So it goes in this upside-down, not-so-brave new media world: those who, if given the power, would subjugate infidels, oppress women, and execute apostates and homosexuals are “moderate” (a moderate, these days, apparently being anybody who doesn’t have explosives strapped to his body), while those who dare to call a spade a spade are “Islamophobes.”
Indeed, being a "progressive" has changed considerably.
When our political and cultural authories tell the people that being upset with the crimes, actions, and ideologies of the jihadis is actually anti-Islam, do not be surprised when the people conclude that Islam itself must be the problem, and not the jihadis who exploit Islam to kill us and undermine our liberties. If a backlash against Moslems ever does come to the West, you can lay this at the feet of our progressives who refuse to distinguish between jihadis and Moslems by insisting that wanting to fight jihadis means you are anti-Islam.
I have confidence that the author's take that this is an anatomy of a surrender is incorrect. I certainly agree that this is an anatomy of a retreat by those in our elites who feel we deserve to surrender. But in the end, our people--who are neither wracked by guilt nor dismissive of our freedoms--will not submit to the call to surrender.
