Left running in circles to avoid naming elephant in the room
- by:Tim Blair
- From:The Daily Telegraph
- April 29, 201312:00AM
0IT'S now 14 days since the Boston Marathon was bombed by Islamic extremists, 406 days since an Islamic extremist shot Jewish children in France, 1171 days since Islamic extremists bombed Pune in India, 1270 days since an Islamic extremist murdered 13 people in Fort Hood, Texas, 1615 days since Islamic extremists launched an assault on Mumbai that killed 164 citizens, 2853 days since Islamic suicide bombers slaughtered 52 commuters in London, 3336 days since 191 were blown apart by Islamic extremists in Madrid, 3852 days since Islamic extremists killed 202 people including 88 Australians in Bali and 4248 days since nearly 3000 died in the Islamic extremist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
There may have been one or two other recent Islamic extremist incidents besides. It's difficult to keep count. In any case, a pattern seems to be emerging that involves extremists of a particular type.
It's obvious to all except our friends on the Left, who have developed three distinct coping mechanisms over the past decade or so in order to dodge any confrontation with Islam.
The first is outright evasion. Here, for example are the "bare facts" of the Boston attack, according to the ABC's Jonathan Green: "Two bombs exploded, 10 or so seconds apart, the first about 2.49pm, on Boylston St, Boston ... Three people were killed, while 264 others were injured. As a consequence one suspect was arrested, and another died in the course of a massive manhunt. The pair were Chechen brothers. The surviving suspect has been charged in a bedside hearing in hospital. His condition is now described as fair. That's about it so far."
Not quite. By the time of Green's faith-free outline, another fact was known. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev "told federal agents he and his brother were motivated by extremist Islamic beliefs", the New York Times reported.Another form of evasion: since 2001 the Left has become overwhelmingly concerned about what the weather may be like in a few hundred years. It's their way of seeming to be worried about important global issues while ignoring a global issue that is killing and tormenting people right now, every day.
The second coping device is the complexity disguise, whereby the simple realities of Islamic terrorism are submerged beneath tonnes of pointless, faux-sophisticated chatter. US academic John Cole steps up to the plate: "This sounds to me like a classic father-son struggle, and a tale of adolescent rebellion, in which radical Muslim vigilantism appears mainly as a tool for the young men to get back to their father, and perhaps to wipe off the shame they had begun feeling about the family having been on the wrong side of the Chechnya fundamentalist uprising. They were playing the nihilists Arkady and Bazarov in Turgenev's Fathers And Sons. The shame of the secular uncle may have been mirrored from the other side in the shame of the newly religious-nationalist adolescents."
I prefer Tamerlan Tsarnaev's more direct explanation, as related to the Chinese man whose car he and his brother hijacked during their bid to flee Boston. "I did that," said Tamerlan, referring to the marathon attack. "And I just killed a policeman in Cambridge. I'm a Muslim."
He'll never get academic tenure with that impressive verbal economy. There's also the problem of Tamerlan being dead, having been run over by his brother's stolen SUV, which is a plot development rarely seen in 19th century Russian drama.
A few on the Left reject this nonsense. Following the capture of the surviving Tsarnaev idiot, Brian Levin, the director of something called the Center for Study of Hate and Extremism, turned up on Bill Maher's US talk show. Now, Maher is usually as mushily Left as they come, but this night he nailed it. "There's only one faith that kills you, or wants to kill you, if you draw a bad cartoon of the prophet. There's only one faith that kills you, or wants to kill you, if you renounce the faith," he told his guest, who'd tried to draw an equivalence between Islam and other faiths. When Levin continued, weakly claiming that an anti-Muslim musical could be presented on Broadway without subsequent deadly mayhem, in the manner of The Book of Mormon, Maher asked: "Tell me what colour the sky is in your world." Good question.
The third coping strategy is a simple blame-switch. On the Friday prior to the Tsarnaevs' showdown with police, Fairfax publications ran an illustration pointing an accusing finger at the presumed marathon killers. It depicted a teapot decorated with the stars and stripes, atop which a lit fuse sparkled.
Fairfax's best guess on the identity of the Boston bombers was the Tea Party, a mainstream political movement in the US primarily concerned with low taxation.
Islamic extremists pick out soft targets. In Boston, the murdered victims included an eight-year-old boy. The Left likes soft targets, too. No Tea Partier has bombed anybody. They're basically middle-class types who, if they ever do use pressure cookers, use them for cooking rather than killing.
The common element with all three Leftoid coping mechanisms is a gutless unwillingness to face reality. They're boldly standing up for cowardice, which is something of an accomplishment considering that the closest thing they have to a spine these days is the yellow streak running down their backs.
Meanwhile, the rest of us may consider again the list at the top of this column and marvel at the words of Tamerlan Tsarnaev's former brother-in-law, searching for a reason behind this month's latest Islamist outrage. "He was angry," said the bro-in-law, "that the world pictures Islam as a violent religion."
Well, he can't blame the Left. They'd never say such a terrible thing. They wouldn't dare.
No comments:
Post a Comment