The Shafia murder trial currently underway in Ontario, Canada is a public relations bonanza for anti-Muslim bigots who have made so-called “Islamic honor killings” a major theme in their campaign to vilify Muslims. Three of Mohammad Shafia’s daughters and his first wife were found dead in a car submerged in a shallow canal two years ago in what prosecutors say was a quadruple murder staged to look like an accident.
Mohammad Shafia, 58, his second wife, Tooba Mohammad Yahya, 41, and their son Hamed, who was 18 at the time of the incident, have each been charged with four counts of first-degree murder. All three have pleaded not guilty.
Shafia is a wealthy Montreal businessman originally from Afghanistan, who was apparently living in a polygamous arrangement with his first (infertile) wife, his second wife, and their seven children. After leaving Afghanistan in 1992, the family had lived in Dubai, Pakistan and Australia before settling in Quebec, Canada.
Two summers ago on a return trip from a Niagara Falls vacation, the family checked into a Kingston hotel for the night. Early the next morning, police found the family’s wrecked sedan in the nearby Kingston Mill locks.
Inside were the bodies of sisters Zainab, 19, Sahar, 17, and Geeti Shafia, 13, and Mohammad’s first wife, Rona Amir Mohammad, 52. Autopsies indicated all four victims had drowned.
At first, the couple told police their eldest daughter had taken the sedan for a joyride without their permission, resulting in a tragic accident. Inconsistencies in their story left police suspicious, and evidence found at the scene contradicted their account.
Investigators said the sedan would have had to travel past a locked gate, over a concrete curb and a rocky outcrop, and then make two U-turns to wind up in the locks of the canal. Damage found on both vehicles indicates that Mohammad Shafia’s SUV pushed the sedan into the shallow canal at an isolated, unlit location.
Police seized a laptop from the family’s Montreal home they said was owned by Shafia but used by his son Hamed. In the weeks leading up to the alleged murder, forensic experts found incriminating phrases had been entered in the Google search engine, including “Where to commit a murder,” “Can a prisoner have control over their real estate,” and ”Montreal jail.”
Shafia’s chilling statements captured on police wiretaps suggest he orchestrated the death of his daughters because they consorted with boys and dishonored his family with their defiant behavior:
“They committed treason on themselves. They betrayed humankind. They betrayed Islam. They betrayed our religion…they betrayed everything.”
An apparently remorseless Shafia told his second wife that when he views the cell phone photos of Zainab and Sahar posing with their boyfriends or in suggestive clothing, he is consoled, saying:
“I say to myself, ‘You did well.’ Were they come to life, I would do it again.”
The trial has received intense media coverage in Canada, but in the US, coverage has been mostly confined to anti-Muslim hatemongers and outrage peddlers. Frontpage Magazine, a site run by anti-Muslim loon David Horowitz, prompted some hate-filled comments from readers responding to an article about the Shafia trial:
“IslamoFascist Pigs will continue to carry out the tenets of Islam because they are 7th Century barbarians in the 21st Century. It’s unfortunate that Canada doesn’t have a death penalty.”
“…The West is drinking poison, we need to puke it out and close the door and seal every crack to keep this evil out.”
An article on The Blaze, a right wing website founded by former Fox News host Glenn Beck, provoked over 200 colorful comments, including:
“These towelheads think they are above the law. I don’t know what its going to take to wake up our country and it’s leaders.”
“ISLAM THE MUSLIM BARBARIC SATAN CULT! These are Dictator Barack Hussein Obamas chosen people! The SHARIA-LAW IS ALREADY STARTING IN OUR AMERICA!”
“Gee…if Muslims keep this up there won’t be a ‘problem’ with them. I say we need to keep hands off and let this run its course.”
“Nuke Mecca, Nuke Medina. Peace through Strength, Strength through Superior Firepower.”
Pamela Geller’s website Atlas Shrugs is also covering the story, and her readers appear to be equally hateful, paranoid, and in some cases, unaware that Afghans are not Arabs:
“Muslim DOGS is what they are… Arab DOGS!”
“Just another moderate Muslim. And that is not tongue-in-cheek. DEPORT ALL OF THEM.”
“The pathetic politically-correct wussies in the canadian parliament have totally rolled-over and caved to these islamo-crazies. Sharia will be the law of the land in canada within the next three years. It’s time to beef up our northern border.”
Notice that these comments are not confined to outrage over this specific crime, but are a wholesale denunciation of all Muslims and the Islamic religion, as well as calls for violence, deportation, and even genocide. Comments consistently expressed a visceral hatred of Muslims, belief in a sinister left-Islamist alliance, and paranoid conspiracy theories about Muslims taking over and imposing Sharia (Islamic Law) in the Western world.
Geller has a section on her website entitled, “Honor Killings: Islam Misogyny,” where she frequently repeats the lie that honor killings are sanctioned by Islamic Law. She describes honor killing in America as, “a grotesque manifestation of [S]haria law abrogating American law,” and warns that “creeping [S]haria” will bring a myriad of barbaric practices to the US if “Islamic supremacists” are not stopped.
The fact is that honor killings are not religiously or legally sanctioned by Islam. Rafia Zakaria is a lawyer, a doctoral candidate at Indiana University, and the Director for Amnesty International USA. Zakaria is also a Muslim feminist and a regular contributor to Ms.blog Magazine, which covers contemporary women’s issues. On the subject of honor killing, she has said:
“That is one of the black and white statements I can make. There is absolutely nothing, either in the Qur’an or in the Hadith, or even in any secondary source that says that honor killing is something that Muslims should do or can do or that is lawful.”
Honor killing is an ancient practice that can be linked to the ancient Babylonian Code of Hammurabi, circa 1700 BC. Barbara Kay, a harsh critic of Islam who previously sparked controversy with her column, “The Rise of Quebecistan,” says the first honor killing in Judeo-Christian civilization is recorded in the Bible in Genesis 34. She relates the story here.
Some Muslims, a minority mistakenly believe that “honor killing” is permitted in Islam, and Mohammad Shafia’s statements in the wake of his daughters’ deaths suggest he shares this misconception, conflating culture and faith. For this reason, it is important to spread the news that Islam does NOT condone these killings, yet anti-Muslim bigots who claim they care about Muslim women are doing the opposite.
In a pathetic attempt to prove Islam sanctions honor killings, the loons have dredged up ”Reliance of the Traveller,” a classical manual for the Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence written over 600 years ago. A convoluted interpretation of select passages has gone viral, and is now routinely cited on the pages of hate sites and in comments on numerous articles related to honor killing.
Geller quotes a section of The Traveller on her website that says certain crimes, including the killing of one’s offspring, are not subject to retaliation, implying Muslim parents have a free pass to murder their children under Islamic Law, which is a bold faced LIE. Retaliation is a form of reciprocal justice, lex talionis, commonly known as “an eye for an eye.”
A crime that is not subject to retaliation can still be punished by other means. Restrictions on reciprocal justice in the Qur’an were meant to reduce blood feuds and the cycle of vengeance. The concept of retaliation is also found in Jewish and Christian scriptures, and like honor killing, traces back to the ancient Code of Hammurabi.
Even if The Traveller sanctioned honor killing (which it doesn’t), it would be the interpretation of one Islamic cleric who lived centuries ago, and not a formal part of Islamic Law. Sharia is drawn primarily from the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and neither sanctions honor killing.
Of course Geller is only parroting a common anti-Muslim talking point pushed by her teacher in all things Islamic, Robert Spencer. Spencer, since the launch of JihadWatch has tried his utmost to find an Islamic text that he could contort and link to “honor killings.”
His one method has been to cite the well known story of Khidr in the 18th chapter of the Qur’an as such a justification for “honor killing” in Islam:
Khidr killed the young man because he would grieve his pious parents with his “rebellion and ingratitude” (v. 80), and Allah
will give them a better son (v. 81).
…[further down states]…
Another point emerges in Islamic tradition: don’t kill children, unless you know they’re going to grow up to be unbelievers. “The Messenger of Allah
Robert Spencer shamelessly tries to mislead the reader into thinking there is some textual justification for honor killing. Seeking Ilm, a traditional conservative Muslim website takes Spencer to task for this and sheds light on the above falsities, debunking Spencer’s mythical explanation:
Such an explanation is not at all mentioned by the scholars of old or of late. None understood this story to mean that it is permitted to kill children if they will be an unbeliever.
It goes on to discuss the tradition mentioned by Spencer: first the speaker is a disciple of the Prophet Muhammad known as Ibn Abbas; second, the wording of the tradition cited by Spencer is from a shaadh (peculiar) narration of the said tradition and is therefore “weaker” and not “accepted”; third, it is narrated differently in the Sahih of Imam Muslim (one of the most authoritative books of tradition) with only these words,
“Verily the Messenger of God (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) did not kill children, so do not kill children, unless you know what Al-Khidr knew when he killed the child.”
The Seeking Ilm folks go on to write,
The fact is it is impossible to know what Al-Khidr knew. Imam An-Nawawi (1234-1278 CE), recognized as one of the most brilliant Muslim jurists and judges to have lived, explained these words in his commentary upon the Sahih of Imam Muslim:
“It means: Verily it is not permitted to kill them (i.e. children), nor is it permitted for you to make a connection to the story of Al-Khidr utilizing it to kill children. For verily, Al-Khidr did not kill except by the command of God, the exalted, as this was specifically allotted to him just as was mentioned in the end of the story [of khidr], “And I did it not of my own accord.” So [Ibn ‘Abbas is saying] if you came to know of such from a child then he is to be killed. And it is known such cannot be known [by a person] and so it is not permitted to kill him.” ((Sharh Sahih Muslim: Translated by Seekingilm team ))
What is also important to mention is that Imam Nawawi himself, the great Dr. in Hadith and commentator of the Sahih, places this hadith beneath the chapter title, “Women Participants in Jihad are to be Given Reward but not Part of the Spoils, and the Prohibition of Killing Children of the People of War.” This fact stresses our point that the Muslims did not extract the meaning claimed by Robert Spencer. If Robert Spencer and crew did not get all of what we just stated, let us sum it up for the idiots out there: one of the most prominent scholars for all Muslims is clearly stating that killing children is not permitted based upon this verse, as knowledge of the child’s future is not certain save by revelation from God, as was received by Al-Khidr. Even Moses, according to the story, did not know of the plight of the child, so how is it that a layman is to know of such? Furthermore, Imam An-Nawawi known as the second Imam Ash-Shafi’i, is stating that it is totally forbidden to kill children. The fact is Spencer’s null attempt at utilizing this statement for his own fear-mongering and islamophobic agenda only shows anyone with any knowledge of Islamic law how horridly ignorant Robert Spencer is of Islam.
Horridly ignorant is right!
In any case, it seems highly unlikely that the Canadian court will consult a centuries-old manual on Islamic jurisprudence to determine sentencing in the Shafia case.
Loons, who are clearly unhinged from reality, insist liberal “wussies” are caving in to “Islamo-crazies” and will allow Muslims to invoke Sharia to get away with murder in Western courtrooms. Apparently they see no contradiction between their belief that Islamic Law is soft on crime and simultaneously, exceptionally harsh and barbaric.
Outside of the loons’ fevered imaginations, Sharia is not a factor in the Shafia trial. The accused will be subject to the Law of Canada, and if convicted, all three face life in prison.
November 1st, 2011 at 4:08 am
Horrid case, the Muslims of Canada should use this to correct the misconceptions of Islam
November 1st, 2011 at 5:18 am
Thanks Ilisha for your scholarly work.
November 1st, 2011 at 5:34 am
Nice article in exposing the true face of Islam even in the 21st century.
November 1st, 2011 at 5:56 am
What an evil, evil man. The fact that he shows no remorse for murdering his children, means he is probably severely mentally ill or perhaps possessed by Shaytan himself.
November 1st, 2011 at 6:22 am
I know that “honour” killings are not unique to Islam it exists in many primitive cultures. These people are murderers. End of.
November 1st, 2011 at 7:20 am
The only person to use the story of Khidr as evidence to kill children is none another than Robert Spencer. What such behavior of Robert Spencer proves is the extent to which Spencer will go in his bigotry. If someone was to give him authority to interpret the bible he would without doubt justify a global holocaust against Muslims using his interpretative skills.
As for honor killing in Islamic society’s, its clear that in some of the society’s “honor” continue to be held with great supremacy. Afghanistan is an example of where honor is held with great importance in their traditional codes of societal law. There are even extremists fire brand “scholars” who use “preserving their honor” as a basis for fighting, even though I have found no basis for giving such supremacy to “honor” in the Quran or Prophetic tradition. That seems more like the pre-Islamic tribalist values. Yet fact of the matter is that even in such Afghan or some conservative Muslim society the vast overwhelming majority don’t justify honor killing.
Some of these honor killings which have a element of Islamic justification by the committed individuals are lone misguided frustrated individuals caught up in changing society’s that moved their family members to commit action he finds intolerable to his traditionally held values. They then perhaps invoke some medieval story or incident they heard of some strict Islamic custom that supposedly existed and use this as moral basis for validity to commit the action or take laws into their own hands. But what is common among these lone individuals is that we find they aren’t strict in the religion themselves nor grown up being strict with conservative religious education from their parents. They fall under the category of idiots who are quick to point fingers of guiltiness at others without looking at their own irresponsible state of affairs and how they themselves bear responsibility in whatever they point fingers at. Their action is no different to the individuals who murder their girlfriend after they break up. All the frustration and self justification they create at that moment to murder is not because the society he lives in justifies it. Its his personal stupidity.
So on the one hand Robert Spencer is extremist bigot for attribution of honor killing to Islam but yet I would still hold me as a muslim and my fellow Muslims responsible for such lone individual continuing to exist with mentality’s that find justification in Islam for such actions.
November 1st, 2011 at 8:01 am
Ilisha thank you, great article.
You may want to search the Loon Watch archives, there is something there on honour killings which has extensive links in the comments, links to honour killings in other communities. I don’t have time to look it up now, but I found it useful once when researching this subject.
This practice actually started with Robert Spencer’s ancestors, the Greeks. It also goes on in other communities in the world, but of course like you said the Islamophobes are gleeful.
The truth is they discredit themselves more and more. Even Islam haters (the normal ones) know this is not a religious practice, so they do end up disgracing themselves.
November 1st, 2011 at 9:15 am
Here in Illinois, we’ve got Craig Stebic, who killed his wife. That same summer, former cop Drew Peterson killed another one of his wives, and the case of his (I believe) second wife’s mysterious death was re-opened. And perhaps most egregious was Chrsitopher Stebic, who shot his wife and kids to death on the road side, apparently trying to copy the plot of an episode of Law & Order he had DVRed.
Care to guess what all these bastards have in common? They are all MURDERERS, yes, I’ll grant you that much. But also… they are all white, upper middle class Protestant Christians from the suburbs of the Midwest. That means that these so-called ‘family annihilators’ do not have their race or religion linked to their crimes. Middle America almost wants to overlook them, because it strikes too close to home. In fact, you’ve actually had people making justifications for them, or excuses, which baffles me to no end.
One can only hope there is a special place in Hell reserved for people like this, and I include Muhammad Shafia in that category too. Just because he’s Afghani and nominally Muslim doesn’t mean he has my sympathy.
November 1st, 2011 at 9:24 am
More on so-called ‘family annihilators,’ if you can stomach reading about such things: http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/02/10/inside-the-minds-of-family-annihilators.html.
Personally, I think it’s about selfishness bordering on narcissism, and more importantly, power. Power to decide the fate of your wife and children. Again, there’s a double standard. When a Muslim displays so much as a hint of chauvinism, it’s blamed on Islam being an ‘oppressive and patriarchal religion.’ When a white Christian displays the same prejudices, it’s put in gentler language, as ‘extreme chivalry’ or some such nonsense.
November 1st, 2011 at 9:41 am
You guys know about the Saudi salafi site Islam QA? Well firstly they’re only good for fatwas on fasting and prayer, cuz it is from Saudi. But one questioner asked about honor killings and the salafi sheikh said it is COMPLETELY un Islamic, and only high Sharia courts can sentence punishments. Which is probably why there NEVER has been an honor killing in Saudi Arabia!!!
Please anyone go to Google, type in ‘pastor arrested’ or ‘pastor charged’ and you’ll get LOADS of articles that speak of church officials raping, beating and killing young girls and women, and this is found in the US!! I’ve been doing this for years, and not a week goes by without some pastor doing something like this.
November 1st, 2011 at 10:06 am
Islam QA is not Salafi. It’s Qutbist, according to the Salafis. They don’t follow it.
[Thank you for the feedback JoJo, we have addressed it above.] –Garibaldi
November 1st, 2011 at 10:27 am
@twiceasnice:Muslims don’t have to continue living in the 7th century primitive Islamic culture.
November 1st, 2011 at 10:48 am
As in followers of Sayyid Qutb? No thank you! O_O
November 1st, 2011 at 10:53 am
My mistake jojo
Now look here. Christian parents in Russia murder their own daughter by ripping out her intestines, the police have labeled it as an excorsism killing. Paramedics claim when they got to the house she daughter was in a crucifix position:
http://www.canada.com/mobile/iphone/story.html?id=5637425
November 1st, 2011 at 10:59 am
@Cartoon
The Sharia’s for all times.
November 1st, 2011 at 11:45 am
I can understand how upset most Muslim can be when there are lumped together with murderers then feel no relation with. As mentioned earlier, killing one’s own family is not reserved to any particular culture or religion. In fact, since killing one’s own offspring is pure madness, we observe that shear madness is not reserved to any race or culture.
However “Honour killing” is prevalent only through two cultures: in the caste base Hindu cultures and in several Muslim cultures. Why is it so? Could it be that the underlying religions without clearly saying so, is nonetheless giving ready made excuses to would be “honour murderers”? By condoning husband violence toward his wives and by blessing actual murder of unfaithful wives (and apostates as well), is sharia not showing the obvious direction toward murdering unruly women?
Just asking?
November 1st, 2011 at 1:00 pm
“However “Honour killing” is prevalent only through two cultures: in the caste base Hindu cultures and in several Muslim cultures. Why is it so?”
Indeed, well done. If we look at where these ‘honor killings’ take place, we see they are clustered in concentrated groups. Where they occur, ‘everyone’ does it. For example, on the sub-continent, you’ll find Muslims, Hinds, Sikhs, Christians etc all have ‘followers’ of their faith that carry out ‘honor killings’. In Afganistan, where it happens, it happens across all ‘tribes’ whether they be Sunni, Shia, Debordih etc. In the Middle East, once again Christians and Musllims, even some Jews, carry out ‘honor killings’.
On the flip side, the largest Muslim nation, Indonesia, has a wide range of tribes, religions, cultures etc (over 500 languages for one thing!) yet no ‘honor killing’. Central Asian Muslims, who again come from a wide range of backgrounds as diverse as static cave dwelling Chinese Hann Muslims to Kazak Stepp herders who travel all over outer Mongolia, don’t do ‘honor killing’.
I can go on, but you get the picture. Culture, not faith, dictates these crimes.
“By condoning husband violence toward his wives and by blessing actual murder of unfaithful wives”
I’d have to see where ‘Sharia’ blesses murder please. Apostasy is a mixed bag, some say a state can execute them, many say they cannot, but all agree that an individual cannot just go out and carry out vigilantly justice. That’s one of the main things against ‘honor killing’; Sharia states that only a properly sanctioned ‘state’ with a legal system can actually hand out a death penalty or any punishment really. Else you get ‘I’m more Islamic than you’ morons like that Taliban running around…
Jack
November 1st, 2011 at 1:03 pm
@Michel Virard…
“By condoning husband violence toward his wives and by blessing actual murder of unfaithful wives (and apostates as well), is sharia not showing the obvious direction toward murdering unruly women?”
Ok just to be clear can you cite the relevant text which blesses the murdering of unfaithful wives?
November 1st, 2011 at 1:04 pm
@Michel Virard……Last time I checked Islam was a religion and not a culture.
November 1st, 2011 at 1:56 pm
Facts have no place in the world of bigots.
2 Quotes about bigotry i thought deserved to be posted:
Bigotry tries to keep truth safe in its hand with a grip that kills it.
-Rabindranath Tagore
Bigotry and intolerance, silenced by argument, endeavors to silence by persecution, in old days by fire and sword, in modern days by the tongue.
-Charles Simmons
November 1st, 2011 at 1:59 pm
Why don’t they call it honor killing when a Christian murders his daughter for religious reasons? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/26/religion-and-discipline-children_n_1032776.html
November 1st, 2011 at 3:38 pm
Great piece Ilisha, glad to you have as part of the team.
November 1st, 2011 at 5:32 pm
@Michel Virard
That’s a reasonable question. I agree with Jack Cope, and will add to his points based on my own research.
Regardless of religious affiliation, honor killings occur mostly in societies where (1) shame is tied to the whole family, clan, or tribe (2) there is a patriarchal tradition, and women are viewed as moral vessels.
We see this correlation in some (not all) of the countries in South Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America.
Many Latin American countries, where neither Muslims nor Hindus are a majority, also have relatively high murder rates overall. This is not the case in the other two regions.
Here is a link to a previous article that may interest you as well:
http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/09/honor-killings-the-epidemic-that-isnt/
November 1st, 2011 at 8:31 pm
@Jojo, let’s not bring that bit up. If you were to listen to the whack-jobs in Birmingham, yes, it’s Qutbist (because someone who runs the site knows someone who somehow may have; according to someone else; said something positive about Syed Qutb). But in my reading of it (which has been frequent) it seems very well aligned with the Salafi methodology.
November 1st, 2011 at 9:07 pm
To start with Islam forbids “honor” killings, and as others have already mentioned here, where these crimes do occur (and I’d mention these are very rare) they come from tribal customs which Islam came to eradicate (like the people who used to bury their baby daughters alive that Islam came and stopped). Also what about child abuse, including killing of children in the US by many non-Muslim Americans, just turn on your news! Also one could list a huge number of people of Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. faiths committing crimes (including abuse, murderer, etc) but this in no way makes their religion any more allegedly “guilty” of these individual’s actions then this one apparently demented families actions supposedly “represent” Islam (which they obviously don’t).
Also even for the sake of argument, in an Islamic state where Shari’ah law is practiced, the Hudud (that is the specific punishments for all the various crimes laid down in Islamic Shari’ah law) can only be implemented by the Islamic state and its Islamic courts watched over by a Mufti (that is a Qadhi or judge). No person can go around killing people or implementing punishments (even if they claimed they had evidence in Shari’ah that, that specific person in question should be convicted of a crime and punished) only state power can implement punishments in Islam anything else is simply vigilantism and is completely forbidden by Islamic law.
November 1st, 2011 at 9:38 pm
Wanna bet that “Cartoon” aka Haram PorKKK will never understand that sharia law forbids honor killings? On a different note has anyone noticed his ranting has gotten worse?
November 1st, 2011 at 10:29 pm
To Jack and Sam who asked me to justify my sources:
“Ok just to be clear can you cite the relevant text which blesses the murdering of unfaithful wives?”
http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_adul2.htm
I think the relevant texts are the interpretation of the sharia as embodied into jurisprudence and state codes of several countries.
True, today only a minority of predominantly Muslim countries ask for death penalty for adultery but even the more lenient ones would be hard pressed to ignore the Quran injunction that specifies lashing for adultery (yes, I know, it has to be “proven”). So, yes, honour killing is mostly a cultural trait and it does happen in Latin America too (but it is no longer part of their official justice code while it is still part of several Muslim countries code).
However, you cannot easily escape the feeling that meting extremely harsh physical punishments on weaker humans (women in this case) paves the way for worse things.
November 2nd, 2011 at 12:32 am
Indian couple slain in ‘honor killing’
Asha Saini and Yogesh Kumar were in love and wanted to get married. But Saini’s family did not approve of Kumar: As a taxi driver, they said, he did not have the right kind of job. But more importantly for them, he was from a lower caste.
Despite their objections, Saini, 19, kept seeing Kumar, 20. To keep them apart, her father and uncle tortured and killed the couple, police say
————————
http://www.stophonourkillings.com/?q=node/4714
Shobha and Monica were cousins. They walked to school together through the narrow, fly-ridden alleys of Wazirpur, a once rural village now overtaken by the sprawling suburbs of northern Delhi. They were often in each other’s homes, narrow apartments with little privacy.
They sometimes met at the dairy, an ill-lit room stacked with steel churns and basins of curd where a friend, Deepak, 18, remembered Shobha as “pretty, fun, outgoing”.
Shobha, 20, had a rebellious streak. Sometimes, she even took the bus to McDonald’s or the mall in the upmarket neighbourhood just a mile or so away. Friends said she wanted to be a model.
Monica, 24, was more serious. She had married a local boy, Kuldeep, four years ago and was, relatives said, happy with her new life.
Shobha, Monica and Kuldeep were each shot twice in the head last Sunday evening. They had no reason to suspect their murderers. One was Shobha’s brother, Mandeep. The other was Monica’s brother, Ankit. The third was a local boy known to them both
Killers Family : They have done the right thing This act will send the correct message
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rx8tJxziyU&feature=player_embedded#!
—————————
NRI Rajinder Atwal convicted for murder of his daughter Amandeep
Kitimat, BC, July 2003:
NRI Rajinder Singh Atwal has been convicted of second-degree murder in the July 2003 stabbing death of his teenage daughter. A jury deliberated for five hours before coming up with the guilty verdict for Rajinder Singh Atwal, 48.
The Atwal family’s house in Kitimat. It was put on the market in April pending a move to the Lower Mainland, where Rajinder Atwal had bought a house in Surrey.
Amandeep Atwal left home on July 19 without saying a word. Fearing her parents would try to stop her from moving to Prince George with her boyfriend, the 17-year-old just packed her bags and left a note.
Amandeep’s mother tracked down the couple before they left and asked her daughter to stay. By the evening, however, her father had decided to let his daughter go. A few days later, the Atwal family left Kitimat for a trip to Vancouver and picked up Amandeep in Prince George.
Todd McIsaac, 19, her boyfriend, thought Amandeep would return to Prince George in a week. but but she was dead .by Wednesday. Police who attended Langley Memorial Hospital, where they were called to investigate a suspicious death, say she died from multiple stab wounds.
Rajinder Atwal, her father 46, is charged with second-degree murder in his daughter’s death. She was working at the 24-hour Esso station late at night and Rosario’s restaurant.
November 2nd, 2011 at 12:32 am
/\ I really can do this all day and keep posting but you get the point
November 2nd, 2011 at 2:17 am
Yawn… more lunacy on LW. Genesis 34 is not an “honour killing”. No woman is killed for any man’s or family’s “honour”.
Dinah, the rape victim, is not deemed to have dishonoured anyone or brought shame on anyone.
The RAPIST is killed for raping Dinah and adding further insult and dishonour to HER by claiming to have “fallen in love with her” and wanting to marry her. Her brothers are clear that they will not let the rapist treat their sister like a whore and DISHONOUR HER in such a fashion.
It is her honour, not theirs, that they fight for. That is not an “honour killing” of an Islamic nature where daughters are killed for bringing dishonour to their fathers, brothers and families – even in the case of rape.
November 2nd, 2011 at 3:21 am
Owner of car dealership labeled “Taliban Toyota” wins millions
http://news.yahoo.com/owner-car-dealership-labeled-taliban-toyota-wins-millions-004302989.html
MOBILE, Ala (Reuters) – The owner of a large southwest Alabama car dealership derided as “Taliban Toyota” by a competitor has been awarded $7.5 million in damages after a jury trial for his slander claim.
Iranian-born Shawn Esfahani, owner of Eastern Shore Toyota in Daphne, Alabama, sought $28 million in compensatory and punitive damages from Bob Tyler Toyota, claiming employees at that Pensacola, Florida-based dealership falsely portrayed him as an Islamist militant to customers.
“The feeling I received in the courtroom for the truth to come out was worth a lot more than any money anybody can give me,” Esfahani told Reuters on Tuesday.
Esfahani’s lawsuit said that Bob Tyler sales manager Fred Kenner told at least one couple considering buying from Eastern Shore Toyota in 2009 that Esfahani was of Middle Eastern descent and was “helping fund the insurgents there and is also laundering money for them.”
Esfahani, a naturalized U.S. citizen, fled his native Iran in 1980 following the Islamic revolution that toppled the U.S.-backed Shah and swept Shi’ite Muslim clergy to power, his lawsuit said. He opened his car dealership in 2007.
November 2nd, 2011 at 3:31 am
Georgia men charged with plotting to make ricin
http://news.yahoo.com/georgia-men-charged-plotting-ricin-012138938.html
(Reuters) – Federal authorities on Tuesday arrested four Georgia men accused of plotting to buy explosives and produce a deadly biological toxin to attack fellow U.S. citizens and government officials.
The Justice Department said the men were members of a fringe domestic militia group and had planned to manufacture ricin for use in their attacks.
The men attended meetings starting in March where they discussed carrying out crimes, including murder, in order to undermine federal and state government, prosecutors said. The targets included local police, federal government buildings and employees of agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service.
The meetings were monitored by FBI agents with the assistance of a confidential informant, according to prosecutors. Two of the men also met with an undercover agent to discuss buying explosives and weapons parts, prosecutors said.
The men are Frederick Thomas, 73; Dan Roberts, 67; Ray H. Adams, 65; and Samuel J. Crump, 68. Thomas is from Cleveland, Georgia, and the other three men are from Toccoa.
At a meeting at Thomas’ house in March, Thomas said he had enough weapons to arm everyone at the table and that he had compiled a “Bucket List” of government employees, politicians, corporate leaders and media members he felt needed to be “taken out” to “make the country right again,” according to court documents.
“There is no way for us, as militiamen, to save this country, to save Georgia, without doing something that’s highly, highly illegal. Murder,” Thomas said during the meeting, court records show.
During a meeting in September, Crump said he wanted to make 10 pounds of ricin and disperse it in various U.S. cities, according to prosecutors. Authorities said he described one scenario in which the toxin would be blown from a car traveling on Atlanta highways.
=====================================================
This was posted today Wednesday, Nov 2, 2011
Let all wait and see How much of a big deal the media makes out of this……..
I am betting this will be ignored too bad these guy were not from the evail race (arab) who are trying to take over the country and trying to kill a Saudi Arabian ambassador prob get more attention
November 2nd, 2011 at 4:11 am
Sharia states that only a properly sanctioned ‘state’ with a legal system can actually hand out a death penalty or any punishment really.
The shari’ah of the Torah establishes an “avenger” in cases of murder (who can be avoided by flight to one of the “cities of refuge”), gives the priests of Levi the authority to direct the people (starting with the accusers) to stone people, and also sets up a “state” ruled by Judah according to the law of the priests of Levi. The shari’ah of the Qur’an sets up no such “state,” nor any “priesthood,” but within two centuries of the abrogation of the Torah, the Arab muslims had restored the Torah to canonicity in the Abbasid regime and had turned their “hadith” into canon law as well.
See “The Distinctive Character of Tradition” for the progression, keeping in mind that (1) Islam itself was not “new,” but was completed in the time of the Messenger of the Covenant; (2) we were informed by the Messenger that the Arab muslims would follow the course of the Children of Israel, duplicating their errors; and (3) we were also informed that Allah would take possession of the knowledgeable and the ignorant would take their places and go astray and lead astray. Note that the muslims of the terminally-collapsed millennial muslim world are still waiting for all three of those things to happen.
November 2nd, 2011 at 4:58 am
‘Abdur-Rahman writes: [O]nly state power can implement punishments in Islam, anything else is simply vigilantism and is completely forbidden by Islamic law.
The history of the muslims demonstrates that muslims do not believe this, and that those who have ruled the muslims have fostered this belief among those who have not been part of their ruling classes. The same history shows that this is an idea that was introduced by the Abbasid Tyranny immediately after they had toppled the Umayyad Dynasty by killing all but a handful of the Umayyads, claiming the authority of Islam to do so. That “authority” disappeared from the newly-invented “shari’ah law” immediately after the Abbasids had consolidated their power by killing the muslims who had joined their revolution.
Of course this is not the view of the “official histories” of the Arab muslim empire, it is merely what those histories show.
Humanity was created for sovereign dominion ~ all of humanity, not just one branch of the family or “class” exclusively ruling over all the other branches and classes. Eventually, we’ll learn how to exercise the sovereignty that’s been delegated to us ~ God has shown us how, and has taught some of us how, and has continually suggested to us that life would be much more pleasant if we would keep our duty to Him by administering His dominions in the ways He has woven into the fabric of creation and human nature.
But we tend to make up “rules” as we go along, changing them whenever it’s convenient, instead of trying to understand how His Rules are the best option, should we decide to follow His Guidance in an otherwise impossible task.
And so many who have been shown the “how” of sovereignty have considered it their own private possession rather than a duty, and have twisted the “how” to their own advantage at everyone else’s expense.
It looks like people have grown tired of that. Perhaps one can hope that we’ll try to do it His way ~ before we kill each other off to “settle the issue once and for all.”
November 2nd, 2011 at 5:23 am
@ Abdul-Rahaman:Although Quran claims to be a complete guide to every aspect of life,It would be helpful if you could quote a verse from the Quran in English.Thanking you in advance.
November 2nd, 2011 at 6:19 am
Skhan
I dont think Halal dork /cartoon got worse . She/he just has a new spell check
November 2nd, 2011 at 6:58 am
his is totally irrelevant to the article but wanted to share this link from the 1001 inventions event in London…
http://www.safeshare.tv/v/agj3CBFP3HM
I wonder if US congress would like to play this instead of crap like FITNA?
November 2nd, 2011 at 9:35 am
@Proverb
Barbara Kay explains in her article why she feels Genesis 34 is an honor killing. Slate magazine also discusses the story of Dinah, saying:
“Here is most hideous war crime in a Bible filled with them. As with the story of Dinah, it is sexual misbehavior that spurs the ugliest, evilest biblical vengeance.”
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/blogging_the_bible/features/2006/the_complete_book_of_numbers/the_bibles_most_hideous_war_crime.html
Honor killings did occur in biblical Israel and were actually encouraged in ancient Rome.
In Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus, set in ancient Rome, Lavinia was raped and mutilated and in response, her father killed her. This reflects the historical context, when killing a woman with a destroyed reputation was viewed as an act of mercy.
Several other passages in the Bible can be construed as supporting honor killing. In the Book of Numbers:
“God was threatening punishment for Israelites who’d been whoring with Moabite women. At that very moment, an Israelite walked by the Tent of Meeting with his Midianite girlfriend. Phineas speared the couple to death. God, delighted by Phineas’ zealotry, stops the plague he had sent against the Israelites as punishment for their lechery.” (See Slate article linked above)
Also, children can be killed for cursing (dishonoring?) parents:
“And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.” (Exodus 21:17)
“For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.” (Leviticus 20:9)
“And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.” (Leviticus 21:9)
I agree the determination of what falls the category of “honor killing” is subjective. Nevertheless, imagine the delight of Islamophobes if they could find such verses in the Qur’an.
The point is that honor killing is an ancient practice that cuts across cultures and religions.
November 2nd, 2011 at 11:49 am
@Michel Virard
“… no longer part of their official justice code while it is still part of several Muslim countries code). “
From the article I referenced, of the cases in Honduras, less than a third made it to court. Of those, less than 5% resulted in convictions. No one has been punished for the Juarez murders in Mexico.
Legal impunity is a widespread problem. Laws must be passed AND enforced.
Many countries, Muslim and non-Muslim, are enacting codes with stiffer penalties for honor killings. Queen Rania of Jordan has been an outspoken supporter of such reform.
“However, you cannot easily escape the feeling that meting extremely harsh physical punishments on weaker humans (women in this case) paves the way for worse things.”
Are you suggesting that Islamic Law (or culture) paves the way for honor killing, even if it doesn’t literally sanction this practice?
As Jack Cope pointed out, honor killings are very rare in Indonesia, which is the most populous Muslim-majority country. Indonesia has a secular legal system based on Roman Dutch Law, mixed in with some local customary law.
As Ali pointed out, Saudi Arabia’s legal system is based on Sharia. Although Saudi Arabia has generally regressive policies toward women, honor killings are virtually unheard of in the Kingdom.
A high profile honor killing case has sparked controversy in Syria, which has a mixed legal system. Some experts say specific articles of law (242 & 548) that are used to excuse the perpetrators of such crimes are of French rather than Islamic origin.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/23/magazine/23wwln-syria-t.html?pagewanted=all
Most Muslim-majority countries are not under Sharia. Turkey has a completely secular legal system based on Swiss Law. It also has honor killings.
Prevalence of honor killings is NOT directly tied to Sharia. As others have said, honor killing is a form of murder where the victim is denied a fair trial, which is contrary to Islamic law.
Islam opposes acts of murder and vigilantism, and likens the killing of one human being to the killing of the entire human race (Qur’an 5:32, 6:151, 17:33).
Islam is not the root cause of honor killings, period.
November 2nd, 2011 at 12:57 pm
@ Ilisha
Thank you for that – but it is all pointless as Barbara Kay is not in fact the Bible or Genesis 34 for that matter.
According to Barbara Kay (who you seem to consider good authority) ““Here is most hideous war crime in a Bible filled with them. As with the story of Dinah, it is SEXUAL MISBEHAVIOUR that spurs the ugliest, evilest biblical vengeance.”
COMMENT: it take a thoroughly, morally-depraved animal to call RAPE a ” sexual misbehaviour”. Pray tell, is your authority claiming that Dinah, the rape victim, misbehaved sexually?
You see, Barbara Kay clearly shares the same views as those Muslim fathers who kill their daughter for being raped. It was ‘ sexual misbehaviour’.
Here is what Genesis 34 actually says [my short commentary is in square brackets]:
“1 Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. 2 And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her and lay with her, and violated her.” [Note: violate = rape. But ofcourse your authority calls this 'sexual misbehaviour']
“5 And Jacob [i.e. Dinah's father] heard that he[i.e. the rapist] had defiled Dinah his daughter” [Note: The Bible NEVER implies that anyone, apart from Dinah, had their honour defile or were violated. Jacob and his sons do not see this as a violation of their personal honour. It is all about Dinah- the rape victim. But, ofcourse your authority calls this 'sexual misbehaviour'.]
“19…He [i.e. the rapist] was MORE honorable than all the household of his father.” [Note: If the rapist is the most honourable among the notable males in his family, what kind of savages are we dealing with here? But, pardon me, he only 'misbehaved sexually']
“25…Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brothers, each took his sword and came boldly upon the city and killed all the males….because their sister had been defiled.” [Note: defiled = raped. Mind you, she was raped by the MOST honourable of the men in that clan.]
“But they said, “Should he [i.e. the most honourable rapist] treat our sister like a harlot? [i.e. rape and then want to marry his rape victim]”
Now, there have been reports of Asian men raping and forcing their victims to marry them. We read about Muslim men who kidnap Christia women and force them to convert to Islam and rape them (they call that ‘marriage’). It is all well-documented. Now, perhaps Barbara Kay is comfortable with such rapes – but the rest of us are not. Perhaps Muslims applaud such behaviour – but Dinah’s 2 brothers did not.
I will side with Dinah’s brothers over the Muslim men who kidnap and rape Christian women and call it ‘marriage’ or Muslim fathers and brothers who kill their daughters or sisters for being raped or simply having a boyfriend. Dinah’s brothers cared for HER honour – not theirs. Muslim fathers and brothers care for THEIR ‘honour’ and kill their daughters and sisters.
That you cannot see the clear difference between the two motives is not surprising to me.
November 2nd, 2011 at 3:00 pm
@Ibrahim, I’m just telling you what my “friendly” neighborhood Salafis have to say about Islam QA. (It’s biddaaaaaaaah! It’s haraaaaaam! OK But they say that about everything.)
And I found the verses that condone killing unfaithful wives:
Ezekiel 23
Two Adulterous Sisters
1 The word of the LORD came to me: 2 “Son of man, there were two women, daughters of the same mother. 3 They became prostitutes in Egypt, engaging in prostitution from their youth. In that land their breasts were fondled and their virgin bosoms caressed. 4 The older was named Oholah, and her sister was Oholibah. They were mine and gave birth to sons and daughters. Oholah is Samaria, and Oholibah is Jerusalem.
5 “Oholah engaged in prostitution while she was still mine; and she lusted after her lovers, the Assyrians—warriors 6 clothed in blue, governors and commanders, all of them handsome young men, and mounted horsemen. 7 She gave herself as a prostitute to all the elite of the Assyrians and defiled herself with all the idols of everyone she lusted after. 8 She did not give up the prostitution she began in Egypt, when during her youth men slept with her, caressed her virgin bosom and poured out their lust on her.
9 “Therefore I delivered her into the hands of her lovers, the Assyrians, for whom she lusted. 10 They stripped her naked, took away her sons and daughters and killed her with the sword. She became a byword among women, and punishment was inflicted on her.
11 “Her sister Oholibah saw this, yet in her lust and prostitution she was more depraved than her sister. 12 She too lusted after the Assyrians—governors and commanders, warriors in full dress, mounted horsemen, all handsome young men. 13 I saw that she too defiled herself; both of them went the same way.
14 “But she carried her prostitution still further. She saw men portrayed on a wall, figures of Chaldeans[a] portrayed in red, 15 with belts around their waists and flowing turbans on their heads; all of them looked like Babylonian chariot officers, natives of Chaldea.[b] 16 As soon as she saw them, she lusted after them and sent messengers to them in Chaldea. 17 Then the Babylonians came to her, to the bed of love, and in their lust they defiled her. After she had been defiled by them, she turned away from them in disgust. 18 When she carried on her prostitution openly and exposed her naked body, I turned away from her in disgust, just as I had turned away from her sister. 19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. 21 So you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled.[c]
22 “Therefore, Oholibah, this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will stir up your lovers against you, those you turned away from in disgust, and I will bring them against you from every side— 23 the Babylonians and all the Chaldeans, the men of Pekod and Shoa and Koa, and all the Assyrians with them, handsome young men, all of them governors and commanders, chariot officers and men of high rank, all mounted on horses. 24 They will come against you with weapons,[d] chariots and wagons and with a throng of people; they will take up positions against you on every side with large and small shields and with helmets. I will turn you over to them for punishment, and they will punish you according to their standards. 25 I will direct my jealous anger against you, and they will deal with you in fury. They will cut off your noses and your ears, and those of you who are left will fall by the sword. They will take away your sons and daughters, and those of you who are left will be consumed by fire. 26 They will also strip you of your clothes and take your fine jewelry. 27 So I will put a stop to the lewdness and prostitution you began in Egypt. You will not look on these things with longing or remember Egypt anymore.
28 “For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am about to deliver you into the hands of those you hate, to those you turned away from in disgust. 29 They will deal with you in hatred and take away everything you have worked for. They will leave you stark naked, and the shame of your prostitution will be exposed. Your lewdness and promiscuity 30 have brought this on you, because you lusted after the nations and defiled yourself with their idols. 31 You have gone the way of your sister; so I will put her cup into your hand.
November 2nd, 2011 at 5:01 pm
Michel Virard:
I find your link as proof to be slightly confusing. How is that proof that Islam condones honor killing?
It is well known that to ‘prove’ that a wife is being unfaithful, 4 witnesses who actually saw the wife in the act (I believe the phase is something alone the lines of ‘like a pin into a bottle’, i.e. they must witness penetration) and must observe it together at the same time. These witnesses must testily in court and prove that they are ‘good Muslims’ which would bring into question as to why they were around a couple long enough to verify their identities and see penetration.
Frankly, to have 4 witnesses anyway is a long shot. To have them come to court and stand there and say they saw it is even longer. And to have them explain how, as good Muslims they saw what was happening then grabbed three other good Muslims to come and have a look too is impossible.
To my knowledge, throughout history pretty much no one has ever been sentenced under that law. I believe there was one who was with her lover on a biulding site during lunch break… suffice to say lunch ended early and everyone walked in on them.
That’s the point really, it’s not meant to be enforced or is put in such a way that enforcement is so difficult it’s not worth it. Really it sits there to act as a reminder that doing such a thing is a sin and that you can’t hide from God. Sure, places like Sudan and Somalia try, but in these cases its more about instilling fear into the population than any sense of justice.
But all of this is really irrelevant becuase I’ve never seen a ‘honor killer’ use Islam to justify what they did. At best you’ll get some that say ‘she was behaving un-Islamicly so I killed her’ but even then, cultural perception normally defines what is ‘un-Islamic’. In short, sometimes Islam wrongly is used as a reason but never as justification. Because it can’t be used like that.
I’ve seen anti-Islam people try there damn hardest to link Islam to ‘honor killing’, but the fact is that such a link just isn’t there. The scriptures are strictly against it as well, it’s quite clear cut. Indeed, the only people calling it into doubt seem to be the more extreme Muslims out there and the anti-Islam brigade. For some reason these people all seem to be reading from the same Quran… a Quran I’d love to get a copy of!
Jack
November 3rd, 2011 at 11:09 am
@ Michel Virard
I don’t think that link is proof of what was asked. I did ask for relevant text which as you say ‘blesses the murdering of unfaithful wives. So it’s a red herring really which shows that honour killing cannot be linked to Islam. There is no honour in killing.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:35 pm
@Proverb
“…Barbara Kay is not in fact the Bible or Genesis 34 for that matter.”
Correct. Barbara Kay is a person, not a book. I don’t really understand your point.
In any case, you are awfully hard on Kay, given she is a fellow Islamophobe.
“COMMENT: it take a thoroughly, morally-depraved animal to call RAPE a ” sexual misbehaviour”. Pray tell, is your authority claiming that Dinah, the rape victim, misbehaved sexually?
First, you attribute the quote to Barbara Kay and it was written by David Plotz, Editor of Slate Magazine.
Second, if you read carefully, I think you will see that Plotz was referring to the sexual misbehavior of the rapist, NOT the victim. Please read and understand before you start ranting.
I cited a second article for additional clarification about Genesis 34, but you missed the point. Let’s go back to Kay’s article to address what you’ve said:
“But Dinah’s brothers’ collective sense of shame would not permit such a sensible outcome. They duped Shechem and his father, and in the end massacred Shechem and all his peers. A terrible crime in the name of honour.”
You are correct in that this is not an exact analogy because Dinah was not killed, and Shafia actually killed his own daughters. However, Kay’s point is that the rape shamed not only Dinah but her entire family, who in turn murdered the rapist and ALL OF HIS PEERS in a fit of tribal vengeance. This can reasonably be described as an honor-based mass murder.
It is interesting that you find Kay’s analogy sloppy, yet you provide even less comparable examples of alleged Muslim depravity:
We read about Muslim men who kidnap Christia[n] women and force them to convert to Islam and rape them (they call that ‘marriage’)
“We” read about this? Where? On Jihad Watch, Atlas Shrugs, and other deceitful anti-Muslim hate sites?
It is not a common practice for Muslim fathers to murder their daughters following a rape. Muslim men don’t routinely kidnap and rape Christian women and then force them into marriage.
These practices are prohibited in Islam, and your ridiculous accusations do not stand up to scrutiny. The Qur’an certainly does NOT say that rape victims should be put to death, nor does it instruct Muslim men to kidnap and rape non-Muslim women.
Muslim men are permitted to marry Jewish and Christian women, and the wife is not required to convert to Islam. There would be no need for violence or forced conversion, and such behavior is expressly prohibited in Islam.
Overall rape and murder rates are far higher in most Western countries than they are in Muslim countries, and you can’t erase that reality with a few cherry-picked cases of Muslim crimes. I’m not interested in your attempt to indict all Muslims for the decontextualized crimes of a few.
I notice that you have not addressed the other Bible verses I have cited. Instead you are trying to go off on a tangent, and I am not going to follow.
As I said before, my point is that honor killing is an ancient practice that cuts across cultures and religions. You have said nothing that successfully refutes that point.
November 5th, 2011 at 2:13 am
@ Ilisha
Again, please provide Biblical proof from Genesis 34 that the brothers felt “collective sense shame” or that they even stated anything to that effect. You and your “authority’s” assumptions do not amount to proof of such a fiction.
Furthermore, I still stand by my assertion that only a morally-depraved animal would call rape “sexual misbehaviour”. I also stand by every human rights documentation and every factual finding by interet groups that have thoroughly reported on Muslim men kidnapping, forcibly converting Christian women and raping them in the name of Islam.
There events are even reported in various media, together with reports of Muslim father killing their own daughters for their honour.
Let me know if you wish me to post links, as you are clearly in denial or seeking to make excuses for such inhumane acts. How can a sane person claim that that which is widely and credibly reported is ‘ridiculous”? And Muslims then wish to be taken seriously when they claim to have “moral fibre”….
November 5th, 2011 at 11:40 am
@Proverb
As I have said previously, the validity of Kay’s comparison is SUBJECTIVE (a matter of opinion). I agree with her and you don’t. We’ve been over that already.
I could delete the reference to Kay’s Genesis 34 analogy entirely and not dilute the substance of my article. Plotz is not even cited in the article itself, so if you want to argue over his odd choice of words, write to him at Slate.
Instead of repeatedly harping on the the same trivia, why don’t you address the other Bible verses I cited?
As for your human rights documentation, you are cherry picking, which is a transparent and overused tactic. No matter what incidents you cite, it is a fact that no Muslim-majority country is committing rape and murder on the scale of the Democratic Republic of the Congo:
“In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, rape is used as a weapon of war in a systematic pattern of destruction that has claimed an estimated 2 million victims. The conflict in the Congo has resulted in more deaths than the conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Darfur (Sudan) combined.
The United Nations says, “The brutality and scale of sexual violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo almost defies imagination.” Over five million people have died in the last 10 years in what 60 Minutes described as a ‘War Against Women.’”
http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/09/honor-killings-the-epidemic-that-isnt/
The Congo has an overwhelming Christian majority. If you are a Christian, do you need to answer for the crimes in the Congo? I don’t think so.
Whether or not religion is invoked as a justification, Christians as a whole are NOT responsible for the actions of others just because they share the same faith. Crimes committed by Christians indict the perpetrators, and not the Christian religion.
The same applies to Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. Only bigots insist on double standards.
As for your accusations about being in denial, Loonwatch posted the article about the Shafia trial as a feature in the full light of day. Shafia’s crimes are monstrous and no one has said otherwise. Most of the major media in the US are not even covering this story, and yet you can read about it here.
If Loonwatch is in denial, publishing this article is a funny way of showing it!
November 7th, 2011 at 2:54 am
@ Ilisha
I will address the other Bible verses once we have concluded Genesis 34 as, in case you have conveniently chosen to forget, that was the initial focus of my comment regarding this article.
I am glad that you admit that your questionable morality – calling RAPE some silly “sexual misbehaviour”. Once again, I repeat: provide a verse from Genesis 34 that speaks of of Dinah’s brother “sense of collective shame”.
Your imposition of some bizarre islamic sense of shame on the text is your islamic problem – not the problem of the text. Trying to waste my time with irrelevant copies and pastes is just that: trying to waste my time. I do not care for your claims about Congo.
Provide the imaginary Biblical verse of speaking of a “sense of collective shame” on the part of Dinah’s brothers. Either put up or shut up.
November 7th, 2011 at 11:42 am
@Proverb
So far you have challenged nothing I actually wrote. Do you recognize you are arguing with me about what others have written?
“I will address the other Bible verses once we have concluded Genesis 34…”
I suspect if you could address the verses I cited, you would have done so by now.
“I am glad that you admit that your questionable morality – calling RAPE some silly ‘sexual misbehaviour’…”
Apparently you are unable to grasp that the phrase “sexual misbehavior” was used by DAVID PLOTZ, not by me. Anyone who doesn’t care about the well-documented atrocities in the Congo should refrain from questioning other people’s morality.
“Either put up or shut up”.
Now you are being overtly rude. What is it I’m supposed to prove to you? That people in an ancient story really did or did not feel shame? It is unfortunate that you also can’t grasp the meaning of the word “subjective,” even when it’s followed by a helpful hint.
“Your imposition of some bizarre islamic sense of shame on the text is your islamic problem…”
BARBARA KAY‘s imposition, not mine. Islamic sense of shame? Barbara Kay is not a Muslimah, and shame is a universal concept. Your bigotry is really showing.
Do you understand that Barbara Kay, David Plotz and I are three separate people? Earlier you managed to discern that Barbara Kay is not a book, and in comments on another article, you wrote:
“…That’s as retarded as arguing that the only people who say they are no UFOs are UFOs themselves. Sometimes I wonder where some of you people get your reasoning from…”
Is this your idea of a solid analogy? No wonder you can’t appreciate Barbara Kay’s comparison. I don’t see a need for further debate with you on the validity of anyone else’s analogy.
Your screen name and your obsession with Genesis imply that you’re a Christian, but your behavior does not. Rudeness and bigotry are not part of any religion.
Continue to nurture your (very un-Christian) hatred and see where that gets you.
If there are readers with the stamina to read through this tedious back-and-forth, I’ll leave it to them to decide whose points are valid.
Moving on…
November 8th, 2011 at 12:35 am
@ Ilisha
I repeat: Either put up ot shut up. That is a very common English expression used to challenge people who are tall on claims and short on evidence.
Either put up the evidence or shut up, as you appear to be tall on claims and short on evidence.
Furthermore, WHERE in my response to you do I mention UFOs????? Do you simply have the habit of copying and pasting unrelated comments and mixing them up in your “response”? Honestly…..
Go read my response to you regarding the Congo. I stated that I do not care for YOUR claims on the Congo. I question your knowledge of everything you have commented on in our discussion. You also clearly have difficulty reading simple texts- like Genesis 34 – as you clearly seem to read in imaginary “collective shame” where the text says nothing of the sort.
Rape is not sexual mibehaviour. There is no such silly categorisation of rape amongst civilized people. At the very least, rape is sexual assault. Mibehaviour merely implies bad or unbecoming behaviour, etc. It is a question of degrees. You and your ilk happily downplay rape. I have no respect for your kind.
Then the masterpiece is that you wish to give the impression that you are concerned for women in Congo! Why are you pretending to be concerned – afterall, according you and POLTZ (as if it makes any difference as to which despicable authority you cited), what is happening in Congo is merely “sexual misbehaviour”, isn’t it? By your “logic” we should be able to ignore the rapes in Congo (pardon me “sexual misbehaviours” according you), much like you and your morally-questionnable “authority” feel comfortable ignoring Dinah’s rape.
November 8th, 2011 at 10:32 am
@Proverb
“Either put up ot shut up.”
I choose to “shut up.” It’s not possible to reason with you.
You are obviously angry and filled with hate, and I hope you find a way to move past that. I sincerely wish you peace.
Thanks for your interest in this article. Take care.
November 10th, 2011 at 10:05 am
how about hanging Shafia and Hamed by his balls from the totem pole?