In case you missed it, as I did: John Stewart and John Oliver discuss the events in Mumbai. (Nod to CP, btw)
There are, as a matter of probabilities, essentially zero Muslims who are terrorists. Hundreds of millions of Muslims practice their religion peacefully. They may not endorse the actions of the U.S. (neither do I, btw), but they don't act violently or advocate violence.
But a disturbingly high proportion of terrorists invoke a bizarre version of Islam to justify being psychopaths.
Now, sure, Christians have done, and still do, the same thing. But if I ate a bug, would Marwan eat a bug, too, just to spite me? It's the non sequitur part that is som remarkable, and John Oliver points out: "We hate everything you stand for, and want to kill all your women and children. Join us."
I did have an interesting conversation, on the campaign trail, with a Muslim guy who is a prominent engineering prof at a local university. He cited the conversation between that nut woman and John McCain.
She said, "He's an Arab." McCain takes back the microphone, and so, "No, he's not. He's a decent man, a family man."
Now, I had to give McCain some credit for doing that. But I missed the point a little, as my engineering prof friend convinced me. The "He's not an Arab, he's a decent man" is in fact a problem.
The real answer is, "No, Obama is not an Arab. But what if he were? Arabs are decent people, family people..."
So, let's be careful to soft-peddle the "Islamic terrorist" thing. It's more like "Terrorists who are motivated by a distorted and illogical version of Islam."