Terrorism is a moral choice. Terrorism is not, as some suggest, the weapon of the week against their strong oppressor. Terrorism requires organization, careful planning and funding. It requires a supporting environment, and people who are willing to pick up their targets personally. Terrorists make a conscious choice to kill specific people, and many times themselves too. They make this choice based on fanatical moral convictions, not because they have no other choice. The enemy, therefore is fanatic extremism, of any kind. Movements like ISIS, may present themselves as conservatives who wish to return to some past glory days, but in fact they are just the opposite. They are radicals. The Charlie Hebdo was attacked because they were on to something. They presented a series of cartoons that emphasized the fact that most of the victims of Islamic terrorism are Muslims, and they called Muslims to turn their back on terrorism and make a different moral choice. The Muslim communities in Europe now have to make a decision. Which way will they choose? The fight against terrorism, not only that of Islamic extremists, but any terrorism, always seem to be weaken by two seemingly opposite but equally faulted approaches: That of the far left, which justifies terrorism as a legitimate mean in ethnical and political struggles, and that of the far right, which harnesses the fear of terrorism to justify their racist ideas. Both approaches are wrong because they make it seem like the terrorists and their supporters have no choice. There has to come a clear voice from the sane majority, that we just can't accept or justify terrorism. That we see it as an unacceptable moral fallacy. This is exactly what I mean when I talk about equal participation. We must no longer accept a reality in which isolated societies live within our mainstream cultures. It will take a toll from all of us to eradicate this phenomenon and create a society in which everyone can participate, but we must do that because our lives literally depend on it.