The amount of effort that would need to go into creating that video and the facts that the article asserts is just impressive:<p>-figuring out the group of people<p>-how everyone entered the country<p>-all of their phone communication while they were in the country, including finding out their numbers<p>-how they spent money inside the country<p>-their motions inside the country<p>-where they went after they left the country
Of the two methods currently being used to deal with the militant Islamic fanatics, the 'War On Terror' has only really achieved in causing mass terror amongst our own people and imprison hundreds of innocent people because our government's criteria for 'wrong place and wrong time' were basically Afghanistan and post-invasion.<p>However the allegedly Israeli approach causes virtually no terror to our own people (in fact it appears to instill the exact opposite of terror), it has no collateral damage and only a minor amount of innocents get caught in the cross hairs.<p>What I'm wondering is if the 'Israeli' approach to militant Islamiscs the better approach? IE is it getting the job done at a better tax-payer cost and a better ethical cost (less young soldiers dead, less innocents wrongly imprisoned and less collateral damage vs. a wrong target).
The Mossad Kidon (it's assassination branch) is rumoured to only have about 50 or so operatives. Which means they potentially compromised almost 20% of their resources to take out this one target.
They went to a lot of trouble to make the death look like a heart attack, even somehow having the door locked from the inside as they left.<p>But it seems like it was immediately obvious to the police that this was a murder, so what was the point of going to all that trouble?
I love that there was a guy whose whole job was to show up at the hotel, pay for the room across the hall from the target, hand off the key, and then immediately leave the country.