Terror alerts were sounded this week in Kenya and Saudi Arabia. Our
government expressed concern about the likelihood of renewed action by
Islamic militants. We hope it will turn out to be a false alarm. But
innocent people in both countries have learned the hard way just what
Islamic militants are capable of doing.

Many Americans have probably forgotten that al Qaeda terrorists destroyed
the American Embassy during the summer of 1998. Twelve Americans were among
the 219 people killed. This summer, Kenya's police are said to have
discovered a scheme to destroy our new embassy.

Terrorists in Saudi Arabia reportedly have placed a housing complex for
Westerners under "active surveillance." The recent bombing in Riyadh did
more than just kill and maim people. It sent a shock wave through the
populace, particularly those in the government who had extended support to
al Qaeda.

Many Westerners would think, given the terror alerts, that the term "jihad"
represents violence against those whom the radical Islamists view to be
their enemies. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

My colleague, Robert Spencer, adjunct fellow at the Free Congress
Foundation, has worked tirelessly over the past few years to raise the
public's awareness about the threat that Islamists pose to the United States
and Western Civilization. He has published a number of monographs and three
books on Islam, including one co-authored by Daniel Ali, a former Muslim who
converted to Catholicism. Their book, Inside Islam: A Guide for Catholics,
was written in the hope of awakening American Catholics to the threat that
we face from Islamic true believers. Admittedly, there are many Muslims who
are leading peaceful lives and who are sincerely tolerant in their dealings
with representatives of other religions. But the threat posed by the radical
Islamists represents an unusual conflict, unlike any experienced by our
nation before: we face an enemy that is not a state. Instead, the enemy
consists of true believers who, given access to sophisticated technology,
can wreak a good deal of damage based on their ability to strike with
surprise.

These true believing Islamists interpret the violent sections of the Qur'an
quite literally and act upon their urgings without fear that they will kill
innocent people. Nor do they respect Muslims who are intent on leading
peaceful lives: witness the bombing in Turkey, a secular Muslim country that
maintains good relations with our own country.

Spencer argues that we in the West are being sold an inaccurate view of
Islam by writers such as Karen Armstrong, author of Islam: A Short History,
who blame Christianity for the tensions between the two civilizations,
failing to concede that even before the onset of the Crusades, the belief in
jihad had driven Muslims to conquer Spain and much of North Africa. Jihad,
explains Spencer, means that the Islamic community has a responsibility to
fight unbelievers, including Christians and Jews -- only because they
believe another religion.

Spencer writes in the Free Congress Foundation monograph Jihad in Context:
Beyond Political Correctness, What the Qur'an Really Says that, "it is clear
today and throughout Islamic history, millions of Muslims have considered
jihad to be a war to establish the supremacy of Islam. Many have believed,
and believe today, that they are commanded to fight this war by Allah
himself." Writers such as Armstrong prefer to discount the writings
contained in the Qur'an's Sura 9, the most violent teachings of Muhammad
that come from when he was a political and military leader. Yet many Muslim
theologians assign these teachings greater precedence in Islamic theology
than more tolerant sayings of Muhammad that he spoke earlier in his life.

Radical Islamic fundamentalists harbor contempt for our democratic way of
life and, given the opportunity, will stop at nothing to accomplish their
goal of bringing our country to its knees. We have placed tough
anti-terrorist laws on the books to help our law enforcement agencies stop
terrorists. There is a need for proper accountability and oversight on the
part of Congress and the Judiciary to ensure the USA-PATRIOT Act's
considerable powers are deployed against terrorists in the way that Congress
intended when the law was passed in October 2001, not used to circumvent the
constitutional liberties of American citizens involved in non-terrorism
cases. If the USA-PATRIOT powers are allowed to be deployed
indiscriminately, that would hand the terrorists a backhanded victory,
proving their contempt for Western democracy is justified.

Even so, more than two years after the attacks of 9/11 many Americans would
like to believe that things are back to normal. Spencer's work, however,
indicates that what many Americans and our radical Islamist adversaries
consider "normal" are likely to be two very different things. We can only
hope and pray that the West's belief in peace and tolerance prevail in a
conflict that has no end in sight.

Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.