"I deeply regret that things came down to what they came down to": Muslim TV exec gets 25 years for beheading wife

Thanks for that link, Kaddafi Must Be Destroyed. The author of that article, Greg Sargent, is, of course, self-righteously foolish, all the while I'm certain he thinks himself on the correct side of how Islam should be assessed even though I'm virtually certain he knows next to nothing about this religion, but I will take some comfort in the fact that the Pew Research poll he cited showed that 40% of Americans overall think Islam encourages violence and 42% think it does not.

Ten years ago I doubt that even 10% would have concluded that Islam is full of hateful pathologies and thus indeed encourages violence and so I see progress here. I can't imagine, as the years go on, it will be the case that FEWER Americans will see Islam as inherently violence prone. The only percentage, realistically, that will change is how many don't think Islam is bad news from the getgo. And this percentage has almost no chance of going anywhere but down.

Slowly, sometimes too slowly to be sure, Americans in large numbers are beginning to grasp just how inimical Islam is to liberty and other good things that most Americans cherish. And it should come as no surprise that those who continue to remain clueless about this will, for the most part, be found on the left side of the political spectrum. But even many liberals eventually get around to understanding the nature of things, though it often takes them a hell of a long time to do so since modern liberalism and thinking with a lot of common sense are opposed to one another ordinarily.

Ha. .you sure've got Greg Shmuckface hopping on hot coals there Delenda_Est.

I over endulge my toady torment hobby.

Without the slightest hint of irony, WaPo drones this morning;

Here are the numbers from WaPo:

Pew finds that the only group to think Islam is more likely than other religions to encourage violence are conservative Repubilcans and Tea Partyers. Both groups overwhelmingly endorse this view, with two thirds of each agreeing with it.

By contrast, not even moderate Republicans as a group believe this: 46 percent support this view, while 47 percent oppose it. This view is also opposed by independents (38-44) and the broader public at large (40-42).

These numbers are disconcerting. Given the overpowering abundance of factual evidence that Moslems are the most dangerous people on earth, one wonders what it would take for the masses to regard them as such.

The numbers from Pew above also serve as a metric of just how powerful opinion programming is in the creation and maintenance of fictive realities.

Anybody who believes that Moslems are a no greater threat than to America than Christians, Jews, Hindus etc. is de-coupled from reality.

*** 33:21 ***

Did you see that clip of the federal offical last night? It showed some geeky Ivy League Moron flatly state that he regarded right wing extremism to be a greater domestic threat than "American" Moslems. Worse, he had a goatee on his face.

Is it now that strict constitutionalism = right wing extremism? Aren't constitutions supposed to be strictly adhered to by their very nature? I think so, given that the word root is cons-ti-tute, and in comprise. That's why they call these documents "constitutions."

Moslems have a constitution of their own, it's called the Ko-Ran.

Works for me. Have 'em all get in line.

Miscarriage of justice. He should have gotten death by beheading. "An eye for an eye..." etc.

funny. the judge told him " you left two marriages before and you knew how to do it but...

"25 years for beheading a human being ? What the hell is wrong with our judicial system?"

Very, very wrong. The two evil psychos' who raped and murdered Dr. William Petit's family in Connecticut in 2007 should be taken out to the village square tortured and hung - the same as they did to Dr. Petit's wife and two daughters. They raped his 11-year-old daughter.

Our "justice" system is extremely f'd-up. These two evil bastards get to live, in prison. Disgusting. Shame on you, America "justice" system.

Using your reasoning, we should suspect all Roman Catholics of likely pedophilia.

Roman Catholics are not obligated to jihad...It is not haram for a Muslim man to marry a non Muslim woman...An who reported that he did not pray or fast? Bridges TV, to bridge gaps in cultures is a taqiyya operation, just like Imam Raufs bridge building...Having Jewish friends, if true, does not mean he really regarded them as 'friends', maybe they are just 'useful'...You might be right that this is not about religion, but that is far from an absolute...Sometimes images are deceiving, when you are at war, 'War is deceit'...

"A Chinese kid cut off his friend's head down in Virginia and nobody blamed Confucious or Mao."

Come on, Chris. Did either Confucius or Mao claim to be the "perfect" (head-chopping) man whose actions were to be emulated by all his followers? Is there some epidemic of "Chinese kid" violence out there that we missed? Get real.

"In this case, his religion is irrelevant. Using your reasoning, we should suspect all Roman Catholics of likely pedophilia."

Saying that religion is irrelevant to this case is like saying that that 6-pack of beer you just downed had nothing to do with your subsequent DUI arrest.

I may not know how to spell "tu quoque" but I know it when I see it...

"In this case, his religion is irrelevant."

Nope. Muslims behead, following their Warlord "prophet," who beheaded the Jews of Arabia, haven't you heard?

And Daniel Pearl. Haven't you heard? And Nick Berg. Haven't you heard? Here's a link:

"Beheading in the name of Islam":

http://www.meforum.org/713/beheading-in-the-name-of-islam?gclid=COaes-OwwqcCFQjs7Qodnnd9yg

Sorry to disagree: his religion IS relevant here! Islam allows this sort of violence against both unbelievers, women and apostates. It part of the wicked "works righteous" theology of Islam.
Christianity on the other hand does NOT allow any violence or abuse. Those who have perpetrated such are disobeying Christ Jesus. As far as the Roman Catholic church (and other denominations) and pedophile priests,it is sin! Jesus himself said "woe to the person who cause these little ones of MINE to sin, It would be better to have a millstone tied atround their necks and they be cast into the sea".

There's nothing in the Bible or church teaching that says a Catholic has to screw little kids. That's something that an aberrated Catholic comes up with all on his own. Not so under Islam. Men may beat their wives, starve them to death, divorce them by repeating they are doing it three times and keep the kids, all with Allah's blessings.

Apples and oranges, my friend.

Have to disagree with you. This murderer's Islamic faith MAY have been irrelevant to this barbarous deed, but I think it far more likely it played a role in the murder. Islam inculcates in the male a superior attitude to women, even to the point of justifying violence against them for nothing more than fearing disobedience from them (Koran 4:34) and this guy's Weltanschauung would have had the Islamic view of the world all over the place. Think probability here.

My point is that all of this is speculation. As someone said, this is far from an absolute.

All Muslims are not obligated to violent Jihad. Most are not. Actually none are. Just ask a Muslim.

You are right there is no epidemic of Chinese kid violence. Nor is there an epidemic of American Muslim beheading. There have been plenty of examples of Chinese violence and torture, the vast majority of ordered by Mao. You can't blame an individuals murderous behavior on their cultural leader.

If the man was essentially, from a devout Muslim's perspective, irreligious, then how is his religion relevant? From an Islamist Fundamentalists perspective he is an infidel himself.

I don't think you (George) are using the term tu quoque correctly. My argument was certainly not fallacious or ad hominem in nature. No one has determined that this man is a devout, sharia loving Islamist. The evidence points away from this. The mere act of killing his third wife over divorce makes him no more of a Muslim extremist than it does Henry VII. What if my six pack was O'Douls. Looks like beer (sorta) tasted like beer but it won't get me drunk.

Christians behead as well. And cut off their enemies feet (remember that the genocide in Rwanda was perpetrated by Christians). And if you take the Bible literally (which I think John just might) then according to John's Revelation then Christians also follow a sword wielding warlord. And apparently, based upon the evidence, quite a few Christians have been disobeying Jesus Christ. But if that makes them faux Christians most Muslims say the same sort of things about those who kill in the name of Allah.

You are getting one thing right. Religion is not always (if ever?) a good thing.

But even many liberals eventually get around to understanding the nature of things, though it often takes them a hell of a long time to do so since modern liberalism and thinking with a lot of common sense are opposed to one another ordinarily.

What keeps some liberals from common sense is that so much of what passes for liberal thought is Utopian. In this liberals share something with the Muslims whose totalitarian theology is also Utopian. Indeed, yesterday at NRO, Andrew McCarthy posted a witty article with the title Jean-Jacques Jihad in which he discussed the similarities between Rousseau's The Social Contract and some Islamic ideas about governance.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/261366/jean-jacques-jihad-andrew-c-mccarthy

(I hope I didn't make a mess of that link.)

In much of liberal thought no one ever seems to be to blame for anything. It is "circumstance" or "society" or "forces" that account for human behavior and not the individual himself. What Mr. Hassan truly regrets is having been held to account, as well as not having had his fatuous explanations accepted by the court. The judge showed far too much patience with him. In spite of his bowed head, he has no real contrition and maintains to the end that responsibility for the crime is not really his. Prison may finally humble him, though there isn't much hope for that as long as the very well-fed Mr. Hassan remains a Muslim. This seems a good argument for denying any Islamic books or food or dress or visits from the Muslim chaplin to Mr. Hassan. If it can be done, Hassan's Islamic identity ought to be erased. Perhaps then, the idea of personal agency and responsibility will at long last sink in.

We have seen this kind of thing so often from the Muslim world that we can only conclude that the notion of responsibility is a great problem for the Islamic mind - maybe an insurmountable one. In today's story about Imam Rauf, Ms. Seibold makes a brilliant paraphrase and parody of how Rauf deflects accountability for what Islam teaches. She writes, "It's not Islam...it's the Spiral." The "spiral" that Rauf talks about is simply resistance to Islam of course, and when Westerners criticize Islam, Islamic radicals react with violence. Westerners then react to that violence and the whole thing becomes a "spiral." When women speak up for themselves against abuse, that goes against men and against the place given to men by Allah through the words of the wicked Muhammad. Thus, for a woman to defy a man's wishes is to defy Islam. Defiance creates the "spiral". Well maybe the Spiral killed Mrs. Hassan too. Damn that Spiral. What is Allah is going to do about it? If too many Muslim women assert themselves against the control of Muslim men, where will new Muslims come from? Allah's Ummah might be in trouble.

Channe wrote:

25 years for beheading a human being ? What the hell is wrong with our judicial system ?
.............................

Chris Beyer wrote:

But only 25 years to life? That is hardly sufficient punishment.
.............................

Correges W wrote, quoting Channe:

"25 years for beheading a human being ? What the hell is wrong with our judicial system?"
.............................

I do agree. But New York State does not have the death penalty—ergo, "25 years to life" is *the stiffest sentence Hassan could receive*.

Personally, I wouldn't expect to see him getting out in 2036—or 2046, or 2056...

You have a clever screen-name KDE. Kaddafi Delenda Est? Now I know why the Libyan colonel wears those flowing clothes. I had no idea that Kaddafi was a feminine noun. Thanks for the joke.

"All Muslims are not obligated to violent Jihad. Most are not. Actually none are. "

Sounds like you cannot make up your mind on this issue, or perhaps you've never studied the Qur'an.

"Just ask a Muslim."

More idiotic words were never printed.

"Christians behead as well."

Do Christians behead people as an imitation of Jesus Christ, or in opposition to His teachings?

You forget that Mr. Hassan tried to claim that it was his status as a Muslim that would create a problem for him in the court. He asserted that the jury would assume his guilt simply because he was a Muslim and thus the trial could never be fair. This is a well-known Islamic tactic - a variation on the argumentum ad misericordiam fallacy. That he would argue this way shows that being a Muslim means something to Mr. Hassan and therefore it isn't unreasonable to assume that Islam might have influenced him in some other more profound way.

I'm in complete agreement with you, classicus, that Utopian thinking is one of the major defects of the modern liberal mind. Such a mind has a very great difficulty in comprehending Margaret Thatcher's sage observation that "the facts of life are conservative."

Thanks for the link to the McCarthy article. I had missed this one of his. McCarthy is three-quarters of the way to getting things correct and that's not bad at all, though he still clings to errors such as thinking that Zuhdi Jasser is on the right side of history and that the word "Islamist" should be used to describe so-called radical Muslims. There's no good reason for this. "Radical Islam" is a redundant term and the continued faux distinction between Islam and Islamism is a phantom difference. Even good folks like McCarthy and Charles Krauthammer are guilty here.

As for liberals never taking the blame, again I couldn't agree more. As Dennis Prager has said, "being liberal means never having to say you're sorry." Yep, liberals just move on to the their next error and almost never acknowledge past errors. It's all part of being a liberal.

Oh yeah, have despised Jean Jacques Rousseau for as long as I remember. He serves as just one more example of how intellectuals, as JFK maintained, "rarely have both feet on the ground." Just so. Hope you're doing well.

"Even Marcia Pappas of NOW stated 'This was apparently a terroristic version of honor killing, a murder rooted in cultural notions about women’s subordination to men.'

Define "terroristic version" as opposed to any other kind of honor killing. What examples of non-terroristic honor killings are there? Pillow smothering?

Also please cite some recent Methodist killings.

Lastly, "a Chinese graduate student at VA Tech." At the risk of being called "xenophobic," I'll go out on a limb here and say this guy was a non-Westerner, like the VA Poly Tech Institute shooter. Maybe religion was not a factor, but I'll definitely agree that culture was.

'All Muslims are not obligated to violent Jihad. Most are not. Actually none are. Just ask a Muslim'.

Just ask a Mahoundian? I suppose you are kidding...Every Mahoundian is 'obligated' to jihad...it is a duty to Allah...
There are more than one kind of jihad and not all of them are violent, but they all have the same goal...The spread of Islam until the whole world is for Allah...

I'm going to post this for your education...

Noble Qur'an:2:190 Footnote:"Jihad is holy fighting in Allah's Cause with full force of numbers and weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars. By Jihad Islam is established, Allah's Word is made superior (which means only Allah has the right to be worshiped), and Islam is propagated. By abandoning Jihad Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim. He who tries to escape from this duty, or does not fulfill this duty, dies as a hypocrite."

Note the last two sentences...An 'obligation'...There are no hypocrites in Allah's paradise...

OK Chris, please tell me where it is TODAY that Christians are dismembering and decapitating innocents in emulation of Jesus?
Flying planes into buildings according to the bible? Blowing-up churches and schools per the Jewish texts? How about killing people over cartoons? Where in the Bible does it say it's OK to lie if it furthers Christianity? But I can tell you who's responsible for that and a whole lot more, EVERY DAY. Can you guess? And they're not doing it for Confucius or Mao, and they're sure as hell not doing it for Jesus! Call islam a religion, call it a culture, call it anything you want; I call it sick, twisted, perverse--and I don't want it here.
I'll take my chances with the Christians and Chinese, Chris, thanks anyway...

You said:
"My argument was certainly not fallacious or ad hominem in nature. No one has determined that this man is a devout, sharia loving Islamist. The evidence points away from this."

For starters, in Islam there are either soldiers or sympathizers. If he is not a devout muslim, the mention of which sends shivers down my back, then he is a MUSHlim, that is, culturally Islamic. The city of Paris is surrounded by MUSHlims. Individuals beware: gangs, rape, thievery, etc. A pathetic bunch. As undaunted said, "line 'em up". Being a 9mm pistol marksman I can contribute. The West is in a death vortex with Islam.
WUI

You're either a typical PC leftist or a Muslim. In either case, your worn out "redirect and deflect" game of moral equivalence holds no ground here. Maybe it does over at HuffPo, your usual stomping ground, but not here.

If you truly think asking a Muslim is a good source of information about jihad, you're hopelessly clueless.

Turd of medina, i suppose these Russian neo nazis beheading these dark skinned men due to their skin color were doing it because they were white, Orthodox Christians. (sarcasm off)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6946810.stm

As horrible as that event is, it's one event. There are many videotaped beheadings made by Muslims. And, unlike the Muslims, those Russians don't have a religious belief that teaches them to "smite at the necks" of their enemies.

Oops! This verse from Surah 8:12 is certainly inconvenient then. Here are three versions to choose from, all from accepted Islamic authorities.

008.012
YUSUFALI: Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."

PICKTHAL: When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger.

SHAKIR: When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

I think the "cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers" part is kind of trying to tell us something. ; )

Chris Beyer wrote:

But he wasn't even a devout Muslim. His first wife (the victim was his third) was an American. His company, Bridges TV, was engaged in opening up communication between cultures and most employees were not Muslim. He reportedly did not pray or fast. He had Jewish friends.
..................................

Muslim men are allowed to marry non-Muslim women. In fact, Muslim immigrants marrying Western women—often to secure citizenship—is *very* common. It is only Muslim women who are prohibited from marrying Infidels.

Bridges TV was all about selling Islam—a bright, shiny, seemingly nonthreatening Islam—to the West. Hassan's *beheading his wife* may have put a few kinks in promoting that fiction.

As to "nonobservant" Muslims turning to Jihad, this is extremely common. Many Jihad terrorists drink, eat bacon cheeseburgers, and frequent strip clubs—but then are all too happy to commit "honor" killings or strap on suicide vests.

More:

All Muslims are not obligated to violent Jihad. Most are not. Actually none are. Just ask a Muslim.
..................................

Not true. At any given time, Jihad is considered "Fard Kafiya"—meaning it is incumbent upon the Muslim community, but not necessarily upon every individual Muslim. A Muslim may also supply support for Jihad, through "Zakat"—"charity" for Jihad—or other material means.

If, however, a Muslim land is invaded, or if Islam is deemed to be under especial threat, then Jihad becomes "Fard Ayn", or incumbent upon every able-bodied Muslim male.

You operate from the idea that something must be totally proven before it is believed. Or from the idea that "Islam must be innocent until proven guilty", in this case of having influenced the evil behavior of this man.

But we can turn this around and ask if Islam does have much influence or not. And if it has influence if it is bad or good, harmless or dangerous. And for what it is bad or good, harmless or dangerous. We can do the same with other religions and atheism and note the difference.

I think we can all agree that it is a good thing that the teachings of Islam and of it's most influential leaders are studied and known well here and used to determine the influence of Islam on the behavior of it's followers.

Well, then, by ex-Muslims, Islam-critics, and many, many anti-Jihadists the bad and dangerous influences are amply shown, in many, many clues. About texts and declarations of the perpetrators themselves and their supporters. In real contrast with the influences of other religions and atheism on the attitude and behavior of their followers.

And the burden of proof has long since shifted to people who, desiring to be fair-minded and protective of "poor Muslims", seem to keep insisting that Islam cannot possibly have a more detrimental, dangerous influence than the other major religions or atheism on it's adherents.

In case of a perceived clear danger it is imperative for governments and concerned citizens to take precautions instead of waiting for "enough evidence for guilt", while all the countless clues are being rejected and much ignored. Mainly so as to preserve the pre-conceived and precious innocence of Islam and Muslims at all costs.

It's quite worrying as far as the Pew Research Poll indicates. The general public has to know about the muslims aggresion. In India, despite the huge muslim population, there are a HUGE amounts of dhimmis. I can see it in America also. We're getting there, but we're not there yet.

K. Bond:
You said:
"Surely then you will realize the grave predicament we are in. Western civilization is doomed. 100% doomed. It may take hundreds if not 1000 years, but they will win in the end."
If we continue on our current path this is true. If we recognize that this an emergency that requires emergency ethics and emergency actions, that is, putting our usual civilized and lawful behaviour aside to deal with the emergency, the end need not be so. The first ethic that needs to be instituted is "My Western civilization right or wrong." Have the squeamish and those of a thousand "but..."s stand aside. To win this war we need men and women of direct and focussd action. When the Muslims are expelled from Western lands we will have gone a long way towards the RESTORATION. After that we can get back to the arguing of fine points. A successful resolution of the emergency will not be pretty, but it will be prettier than the alternative.

"Do Christians behead people as an imitation of Jesus Christ, or in opposition to His teachings?"

It's so simple. It's so simple to see the difference. I often point out this difference to people I get a chance to discuss this with, this difference between the violence perpetrated by Muslims versus Christians.

It's always amazed me that so many who believe themselves so intelligent can't understand that very point. Unless they can understand it BUT can't admit it because of pride or an inflated sense of self-importance.

Hell yes, LJ. Molon Labe.