There is an article in the NYTimes whose author not only blames the French for provoking the terrorists into slaughtering them by wounding the killers’ dignity but also makes thinly veiled threats that more attacks are forthcoming if the French don’t ditch the entire legacy of the French republicanism that dates back to 1789. There is not a single sentence expressing sympathy and compassion for the victims. Instead, the author poutily scolds the French for forcing terrorists to slaughter, bomb, cut people into pieces and hit them with trucks by not being welcoming enough to burqas and public prayer.
“France is no more Islamophobic than its neighbors,” the pouty fellow announces. And he should know all about Islamophobia since his vision of Muslims as violent, volatile and essentially dumb people who are ready to go cut off some heads whenever they decide that their dignity has been wounded by the fall of Bastille centuries ago reeks of hatred for Islam. Instead of asking just how desperate these terrorists could have been to practice Islam if they boozed, whored around and killed people wantonly irrespective of what the Prophet had to say about these activities, the sorry fellow makes Muslims look worse than Donald Trump could ever hope to do. Instead of drawing attention to the hundreds of millions of Muslims who grieve for victims, fear terrorists, and live peaceful, productive lives, this stupid piece of work leaves no space in his narrative of Islam for its peaceful, non-violent version.
What can be more Islamophobic, I ask you, than this kind of “defense” of Muslims?

Leave a comment