Yes, it would be stupid to blame all postal workers for a given postal worker that goes “postal.” The stupidity of generalization of blame to an entire cohort for the actions of a few, however is not always that clear-cut. Should the members of a KKK group in Georgia be blamed for the actions of a few that burn down a black church? No. They cannot be blamed for actually burning the church but it is rational that they be treated with the suspicion as to whether they support as much. They have earned the suspicion and distrust of those who regard such actions as inexcusable.

We are constantly told that it is a stupid logical fallacy to blame all Muslims for the actions of a few. It is so stupid that it could only be the result of a psychological malady: Islamophobia or hysterical anti-Muslim derangement syndrome.

But that, in part, is just what the Muslim community regards as unfair and irrational. They complain about being viewed with distrust and suspicion.

I get people who don't want to sit next to me, people who whisper things like, 'Does she have a bomb on her, is she going to harm us?'" she says.

And this from Pew Research:

…life for Muslim Americans in post-9/11 America is difficult in a number of ways. Significant numbers report being looked at with suspicion (28%), and being called offensive names (22%).

When the distrust and suspicion spill over into hatred and violent crimes -- that is certainly unacceptable. But in and of itself, being viewed with distrust is just what the Muslim community, in conjunction with statistics and ulema pronouncements, has earned.

A survey conducted by the Center for Security Policy (CSP) finds (in contrast to Pew Research) that a majority of Muslims living in the U.S. support Muslim supremacy and domination by hook or crook.

A majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” More than half (51%) of U.S. Muslims polled also believe either that they should have the choice of American or shariah courts, or that they should have their own tribunals to apply shariah. Nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.” Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country. Roughly 300,000 Muslims living in the United States who believe that shariah is “the Muslim God Allah’s law that Muslims must follow and impose worldwide by Jihad.”

Moreover, now the former head of Britain’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Trevor Phillips, has just admitted that he “got almost everything wrong” regarding Muslim immigration and that the major problem is hardly Islamophobia but that Muslims are intentionally creating “nations within nations” in the West.

And then there is a document recently discovered online by the Center for Security Policy regarding the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) that insists the only legitimate law according to Islam is sharia and urges American Muslims to nurture hostility towards U.S. law. The document, which was written in 2007 and presented at a 2008 Houston imams conference, makes clear that the AMJA’s ultimate goal, as described by Andrew Bostom, “is nothing less than the eventual subversion of the American legal system” to Islamic law (sharia).

The AMJA’s website describes the annual Imams Conference as a “service to [the] Muslim community” that offers training to Muslim clerics working as a minority under “infidel” legal systems in North America. The goal is to provide guidance for these imams to pass on to their communities, especially those involved in the legal profession, on how to act overtly to present a façade of compliance with the existing legal system while feeling “hatred” in their hearts.

The paper specifically instructs these Muslim imams to encourage deception if necessary in order that Islamic law eventually will triumph over the laws to which they must temporarily feign allegiance (i.e., laws derived from the U.S. Constitution). The participation of Muslims -- whether clerics, ordinary lay persons or members of the American legal community -- in a non-Muslim legal system is described as temporary only and sanctioned by darura, the doctrine of necessity.

Being looked at with suspicion and distrust? You’ve earned it.