As bad as the US media is, you really need to look to the Brits to produce a truly idiotic response to the Orlando Muslim massacre. This piece by Ruth Sherlock (the jokes write themselves) reads like a perfect parody of clueless liberalism at its ridiculous worst.
Ruth complains that Trump's "decision to label the attack 'Islamic terrorism' came before any official assessments were made."
You mean just based on the shooter calling himself an Islamic terrorist? How could Trump fail to wait for the "official assessment"?
"Just as the nation needed unity, Mr Trump said President Obama should resign in 'disgrace' for refusing to use the term Islamic terrorism so early on in the events."
The nation needs unity against Islamic terrorism. Not unity in covering up Islamic terror.
"Moreover, in being so keen to foment fear about Islamic extremism, the presidential candidate played to the very hopes of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant."
Yes, what ISIS wants most is for us to do something about them. Instead of just ignoring them.
"Isil may at its heart be a nexus of commanders in Syria and Iraq. But it's power is not as a coordinated army. It is, rather, the strength of its poisonous ideology. It has become an umbrella term by which psychopaths feel they can justify deranged acts."
That's pretty much the definition of Islam.
"Mateen did not travel from Syria or Iraq. His hatred was bred in the New York streets where he grew up"
If his hatred was bred on New York streets, it came from the mosques on those streets. Not from anything American.
"Isil has become a way for the dangerously mentally ill to find meaning in their madness."
So ISIS just consists of tens of thousands of mentally ill people? These mentally ill people somehow managed to take over entire countries and win major battles.
What about all Islamic terrorist groups? Are they all filled with crazy people? Was the founder of Islam crazy?
"Mr Trump has called for meeting violence with violence. He has has called for the torture of captured jihadists, and surveillance of mosques. In his call for 'vigilance' he implies a vigilantism."
If he becomes president, how can his actions be vigilantism?
"But Isil cannot be beaten this way, because it feeds on fear."
We can't beat ISIS with violence? How do we beat it then.
"Isil's biggest enemy is reason. It thrives amid social divisions, but is stifled by unity. It needs to be shunned, and dismissed. People who attack in its name need to be labelled not as Islamist terrorists but simply as the mentally ill."
That will fix that. We just shun ISIS terrorists, call them crazy and refuse to do anything about ISIS.
This plan is
1. Bound to work
2. Get us all killed
Maybe if a terrorist walks into the Telegraph offices, they can try shunning him in the best style and see how that works.