Throughout my tenure at the Daily Illini, it has not been uncommon for a colleague to publish a sucker-punch targeting my character and beliefs. While most contained outrageous accusations that were so laughable they did not merit response, I feel that Shouger Merchant’s column defending terrorism, hilariously titled “Islamaphobia” is worth a second glance.

It’s funny to watch liberals, when faced with a logical conservative argument, retreat to the same lame sound bites time and time again. I published a column last Thursday titled “Fight to win,” which gave a reasoned argument for giving special attention to Muslims at security checkpoints at airports, train stations and bus stations. When Merchant read this piece, she took a page out of Sen. Dick Durbin’s playbook and found “racist” to be the appropriate generic response, followed by invoking the Holocaust. No wonder a columnist’s pay is so meager.

Can’t liberals do any better than the “racist” label? I said nothing about race; I’m referring to a religion – a fanatical sect at that. Am I a religionist then? I also said nothing about myself, as a white man, being superior to Muslims. I just pointed out that it’s Muslims, more than any other religion, who seem to have more of an interest in blowing Americans up. That’s not racism, that’s fact.

But liberals don’t take much stock in fact. They don’t care for it in politics, and apparently, they don’t need it when it comes to fighting terrorism. Merchant says “to win the war on terror, everyone must be treated right.” Yes, Shouger, you are correct. To defend our borders and our homeland, let’s coddle every America-hating extremist. Let’s invite them to our bosom of love and peace and democracy and let them suckle at the teat of freedom until they bite so hard we bleed. Because that’s what happened Sept. 11. That’s what happened in Spain. That’s what happened in London, and I’ll be damned if I sit here without trying to prevent it from happening again.

We cannot afford to be naive about terrorism. Merchant claims that “all religions have their fanatics” but she omits that Islam is the only religion whose fanatics evangelize by hijacking 737’s and detonating bombs on buses. If skinny white Christian frat boys were denouncing America and making us targets for terror, I would be first in line to be searched at security, because I know I am not one of them.

Like I wrote, and Merchant confirmed, leaders of the Muslim community have the wrong mindset as well. The best way to condemn terrorism is to take action within your institution and make it stop. Show us that you condemn terrorism by ratting out all the radicals in the U.S., then making a trip back to the Middle East, and forcing the jihadists and insurgents to knock it off. Get results. As a Catholic, I’ve sat through many a Sunday homily prescribing a fix for the priest sex abuse scandals. But I’ve never heard of a cleric scaling the steps of the Ka’ba and telling everyone visiting Mecca to work against extremism. Why? He’d be tossed faster than James Caviezel bearing a crucifix.

If Merchant’s invented “Islamaphobia” means that I’m worried about Muslim terrorists, then she’s damn right I’m worried. There were days this summer I wondered, after a day of work next to the Sears tower and a Metra ride home, if my mother would return home safely at night. How dare Shouger Merchant demand that Americans live in fear instead of providing ourselves with peace of mind? My opinion is not out of the mainstream, and God forbid another attack befall our nation, profiling will be the most tame response offered as defense.

Bitter name-calling is not journalism. Columnist bashing is not journalism. That’s what letters to the editor are for. And why hasn’t that section lit up with leftist rants of racism and insensitivity? Because profiling makes sense.

Chuck Prochaska is a junior in LAS. His column runs on Thursdays. He can be reached at [email protected].