Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Horrific Fact or Propaganda? (The new Cult of Moloch)

What a lovely story to wake up to. It concerns that spectacular, brazen assassination attempt on
Benazir Bhutto last month.

"Investigators from Ms. Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party said yesterday they believed the bomb, which killed 170 people and left hundreds more wounded, was strapped to a one-year-old child carried by its jihadist father.

They said the suicide bomber tried repeatedly to carry the baby to Ms. Bhutto's vehicle as she drove in a late-night cavalcade through the streets of Karachi.

"At the point where the bombs exploded, Benazir Bhutto herself saw the man with the child and asked him to come closer so that she could hug or kiss the infant," investigators were reported as saying. "But someone came in between and a guard felt that the man with the child was not behaving normally. So the child was not allowed to come aboard Benazir's vehicle."

Ms. Bhutto is said to have told investigators she recalls the face of the man who was carrying the infant. She has asked to see recordings made by television news channels to try to identify the man."
(full story)

The normal immediate reaction would be one of horror, disgust and outrage and it has been so far. Words like despicable, barbaric, animals, nauseating, satanic are being used in comments about this story on various blogs and forums. But I'm having a hard time with this one. I so want this to be UNtrue. Could it be speculative hyperbole from Bhutto's camp? It is a bit hypocritical of me, I reckon. I am so quick to believe the worst in these islamists in most cases, that nothing is beyond the pale for them in their quest for global domination and worldwide jihad. But this makes me stop for once and wonder...could it be true? Must be that maternal thing. This is beyond my comprehension and humanity. I just can't accept this as an actual fact. My brain so wants to deny this or at the very least, try and rationalize it in some way.

For instance, if true, I have to believe that it was not the father or family member carrying the child. At least in our culture, we have seen how easy it is for some digusting fellow human to commit violent acts on a child not biologically theirs. But, see, I'm applying my cultural bias to this! I'm assuming that EVERYONE has some natural affection for their spawn. That's the way I was brought up. And because of that upbringing, my mind goes into complete denial when confronted with "facts" such as this!

Another rationalization is that the baby was merely a "prop"-not wired with explosives- in order to get closer to the bus. The man carrying the baby was the one wired. The explosions were caught, live, on Paki TV and were quite huge. I seriously doubt one could wrap something as relatively small as a year old infant with that much firepower, swaddled or not, to set off such a blast. Which brings me back to the question of whether or not the man was indeed the father of the child- if he was, then perhaps he was willing to sacrifice his life and that of the child, knowing that they would get their reward in the afterlife from their moongod. Daddy gets the virgins, but what, pray tell, does a baby blowed up in the cause of jihad get? 72 pretty ponies? It's tough to try and understand the mindset here. Was the child female? We all know what low value females have in those cultures. Could that have made the job any easier? God! What a question to ask!!

Of course, for the sake of my own sanity, I question if the child was even real to begin with. Could it have been a doll, heavily swaddled? And if not, could the child have been already dead? The shenanigans in Lebannon with staged photo ops has taught us that they are not beyond dragging out dead children to various locations to make a point, despite islamic taboos regarding the dead. As weird as it sounds, I can cope with this better if I believe the child was freshly deceased before the act. But then you stray into a whole 'nuther place thinking that, and I really don't wanna go there!

Then my brain has to factor in the fact that life over there is pretty damn cheap to begin with. Over here, in Normalville, parents have an idle threat that we like to toss at our kids when they really piss us off-we've all heard it-and maybe even a few dads have actually uttered it, of course we really don't actually mean it-it's just done for shock value:
"I brought you into this world and I can take you out! And it won't bother me, cuz I can make another one just like you!"

Maybe over there, in the squalid, violent, primitive 5th world that is realm of the islamofacists it's not an idle threat. It's just a plain fact. And that makes it all the more easier to do; they may be lacking in any compassion and humanity but they are counting that we have it in spades and that makes acts such as this the epitome of evil itself. We will be destroyed by our "niceness".

Either way, if this is indeed true-if another human being felt driven to sacrifice an innocent baby for a theological cause, then this truly is a religion hijacked by Satanic forces. It has become the cult of Moloch. And woe to those who try and say otherwise.

This article has brought into question whether I have the gumption and fortitude to withstand such a barbaric assault...but that's exactly what they want us to think. We are being numbed by the endless beheadings, massacres, bombings, multilations, killings...what's one dumb baby in the cause of jihad?
After all, they can make more.


Blogger Lemuel Calhoon said...

The British who fought the Muslims in Afghanistan reported that the women would throw their babies on the British bayonets before the Muslim men would charge.

The Muslim conduct of war is what led Kipling to write this:

And when you lie dying on Afghanistan's plains / and the women come out to cut up what remains / just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains / and go to your God like a soldier.

11/21/2007 12:11 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home