Instapundit points to an excellent commentary by Tim Blair in Australia’s Daily Telegraph:
You can’t help but feel a little bit sorry for your average Muslim terrorist. They go to all the trouble of blowing up children in Boston, killing US Army personnel in Texas, detonating bars in Bali, flying jets into New York skyscrapers and now basically removing a soldier’s head in a London street, all in the holy name of Islam.
But where’s the credit?
Where’s the respect?
Following yesterday’s murderous outrage, one of the alleged killers – easily identified by blood-covered hands and two dripping knives – stood in the street and declared to the world he’d slaughtered his victim as a direct consequence of Islamic beliefs.
There are “many, many ayat throughout the Koran,” the man said, citing the book’s ninth chapter, that encourage followers to “fight them as they fight us.”
That’s a fairly clear message. Also clear were the cries of “Allahu Akbar” as the two alleged murderers went about carving and hacking at the fallen soldier’s body, having already run him down with a car.
Then, as usual, the western media’s reflexive timidity kicked in. The default mode in any coverage of Islamic violence is a painfully cautious avoidance of Islam.
British television network ITV was among the first to broadcast the alleged killer’s speech, but neatly edited any mention of the Koran by talking over him. “In a south London street,” a voiceover intoned, “a man with bloodied hands carrying a knife and machete approaches a camera and tries to justify what just happened.”
We then heard the fellow’s so-called justification, which made little sense without knowing anything about his blatant and declared Islamic motivation: “I apologise that women had to witness this today but in our lands our women have to see the same.”
Actually, I’m pretty sure that women in “his lands” don’t usually see South London psychopaths chopping heads off in the street. The standard Islamist slaughter devices in “his lands” are guns and bombs, such as were deployed by Muslims in Iraq over the past week to kill nearly 100 people, almost all of them sharing the Islamic faith.
Perhaps those killers subsequently delivered “political statements” about their acts. That’s how one BBC report described the alleged killer’s South London speech: “Footage has emerged showing a man wielding a bloodied meat cleaver and making political statements.”
These “political statements” are a popular feature of Islamic communication in the UK. At a London rally in 2006, the following political statements were presented in the form of hand-printed signs: “Behead those who insult Islam.” “Massacre those who insult Islam.” “Annihilate those who insult Islam.”
Alert readers many detect a theme here. Also, extremist Muslims now own at least one copy of Roget’s Thesaurus and have learned how to read it.
I want you defenders of Islam to note the text that I “bolded” for you.
While attacks like Boston and London get a lot of press in the US and UK, where are the most casualties taken?
- In Iraq, an analysis by Iraq Body Count and co-authors published in 2011 concluded that at least 12,284 civilians were killed in at least 1,003 suicide bombings in Iraq between 2003 and 2010. The study reveals that suicide bombings kill 60 times as many civilians as soldiers.
- According to the BBC, terrorism in Pakistan has become a major and highly destructive phenomenon in recent years. The annual death toll from terrorist attacks has risen from 164 in 2003 to 3318 in 2009, with a total of 100,000 Pakistanis killed since 9/11 as of 2010
- .As Islam spreads to Southeast Asia, terrorism follows
- Most terrorist attacks in Egypt are linked to Islamic extremism. Targets have included government officials, police, tourists and the Christian minority. Terrorism increased in the 1990s when the Islamist movement al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya targeted high level political leaders and killed hundreds in its pursuit of implementing traditional Sharia law in Egypt..
- In Africa: From east to west Africa, a rise in Islamic extremism has led to a surge in deadly attacks and kidnappings by groups linked to Al-Qaeda. While these groups are mostly occupied with domestic issues, their anti-western rhetoric and targeting of foreigners pose a wider challenge. So too does growing evidence of ties between armed groups from the Sahel and east Africa and Nigeria, observers say. The three main Al Qaeda-linked groups are Somalia’s Shebab in the Horn of Africa; Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) which is active across the Sahel; and Boko Haram, which has sharply increased its attacks in Nigeria since 2010.
- How about the killing and beheading of adults and children in Thailand?
- Remember the Taj Hotel bombing in Mumbai in 2008 and Islamic terror in India?
I ask you defenders of Islam – if Islam isn’t the reason for terrorism, why is it prevalent in majority Muslim countries? Why, as in Iraq and Pakistan, do they kill fellow Muslims? Why do they kill in non-Christian nations like India and Thailand?
Here’s a clue – it isn’t American foreign policy or oil reserves that causes a Muslim terrorist to kill a Hindu or behead a Buddhist priest. It isn’t UK involvement in Afghanistan that causes a Muslim terrorist to behead a 9 year-old child in Thailand.
Perhaps your time would be better spent explaining “real Islam” to the jihadis who are “bastardizing” your faith (as one of our Muslim commenters put it) because they don’t know what “real” Islam is…
This is what I have been trying to get across to the useful idiots of Islam who excuse these attacks because they suppose that I am a bigot and Islamophobe – and therefore a liar.
You try to explain away incidents like the London atrocity and the Boston Marathon bombing as individual and isolated incidents by “a couple of jerks” because that allows you to feel comfortable in your self-righteous indignation. It allows you to feel safe if you can just compartmentalize these as “one-off, lone wolf” events because that prevents you from having to think about this situation as what it is – a global conflict.
There also should be no confusion that this Islamic “revolution” does have a political dimension but you won’t go there – you will happily ignore that dimension. Why? Because a defined political incursion of this magnitude is a pretext for a real war. As long as you can keep this debate in the politically correct, post modern realm of “religion”, you liberals, you in the media and you in our political elite can safely avoid taking the hard decisions to protect your own culture and country.
It is far easier to hide behind a shield of sanctimony by defining those who are drawing attention to this global conflict as bigots and Islamophobes than it is to actually contemplate the “real” problem.