Your thinking and declarations are counterproductive as you move from reasonable threat assessment of the spread of radicalism into extremism that denies the reality of hundreds of millions of Muslims seeking no Jihad, no death to infidels. Perhaps you should get out more and see the world.If it wasn't bad enough that Maxtrue falsely accuses me of "denying the reality of hundreds of millions of Muslims seeking no jihad, no death to infidels" (from where does he get "hundreds of millions"? Has Michael interviewed that many "real people on the street"? If so, were they honest?), he misses the simple fact that I've not been talking about "all Muslims."
How is that both he and Michael Totten both wrongly conflate "sacred" texts with individual believers?
An individual Muslim necessarily represents Islam the way Muhammad and his allah intended no more than a "Christian" necessarily represents Christ accurately.
So, who represents Islam more faithfully, the Muslim who seeks to establish shari'a over all the earth using any means necessary, including violence, or the Muslim who truly rejects offensive warfare against the non-Muslim world and actually believes in equal rights for all people regardless of religion or gender?
Who represents more closely the command of Allah and the example of Muhammad, the jihadist or the "moderate"?
This leads to the question, who has the right to define "Islam"?
Just as Christ and His Apostles are the final word on what Christianity is and should be, so too Allah and its apostle define Islam.
Since Muhammad commanded and practiced offensive warfare against the non-Muslim world, the answer is clear.