flaming cloth wick (Molotov cocktails). The mainstream media world-wide tends to refer to these attacks by completely omitting the Molotov cocktails and belittling the size of the rocks by using the terms stones or even pebbles. They also refer to those who are launching these projectiles as youths or young teens when in actuality there are young men up through age thirty-five and some are young teens. What they also tend to omit is the use of slings and that many of the road rock attacks are done by launching the large rocks from a speeding car at vehicles traveling in the opposite direction adding the speed of both vehicles to the impact providing often well over seventy miles an hour speed to the impacting rock compared to the windshield it impacts and often pierces.
Going back there has been two previous intifada in Israel. The first intifada was implemented by Yasser Arafat and consisted mostly on rock attacks, stabbings and shootings. The second intifada was called by Yasser Arafat and had been planned before he joined in negotiations which he entered planning on walking out and not accepting any offer even if it gave him everything he asked for. The offer he received would have returned 95% of the West Bank, all of Gaza, the eastern half of Jerusalem and exchanges of land to make up lands equal to the 5% of the West Bank being retained by Israel. Yasser Arafat walked out of the negotiations after hearing the offer without even giving any reason for his refusal or making any counter offer or amendment to the offer. Madeline Albright was filmed by news cameras chasing after Arafat pleading for him to please return and negotiate promising they could find an agreement he would accept no matter what he desired. He completely ignored her as if he had to accept anything he would not have been able to implement his intifada and he had already planned everything out. This second intifada was extremely violent consisting of car bombs, suicide bombers, suitcase and carrying bags left in public places containing bombs. Could such murder and mayhem actually ever come to Europe or America? That depends on certain conditions and actions that are taken in the near future and is worth an investigation.
The probability of Muslim terror has been found to be related to the percentage of unassimilated Muslim population within the general population. The theory is that when the unassimilated Muslim percentage grows to between ten and twenty percent and there is a potential for radicalization being fomented within the population of sufficient strength, it is likely to cause levels of terror attacks which would be perceived as a societal problem. This alone is insufficient as people do not act in such an antisocial manner without stimulus and causation. This could be initiated by sermons from radical Imams giving sermons in the Mosque or radicalized agenda being taught in the school affiliated with the Mosque. This has been witnessed in numerous locations through northern and central Africa where nations are divided with a strong Muslim centered population bordering a strong Christian or Animist population where most of the violence occurs on the border regions. So, should the population densities begin to attain levels conducive to potential, what forms would such terror take on?
To be completely honest, the Boston Marathon bombing is indicative of what can be expected. The targets would be more varied with any place where people congregate becoming a viable target. Such places would be restaurants on special days where there would be people waiting for a table and thus congregated in close proximity. IHOP on a Sunday morning or virtually any restaurant on Mother’s Day would be examples. Also fairs, circuses, sporting events, or grand opening events, especially new shopping malls would also be inviting targets. Targeting would often tend to be aimed toward places with ties to the community and places which people would normally frequent so as to maximize the affects at making people feel uneasy when doing normal everyday life events. This is what is behind targeting family eateries, shopping centers, sports events, and anywhere families would tend to congregate. The aim is to make life so uncertain that everyday life becomes a questionable event and thus public fears are maximized. An attentive and aware public can minimize the threats by learning the signs and indicators which should attract suspicions and then having law enforcement able to make a rapid response and determination quickly with removal or other resolving of any threat with minimal interruption to normalcy. The ability to interdict terror attempts is the best solution that can be applied as it minimizes the threat and that takes away the fear factor which is the entire motivation behind such attacks. Of course the best way to address the potential for terror is to facilitate the assimilation of all peoples making them integrate and become an accepted member of the community. The efforts of every community should assist assimilation and incorporation of all members and peoples as integrated, functioning members of an open and accepting blend of neighborhoods. Fortunately, America has a strong history of assimilation and acceptance.
Beyond the Cusp