In recent months, both New England and old England have suffered attacks by Islamist terrorists bent on causing mayhem and carnage in the streets.

Sadly, though not surprisingly, the reaction from the great and the good — i.e. politicians and the media — has been similar. In both cases, “our betters” come across as more concerned with Islamophobia and possible attacks on Muslims than they do on the actual victims of the attack.

Of course, in both the Boston Marathon attack and the Woolwich beheading in London a few weeks ago, the men involved had been on the security services’ “radar.” In both cases, foreign governments had been concerned with the individuals and alerted their home countries and were ignored, or the message got lost.

This reaction to these sorts of attacks does no one any good, except possibly the Islamists.

Repeating nonsense like “being anti-Islam or Islamist is racist” is one such example. Islam is a religion and there are members from almost every race, color and creed.

What we don’t have in the U.S. yet is a group like the English Defense League, which has spawned offshoots all over the world and holds loud and thuggish rallies all over England to protest extreme Islam and its adherents.

You may have heard reports in this country that the EDL is anti-Islam. However, a few recent developments would demonstrate that is not the case.

First of all, not long after the Woolwich attack, a mosque invited in some EDL protesters to tea and biscuits. They accepted.

The second event that happened a few days ago was a joint march between the EDL and an anti-Islamist Muslim group to call for calm.

As I said above, the EDL’s tactics of having loud threatening “demos” in England’s towns do not help matters. Much of the EDL membership is street thugs who like yelling and looking hard. They are having so much of an impact that an Islamist cell has just been convicted of planning a bomb, gun and knife attack on a rally to kill as many of them as possible.

Uncouth and unhelpful though the EDL are, they have killed no one. They have planted no bombs, beheaded no one and have no deaths on their hands.

Islamists, on the other hand, killed 54 people in the July 7, 2005 attacks on London transport and, of course, beheaded a British soldier in broad daylight in London. This is not to mention the multitude of attacks that have been stopped or failed since the July 7 attack.

When you talk to Muslim activists and secular Muslims trying to counter the Islamist threat, they complain about the cack-handed way that the two countries leaders try to approach Muslims.

Routinely, governments, desperate to be seen as “doing something,” reach out and sometimes fund groups with Islamist ties while ignoring the long suffering peaceful groups in those communities.

If the West really wants to get a handle on murderous Islamists, it needs to rethink its approach to the problem.

Rather than attacking anyone who questions the influence of Islam on the Islamists, the West needs to talk to those people living in the Muslims areas who have to deal with these murderous thugs on a daily basis. Instead of shunning people like Ayaan Hersi Ali and Salman Rushdie, they need to take their advice and counsel.

The problem that causes Islamist attacks on Muslims and non-Muslims alike is not Islamophobia or Islam, it is twisted hate-spewing imams who rile up these young men to commit heinous crimes.

The people most likely to be able to counter them are not caring and sharing non-Muslims trying to “hug an Islamist,” but ordinary Muslims who want to get on with their lives and live like any other citizen of the nation of which they are a citizen.

ANDREW IAN DODGE is a libertarian former U.S. Senate candidate and writer who lives in Harpswell.