Where did all of that come from? I wasn't disputing any of that. Anyway, end of debate.

I. Far too complex an issue to answer, for me. Give me a gun, and I would drop it, not in defence of terrorist, but in defence of my right not to shoot - or, more importantly, not to shoot someone whose culture I am alien to, whose political belief I cannot even begin to comprehend.

II. If a terrorist is caught in the act of terrorism, he or she should be prevented from carrying out the act further. If that means incapacitation equals a bullet in the head, then so be it, I wouldn't be against that at all.

In life, I believe in, before anything else, The Individual. I hate people who eat and talk in the cinema, not because I don't eat and talk in the cinema, but because in exercising their right to do so, they are intruding upon my right to watch the film without distraction. People's rights should never intrude upon those of others. And I think acts of terrorism intrude upon people's rights to live in a beneficially adapted society.

I don't, however, think terrorists are any worse than some guy who, as an individual with a right to do so (lawful boundaries notwithstanding), makes the conscious decision to smash a bottle against a table in some nightclub and then stab it in another guy's neck. Make of that what you will.