Will it still be appealing to commit acts of terror when no one seems to be interested in who or what you are, or why you’re doing it? So is the following true or false?

“It is important that in the event of violent terrorist actions we:

1) totally ignore the name of any organisation claiming responsibility.

2) characterize any perpetrator as mentally insane and having lost his or her way.”

Can this be a way to prevent unwanted effects like “martyrdom”, or giving the impression there is a powerful force out there that sustains or supports these actions? Can this provide protection from copycats or those easily influenced?
I am afraid it will not work. Not only will the public demand to be informed. This same public may play a role in the apprehension of terrorists. Also you may not do justice to the victims. Should there be questions concerning your national safety budget you cannot maintain that your sophisticated and expensive safety measures were only needed to catch a few escapees from an asylum.
So, too bad, truth better be told fully and without restraint. And frankly, in keeping a lit on things, do we not recognize the essence of a non-democratic political system? It is a little like free Will, when you can also want bad things.