We have gone through a rough period of time recently. Terror attacks or attempted terror attacks are on the rise. From Columbine, to 9/11, to the Mumbai attacks, to the failed Christmas day Nigerian bomber, to Joseph Stack flying his plane into the IRS building, to Major Hasan attacking his colleagues in Fort Hood, to the arrests of the Hutarees, to the stabbing of dozens of school children in China, etc etc. In the last two days, explosives were planted in Times Square and on the route of a marathon in Pennsylvania, and thank God, both attempts failed.

Recently, the administration decided to stop using such inflammatory terms as "Islamic terrorism". With good reason too... Lets evaluate the term first as a term and secondly in light of the recent incidents.

As a term Islamic terrorism is an oxymoron. Islam does permit and support self defense, and sets clear guidelines for warfare, should war arise. These guidelines are very clear, and include protections for among other things, enemies who surrender, civilians and even vegetation. It is also clear that to attack someone is forbidden, but to fight back when you are attacked is sanctioned. Islam clearly does not permit indiscriminate attacks.

From the basic greeting Muslims are obligated to share Salam Alaykum (Peace be unto you), it is a religion founded on and dedicated to peace.

Further, the killing of one person is clearly described in the Quran as equal to killing all of humanity. The value of human life, especially innocent human life, is extremely sacred.

Are there Muslim nutjobs? Clearly, since it is the second largest religion by adherents in the planet, we will have our share!
Are there those who try to justify or rationalize their crimes through twisting their religion? No doubt.
But they in no way are redefining or changing the religion or the principles upon which it is founded. To demonize the religion is akin to demonizing Christianity for the Inquisition, Hitler or the priest abuse scandals, or demonizing Judaism for the Israeli occupation.

What really strikes me about these incidents is how misguided the perpetrators are.

The Mumbai attacks to me are the most disgusting horrifying thing I have ever seen in my life, even beyond Columbine. A group of young men planned and carried out an attack where they walked through one of the most populous cities of the world and indiscriminately shot people. Over 500 of them at that. A quick search of the list of those who died reveals that of the 172 who died, at least 36 of them where Muslim(not to focus on only those victims but to make a point about the perpetrators). The religion clearly establishes that murder of anyone is a crime punishable by death, and murder of a fellow believer is a guaranteed ticket to hell. How could these lunatics justify what they did? It clearly had absolutely 0 basis from their religion. I was truly glad to see that the lone captured gunman was convicted. Hopefully he will meet his maker soon. I was also delighted that the Muslim cemeteries in India refused to accept the bodies of the other gunman. (See http://us.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/05/03/india.mumbai.verdict/index.html) I would not want my family cemetery to house such remains of such vile criminals next to my relatives' remains.

The Christmas day bomber was a seemingly bright 23 year old who burned himself trying to attack a commercial jetliner. I am sure that at least 25-60% of the passengers were Muslims. What would he have achieved? Was it purely a case of suicidal rage? Or was he an imbalanced individual, equipped and sent by criminals to carry out a horrendous crime?

Lets look at the New York Times Square attack. Who would the victims have been (assuming it was a perpetrator who claims to be Muslim)? Locals, tourists? I am pretty sure that at least 20% of street vendors in NYC are Muslim (including one of the first and closest witnesses to the scene)? Cabbies in NYC are, my guess, at least 30% Muslim(according to one source upwards of 85%). And with the general population of the US being approximately 3-4% Muslim, in addition to Muslim tourists, the crime would have impacted the Muslim community as much as the broader community. No different than 9/11, where Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists and all other faiths suffered just the same. My brother had a colleague of Greek heritage who had converted to Islam and was with his pregnant Pakistani wife on one of the planes. A Muslim firefighter was shockingly suspected of some involvement for months, until they found his body with other first responders.

My point is not to focus on the potential victims and what percentage of them were Muslim. Every victim is a tragedy. Every victim is someone's brother, sister, mother or father. Every victim has a family they provide for, who will now suffer. No matter their religion, no matter their ethnic heritage, no matter any characteristic they may have. Each victim is a tragedy for all of humanity.

The young misguided people who have carried out some of these crimes, with their whole lives ahead of them, the question begs WHY? Some might justify actions by blaming foreign policy, inequality, oppression in places, historical incidents etc. But no religion allows you to justify wrongs based on wrongs. As our parents always taught us, two wrongs don't make a right.

In this age, with movies and games that glorify warfare and criminal activity(#10 best selling game of all time is Grand Theft Auto San Andreas, 4 of top 10 PC games of all times are first person shooter games), is it really a stretch if an individual with some misguided passions acts in such ways that have come to seem almost natural to them? Let alone someone with serious issues? These games are definitely not the underlying problem, but they definitely contribute.

Terrorism is terrorism pure and simple, no matter who perpetrates it. We must try to understand what is causing these misguided people to do what they do. We may not solve every problem or prevent every criminal, but at least by trying to come up with the reasons and solutions, hopefully we can stop being part of or contributing to the problem.