Faleh Hassan Almaleki is clearly a Misunderstander of Islam, and did not get the memo about how Islam condemns and forbids honor killing.
An update on this story. "Man charged with murder in 'honor killing': Almaleki accused of running over daughter," by Dustin Gardiner for The Arizona Republic, December 22 :
An Iraqi immigrant accused of slaying his daughter in an "honor killing" has been charged with first-degree murder and could face the death penalty, Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas said Monday.Faleh Hassan Almaleki, 48, of Glendale, is accused of using his Jeep Cherokee to run over his daughter, 20-year-old Noor Almaleki, and another woman in a Peoria parking lot on Oct. 20. His daughter died of her injuries.
Almaleki was reportedly furious with his daughter for becoming "too Westernized," police said.
Prosecutors have labeled Noor Almaleki's death an "honor killing," saying the elder Almaleki killed his daughter because she dishonored the family by not following traditional Iraqi or Muslim values.
She reportedly married a man in Iraq and returned to Arizona to live with a boyfriend and his mother in Surprise.
Thomas announced Almaleki was also being charged with attempted first-degree murder in the attack on his daughter's friend, Amal Khalaf, 43. Khalaf is the boyfriend's mother and is expected to recover from her injuries, police said....
"By his own admission, this was an intentional act, and the reason was that his daughter had brought shame on him and his family," Low said. "This was an attempt at an honor killing."...
Why doesn't this crime have the pathetic 'Hate Crime' epithet plastered all over it? If it were an American running over a poor immigrant it certainly would.
At last the 'Honor Killing' will enter the MSM lexicon and we'll see the floodgates open as more are reported for what they really are and not just cultural misunderstandings and 'mere' murders.
Has it been definitely established that he is a Muslim? Link?
But but- Islam is a religion of peace!
It shows such great respect to women! It's so cultured!
This man was no Muslim, why, his very actions insult Islam! That's what Obama would say if he read this!
Robert you fat hypocritcal, sanctimonious wormlike meek, where is the Quranic verse to link honour killings to Islam?
Pretty successful "attempt" I'd say. At what point does it stop being an attempt?
Link:
"A 10-day manhunt ended when police arrested an Iraqi immigrant accused of running over his 20-year-old daughter to punish her for becoming "too Westernized" and rebuffing the conservative ways he valued."
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/US/muslim-father-arrested-running-westernized-daughter/story?id=8956887
========================
Iraqi immigrant
Daughter's name was Noor (an Islamic/Arabic name meaning light.)
Christians don't kill their children.
jowen : ..where is the Quranic verse to link honour killings to Islam?
With the power and influence of islam in the world where are the moslems decrying the honor killings that so many moslems commit?
Logic. Confusing theists since day one.
Jowen should know that the inbred bedouin savage Arabian custom of doing everything and anything in one's power to reduce the fertility of rival tribes, through the culling of their females, is just another example of those barbaric bedouin practices being turned into another mahoundian "virtue" to be followed by those foolish enough to see anything remotely religious or divine in such practices.
And, so long as there are fools falling for this big fat inbred bedouin savage scam, young women like Noor Almaleki will continue to be victims of such pointless primitive tribal nonsense.
She reportedly married a man in Iraq and returned to Arizona to live with a boyfriend and his mother in Surprise.
.................
Repulsive, misleading phrasing from the Arizona Republic. The above makes it sound as though Noor Almaleki was fickle and possibly slutty—there is no mention in the above article that Noor's "marriage" in Iraq was *forced*.
The man in Surprise was the one she loved.
jowen,
Please refute all ahadith and sunnah. Please forswear these bodies of work as you seem to think that only the quran can drive Muslim behavior.
I await your formal forswearing of these traditions...can't wait to see it in virtual print!
"Honor killing"
A degree, and now also a murder, honoris causa. What a lexicon we apparently must learn to use.
A while ago, someone on this forum suggested that we non-Muslims should refer to murders of this kind as 'pride murders'.
To be quite accurate, it ought to be called "Mohammedan ritual human sacrifice of female kin", but that's a bit too long and complicated to ever make it into the newspapers.
'Pride murder', or perhaps, 'Mohammedan pride murder', will have to do.
http://law.jrank.org/pages/667/Comparative-Criminal-Law-Enforcement-Islam-Homicide-bodily-harm-jinayat.html
Comparative Criminal Law and Enforcement: Islam - Homicide And Bodily Harm ( Jinayat)
There is no culpability if a man kills his wife, daughter, or sister as well as her lover if he discovers them in an act of unlawful intercourse, and none, except in the Maliki school, for harm or death inflicted with the consent of the victim.
A classical manual of Islamic Sacred Law by Ahmad Ibn Naqib Al Misri (D. 769/1368), with the English text, commentary and appendices translated by Noah Ha Mim Keller.
*1*BOOK O: JUSTICE
@O1.1
Retaliation is obligatory (A: if the person entitled wishes to take it (dis: o3.8) against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right. (O: Intentionally is a first restriction and excludes killing someone through an honest mistake, while purely excludes a mistake made in a deliberate injury (def: o2.3), and without right excludes cases of justifiable homicide such as lawful retaliation.)
@O1.2
The following are not subject to retaliation:
-1- a child or insane person, under any circumstances (O: whether Muslim or non-Muslim.
The ruling for a person intermitently insane is that he is considered as a sane person when in his right mind, and as if someone continously insane when in an interval of insanity. If someone against whom retaliation is obligatory subsequently becomes insane, the full penalty is nevertheless exacted. A homicide committed by someone who is drunk is (A: considered the same as that of a sane person,) like his pronouncing divorce (dis: n1.2) );
-2- a Muslim for killing a non-Muslim;
-3- a Jewish or Christian subject of the Islamic state for killing an apostate from Islam (O: because a subject of the state is under its protection, while killing an apostate from Islam is without consequences);
-4- a father or mother (or their fathers of mothers) fir killing their offspring, or offspring's offspring;
-5- nor is retaliation permissible to a descendant for (A: his ancestor's) killing someone whose death would otherwise entitle the descendant to retaliate, such as when his father kills his mother.
Has it ever occurred to you that your point might be better made without having a tantrum? Does calling someone fat clinch arguments for you? You do sound like a child in an adult's body. Also, you do seem to be blissfuly unconcerned that a woman was killed and another one seriously injured by Faleh Hassan Almaleki Mr. Spencer is not sanctimonious but rather has a concern for the well-being of people, rather than defending an ideology at all costs. You really are no different than the communists and fascists of yore.
Taqqiya by a Muslim is deceit in all its true form to defeat the mind, soul, and body of the unbeliever (Kafir) to establish the hegemony of Islam over the dar-ul-harb (non-islamic world).
It starts with denial of facts, pleading victim hood, out and out lying, and graduates to criminal activities ranging from rape, prostitution, street riots and property damage, murder, mayhem and eventually Muslims secede territory from the infidels to root Muslim "statehood" with sharia as law of the land to carry out 7th century barbaric customs such as auctioning women, stoning people to death and beheadings, the usual run of the mill Islamic "republic". It all starts with the routine practice of lying and deceit.
How about "False Pride Murder"? -- that would be FPM.
It makes dealing with this phenomenon simpler -- less explaining, less justification for it.
Just as FGM neatly summarizes the horror of female genital mutilation, we could use FPM as a label to categorize this practice of killing one's female family members.
It's not "honor" but "false pride" that should be emphasized, just as by the use of FGM, it's "mutilation," not "alteration," that is emphasized.
DDA,
Didn't someone, a couple of years ago, coin the term "daughter slaughter"? I've always liked that one. It's brutal, uncomplicated, and sums up these situations rather well.
Let me get this right,, Animals will kill their young under some circumstances...Hmmm muslims kill their young..does this mean muslims are animals..I wonder..
SHARIA LAW imposes second class status on women The shariah code mandates the complete authority of men over women, including the control of their movement, education, marital options, clothing, bodies, place of residence and all other aspects of their existence. Further, it calls for the beating, punishment, and murder of women who don’t comply with shariah requirements. The demand for women to fully comply with Ird and Zina under sharia is the way women are controlled in the Muslim world.
The practice of honor killings is a pathology that has formed in numerous Islamic tribes over centuries because of the Quran and sharia law that treats women like cattle in its most fundamental form.
The United nations estimates conservatively that over 5000 women are murdered in the name of honor killings every year. In Muslim countries those who commit these hideous crimes are viewed as heroes by other Muslim Men. As an example there where nearly 60 honor killings documented in Instanbul, Turkey alone in 2007.
But one still wonders if the reporters that are trotted out to report on Rifqa Bary from Orlando to Ohio ever take even a hour or so to examine this ugly practice before they start reporting from the lame street media?
It is interesting to note that now days one has so much more information to look at because of the internet. And to think ,not to long ago we trusted everything that was in print,on the TV,and the radio.
If muslims don't want their children to become too "westernized" they should not bring them to the West.
When this case goes to trial, the judge should ask this muslim savage why he voluntarily emigrated to America if he despises Western culture. He should ask the primitive, homicidal barbarian to explain the logic of moving his family to a much more appealing country and culture and then demanding that his daughter live like she was still in her native islamic hellhole. That's like waving a lollipop in front of a child and telling the child he can look at it but he can't have it. I would love to hear his answers just to satisfy my curiosity.
Many muslim girls are slipping through the invisible and real fences that muslims have erected in the West to keep them subjugated. They see their brothers running wild, going out with infidel girls, drinking, smoking pot, and having a great time, all of which are forgivable for muslim males. A glimpse of the exciting world beyond their prisons in islamic compounds is too tempting to resist and when they discover what is out there, they run as fast as they can from their miserable lives as slaves and chattel. And who can blame them? They shouldn't have to live in fear of being murdered by their father, brother, uncle, or the henchmen from the mosque. God Bless Rifqa Bary.
Agreed.
And if all kafir societies let it be made clear that such defectors were more than welcome, and that they (non-Muslim societie) would be ruthlessly confident about enforcing and defending their woman-friendly laws and customs, there would be *more* Muslim girls voting with their feet.
I recall, vividly, a line from a chronicle from the Crusader kingdoms. It spoke of the way in which the young men of the Latin kingdoms were finding local wives - mostly, women from the indigenous formerly-dhimmi Christian communities, but, also, (I quote) "Saracens who have received the grace of baptism".
This suggests to me the Rifqa Barys and Hannah Shahs of the 11th and 12th centuries, catching sight of the handsome Frank on his horse with a strong right arm to protect his wife, observing quietly that the Christian women (think of the legends of King Richard's wife) had a good deal more marital security (NO polygyny! Bishops thundering imprecations against concubinage, philandering, and casual divorce!), deciding, 'I want a bit of that!' (like Nonie Darwish watching the film footage of a Christian wedding, as a teenager, and being reduced to tears by what she was seeing), and sneaking away across the lines. Then baptism, and a Christian marriage to a man who would be strongly encouraged by his society to be faithful, and for whom there was no such thing as a 'talaq talaq talaq' easy divorce; but, too, a man who would be well able to thump her male relatives if they came after her to punish her for apostasy or for marrying an Infidel.
It is not historical fact, but it is nevertheless telling that there is a legend that Thomas a Becket was the son of a formerly-Muslim woman who fell in love with a Christian Knight and followed him home from the Crusades.
'Hannah Shah' in the UK left her abusive Muslim family and then, Islam itself ; and then, after having done so, espied a handsome young Anglican Christian Englishman while she and he were attending a Christmas Midnight Mass; sparks flew, and she is now happily married.
Let's pray for Rifqa's liberation; and pray, too, that the supreme matchmaker has, in due time, a fine young American husband lined up for her, one who is not only a strong Christian to support her in her new faith, but also has a strong right arm, a brace of good dogs, and a double-barrelled shotgun for use in case any vengeful Mohammedan hitmen come calling.
In London a terrified muslim girl repeatedly went to the police to plead with them to protect her from her family. They did nothing of course, for fear of disrupting an illusory 'community cohesion'. Her body was discovered sometime later in a suitcase.
And only recently a turkish muslim was convicted of killing his daughter because she was seeing a non sunni muslim. Her mother claimed she didn't know anything about it.
These atrocities ought to be referred to as honour 'murders' and not the morally neutral and culturally mitigating 'killings', but again, it is cravenly feared that this would cause 'offence'.
In London a terrified muslim girl repeatedly went to the police to plead with them to protect her from her family. They did nothing of course, for fear of disrupting an illusory 'community cohesion'. Her body was discovered sometime later in a suitcase.
And only recently a turkish muslim was convicted of killing his daughter because she was seeing a non sunni muslim. Her mother claimed she didn't know anything about it.
These atrocities ought to be referred to as honour 'murders' and not the morally neutral and culturally mitigating 'killings', but again, it is cravenly feared that this would cause 'offence'.