Very good point-counterpoint series of opinion pieces in the Dallas News this morning. The first is by the only consistently conservative, pro-Israel/war on terror editor on their board, Rod Dreher.

Religion's role is central to this conflict

We cannot allow ourselves to be intimidated by American Muslim leaders quick to play the bigot card nor gulled by those who present Islam as if its highest goal is to buy the world a Coke and keep it company....

Islam is the issue, not because we want it to be, but because the enemy explicitly says so and is winning more followers by the day by appealing to the religious sense of the world's Muslims. Meanwhile, warns the CIA's Mr. Scheuer, "U.S. leaders prepare for and fight the war they want to see, not the one standing on the battlefield...."

The second piece is by Arsalan T. Iftikhar, who is legal director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations

Constant use of 'Islamist' overlooks real threats

With the anticipation of a New York Times best seller, the 9-11 Commission report did not disappoint an eager audience...

Nonetheless, by associating the ill-defined "Islamist" modifier to define "terrorism," the commission has overlooked numerous precedents that show an entirely different historical record.

He then goes on to mention the Oklahoma City bombing and a couple of other examples of Christian militia-types who want to kill people.

Iftikhar uses the same charade that radical Muslims use in defending suicide bombers - look at what Baruch Goldstein did in Hebron when he massacred all those Palestinians!

As horrible as Oklahoma City was (which happened almost 10 years ago), to take the acts of isolated individuals who have zero effect on mainstream thought and no support of any government, and compare it with the worldwide efforts to kill as many infidels as possible which is supported by various states, well-respected imams and armed militants and costs untold millions of dollars is outrageous.