An ABC pundit quoted an army officer's wife on the capture of the Fort Hood terrorist: "I wish his name was Smith." Steyn responds:
What a strange reaction. I suppose what she means is that, if his name were Smith, we could all retreat back into the same comforting illusions that allowed the bureaucracy to advance Nidal Malik Hasan to major and into the heart of Fort Hood while ignoring everything that mattered about the essence of this man.
But we’re scrupulously non-judgmental about the ideology that drives a man to fly into a building or self-detonate on the subway, and thus we have a hole at the heart of our strategy. We use rhetorical conveniences like “radical Islam” or, if that seems a wee bit Islamophobic, just plain old “radical extremism”. But we never make any effort to delineate the line which separates “radical Islam” from non-radical Islam.Steyn doesn't come out and say it plainly, but the facts he quotes lead to the only possible conclusion: the enemy of civilization is Islam. The source and promoter of terrorism is Islam. This ideology may lie buried in the psyche of westernized Muslims and incubate there, only to erupt in violence at some future date, unexpectedly, in what has been called "sudden jihad syndrome." And we need to start developing strategies to deal with it.
Read it all here.