Many of us have read and researched Islam and see the differences between it and other large religions in its historical development.
First, it must be understood that when we hear the word "fundamentalist" we think of that in the sense of how that term is used in differintiating Christians. It implies a small percentage.
In Islam, the moderates are the small minority in the Arab world. Wahhabi'ists are the drivers of the Saudi bus, for instance, and actually put the Faud family in place. The great muslim outreach has been in the schools set up by such hard line portions of the main-stream and that is what is being exported to the west.
Secondly, Islam has always been practiced to be a "state religion" and even to serve in lieu of secular government and law. It has always been that way in the Arab world and we see even muslims in Canada (as I recall from a recent story) asking for Shaira law to be applied to them within their own clerical court system and exemptions from secular law. The state then serves to harbor and support and it becomes war "by other means."
We see this in the religious warriors Syria sends out in formal groups but claims no responsibility for and distances themselves from to stay unaccountable.
Read up and you will find that treating the history as though they are a denomination of the Judiac/Chistian world view, like Methodists or Pentacostals is a failure to see the true historical differences.
It is up to western muslims to define their religous community by action in a way that seperates themselves from this history. It is not up to the victims to parse the threat.
Sensible prejudice, as your man Burke taught us, is a natural and a good thing even while true bigotry is not. In our media culture the former is defined as the later to the extent that common sense is abandoned if fear of misidentification.
Much food for thought for all.