"It is the duty of intellectuals to have a critical mind. On any subject. They expose the problem, the wrongdoing, the hypocrisy, the felony, they present their arguments and we approve or not.
I wonder how intellectuals react to things like patriotism which prevents people from critical thinking. In the old Europe, we're generally over and done with feelings like "we are good, we can only do good" which are far too righteous. It has only brought conflicts in 1,000 years."

The problem is you are being ruled by a committee, it's sort of like your intellectuals are member of the board and the people are the shareholders- and that's looking at the bright side.
"patriotism which prevents people from critical thinking" is sorta like saying sex prevents people from critical thinking- in some ways it's correct and in others it's wrong. This view of patriotism [or sex] can lead to bizarre conclusions.
The main problem is it is easier to do nothing then it is to do something. And the long term result of this system would be a strong conservative tendency.

"Terrorism has its origin, practically all the time, from oppression. The resistance against the German occupation; the Palestinians against Israel's occupation. We may not think there is systematically oppression, but it's enough if they do. We should try to understand why."

People have the right to be free, they will fight and die in order to be free. The present terrorism used against Israel is not helpful towards the ends of attaining freedom. You must end war. America reached an agreement with the British: we started a war of independence, then we ended the war- we didn't then continue fighting the Brits. Canada became independence 100 years after the America independence- they didn't have a war, nor use any type of terror. Terror isn't a "new idea"- rather it's the norm throughout human history.
Terrorism is merely a form of warfare- a grassroot warfare, murder or destruction of property for political reasons [rather than for personal reasons- e.g. blind rage]. Murder for personal reasons *could* be more ethical than murder for political reasons. The morality is dependant on neccessity; killing in self defense is not immoral. "Self defense" requires understanding and perception. If you are ignorant and see a car driving down a road, you could mistakenly think the car was some threat to you when it isn't. If you run into the middle of a street and start attacking cars with a baseball bat, then most people will regard you as insane- though there could a logical explanation and because of your ignorance, you may have been acting fairly rationally.