Coming Soon To America?: Critic Of Islam Blogger Hacked To Death
…or: I Like Big Buts And I This Can Deny
From Yahoo News and Reuters, Ruma Paul reporting, we learn:
A blogger was hacked to death by machete-wielding attackers in Bangladesh on Tuesday, the third killing of a critic of religious extremism in the Muslim-majority nation in less than three months. Ananta Bijoy Das, a blogger who advocated secularism, was attacked by four masked assailants in the northeastern district of Sylhet on Tuesday morning, senior police official Mohammad Rahamatullah told Reuters.
Rahamatullah said Das was a 33-year-old banker.
He was also editor of science magazine “Jukti”, which means “logic”, and on the advisory board of “Mukto Mona” (Free Mind), a website propagating rationalism and opposing fundamentalism that was founded by U.S.-based blogger Avijit Roy.
Roy himself was hacked to death in February while returning home with his wife from a Dhaka book fair.
His widow, Rafida Bonya Ahmed, suffered head injuries and lost a finger. In an interview with Reuters in the United States published this week, Ahmed called her husband’s killing “a global act of terrorism”.
According to monitoring service SITE Intelligence Group, Islamist militant group Ansar al-Islam Bangladesh said al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) had claimed responsibility for the attack.
This will come to America if people like Pam Geller are not supported with vigor and determination and resolve.
Mark Steyn wrote the other day: ‘If the American press were not so lazy and parochial, they would understand that this was the third Islamic attack on free speech this year — first, Charlie Hebdo in Paris; second, the Lars Vilks event in Copenhagen; and now Texas’.
And now we have a fourth.
More from Mark:
In Copenhagen, in Paris, in Garland, what’s more important than the cartoons and the attacks is the reaction of all the polite, respectable people in society, which for a decade now has told those who do not accept the messy, fractious liberties of free peoples that we don’t really believe in them, either, and we’re happy to give them up — quietly, furtively, incrementally, remorselessly — in hopes of a quiet life. Because a small Danish newspaper found itself abandoned and alone, Charlie Hebdo jumped in to support them. Because the Charlie Hebdo artists and writers died abandoned and alone, Pamela Geller jumped in to support them. By refusing to share the risk, we are increasing the risk. It’s not Pamela Geller who emboldens Islamic fanatics, it’s all the nice types — the ones Salman Rushdie calls the But Brigade. You’ve heard them a zillion times this last week: “Of course, I’m personally, passionately, absolutely committed to free speech. But…”
And the minute you hear the “but”, none of the build-up to it matters….
And, as he later remarks: ‘Alas, we have raised a generation of But boys’ [and girls — see: Ingraham, Laura].
On Fox the other day, Bill O’Reilly was hopelessly confused about this issue. He seems to think that Pam Geller’s cartoon competitions will lessen the likelihood of moderate Muslims joining us in the fight against ISIS. Putting aside the fact that there is no fight against ISIS, and insofar as the many Muslim countries in the vast swollen non-existent “60-nation coalition” are going to rouse themselves to join the fight it will be because the Saudi and Jordanian monarchies and the Egyptian military understand it as an existential threat to them, put aside all that and understand that Islamic imperialism has a good-cop-bad-cop game — or hard jihad, soft jihad. The hard jihad is fought via bombings and beheadings and burnings over barren bits of desert and jungle and cave country in the Middle East, Africa and the Hindu Kush. The soft jihad is a suppler enemy fighting for rather more valuable real estate in Europe, Australia and North America, so it uses western shibboleths of “diversity” and “multiculturalism” to enfeeble those societies. And it does so very effectively — so that when a British soldier is hacked to death on a London street in broad daylight, you can’t really quite articulate what’s wrong with it; or that, upon the death of the ugly king of a state where Christianity is prohibited, the Christian ministers of Westminster Abbey mourn his passing; or that, when Australians are held siege in a Sydney coffee shop, the reflexive response of progressive persons is to launch a social-media campaign offering to battle Islamophobia by helping Muslims get to work; or that, when violent Muslims stage their first explicit anti-free-speech attack on American soil, everyone thinks the mouthy free-speech broad is the problem. This soft jihad goes on every day of the week, and Bill O’Reilly doesn’t even seem to be aware that it exists.
This blindness towards Islam is just as bad as the one that plagues many on the Right when it comes to Leftists and their intentions.
It is another form of Moral Equivalence and, unlike the other kind, it is one that has a very good chance of getting you murdered in the near future [whereas, the Left In America won’t dare try to for some time, because they still believe it’s better to have you ‘Love Big Brother’ — enslave yourself voluntarily].
We live in a country where the Men have no chests, but they sure do have big Buts.
Could This Be One Explanation?