In an interview with Johann Hari of the Independent, Bernard-Henri Levy accomplishes something very interesting indeed – he manages to make a rather limp-wristed secular liberalism (avec bombes) look vaguely macho and interesting. He considers himself “a human rights activist in fidelity to 1968”, (his wife considers him the modern Jesus Christ). He compares “moderate” Muslims with dissidents in the USSR during the Cold War. He condemns the war on Iraq as the wrong war, yet was Chirac’s personal ambassador to Afghanistan following what he regarded as the ‘right’ war. He repeats the standard non-choice of democracy vs. fundamentalism (as Slavoj Zizek points out, the gesture is intended to produce only one reaction since no one is likely to opt for fundamentalism – the vote is rigged). Specifically, he contrasts Hamid Karzai, “a moderate, open-minded, modern, democratic Muslim” with the “Islam of the warlords and the Taliban”. That’s all the choice we get, is it? Karzai, the political appointee of US homicide bombers, or Osama bin Laden, the political spokesman for suicide bombers?
Levy, like a good many Orientalists before him, drastically underestimates the Islamic world and the many possibilities within it...

 http://leninology.blogspot.com/2004_03_01_leninology_archive.html#107878422951563122