I think that the point of the article was to rally the audience behind the goal of piercing the image that the suicide bombers have in the Muslim world to make it much less glamorous. The author wants us to attack the terrorist organizations' ability to find new recruits as well as attack our own fears about suicide bombing (i.e. it's no longer terrorism if we don't allow ourselves to be terrified).
The author went on at length with various anecdotes about how terrorists are dumb, but I think that I missed the call to action that you are so upset about. Care to point it out to me?
Right, i get that the article is about making the appeal of being a terrorist less glamorous. However, i think that this list of anecdotes not only doesn't achieve his goal, but is actually counter-productive, because the post doesn't get to the root of what should be mocked. The notion that blowing yourself up is dumb. The idea that individual suicide bombers aren't too bright is totally pointless. Like they care what you think?
Point out their hypocrisy, point out how stupid it is for them to go blow themselves up. But calling them stupid is both trite and ineffective.
Calling them 'stupid' for blowing themselves up will not detract from the glamour. They will just claim that you don't 'get it' because you are not a Muslim.
At the very least, you should be quoting the Quran to prove to them that they shouldn't be suicide bombers. Save that, proving that suicide bombers are not devout religious soldiers will destroy the persona they the bombers feel that they will have with the rest of the Muslim world after they are dead and gone.
The author went on at length with various anecdotes about how terrorists are dumb, but I think that I missed the call to action that you are so upset about. Care to point it out to me?