Because she was dating a Hindu man. Islamic law forbids a Muslim woman to marry a non-Muslim man. An update on this story: "Harry Potter actress pleads with police to drop charges against father and brother who 'threatened to kill her,'" from the Daily Mail, July 3 (thanks to Annie Oakley):
A Harry Potter actress whose father and brother are accused of threatening to kill her has pleaded with the courts to drop the charges.Afshan Azad, 22, who has appeared in four of the blockbuster movies as Padma Patil, doesn't want to see her family members locked up as a result of an incident at her home in Manchester.
Her father Abdul Azad, 54, and brother Ashraf Azad, 28, both of Longsight in Manchester, allegedly made a threat against Afshan's life during a bust-up about her boyfriend.
Note that the oft-dhimmi Daily Mail doesn't spell out what the trouble was with her boyfriend.
Ashraf Azad is also accused of assaulting his sister causing her actual bodily harm.John Wolfson, lawyer for the accused, claimed yesterday that Miss Azad doesn't want the case to proceed.
'The actress has tried on three occasions to retract her statement and has pleaded with the Crown Posecution Service not to proceed with the matter,' he said.
'This is a desperately sad situation. She never wanted her father or brother locked up.'
The pair have already spent five weeks behind bars on remand but were bailed this week on condition they do not contact the actress at her new home in London.
As part of their bail conditions, they have also to abide by an 11pm to 6am curfew or contact an unnamed man.
Miss Azad lived with her father, mother Nilofar and her three brothers.
Speaking at the family's semi-detached home at the time, her brother Ashraf, a customer services adviser, said: 'We are going to get trouble from the community now. It is bad news for our safety, her safety.
'My younger brother is going to get harassed at college. All our family is going to be harassed by the community because of this....
Maybe she believes her family members deserve another shot at succeeding in their effort to kill her, huh?
You never know how far mahoundianism can go in damaging one's brains and senses.
All our family is going to be harassed by the community because of this....
The sick thing in their worry about the 'community' reaction is not that they tried to murder their daughter, it's that they botched the job.
'We are going to get trouble from the community now. It is bad news for our safety, her safety.
'My younger brother is going to get harassed at college. All our family is going to be harassed by the community because of this....
The 'community' does not tolerate failure...The cat is already out of the bag...Humpty Dumpty has fallen, and broken, and Afshan can't put it back together again with a retraction...Maybe she does not like the idea of her father/brother rotting away in a kufr prison, but that won't save her life, her Father/brother may try to finish the job, or the 'community' might do it for them...Either way, if she has any cash not stolen by her parents, she should relocate in some undisclosed secure location...
''This is a desperately sad situation'' said John Wolfson the lawyer speaking on her behalf. Indeed it is Mr John Wolfson, and when you've cashed the cheque for 'services rendered', and before you spend a foolish shilling of the proceeds, perhaps you should go back to school here at JWatch.
'This is a desperately sad situation. She never wanted her father or brother locked up.'
So let them go. And don't call the law the next time you are threatened (or worse) by family members. You can't have it both ways. No one can help someone who doesn't want to be helped.
PERCENTAGE OF HONOR KILLINGS DONE BY MUSLIMS
According to the article "Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings," published in the Middle East Forum, Muslims do 91 percent of honor killings worldwide and 96 percent of honor killings in Europe. Those percentages can be found five paragraphs below the heading "Methodology."
According to Encylopedia Brittanica, Al-Azhar University is the "chief center of Islamic and Arabic learning in the world..." Robert Spencer wrote that
That may be why 91% of honor killings worldwide, and 96% of European honor killings, are done by Muslims.
It shouldn't matter what she wants. This was a criminal offense, not a civil one.
perhaps this young women should then be sent to the land of her ancestors and she can witness where women have no choice and or law behind her. she is a muslim in name only and needs to realize how lucky she is to live in the West.
'We are going to get trouble from the community now...All our family is going to be harassed by the community because of this....'
Maybe someone should do something about the community.
Unfortunately, she'll probably be dead within the week.
"Afshan Azad, 22, who has appeared in four of the blockbuster movies as Padma Patil, doesn't want to see her family members locked up as a result of an incident at her home in Manchester."
You stupid idiot. As Isabella said:
"Unfortunately, she'll probably be dead within the week."
Then whatever pity I had for her is gone.
(Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I have zero patience for people who protect their abusers.)
poor girl ........you are muslim ...........suffering ..is your fate ...............
from Wikipedia: When asked about the politics and message in Harry Potter, J.K. Rowling explained, "I wanted Harry to leave our world and find exactly the same problems in the wizarding world. So you have the intent to impose a hierarchy, you have bigotry, and this notion of purity, which is this great fallacy, but it crops up all over the world. People like to think themselves superior and that if they can pride themselves in nothing else they can pride themselves on perceived purity. So yeah that follows a parallel [to Nazism]"
'We are going to get trouble from the community now...All our family is going to be harassed by the community because of this....'
This is a little vague. It means different things to different people. of course what these SOB's really mean is that their apostizing shameful daughter and sister is in company of a lowly hindu, and they were not succesful in cleansing their honour. So this statment doesn not mean that they were in jail or that they tried to kill her.
It's bad news that they were let out. They should be prosecuted to the full extent of "english" law.
There is one, and only one, possible good that may come of this.
There are *millions* of non-Muslim people all over the world who have read the Harry Potter books and/ or watched the films.
Want to bet just how many of those have had their attention caught by this little episode? And how many of *those*, googling around, idly or perhaps even trying to find out a little more, may have had 'jihadwatch' snag in their google trawl?
We may get a few new readers, ladies and gentlemen.
Be prepared to educate.
And in the interests of further educating possible 'Harry Potter' fans who may be peering over my shoulder even as I write: this is not the first time that the subject of 'Harry Potter' has been discussed at this website.
Three years ago, the mullahs and ayatollahs in Iran decided that the Harry Potter books and films were - you guessed it - and Eevil Zionist Plot to corrupt the hearts and minds of Muslim children.
I give you, ta-daah! - 'Harry Potter, Zionist Agent'. From July 2007:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/07/harry-potter-zionist-agent.html
I recommend the report, and the ensuing discussion, to any 'Harry Potter' fan who may just have googled his or her way in here, and everyone here who may have joined this forum since July 2007 and not yet had time to explore the archives.
Well, of course some Muslims don't like Harry Potter. After all, what's the plot?
1. Harry Potter lays down his life.
2. Harry Potter returns from (near) death.
3. As a result, his friends can't be killed.
4. As a result, the evil one is destroyed.
But even before "Deathly Hallows", some Muslims were complaining that the Christian imagery was too strong. There was a great deal about redeeming blood and sacrificial love even in the first book. It appears, however, that the Azad family didn't recognise this back in 2005, even though Afshan was a starry-eyed Potter fan.
Apparently Afshan has made three attempts to drop the charges against her family - but she hasn't succeeded. What they are accused of doing was a Crown offence, i.e. committed against the whole community. Even when the primary witness for the prosecution retracts her story, the Crown won't necessarily drop the charges. It knows very well that her original version might well prove to be the correct one.
It's possible that she now believes that the threats were made in anger and her family didn't seriously intend to kill her. (She might believe this regardless of whether it is true.) It's also possible that she knows they did mean it, but she still reasons that since she's safe now, she shouldn't put her father and brother to public disgrace.
Unfortunately, she is not necessarily safe now. She is naive if she thinks that appeasing her community will save her life. Some of them (not necessarily her own family) will refuse to be appeased no matter what happens next. Because Afshan is a celebrity, her case is very high-profile and cannot be overlooked.
I hope Afshan Azad will be safe and that her family will be restrained. But there is no easy solution at this point.
In one of the other threads about this story below, commenter DJM noted a salient feature of this sordid affair:
Makes one wonder why the father - if so opposed to having his daughter mix with non-muslims - would allow her to be in the film in the first place.
DJM then conjectured:
I'm not even surprised by this muslim hypocrisy. Her parents let her be in the film, probably encouraging her and welcoming the income, and then attempt to 'punish' her for dishonoring their faith.
The salient feature is the apparent moderation, initially, of the girl's father and brother.
DJM's conjecture is hypothetical. He might be right: It could be simply naked hypocrisy, or it could be what commenter traeh says above in response to DJM, of the father and brother becoming in effect "radicalized" by peer pressure from surrounding Muslims, or it could be the effects of cultural schizophrenia on the brains of the father and brother.
We can conjecture until the cows come home. It could be any one, or combination, or all of these theories, or any number of new ones we can come up with. We can always mix-and-match from among all our hypotheses we have been industriously generating to try to explain away -- or somehow soften the horrible edges of -- the hideously unique and comprehensive fanaticism of Muslims.
The important thing to see here is that what could have been considered to be moderate Muslims -- a father and brother who seemed to have had no problems with their daughter/sister being in a filthy Kafir film -- later turn out to be murderous fanatics following the blueprint of their Islam.
And that's the crucial moral to take from this. Taken judiciously and rationally, it would then lead to a universal suspicion of all Muslims -- including all those who seem to be .... moderate / harmless / Westernized / reformable / "nice".
And from that universal suspicion, then, in the interest of protecting our societies -- for the suspicion does not merely relate to pernicious practices but to the deadliness of attacks on us with WMDs of various flavors (biological, chemical, radioactive, etc.) -- we move rationally to a universal condemnation of all Muslims.
Note: This universal condemnation is not ontological, but pragmatic. It is not intended to declare apodictically that all Muslims are dangerous -- but that all Muslims, practically speaking, given various factors including taqiyya, mountains of data indicating suspect behavior and motives, the complexity of Muslim communities, the horrific potential of the deadliness their ill-controlled fanaticism portends; etc., must be treated as though they were guilty.
What about Afshan Azad herself -- the poor female victim of this symptomatic outburst of the disease of Islam? I would answer with a hypothetical question: What would the eminently rational England, or America, have done with an actress in 1943 who was a German Nazi who for some strange reason continues to support German Nazism even after her German Nazi father and brother had tried to kill her? It's a difficult hypothetical question, because in those rational times, neither England nor America by 1943 would have allowed the situation to get that far in the first place -- i.e., allowing an actress who supports German Nazism to make lots of money in popular English/American cinema. But assuming somehow that she had theretofore slipped through the cracks, I doubt she would be allowed to continue skating along without at the very least her formally abjuring her Nazi Party membership along with a public condemnation of Hitler and a pledge to support the War against her former allegiance.
Of course then the analogy falters at the other end: Azad has no English society or government upon which to rely for rational support of (much less forceful demand for) such a defection from that inimical ideology. Nevertheless, that rationality that would not have countenanced a Nazi actress to continue profiting, in England, from Wartime England's cinema, is the same kind of rationality that refuses to succumb to sentimentalism in our current context.