Terror master Hassan Nasrallah is dead at the hands of the heroic IDF, and The New York Times is very upset.

Per the paper’s simpering posthumous piece on the former Hezbollah chief — killed in a daring airstrike on the headquarters of his murderous cadre — Nasrallah was a “gifted orator” who “maintained that there should be one Palestine with equality for Muslims, Jews and Christians.”

The piece’s headline ran “Protesters Mourn Nasrallah’s Death Around the World.”

That echoed The Washington Post’s equally obsequious piece, praising Nasrallah for transforming Hez into a “potent regional force” and portraying him as a cuddly and beloved religious leader.

What’s next — a reappraisal of Hitler over his oratorical gifts or Mussolini and his train-schedule improvements? 

Maybe a paean to the egalitarian desires of Pol Pot? The unshakable faith of Jim Jones? 

Look, we get that the Times, the (other) Post and much of the rest of the media have turned deeply anti-Israel, with much of their audience hungry for terror apologia.

But Nasrallah was as bad as they got — a bought-and-paid-for-satrap of Iran’s regional hegemonic project; a blood-spattered, terror-dealing antisemite and Holocaust denier.  

He spent decades conducting terror operations against Jews in Israel and around the world — all while doing his level best to force Lebanon’s political and social life to submit to his own twisted worldview. 

By lionizing Nasrallah, these US outlets glossing over the fact that he was widely feared and hated by Muslim Arabs as well. 

Remember, his terror army served as the shock troops for Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian War — and Nasrallah’s death saw Free Syrians burst into spontaneous celebrations. 

Much of Lebanon cheered, too. 

The “tears for Hassan” piece ran without a byline — proof that Times insiders know this effort to paint Nasrallah as a martyred good guy is as specious as it is obscene.