Is evil confused, turning in on itself?

Jeanette has an interesting post up where she is confessing some confusion about the recent bombings in Egypt:

Since September 11, 2001, we have been told many times the reason Al Qaeda is attacking us is we have downtrodden the Muslims, we have occupied Iraq and other various and sundry excuses. Some people actually believe this is the reason. I’m not so sure.

Why the attacks in an Arab country like Egypt? Yes, they killed a handful of tourists but mostly they killed Egyptians. Am I missing something, or aren’t Egyptians for the most part Muslims?

Is killing a handful of “infidels” worth the lives of their Muslim brothers and sisters? I mean, help me out here because I’m having a difficult time following the convoluted logic of this nonsense. The bombings in London and the attacks on 9-11 make more sense than this, although they make no sense at all.

I think lots of people, if they are honest, are confused about the purpose of intent behind the blast which killed 83 people and wounded 200

Most of the victims were Egyptians but the Tourism Ministry spokeswoman said seven non-Egyptians were dead, including a Czech and an Italian, and 20 were injured…

A group claiming links to the al Qaeda organization said it carried out the bombings in retaliation for “crimes committed against Muslims,” according to an Internet statement.

Yes…it is confusing to read that Muslims are killing Muslims in retaliation for “crimes committed against Muslims.”

I can only wrap my head around it by recollecting that Jeanette used the world “evil” to describe terrorism, as did George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard, and “evil” is the correct word. The father of all confusion is the evil one. What I am thinking is that perhaps this evil, finally encountering real resistance after thirty years of apparent impunity, is becoming confused. It is the sort of confusion a boxer might feel after having his head knocked back a few times by an opponant he’d thought he’d bested. The boxer begins to flail about, wildly, his punches not connecting, and he wears himself out. His own energy is turned against him, and his defeat is at that point pretty much assured.

I write this knowing full well that I could be all wrong. I have no idea what tomorrow will bring. But it does seem to me that the two haphazard events in London, and now this odd killing of fellow Muslims to avenge other Muslims, are signalling that this particularly energetic evil is out of focus and set back on its heels. I pray it is so.

And think of it – as much as some would rather not admit it – were it not for one man utterly refusing to back down in the face of this evil, nothing would be changing, there would be no “shaky boxer” metaphor to apply here. Had President Bush caved in to the worldwide pressure he faced against his “extreme rhetoric” and his “unjust war,” there is no doubt that Blair, too, would have faltered, and perhaps Howard, as well. The weakening of the evil network of terrorism, and the frail but blossoming “Arab Springtime” are essentially due to the resolve of one man who would not be deterred. How many times do you get to live through such a moment?

UPDATE: Ed Morrissey has more on this issue and feels that the attack in Egypt spells out plainer than anything that AlQaeda’s Iraq “excuse” is – as we all know – merely that, and excuse. One too many are willing to buy into for the sake of expediency, I think.