Few Mid-East "terrorists" ever reach even that low moral ebb, however; again, we need look no further than the Oslo Agreement to see that, when offered a choice between a negotiated peace and continuing mass murder, most will choose the latter. Offer them what they say they want and they'll reject in favor of more murder. Seems pretty obvious what's going on there, and calling it "terrorism" is being generous, as apalling as that reality is. That's the difference between Fatah and Hamas, because, whatever his other faults and past misdeeds, by the end I think Arafat realized better than any the truth of what I'm saying. If peace, freedom, indepedence and a homeland are within your grasp and you throw it away because you're so in love with killing, you're as great a threat to your own people as to the enemy. It doesn't make anyone in the PLO a saint, by any means, and history has taught me to be very leery of deals with the devil, but I think you understand.

Oh, WHEN is certainly subjective, that's why each of the Founding Fathers struggled with it and many Americans, perhaps most, still do. But that it can happen, MUST happen for any rebellion to be patriotic rather than treason, is part and parcel with government as a social contract and (I thought) recognized as a truism in most Western states.