Not here, not yet

Rico says some people just say it better than he can, and Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch is one of them:

Consider this: Muslims have no qualms proudly declaring the particulars of their religion for all and sundry to hear, no matter how absurd it may sound, or how it reflects on them or Islam. Thus talk about the legitimacy of adult “breast feeding,” paedophilia as marriage, insistence that the Earth is flat, commands not to yawn (lest Satan should fly down one’s throat), the salutary effects of drinking urine, the need to execute the “infidel” Mickey Mouse, and any number of other oddities and perversities are regularly evoked by Islam’s sheikhs and clerics throughout the Muslim world.
There is, of course, one caveat: whenever Islam is vulnerable vis-à-vis the international infidel, as it is today, caution is called for regarding the declaration of those things that might backfire, things that might make Islam look like a threat— things that might incline other civilizations to go on a preemptive offensive, while they have the advantage.
Jihad is a perfect example. Despite the fact that “holy war” to conquer infidel territories and spread Islamic hegemony is an ironclad aspect of the religion— an integral part of its history, its doctrines, its very being— Muslims are careful not to evoke it around infidels.
Even Islamist organizations, including al-Qaeda, while regularly pontificating to fellow Muslims about how Islam demands the subjugation of non-Muslims— simply because they are infidels— always back-peddle when communicating with the West, opting instead to use language and paradigms that comport with Western sensibilities. It is in this manner that many in the West have come to believe Islam’s nonstop aggression around the globe is a byproduct of “grievances”, of “Zionism”, of U.S. “foreign policy”, of anything and everything that is not Islam.