Dr. Alexander: Alright, okay. Thank you Ed for a very rich I think overview of some of the critical challenges and I would like to call on the audience to ask question and make comments but first let me just have a couple of footnotes. Obviously I’m not going to summarize your very insightful remarks but just again to develop some discussion, I think all of us will recall what Lenin said that the purpose of terrorism is to terrorize the element of fear. Even without the definition one element that I think is accepted as a critical element is fear. And we know President Roosevelt already pointed out that the greatest fear is fear itself. So, we have that element, that’s number one. Number two I think, that [IB] once remarked that it is very easy to condemn the evil doers but it is more difficult, more complicated to understand them. So, it’s a question of the mind which brings me to two aspects. One, the threat and secondly the response in terms of the threats fundamentally I think you began with terrorism as a theatre and no doubt about it and in fact the terrorist mentor [IB] in Al-Qaida is Sansu. When Sansu going all the way back about 2500 years ago, tried to communicate that the highest level of strategy is not to win 100 victories in 100 wars but to win without fighting which brings me to the two sides of the coin that terrorism is a propaganda by the date or the date by propaganda, meaning that if you use the media, you kill one and you intimidate millions without even fighting the fear. Let’s say of Al-Qaida especially after the effect obviously of propaganda by the day 9/11. The United States basically was on its knees because of that attack. So in other words we have to look at terrorism on the two aspects. One, propaganda by the day you throw the bomb and you make the political statement and then the date by propaganda you’ll [IB] to have a suicide bomber, this belongs to the first part but you can intimidate because of the terrorism. For example the Al-Qaida tapes but it is Bin Ladin or [IB] whatever to communicate let’s say through [IB] or other outlets. Okay now it brings me to the most important question that I’m really interested from my point of view to hear what the audience has to say.
How do you deal with this problem? Is it an eye for an eye? Is it 10 eyes for an eye? Is it the military response? Is it the law enforcement? You remember we had this event couple of weeks ago at the [IB]. The question was; how do you label terrorism? Is it crime or is it war because obviously each phenomenon has different consequences and different responses. So, the question that I would like to pose to you and to the audience is what is really the strategy of terrorism in terms of comprehensive strategy? Is it clarity in terms of the policy? Is it effective organizational structure? Is it quality intelligence? Is it the role of the law enforcement? Is it the role of the military? Is this the economic responses? Or is it the civic society? Meaning each and everyone, the different communities, the culture, religion let’s say the role of the media, the academics and so forth. So my question is fundamentally is even if we don’t have and you’re absolutely right, we don’t have a universal accepted definition but it is defined by the act itself. If there is a suicide attack we know what it is, hijacking and so on. My question is how do you deal with this? And but what you said before absolutely is correct, I mean we have about 300,000, hundreds of thousand people killed on the road yet and if you have one incident, it’s like the Christmas [IB] you know effect in Detroit with the Nigerian Al-Qaida terrorist, everybody was focusing attention on that. So my question is okay we know what the threat is and you were absolutely right, the most dramatic and venturous is the escalation to the weapons of mass destruction; biological, chemical, nuclear and all that and the question is how do you deal with these issues? So maybe you want to answer or comment on some of the things I said and then…