Denial and deception instead of any honest effort to come to grips with the root causes of honor killing. "Arizona Police Hunt for Dad Accused of Running Over Daughter: Police Say Faleh Hassan Almaleki Believed His Daughter Was 'Too Westernized,'" by Sarah Netter for ABC News, October 22 (thanks to James):
Police in Arizona are hunting for an Iraqi-American father who they say ran over his daughter with his car to punish her for becoming "too Westernized" and rebuffing the conservative ways he valued.
Memo to ABC News: "conservatives" don't generally run over their daughters with their cars for any reason at all.
Faleh Hassan Almaleki, 48, was last seen fleeing the parking lot of the Department of Economic Development in Peoria, Ariz., Tuesday after hitting his 20-year-old daughter and her boyfriend's mother with his Jeep Grand Cherokee.Noor Faleh Almaleki is in "life-threatening condition," Peoria Police spokesman Mike Tellef told ABCNews.com today. Her boyfriend's mother, 43-year-old Amal Edan Khalaf, is also still hospitalized, but with non-life threatening injuries. "It occured because her not following traditional family values. We've been told that by everybody," Tellef said. "He felt she was becoming too westernized and he didn't like that." [...]
Not "traditional family values." Western non-Muslims who adhere to "traditional family values" do not generally run down their wayward daughters with their cars.
Noor Almaleki had backed out of an arranged marriage about a year ago, police learned, and had been living with Khalaf and her son in a nearby town.Tellef said the young woman dressed in American clothing and was wearing typical Western attire when she was struck.
The family were all American citizens, though Tallef believes the parents were born in Iraq.
He said it was unclear if Faleh Almaleki intended to kill his daughter, but "it was definitely intentional that he ran them down." [...]
While Tellef had heard of so-called "honor killings" in other parts of the United States, this was the first such crime in Peoria.
Ibrahim Ramey, human and civil rights director for the Muslim American Society's Freedom Foundation, told ABCNews.com that whenever this type of crime involves a Muslim it can serve to elevate the fears of people who may already harbor misconceptions about Islam.
Typical denial and deception.
In the first place, what is the Muslim American Society?
"In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation's major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members." -- Chicago Tribune, 2004.
And what is the Muslim Brotherhood?
The Muslim Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." -- "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," by Mohamed Akram, May 19, 1991.
And secondly, instead of worrying about people getting "misconceptions of Islam," he should be working in the Islamic community to root out the assumptions that lead to honor killing. But you'll notice that he says nothing about that.
"It's reprehensible," he said of honor killings. "It's wrong."Ramey pointed out that a verse in the Koran specifically states that there is no compulsion in religion, meaning that people can not be compelled or coerced into being Muslim or adhering to a certain set of rules.
"People have to obey or adhere to Islam ... according to the dictates of their own conscience," he said.
Yet despite the fact that Koran 2:256 -- "There is no compulsion in religion" -- is in the Koran, honor killing is broadly tolerated in the Islamic world. No one, of course, dares to confront the root of the problem by pointing out such inconvenient truths as the fact that a manual of Islamic law certified by Al-Azhar as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy says that "retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right." However, "not subject to retaliation" is "a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring." ('Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2).
In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law. In accord with this, in 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that "Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values."
Then this ABC story drags in Rifqa Bary:
Honor Killings Unfairly Cast Negative Light on IslamThe notion of an honor killing -- Muslim men murdering female relatives for dishonoring the family by violating Islamic tenets -- made the news over the summer when 17-year-old Rifqa Bary ran away from her parents in Ohio and turned up in the Florida home of Christian pastors Blake and Beverly Lorenz. Rafqa Barry [sic] claimed that her Muslim father had threatened to kill her for converting to Christianity.
Rifqa made tearful television appearance, crying on the Lorenzes shoulders, describing how she had to sneak around to attend church.
"They have to kill me because I'm a Christian. It's an honor [killing]. If they love me more than God, then they have to kill me," she told ABC's Orlando affiliate WFTV last month.
Blake Lorenz pointed to other honor killings, including the January 2008 murders of two Texas sisters who were believed to have been murdered by their Muslim father in a religion-fueld [sic] rage.
But Rifqa's father, Mohamed Bary, denied the accusation and said that while he preferred his daughter be a Muslim, she was free to practice whatever religion she chose.
"I don't believe my daughter would say this," Bary told "Good Morning America." "She's completely being coached -- I mean trained, influenced by these people. It's so sad."
An assertion without evidence, contradicted by the fact that she was a Christian for several years before she met those who allegedly coached her.
A Florida judge this month said he planned to send Rifqa back to Ohio after determining there was no evidence that her life was in danger.
See here for the facts.
Ramey said it's expected that incidents such as these will cause some backlash against the Muslim community, especially among Americans who have become fearful of Islam in the years since the war on terror and conflicts in places like Somalia.But they can also open a door for discussion and questions so the community can understand that Islam is not a violent religion.
"It's certainly not part of the religion," he said," to run people down with vehicles."
That is merely a statement about the manner of killing, not about the killing itself.
There is no compulsion in brain death by one's own hand.
Ibrahim Ramey said it's expected that incidents such as these will cause some backlash against the Muslim community, especially among Americans who have become fearful of Islam in the years since the war on terror and conflicts in places like Somalia.
Again with the 'backlash' which rarely materializes and more often than not has to be concocted by mosque regulars.
And as for 'Americans who have become fearful of Islam', get over yourselves, moslems. It's not fear you see, although that's what you're trying to elicit. It's revulsion at the insidious way islam and its 7th Century practices is trying to infect the U.S.
It's islamomisia, not islamophobia, stupid!
"It occured because her not following traditional family values. We've been told that by everybody," Tellef said.
Here the police are repeating the apparent motive, as they've been told by "everybody," as though it were true, legitimate, and justified. I hope the police dig a bit deeper.
Most importantly they need to make it clear that regardless of the apparent provocation, attempted murder is not acceptable. Here it sounds a though the police are giving credence to the reasons offered.
Also, the phrase "traditional family values" cannot be taken at face value. We need to ask: What traditions? What family? What values?
"The family were all American citizens, though Tallef believes the parents were born in Iraq."
If the father objects to his daughter's westernization then what is he doing here in the first place? He should have kept his family in Iraq.
"Typical denial and deception."
Indeed, Robert!
Such a problem for Muslim male cowards...gotta promote da' jihad here but can't control their daughters when they do.
Not a good reflection on Muslim males.
In the context of Islam, "traditional" is simply a synonym (or euphemism) for "retrograde."
I have a twenty-year-old daughter. There is nothing she could possibly do that would justify ME running her over. I happen to love my daughter.
That's the difference between myself and some islamomaniac.
But! The majority of the planet is expected to understand this "cultural" act?
WTF? It's going to happen HERE more and more.
An outlet like ABC News regularly uses the term "conservative" when it should use "reactionary" and, as well, speaks of "traditional family values" when it should be talking about "retrograde, primitive values." Don't count on ABC comprehending any of this anytime soon, if ever. Most Western news outlets suffer from hubris and ignorance of the highest degree and I see nothing in the foreseeable future which will alter these errors. If there is a viable competitor to the foolhardiness found in Western universities these days, it's the Western media. Just goes to show any person of sense that Western Civilization is presently faced with a double enemy------Islam and useful idiots.
Of course it's not part of the religion to run people down
with vehicles.Motorised vehicles weren't around when the qu'ran was written,otherwise that method might have been
one of the methods stipulated.
Wait, so she wanted to marry another Muslim guy, her dad ran her down and he doesn't have a beard, yet Bobby and Pamela are barking up the same tree yet again.
Ding * Ding * Ding! ...we have a winner!
DustanH proves Robert's point...
"Typical denial and deception."
Denial, deception ...what is Islam without it's dysfunctional group of followers there to prop it up. Ho-hum.
Did you actually read this article? Is ABC News part of Jihad Watch or Atlas Shrugged? Did you miss the part about Noor Faleh Almaleki turning down an arranged marriage? You might have also missed the part about Noor no longer living with her father, but with her boyfriend's mother. Was there a reason for that perhaps? Once again, you might try reading an article before commenting, if you want to be taken seriously. One woman might die and another one is quite injured. Do you have a pint of compassion for either of them?
It comes in pints?
The Florida judge _never_ said that he had determined that there was no threat to Rifqa's life. Never. That is such incredibly shoddy reporting. The Florida judge is willing to cede jurisdiction to Ohio because he has decided Ohio has a better claim to jurisdiction now that the parents filed a case there. However, he is delaying sending Rifqa back until her parents produce the immigration papers he told them to produce months ago and on which they have stonewalled. If one is to draw any inference about what he thinks, one could more justly infer that he is concerned that if they are here illegally she will be deported with them to Sri Lanka, and he wants to prevent that if he can.
And can you believe the way this news story starts with a father who actually ran down his daughter with a car and somehow uses that as an opportunity to assure us that Rifqa _isn't_ in danger? What kind of bizarre story is that?
"despite the fact that Koran 2:256 -- "There is no compulsion in religion" -- is in the Koran, honor killing is broadly tolerated in the Islamic world."
2.256 means two things.
For Muslims, it means that no one cannot compel inner belief, but Muslims, rulers and people alike, can compel from any wavering Muslims all the outward and visible signs of complete adherence to Islam.
For non-Muslims, who are allowed only three choices according to those who follow the true-blue rules of Islam: immediate conversion to Islam, death, or in the case only of those who are called the ahl al-kitab, the People of the Book (that is, Christians and Jews), continued existence, but as dhimmis, subject to such onerous social and economic and political disabilities as to lead many, over time, to convert to Islam -- compelled to do so, that is, in order to escape those burdens, that fate.
Article: "Ramey pointed out that a verse in the Koran specifically states [1] that there is no compulsion in religion, meaning that people can not be compelled or coerced into being Muslim or adhering to a certain set of rules.[2]"
[1] "Specifically states" what is essentially an ambiguous quote that was perhaps originally intended as propaganda and to be used as propaganda. Muhammad boasted that he had been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and this "no compulsion" apologist gem is apparently one such example. Muhammad cited the phrase "there is no compulsion in religion" in numerous different contexts according to the Hadith and Sira, not the least of which was in his pre-invasion invitation/threat to the Khaybar Jews that they embrace Islam--or else. Somehow to Muhammad there was no troubling inconsistency (or no trouble with the inconsistency) between saying "no compulsion in religion" while implementing policies of conquering the infidels in the name of Islam, compelling them to convert or die (Quran 9:5) or convert, accept the dhimma subjugation, or die (9:29), taking slave girls captive and having sex with them (4:3, 4:24, 33:50-52, etc), and so on. The man quoted as saying "no compulsion in religion" also reportedly called his jihadist companions the "best of peoples" because they drag the infidels to Paradise in chains. The Hadith and Sira contain numerous instances of Muhammad and his companions forcing individuals and whole groups to convert to Islam under the threat of death.
The Quran also talks a great deal about the hypocrites. If there is no compulsion/coercion in Islam, then why are there "hypocrites"?
[2] To suggest that the Quran itself doesn't have anything to say about following rules (i.e., policies, and examples, of compulsion in religion) is misleading and absurd. Verse 5:38 clearly calls for Muslims to cut off the hand of the thief. The Hadith elaborate that, for each theft, an additional limb is cut off, until the thief no longer has any limbs and must be killed (if not yet dead). The Quran says that those who "do not judge by what Allah has revealed" are "evil-livers," "wrong-doers," and "disbelievers" (5:44-49). Jihad warfare is "prescribed" for Muslims, "whether they like it or not" (2:216). Islam will reign victorious over all religions, no matter how much the non-Muslims dislike this imposition (9:32-33). Verse 2:257, immediately after the "no compulsion" verse, shows one of the many important limits, in "small print" if you will, constraining that nice-seeming and usefully confusing propaganda about "no compulsion," i.e., that people must accept and adhere to Islam or they will be punished in hell-fire for eternity. Hence, "no compulsion" can't mean "no penalties"--unless we are dealing with a blatant contradiction. The Quran says that those who reject Muhammad's revelations are evil (7:177), and, after Muhammad, no other religion than Islam will be accepted (3:85).
Article: "People have to obey or adhere to Islam ... according to the dictates of their own conscience," he said.
Muhammad, Abu Bakr, Ali, Bin Laden, Qaradawi, Tantawi, al-Sistani, et al., would agree; they each follow(ed) Islam according to their own conscience. Their own conscience dictated that Islam, or Islamic rule, needs to be forced onto others.
Hi Hugh,
I’ve been compiling a list of the counter arguments I know will come up as our Leftard-fueled INT-brief Islamic (ROP diatribe) handler will try to sell islam as a relativistic ideology of peace and that all crimes against humanity committed in its’ name are wrong, and you’re short insights, such as this one (which I know I’ve read over and over again here at JW, but never bothered to take stock because I didn’t think I’d need to vocally essay in rebuttal): conversion, death or life as al-kitab (Jizya and life as a dhimmi).
Thanks. Plenty of terms have been stocking up to harangue as truths to be denied by what I’m certain will be an interesting brief. I can’t wait for the Q & A after the bill of goods gets sold.
Throughout the last 4 weeks, our course has had personnel attending from all over Canada, and I wasn’t surprised to hear the easily quipped leftist ideological superiority over American statements by my co-workers. But when challenged on how this treaty holds on the ROP, their relativistic arguments quickly faded to blank stares. The truth is always difficult to deal with, more so when you believe that a system of perceived (socialist) intolerance (the US) is inferior, only to discover that your own system of government has sold you a lie about the most popular intolerant belief system in the past two millennia (I’m really talking about the Canadian education system here, but feel free to apply this to your own reality if it applies.).
We Canadians might be quick to make jest of the short comings of the US republic for certain things we take for granted, such as health care, but I’ve noticed my countrymen are very afflicted with the lie that questioning any ideology is equal to racism. I’m not saying US citizens are any more educated on this subject, I just expected that the persons my government would fund for out-of-country training would be more aware of the global reality. If my cross section resounds true, out of 12, 2 agree (me included), 1 is sitting on the fence, 2 will argue against, and the rest don’t care. Sound about right?
Only in Delaware, the first state of Independence and Liberty would motorcyclists be allowed to ride without helmets. This says a lot about the right to wag the middle finger to what the state tries to enforce over the common man because it is the “state.” If only this same exuberant exercise of rights were applied to fight the encroaching assault on the freedom of speech in respects to religious insensitivity by the Obama administration in support of the fake UN (in)Human Rights.
Yes Hugh, keep ‘em coming. The sound bites are necessary and fill our mags with ammo to be fired off in response to the silent acquiescing soma suppressed public chants which denounce questions about islam as intolerance, all the while allowing the intolerance of islam to creep its’ tentacles further throughout the common taxpaying republic scrub.
Fox Cable's Bill Oreilly addressed this attack by the father of his adult daughter this evening with Laura Ingraham. They did not mix words on this growing problem in America that the likes of Michael Kruse felt compelled to dismiss in his ignorant articles on the rifqa Bary case.
Laura Ingraham was quick to point out that honor killings where a growing and serious problem in America as she reflected on how often it occurs in Jordan --Kudos to Laura.
Try reading the article before commenting. If that is all that you got out of it, you might as well repeat elementary school. Also, I did not know that Jihad Watch and Atlas Shrugged owned ABC News.
''Muslim American Society's Freedom Foundation''
This is a joke right? An oxymoronic gag of some sort?
How can those who sole raison d'etre and whose aspirations extend no further than being the 'Slaves of Allah' have any notion of what 'freedom' entails? Whether it be for themselves or the wish to impose their idiotic creed on others by force or fraud. A creed whose only absolute wish is to be 'enslaved' by an angry God and as such have otherwise abnegated their personal freedom (an by dint the responsibility for their actions) in the 'cause' of some imagined deity?
"Police in Arizona are hunting for an Iraqi-American father who they say ran over his daughter with his car to punish her for becoming "too Westernized" and rebuffing the conservative ways he valued.
Memo to ABC News: "conservatives" don't generally run over their daughters with their cars for any reason at all."
RS, I know what you mean to say, but it seems pretty clear the reporter was referring to the kind of conservativatism symbolized by extreme parental control of daughters and the arranged marriages one finds in Iraq, as opposed to liberalism as it's understood here.
As Islam is no bastion of liberalism, it is laughable when Western liberals--like Maddow, for example--assign the 'conservative' label to those who criticize or malign Islam.
Salam,
There has been much discussion on “The Hadith and Sira contain numerous instances of Muhammad and his companions forcing individuals and whole groups to convert to Islam under the threat of death by the sword”.
I have a real problem with you on this, as yours is a wholly simplistic view.
Suppose someone puts a sword to your neck and says “convert or die!” In order to save themselves then and there they recite the sahada and convert. They MAY say it in trembling voice and get it wrong, they may pronounce it right or wrong…but do they MEAN it? Do they start to believe in Allah SWT there and then; like a light switch?
I mean think about it, if you have been an unbeliever all your life, will you actually become muslim on the spot? will Muhammad SAW REALLY become the messenger of God there and then, will you believe in the Hijra?
Folks, you only become something if you believe it from the heart, and have FAITH in the words.
This is like a cancer patient on the verge of death…and someone puts a sword to their neck and forces them to say “There is nothing wrong with me!”….does that mean that they are cured….of course not…it’s stupid …right…RIGHT!
Folks, this “conversion by the sword” is total BS. I believe conversions happened over the centauries because the kuffar envisaged a better way of life for them, a superior way, they wanted to be 1st class citizens and not Dhimi class, they saw Allah SWT as a stronger god than Jesus ..who had abandoned them for centauries…what was the point of beating a dead horse or praying to an image of a cruxified man who himself was in such pain himself.
You the kuffar; do not face up to the reality that conversion by the sword is virtually impossible. Conversion happens with belief, for example…As a God, Allah SWT is superior than Jesus pbuh….finally they believed that as fact…but you need time for that…years maybe….and cannot be forced.
Egypt, Sudan, Somalia, and now Turkey go the way of Islam not by the sword…but by kuffar CHOOSING to do so…over time...so yes I believe implicitly the Quanar’s verse that “there is no compulsion in Religion”….because it’s true.
With Love and Peace
Yom
"I have a real problem with you on this, as yours is a wholly simplistic view" --Yom
It's not my view.
Yom_al_Jumba sez:
"
Suppose someone puts a sword to your neck and says “convert or die!” In order to save themselves then and there they recite the sahada and convert. They MAY say it in trembling voice and get it wrong, they may pronounce it right or wrong…but do they MEAN it? Do they start to believe in Allah SWT there and then; like a light switch?"
Once you are "converted" to Islam by whatever means voluntarily or unvoluntarily, you are considered to be a Muslim and you will be killed should you try to return back to your previous religion, you could be killed if you are not "Muslim enough", you could be killed if you try to save your friends from being "converted", you will be killed if you try to report the activities of those "peaceful" Muslims.....and of course you would be killed in your "conversion" should you refuse....
The whole point of forced "conversions" is to give Muslims more ways to kill you....increasing the Muslim fold is a secondary matter....
"I believe conversions happened over the centauries because the kuffar envisaged a better way of life for them, a superior way, they wanted to be 1st class citizens and not Dhimi class,"--Yom
Ergo, Yom believes in conversion by coercion.
"[...]they saw Allah SWT as a stronger god than Jesus [...]"--Yom
Yom believes in the appeal to force and that this convinces people to believe in one god versus another.
Even Iblis (Satan), according to the Quran, did not buy into Allah's appeal to force:
38:72-76. "So when I have made him complete and breathed into him of My spirit, then fall down making obeisance to him. And the angels did obeisance, all of them, But not Iblis: he was proud and he was one of the unbelievers.* He said: O Iblis! what prevented you that you should do obeisance to him whom I created with My two hands? Are you proud or are you of the exalted ones? He said: I am better than he; Thou hast created me of fire, and him Thou didst create of dust."
*alkafireena
How did Iblis become a "disbeliever"? Given that he is talking with Allah in this story, it cannot be said that he lacks a belief in the existence of Allah. Instead, Iblis is called a disbeliever by Allah because Iblis refused to obey Allah, refused to prostrate himself in submission to one of Allah's creations.
"Converting" to Islam means, first and foremost, submission. It means obedience to a system. After the initial submission to Islam, belief in Allah's existence may or may not come later, depending on whether or not Allah wills it.
49:14-17: "The wandering Arabs say: We believe. Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Ye believe not, but rather say 'We submit,' for the faith hath not yet entered into your hearts. Yet, if ye obey Allah and His messenger, He will not withhold from you aught of (the reward of) your deeds. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. The (true) believers are those only who believe in Allah and His messenger and afterward doubt not, but strive with their wealth and their lives for the cause of Allah. Such are the sincere. Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Would ye teach Allah your religion, when Allah knoweth all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth, and Allah is Aware of all things? They make it a favour unto thee (Muhammad) that they have surrendered (unto Him). Say: Deem not your Surrender a favour unto me; but Allah doth confer a favour on you, inasmuch as He hath led you to the Faith, if ye are earnest."
Emphases added.
So very kind of Yom to confirm what we already know here at JW:
"Conversion happens with belief, for example…As a God, Allah SWT is superior than Jesus pbuh..."
Thanks so very much, Yom, for confirming that allah was just 'a' god, one of the 360 rock idols in the pantheon of Mecca.
I've had my laugh for the day.
Right on, Boneshack! ...yeah, Yom would have us believe that allah is the One true God; when in fact, Yom and allah are both a couple of conniving tricksters.
Worse still, allah is actually the devil masquerading as god? It seems so, especially when we take into consideration that the Qur'an boasts that allah is the best deceiver, schemer, trickster, conniver and cheat of them all! ... and that he perverts, misguides and corrupts people in the same way that satan does.
Champ,
You're absolutely correct in that analysis! It just completely baffles me why in the world anyone with an IQ larger than his/her/its shoe size would believe ANYTHING in the KKKorant.
Good G-d, there's holes in those stories big enough to drive a Mack truck through. Jeez!
(P.S. Nice fam pix on FB.)
Aw, thanks, Boneshack! :->
'Suppose someone puts a sword to your neck and says “convert or die!” In order to save themselves then and there they recite the sahada and convert. They MAY say it in trembling voice and get it wrong, they may pronounce it right or wrong…but do they MEAN it? Do they start to believe in Allah SWT there and then; like a light switch?'
What difference does this make? Either way, it's death sentence.
'They wanted to be 1st class citizens and not Dhimi class, they saw Allah SWT as a stronger god than Jesus ..who had abandoned them for centauries…what was the point of beating a dead horse or praying to an image of a cruxified man who himself was in such pain himself.'
'As a God, Allah SWT is superior than Jesus pbuh…'
Does this mean that you're willing to strap on the theological gloves and go a few rounds over the Incarnation?
Be prepared: Christ is nowhere near as capricious as Allah :)