I spent too long typing my big long reply so when I actually hit reply the link expired. So I'm just going to go with the highlights.

1. Although reform has begun to happen in our lifetime we will always see it as too small when compared to our own countries.

2. The author calls for reform but doesn't actually provide any tangible way that this could happen. It is happening right now, women gained the right to vote in Saudi Arabia and although that seems small to us it's not small to them.

3. If the strongest predictor we have of who will commit acts of terror in the name of Islam is a strong belief in a fundamentalist version of Islam then we really don't actually know anything.

I feel that the article laid the ground work for a good conclusion but then fell flat by just jamming in a few sentences about reform. It's just a buzzword with no real substance. I agree with issue of religion in politics but the author also begins to talk about a difference in values which too me is another buzzword. I have heard so much about my countries "values" without anybody specifying what they are that it's lost all meaning. It's a term used by politicians and horoscope writers because it will mean something to anybody listening. Without actually saying what these value are or this reform entails it allows the reader to insert whatever they want.