Mariam Sobh's response to Nathan Valentine's editorial on Monday is just the type of thing I have come to expect from this paper and, in particular, Sobh. Valentine used satire to criticize Mahathir Mohamad's speech in which he declared that Jews ruled the world by proxy.

First and foremost, Sobh begins by claiming that any criticism of Israel is equated with criticism of Jews. I don't know why she even bothered writing this, since Mohamad's remarks in which Valentine criticized were not about Israel, but directly against all the Jews of the world. Yes, in his speech Mohamad did condemn Israel, but those comments were not part of Valentine's opinion. He was simply refuting the claim of a vast "Jewish Conspiracy."

The problem with Sobh, and indeed other opinion columnists in this paper, is their blanket denial of the reality of the Muslim world. They want to present a picture of moderation and to marginalize the fanaticism that is prevalent. She says criticism of Israel not equal to criticism of Jews, yet Muslims around the world already make the false connection that everything Israel does is related to all Jews. She wants to claim that most Muslims do not think this way, but is dead wrong. Bin Ladin did not declare war on Israel, he declared it on all Jews (and America, of course). He is not some fringe element in the Islamic world, but one of the most popular figures within their society. In Saudi Arabia, the stories of blood libels (Medieval Europe, Jews need Christian blood) are ripe and in Egypt, stories of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are played on TV. The reality is that if they ever succeeded, Muslim fundamentalists would murder world Jewry.