What would you call the act of a lone gunman who laid in wait for hundreds of shoppers at a farmer’s market in Kabul and then opened fire on them with two guns? And, if you learned that gunman had, over weeks, terminated his rental contract and given away his furniture (and leftover broccoli) while saying good-bye to his neighbors, would his murder of as many unarmed and unsuspecting infidels as he could kill seem to be the act of one who suddenly snapped? And, what would you have thought upon learning that he shouted “Allah is Great” as he opened fire on the helpless victims? Would you have concluded that the murderer acted in random fashion as a crazy person?

It is true that we do not know if Nidal Malik Hasan originally joined the military with intentions to agitate against American wartime initiatives. We do know that he was not prepared to serve unless the declared military campaign suited his personal agenda. When, in response to the attacks of 9-11, the US went to war against states that perpetrate Islamist terror, he consistently expressed opposition to the goal of defeating Al Qaeda. He also used his position as Army psychiatrist to preach Islam to returning war vets that he was assigned to counsel. The rants against the war effort and in favor of Islam earned him a poor job performance rating at Walter Reed and a transfer to Fort Hood. His internet postings drawing moral equivalence between suicide bombings and heroic acts of American troops to die in attempt to save comrades later earned him a place on the FBI watch list.

Jihad, known generally as the holy war waged by Muslims against infidels, has been characterized in our time by suicide killers who announce that Allah is great before activating a bomb vest, crashing planes into buildings, or firing into groups of unarmed people. These rampages only stop upon death of the jihadist. The act is intended to make a signature statement and expected to instill fear and horror in a community – as well as the civilization at large.

The hard dichotomy for many westerners to confront is that jihad is not personal. Jihad is a generalized attack on a way of life and a way of thinking. Thus, the tendency to describe the suicide killers’ senseless acts as random seems rational and offers some comfort to dazed westerners. These Islamist killers are often described as respected professionals as were the doctors that planned the London and Glasgow terror attacks. Many who knew Hasan have spoken, like his landlord and uncle, in bewilderment and surprise when acknowledging his act of mass murder. But the jihadist’s war is not against the nice people encountered along the way but against a consensual political compact that directly repudiates his favored Sharia-inspired doctrinal tyranny.

Why is it important to call this barbaric and cowardly act, jihad? Although painful, we must recognize there are those among us, some were even born to America, that have joined a conspiracy to destroy all that is American. In the name of all victims of jihad, including those who died on 9-11, we have a responsibility to recognize and declare jihadist attacks for the evil they represent to liberty loving Americans.

At a time when tension is high, it is important to recognize the western-oriented American Muslims who live among us and who sincerely condemn acts of jihad. But we also must preserve the freedom to judge a terrorist act by its design. Just as a jihadist distinguishes between individual westerners and his general hatred of the permissive democratic system that they embrace, so too must westerners find a way to identify and resist terror actors who mean us grave harm while still accepting individual Muslim citizens who contribute positively to our democratic and pluralistic way of life.