Amazing that a man would move his family from Egypt to the United States if he felt that his kids would be "contaminated" by exposure to the majority culture. Hang him high.

Posted by: MP at January 2, 2008 8:15 PM

Honor killings are indeed about the fathers or brothers sexual pathologies.

It's about their inability to deal with sexual feelings for their own kin and rage at losing their "monopoly" over the girls as they imagine other men/boys who desire the girls. The fathers or brothers simply cannot deal with daughters or sisters who may illicit in them feelings of desire. They also cannot deal with the loss of control over these girls, both the chaos resulting from the girls' attracting other men, which is competitive, and the male relatives' loss of the power to give the girls away to men they choose in an arranged or at least "honorable" and sanctioned marriage.

The whole problem with Islam ultimately boils down to feelings of impotence and the sexual and power-related psychoses of Muslim males.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 8:24 PM

Oh the things you can find on the net..from Amina's myspace page

http://www.myspace.com/semirockerchic

Daddy!

http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=200531942&albumID=259554&imageID=855963

Daddy meets his kin in Egypt!

http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewImage&friendID=200531942&albumID=259554&imageID=1244671

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at January 2, 2008 8:30 PM

Well,

It's probably an honor killing.

And if Islam is at its root, exploit that.

But it happens in other cultures, too.

Grandmother jailed for 'honour killing'
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22449208-12377,00.html

Does pointing out an honor killing in the American Muslim community help or hinder?

Won't Muslims note the honor killings in non-Muslim communities, too?

Posted by: PRCS at January 2, 2008 8:32 PM

Well, I guess we shouldn't rush to judgement because there could be mental health issues.

But it makes me mad as hell that a guy would move him family to America if he couldn't handle American culture or didn't have any respect for it. What was he - a freeloader?

Posted by: devorgilla at January 2, 2008 8:38 PM

PRCS:

They appear to be sikhs based on the name Singh.

On the "mitigating" side, this was an honor killing to prevent divorce, according to the article. It could more appropriately be called a "shame killing."

This is still different from the canonical Muslim honor killing, which is about preventing any display of sexuality in a daughter or sister.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 8:42 PM

Wimbledon Womble,

I posted that because they're Sikhs; merely as an example of honor killings in the non-Muslim world.

But, my friend, an honor killing does not, ultimately, differ from a 'shame' killing.

If the Dallas murders have a clearly indentifiable Muslim aspect, exploit that.

But do they?

Posted by: PRCS at January 2, 2008 8:53 PM

People should look at the myspace page presented by greatcometof1577:

http://www.myspace.com/semirockerchic

Amina seems to have been a bright, happy American girl who could not escape an inferior culture.

Posted by: StillBreathing at January 2, 2008 8:54 PM

Honor killing began in Sumerian culture, where a woman's reproductive capacities were considered to part of the wealth of the tribe, not her own by any means. Sumerian culture was also the first to criminalize sexual behavior.

Honor killing *in ancient times* has been known in many cultures: Asian, Middle Eastern, American Indian, etc.

In the last 300 years it has begun to disappear, though "crimes of passion" and "justifiable homicide" at the thought of a man being caused some discomfort over the infidelity of a woman is still prevalent in many cultures.

Middle Eastern tribal mores are the last great bastions of honor killing, although there is a significant wrinkle caused by the Neapoleanic French. The Napoleanic Codes legalized honor killings in the Codes around 1800, and those codes became then some of the basic legal framework in places like Jordan. That's why now Palestinian men who honor-kill their wives are taken over to Jordan to be tried, because they'll be let go using this code.

This same code also appears in Brazil. Honor-killing in Brazil wasn't outlawed until the mid-1990s, and it is still hugely prevalent, accounting for some 16-20% of the world's total in most years, even now that the law has been changed.

So, the Napoleanic French did much to screw things up. But on the whole, it is an overwhelmingly Muslim problem, and not just an Arab one, as evidenced by the fact that it is a huge problem in Turkey, which isn't Arab—and in Iran, which isn't Arab, either.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 8:56 PM

There are lots of fathers who are scandalized by their daughters' carrying on. Hell, what parent isn't at one time or another, and what father hasn't at some time cursed his daughter and cursed the societal norms that led her astray?
The uniquely evil aspect of this is that once again we suspect Islamic morality, with its sanctification of violence, to be the instigator. It's too bad that the true moral depravity here will probably never be identified accurately by the wider public, but will instead be dismissed as merely the sick actions of one man.

Posted by: jewdog at January 2, 2008 8:56 PM

Police will eventually get him and he will stand trial. But it will be in vain if prosecutors don't bring this evil ideology to the justice. They should ask - why? Why he killed these angels? Who motivated him? Who is his teacher?

Posted by: LazarOfSerbia at January 2, 2008 9:04 PM

devorgilla said:

"Well, I guess we shouldn't rush to judgement because there could be mental health issues."

Of course, there are mental health issues. The issues are related to the mental health of men who are indoctrinated into sharia.

The father could not handle that his daughters were exhibiting normal signs of sexuality that might elicit a response in other males.

The father's mental health issue is called sharia.

And it is outrageous that we allow those completely under the influence of the sharia mindset to immigrate to the US and Europe, where, even if they do not kill their own daughters, they will never assimilate.

We have tests that all aspiring US citizens must take. These should be expanded in the case of immigrants from Muslim countries to determine whether or not they reject sharia.

In the West, men have given up explicit sexual control over women. It may lead to more male insecurity, as men can no longer be as certain about paternity. In the West, men have come to deal with this loss of control. In Muslim countries, such loss of control is unfathomable.

Sharia and Western culture are incompatible.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 9:10 PM

>Sharia and Western culture are incompatible.>

Yup, so are shari'a and human rights.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 9:17 PM

greatcometof1577 said"

"Oh the things you can find on the net..from Amina's myspace page

http://www.myspace.com/semirockerchic"

She seemed like she was breaking free of the oppression of her father and his ideologies. She was thoroughly Westernized. She wanted to be a doctor. She and her sister appear quite free in dress and apparent behavior from the pictures. It is easy to see how this would drive their father mad. It all adds up to an honor killing.

It is creepy how below the main picture, the last login is from Dec. 27, 2007. She logged in on that date without knowing it would be her last. Quite sad.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 9:23 PM

If a father kills a TWO daughters, what the hell else could it be? I'd just be interested in knowing. What???? They're running guns from Ethiopia? What?

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 9:26 PM

Morgaan Sinclair said:

"Yup, so are shari'a and human rights."

Well, that just brings up other issues, such as why human rights organizations and feminists shy away from the question of sharia, but there are many other threads for that discussion.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 9:27 PM

Morgaan Sinclair:

You say:

The Napoleanic Codes legalized honor killings in the Codes around 1800, and those codes became then some of the basic legal framework in places like Jordan. That's why now Palestinian men who honor-kill their wives are taken over to Jordan to be tried, because they'll be let go using this code.

This same code also appears in Brazil. Honor-killing in Brazil wasn't outlawed until the mid-1990s, and it is still hugely prevalent, accounting for some 16-20% of the world's total in most years, even now that the law has been changed.

So, the Napoleanic French did much to screw things up.

This is all out of focus, lumping together what used to be called crimes of passion, the killing of one's wife when caught in or suspected of adultery, with the killing of children who are considered to have sullied the family purity. The latter is not a phenomenon in Brazil, nor was it the crime that was "legalized" by the Napoleonic Code.

All murder is monstrous, but to equate the killing of a spouse on suspicion of adultery with the killing of a child who is the victim of rape is to practice a particularly common and virulent strain of contemporary moral equivalence, and effectively works toward exonerating the Islamic nations of responsibility for this great crime against its children.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at January 2, 2008 9:30 PM

Morgaan Sinclair said:

"This same code also appears in Brazil. Honor-killing in Brazil wasn't outlawed until the mid-1990s, and it is still hugely prevalent, accounting for some 16-20% of the world's total in most years, even now that the law has been changed."

This may be the case, but it must be qualitatively different. You never hear of Brazilian immigrants to the US killing their daughters or sisters. Clearly, whatever honor killings occur in Brazil are not deeply embedded in the culture or do not influence that segment of Brazilians who emigrate to the West. In contrast, it is now becoming almost commonplace within the Muslim communities of the West, even in Muslim families that have been in the West for some time. So clearly there is a difference in how deeply entrenched whatever sickness it is that drives fathers or brothers or uncles to do this.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 9:37 PM

Robert, is there any, even smallest, possibility that ideology can be taken into account at the court of law in a case like this one? Any lawyer here?

Posted by: LazarOfSerbia at January 2, 2008 9:41 PM

What these very ugly Islam-instigated child-murders (ever notice, by the way, how most incidents involving Islam in America ARE ugly??)are graphic evidence of is WHY Muslims should be denied any rights to immigrate into the United States and why Islam should NEVER be imported into ANY non-Islamic country, least of all this one...

Posted by: pythagoras at January 2, 2008 9:44 PM

Wimbledon Womble,

It is not even the same phenomenon, and to lump the two together under the same general rubric of "honor killing" is just yet another way to enable Islamic entities to continue their ongoing and total evasion of self-criticism and responsibility.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at January 2, 2008 9:47 PM

Lazar of Serbia,

I would doubt it.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at January 2, 2008 9:48 PM

Actually, Robert, I've done quite a lengthy study of this with women friends who are professionals at this research, and it is not out of focus at all.

To be quite specific, the Jordanian law is a fusion of Egyptian law and the Napoleonic Code of 1810. Please see:

Warwick, Catherine. "The Vanishing Victim: Criminal Law and Gender in Jordan," Law & Society Review, Jun 2005.

The truth is that this kind of violence toward women is NOT restricted to Islamic culture and has a VAST history in the Orient, in American Indian culture and elsewhere. The truth is also that if this 1810 code hadn't been spread through the Middle East with French conquest, the LEGAL problem wouldn't be as bad as it is today where there is SECULAR legal code to be applied.

This law has been overturned everywhere EXCEPT where it's still backed by shari'a. However, the problem in Brazil is extremely bad, ongoing, and the male judiciary there wink and smile and let these guys go.

Please see: Andrade, V. R. P., Criminologia e Feminismo, in Baratta A., Streck L., and Andrade, V. (ed.), Editora Sulina (1999), 105-117. This article was written 8 years after the passage of a law outlawing honor killing in Brazil, before which it was SIMPLY LEGAL.

I think after you read Warwick and Andrade et al. you will have a bit of a different perspective on the problem. What is needed is an across-the-board confrontation of men (by other men!) who batter and kill their wives and claim they have somehow been dishonored as an excuse.

That said, of course it is more an Islamic Middle Eastern problem first and foremost. But we shouldn't dismiss the fact it happens elsewhere.

Please also see: Nebehay, Stephanie "'Honor Killings' of Women Said on Rise Worldwide," Reuters dispatch, April 7, 2000. According to Stephanie Nebehay, such killings have been reported in Bangladesh, Britain, Brazil, Ecuador, Egypt, India, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Pakistan, Morocco, Sweden, Turkey, Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran — as well as Pakistan (the worst apparently) and other Middle East countries. Note that there are no figures available for Saudi Arabia as the death figures for such are NOT available to any of us who study this.

I am not sure that all of the killings in Brazil, India (where wife-burning is the acceptable form of killing your wife), Italy, Israel, Ecuador, and Sweden are Islamically based.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 9:59 PM

What to do?

Here is an option ~ your choice.

If you see a man or men assaulting or attempting to use force against a woman, call the police immediately. ESPECIALLY IF THE MAN A/O THE WOMAN APPEAR TO BE FROM THE MIDDLE-EAST, OR, LET'S SAY, FROM SOMEWHERE LIKE INDONESIA.

Stay there. Be a good witness. Make noise so they see you seeing them. Write down license plates, take pictures with your freakin' cell phone. If they won't stop and you're armed then you need to do some quick math. Will you have a reasonable man defense if what you're about to do ends up in court? Will you be able to explain the totality of your circumstances at the time to people who were not there at the time to see what you did? Know what your state laws say about what constitutes assault, brandishing a weapon, when citizen's arrest is permissible.

If they leave the scene with the girl, follow them from a safe distance and call the cops and get them ASAPing to where you are.

Or, how about this? Start a secret club to protect sweet Muslim girls who just want to grow up as free women, unafraid of being brutally raped and murdered by those who are supposed to love them most and protect them. Yea; you can set up safe-houses in your basement for them, post subtle notices of your service on craigslist or on the bulletin board at the local halal market. That would take some balls, eh? You want to really make a difference? Get all sorts of photo evidence on honor killings and the treatment of Muslim women by Muslim men and have a car wash. When drivers pull in expecting to get schmoozed for a few bucks so a few Baptist kids can go to summer camp and play in the lake, collect donations of food and money to help establish a safe place these terrorized young ladies can run to when their male kin feel froggy about asserting their twisted view of honor.

Or do nothing. Then, will you be able to live with your shame if she's found dead in a shallow grave or dumped at the curb or stuffed into the back of a cab with her dead sister because you didn't want to get involved, because you didn't want people to call you a racist or an islamophobe.

Whatever you decide, you'd better be unerschrocken, baby.

Posted by: undaunted at January 2, 2008 9:59 PM

P.S. to Robert ...

I think that since the Jordanians and others are always throwing at us, "Well, it's YOUR law," we should make a point of saying we no longer support the Napoleonic Code of 1810. Now the attempt to overthrow this law failed because the government said that to do so would be "unIslamic" so there is no question where the power in this situation is coming from.

But this little Napoleonic anachronism has wreaked havoc with a number of Islamic feminist lawyers who have tried to get these cases convicted.

Cordially,
Morgaan

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 10:03 PM

The killings of Brazilian girls by their brothers who are offended by their behavior is NO different than some guy killing his sister in Pakistan for the same thing.

I do not necessarily think that the people who study this worldwide are making a mistake in adding such murders to this list.

However, the murder of a woman because she has been raped is clearly an Islamic thing, not a Western thing, and has nothing to do with Napoleonic codes. But the DEFENSE of it can be affected with it just the same.

Do you actually think that the people trying to stop this phenomena should be required by you to divide their list between honor killings by Muslims and honor killings — which are CALLED THAT by the people who do them — by others?

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 10:08 PM

There is nothing that can be done about honor killings without solving the whole problem all at once. It's a Gordian's knot.

Sharia, jihad, honor killings - they are all tied up in one ideology and pathology, and all of these are self-reinforcing aspects of that ideology.

We need to disengage from the Muslim world. We need to implement a policy of containment, treating the Muslim world as we treated the Soviet Union. We need to only allow immigration of apostates, or those who can be proven to reject every aspect of sharia, from Muslim countries.

Whether it is outright hard jihad or soft jihad, dawa and pro-sharia agitation by Wahhabi groups, whether it is lawsuits, car-burning or honor killings, it is simply unacceptable to allow this kind of instability and destructiveness into the West as we are doing now. We must retrench and allow the Muslim world to destroy itself, if that is what it is wont to do, without destroying us as well.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 10:10 PM

LazarofSerbia ...

I would BET you that when it comes times to try this creep, he will use his culture as a defense, and Aqsa Parvez's father, too.

Since the head of the ISNA in Canada has already SAID that's what it is, it can hardly be missed.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 10:15 PM

Morgaan,

You seem to have missed the distinction I was making. There is no doubt that spousal abuse and killings on suspicion of adultery are found in all cultures. But the case at hand, to take just one example, actually has nothing to do with the killing of a wife, does it? And to lump the two phenomena together -- the crimes of passion with the killing of children for reasons of "purity" -- is myopic, out of focus, and ultimately enabling of the Islamic evasion of responsibility and refusal to face squarely the implications of the killings of girls like Amina and Sarah, and Aqsa Parvez, and all the rest.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at January 2, 2008 10:17 PM

I wonder if there are any stats available on these so called honor killings. Are there police records kept on these nation wide as we've been hearing about them sence the late 70's.

Posted by: AMartinez at January 2, 2008 10:20 PM

Robert,

Apparently all the people who are studying this have just failed then, no?

I suppose the guy in Brazil who kills his sister because she has just shamed the family honor must have taken a secret shahada on his last trip to Ipanema.

I do not see how defending the Girl from Ipanema rips off the Girl from Shiraz, because they are both equally dead, and both dead from the same male supremacist thinking and behavior that is entrenched in Islamic society, but certainly not absent from other societies as well.

And, I see a danger in trying to ignore the other in favor of focusing SOLELY on Islamic evils and letting the other guys slide. I don't think a Brazilian teenager's life is necessarily worse than her Pakistani counterpart, nor should it be ignored because it's not the fight WE want to be fighting now.

I am aware that you have a focus here you would like to preserve, so you do not want to talk about the other.

Fine. I'll leave, which is clearly what you want. But don't accuse me of "enabling the Islamic evasion of responsibility". I don't spend half my time standing these guys down and defending you to take that one lying down. And I think you know what I mean. Or you should.

Cordially,
Morgaan

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 10:25 PM

Morgaan Sinclair:

The killings of Brazilian girls by their brothers who are offended by their behavior is NO different than some guy killing his sister in Pakistan for the same thing.

Maybe, but that is a small percentage of Brazilian cases, and there is a significant difference in the underlying reasoning justifying the act. The overwhelming majority of cases in Brazil have to do with wives suspected of adultery. That is vastly different from killing a girl for adopting Western mores, or because she was raped, and to lump them together only once again gives the vaunted Islamic reformers who should be speaking out against this a free pass to consign it all to "culture" and hence out of their purview.

Moreover, Brazil has not in the 21st century declined to stiffen penalties for honor killings, as Jordan has. And Jordan did this on Islamic grounds. The much ballyhooed Islamic reformers, were they sincere, might take note of this and speak and act against it, instead of starting to burble about Brazil.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at January 2, 2008 10:25 PM

Morgaan Sinclair: You wrote above, "The truth is that if this 1810 code hadn't been spread through the Middle East with French conquest...." May I ask how you came to the conclusion that the criminal portion of the Napoleonic Code which came out in 1810 (the initial Civil portion being published in 1804 while Napoleon while still First Consul) came to be applied in the Middle East? Napoleon was there in 1798-1799. How did the criminal portion of the Napoleonic Code come to be implemented in Ottoman lands long after Napoleon was gone? I will look forward to your explanation.

Posted by: Wellington at January 2, 2008 10:29 PM

Robert,

Brazil changed it laws, and then its judges nullified the change by not enforcing them, and police officials don't charge the crime.

For my edification, please tell me how a Brazilian teenage boy killing his sister for sleeping with her boyfriend is different from an Iranian boy killing his sister for the same thing. The Brazilian boys and men who kill their sisters, wives and mothers for such sexual "transgressions" say it is an affront to their honor.

So how is that different?

Cordially,
Morgaan Sinclair

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 10:29 PM

Morgaan Sinclair:

As I said above, the overwhelming majority of Brazilian cases are not killings of children. Nor are these killings justified on Islamic grounds, as they are explicitly in Jordan and elsewhere.

As such, they are not remotely comparable phenomena, and to pretend that they are, once again, only relieves self-proclaimed Islamic reformers of their responsibility to address this problem.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at January 2, 2008 10:31 PM

Wimbledon Womble:

We can stop honor killings, at least in America.

The answer is actually very clear-cut and quite simple: Outlaw Islam on the grounds that it is in violation of US legal statutes (it actually teaches Muslims to commit first degree murder as they find necessary!!!) and in violation of the US Constitution. This is also grounds for mass deportations of Muslims from America too. It will take time and determination but I am certain it can be done.

First degree murder is both an essential component of Islamic ideology in addition to its being a CAPITAL CRIME IN THE UNITED STATES AND THAT APPLIES TO ALL MEMBERS OF EVERY RELIGION. No one in the United States may commit first degree murder under US law and that goes for Muslims too. (Here is a Kuranic teaching of first degree murder: Surah 9.5: "And when the forbidden months have passed, slay the unbelievers everywhere they are found; besiege them, capture them, torture them, prepare every strategem of warfare against them...").

Religious rights in the United States are NOT absolute so outlawing Islam on legal grounds is probably quite doable--if anyone would only show the decency to face the US public, judiciary, and government to explain how Islam both teaches and institutionalizes first degree murder (which we call "terrorism" is actually considered by the Kuran and called 'jihad').

Islam violates the US Constitution as it teaches and perpetrates "cruel and unusual punishment" again as a matter of its own core, indispensible doctrines. Islam teaches and sanctions honor killings, beheadings, amputations, dismemberments of the human body (including of corpses--which constitutes a crime under US laws), slavery, and much, much more. There is no question that Islam practices "cruel and unusual punishments" as an inherent part of its "religious laws" or shariat. When was the last time you saw the US judiciary mete out, let alone sanction, dismemberments or beheadings of criminals???????

So we can get rid of this honor killings--AND ISLAM!!! We must find the political will and step up to the plate and DO IT.

I think that should answser your posting.

Posted by: pythagoras at January 2, 2008 10:34 PM

Some of you guys are going to be pissing and moaning at each other about why they're slitting throats ... as they do it to you.

Posted by: undaunted at January 2, 2008 10:37 PM

No, undaunted, some of us will be explaining as our throats are slit that the slitting of throats is really a cross-cultural phenomenon, and has nothing to do with Islam. And that will make the slitting of our throats by the mujahedin so much easier to take.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at January 2, 2008 10:39 PM

Morgaan Sinclair said:

"For my edification, please tell me how a Brazilian teenage boy killing his sister for sleeping with her boyfriend is different from an Iranian boy killing his sister for the same thing. The Brazilian boys and men who kill their sisters, wives and mothers for such sexual "transgressions" say it is an affront to their honor."

Is this behavior culturally sanctioned in Brazil? Also, do Brazilian immigrants to the West engage in such killings with the frequency that Muslim immigrants do?

No and no.

Sharia sanctions honor killings. It is such a deeply held "value" that it occurs with alarming frequency even within immigrant Muslim communities in the West.

There is no meaningful comparison. It is like comparing the crusades to jihad and making moral equivalency arguments. One crime occurs despite the cultural moors, the other because of it.

The pathology of Said and Aqsa peres is rooted in Islam and is the consequence of a 1,400-year-old theological/ideological sickness, codified as sharia, that engenders a social sickness that engenders psychological sickness.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 10:41 PM

Wimbledon,

Indeed.

It's just another bout of excuse-making and enabling for the pseudo-reformers who stand by and say and do nothing about this sort of thing, because after all, why should they have to do anything about it? They do it in Brazil too!

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at January 2, 2008 10:43 PM

Robert, I hope you brewed some coffee. It's going to be a late night.

Posted by: special_guest at January 2, 2008 10:43 PM

No, special guest, I'm going to bed. I don't even think I will look in on this thread in the morning. Some battles aren't worth fighting.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at January 2, 2008 10:44 PM

Wellington,

After the Napoleonic conquests in the Middle East, particularly Egypt, a lot of "culture" got passed through. Legal codes were re-made using Western codes. Adoption of Western constitutional elements and then whole constitutions (particularly the Belgian monarchical constitution) swept through parts of the Middle East: Jordan and Egypt in parts of their laws (French and British). Then, the three countries which were never successfully colonized by a Western foreign power — Turkey, Iran and Afghanistan — adopted huge parts of the Belgian constitution for general overall use, while running at least three other legal codes at the same time: pre-Islamic tribal codes, shari'a, and non-Islamic civil codes from previous conquerers. It was a mess. See Kebbie on Afghanistan, Kurcher on Turkey, and Houchang Chehabi on Iran. Chehabi will teach a course on Iran at Harvard in the spring and I'll take it, but I think he is also coming out with a book. It should be good. Chehabi, who has an Iranian father and a German mother, has a very clear Western-thinking approach to Iran and his explanation of what happened between the ulema in Iran and the fast-secularizing leaders right before the adoption of the 1920 constitution -- which gave Iranian women as many rights as American ones -- is fascinating. Burying their rage, the ulema smoldered for 60 years, and then, Chehabi says, came back "with a vengeance." No kidding.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 10:44 PM

I'm with you, Robert.

Good night all.

Posted by: undaunted at January 2, 2008 10:49 PM

Robert,

I do believe we can walk and chew chewing gum at the same time and that we can tell the Islamists to handle their problem while not ignoring areas in the world where there are other problems as well.

I do not consider a simple recitation of the history of honor killings evidence that I am a traitor to the cause since I can GUARANTEE you that I spend one hell of a lot more time fighting battles for Muslim women than you do, so do NOT come at me with this crap that I am molly-coddling Islamists on this problem. I most CERTAINLY am not, and since I have spent some two months doing research for them on just this issue, you are completely out of line casting that aspersion.

If you don't think so, go ask any of the Muslim feminist lawyers you know, and they'll tell you.

And lastly, I find it incredibly amusing when men try to tell women how they should handle the worldwide issues of abuse that affect them.

And if you are looking for the person who dragged the discussion off topic, I think you should credit yourself for having found it so important to discipline my focus on the issue.

Cordially,
Morgaan

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 10:51 PM

All I know is that two beautiful young girls, full of hope and promise, who each loved their sister and their friends, and who from their pictures had a light in their eyes, and no guile, are now dead in my country. And all because of Islam.

When are we as a society going to stop this crap from happening again? How many more Saras or Aminas or Aqsas are going to die because we don't know what to do? Will this lead to the deaths of Brittanys and Marys and Nicoles?

This story had me at "The father was a cabdriver from Egypt..."

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 2, 2008 10:56 PM

Wimbledon Wombie

"Yup, so are shari'a and human rights."

Well, that just brings up other issues, such as why human rights organizations and feminists shy away from the question of sharia, but there are many other threads for that discussion.

Western feminists have TOTALLY failed on it, and I can't think why except if they are really so self-centered and/or aligned with a Leftist agenda they can't help themselves.

Kazi Jalal, at Harvard, said that without American women's groups' support he didn't know how Muslim women would make it.

So I think they've completely abandoned them.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 10:56 PM

1812 Overature!

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at January 2, 2008 11:04 PM

Great Comet ...

Please move the cannon a little to the left.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 11:06 PM

Morgaan Sinclair: Well, I'm a lawyer but trained in English Common Law, so I don't have a first-hand knowledge of Roman law, which is applied here in America only in Louisiana, but you contended that the crimial portion of the Napoleonic Code (which is just Roman law revised) was spread by Napoleon's conquests in the Middle East. This is simply not the case. Napoleon did his ephemeral conquering over ten years before the 1810 Criminal Code came out. Therefore, it wasn't due to his conquests that this portion of the Code was spread. This is chronologically impossible. Perhaps his prestige as Emperor was a factor post 1810, but surely you can see it wasn't due to any military conquests per se, unless, by extension, it would have been the memory of them.

Also, I have to wonder (and I'm speculating here) if what you maintain to be honor killing sanctioned by the Napoleonic Code is nothing more than what the Common Law treats as heat of passion homicide, thus reducing a murder charge to manslaughter. Nothing in Common Law would exculpate a family member killing another family member for any reason other than self-defense. I am dimly aware that the paterfamilias under Roman Law could take the life of his family under certain circumstances, but I don't know if this was ever extended in ancient times or more modern times to what is termed "honor killings." Anyway, nothing personal here and I wish you the best.

Posted by: Wellington at January 2, 2008 11:09 PM

Morgaan Sinclair

Never attack my right.

I have 17,000 troops in the valley and your middle is weak.

Austerlitz...

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at January 2, 2008 11:12 PM

Isabellathecrusader said:

"This story had me at "The father was a cabdriver from Egypt...""

Mohammed Parvez was also a cabdriver, although from Pakistan.

Let's see... What is common between these men? Hmmm... Both cabdrivers. Anything else? Anything? USA Today, which called Mohammed Parvez a frail 57-year-old man? Anything, USA Today?

Well, okay then...

The cabs made them do it.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 11:13 PM

Wellington ..

Please see:

Warwick, Catherine. "The Vanishing Victim: Criminal Law and Gender in Jordan," Law & Society Review, Jun 2005.

Keddie, Afghanistan; Kurcher, Turkey; Chehabi, Iran.

Or see David Lewenstein on the spread of codes of France, Belgium, etc., into the Middle East (Lewinstein teaches Islamic history at Harvard).

That Napoleon was at Elbe by the time some of this stuff got spread is NOT the point. The point it is incontrovertible fact that it did, and that Middle East governments were in the process of adopting all kinds of these things during this period, and right up through the constitutions of 1900 in Egypt, 1920 in Iran, and even by Zahir Shah, who "proclaimed" a lot of women's rights right out of the US constitution for the Afghanistan of the 1950s.

The first reference above — Warwick — will explain it. Or, you can ask see if you can find a law prof at a university near you who specializes in Middle East civil law to explain it to you.

Historically, it's a rich and fascinating period, where the Middle East flirted with freedom, an urge destroyed by a very vicious ulema bent on power, then as they are now.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 11:16 PM

>The cabs made them do it.>

Perhaps their male ego, the demigodhood bestowed upon them by conservative Islam, made them do it.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 11:18 PM

Morgaan Sinclair deserves the distinction of being the smartest person in the room. She always has.

Her weak and ineffective point to Robert that this type of behavior is not exclusive to the Muslim community, is borderline irrelevant, and quite frankly not worth discussing. Islam certaily does not hold all the cards in any particular subject, but it does display a systemic form of redundancy.

No matter what, if Morgaan has an example outside of the Islamic community, she will play that card, simply for self-affirmation that she is the smartest person in the room.

This is not news to anyone who has been here for more than a week.

Let her blather. I also suggest that the community laud her with praise for her superior intellect, being more learned and well-read than well, anybody here, including Robert. It tends to disarm her a wee bit, lest she cut and paste another windy retort to re-affirm her superiority.

She is a simple animal, like Naseem. Her contribution to this site news-wise is noted, but she is far from THE site, and her resume, albeit impressive, means little in the full spectrum of what Robert is trying to accomplish on this pedagogical site. She is more than welcome to form her own unvisited blog, displaying her self-proclaimed divinity.

Morgaan will surely respond to this comment, as is expected by the most exalted one. The question is who will play her game and respond?

Call this a test, if you will.

Good luck.

Posted by: awake at January 2, 2008 11:20 PM

Did you see the comment beside her picture? "I don't want to become a memory."
Just so sad that the one person those girls should have been able to lean on murdered them.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at January 2, 2008 11:24 PM

Great Comet ...

ROFLOL ... Hysterical! Thank you. I needed to laugh.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 11:26 PM

Well said, Awake. Bravo.

Posted by: undaunted at January 2, 2008 11:28 PM

Did you see the comment beside her picture? "I don't want to become a memory."

Posted by: interestinconundrum at January 2, 2008 11:24 PM

I did. It was sadly prophetic, don't you think?

Posted by: awake at January 2, 2008 11:28 PM

Wellington ...

Interesting we should be talking about Napoleon.

Meanwhile, please check out:

Stefanie Eileen Nanes, “Fighting Honor Crimes: Evidence of Civil Society in Jordan,” Middle East Journal, vol. 57, no.1 (Winter 2003), p. 6.

She explains how ARTICLE 340 of Jordanian Code, which is the problem, came into Jordan from the Napoleonic Codes via the Ottomans.

What can I say. They must just have really liked this sucker. But a lot of it also came after the French took Cairo, and it filtered in from there as well.

Perhaps that's why Winkler characterizes Article 340 has a hybrid from Egyptian and French sources.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 11:29 PM

Wellington said:

"...I'm a lawyer but trained in English Common Law..."

Sorry for excerpting just this statement. I did enjoy your last post! But it is nice to see a lawyer here. There is no legal counter-balance to the system of pro-bono or CAIR-paid lawyers who fight jihadi battles in the West. What can be done? This is a huge issue, I think. The jihad in the courts is not a level playing field, particularly against individuals or organizations without the means for defense that CAIR has for offense.

It seems to me that a legal specialty focused on Islamist misuse of courts and, moreover, a network of pro-bono lawyers or some large legal defense fund must evolve to meet this threat.

The only other solution to this mess would be if frivolous lawsuits by Muslim fanatics would be dismissed up front with indemnification for judges who dismiss them. It would be like a triage at a hospital. That is not going to happen, obviously, in this PC world of ours.

Regarding pro-bono lawyers to defend those targeted by jihadis or even just Muslims out for a quick buck playing the Islamophobia card, are there lawyers who would be willing to do this, sacrificing earnings and perhaps negatively affecting their reputation because they would be vulnerable to being labeled Islamophobes themselves? If not, the only other solution is a huge legal defense fund, but there is no counter-jihad Soros to fund such a thing.

I fear that CAIR and other well-funded Wahhabi organizations, as well as the sundry lesser Muslim entities trying to milk the political correct climate for all it is worth, will continue to have the legal advantage.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 11:30 PM

Morgaan Sinclair: Here's my bottom line: Whatever faults lie within the Napoleonic Code, said modern Code did not lead to or allow honor killings of family members in France. If the same Code did allow honor killings in the Middle East, that should tell you far more about those who inhabit the Middle East than it does about the Napoleonic Code. Moral equivalency thinking is almost always an error. Be advised. I rest my case.

Posted by: Wellington at January 2, 2008 11:32 PM

Wellington ...

Please let me know if you find out anything that contradicts Warwick on this. I'd be glad to hear about it if you do.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 11:33 PM

Interestinconundrum,

I was just checking back here one last time before I go to bed but then I saw your post and now the tears won't stop coming. I am just sick over this. These girls should have been watching a rerun of Gigi this weekend and listening to Maurice Chevalier singing a song to them, ("Thank heavens, for little girls...") not clinging to each other and trying to get out of the cab while their father terrorized them and told them how much he was going to enjoy blowing them away.

To him and all the millions of other "hims" in the Islamic world, they can all go to hell. And please, go now, so we don't have to read one more story like this.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 2, 2008 11:36 PM

This creep may have slipped away ...

Lewisville cabdriver sought in slayings of 2 teen daughters

08:54 PM CST on Wednesday, January 2, 2008

By WENDY HUNDLEY / The Dallas Morning News
whundley@dallasnews.com

Area police continue to search for a man who they believe killed his two teenage daughters and left their bodies in a taxi at an Irving hotel.

Police sealed off a street and surrounded the man's home in Lewisville for more than five hours Wednesday but found that Yaser Abdel Said, 50, a cabdriver, was not inside.

He is being sought in connection with the deaths of Amina Yaser Said, 18, and Sarah Yaser Said, 17.

Both victims died of multiple gunshot wounds, the Dallas County medical examiner's office ruled Wednesday.

About 20 SWAT team members from the Lewisville Police Department and the Denton County Sheriff's Office sealed off the 1000 block of Lakeland Drive and surrounded the modest, one-story home of the Said family for about five hours beginning about 11 a.m.

After shooting tear gas into the home, SWAT officers entered but found no one inside.

Police provided no clues about the motive for the killings. "There are several things we're looking into," said Irving police Officer David Tull, noting that the suspect faces capital murder charges.

Officer Tull said there have been some "domestic issues" with the family, but he did not elaborate.

Police did say they are looking into the possibility that the father was upset with his daughters' dating activities.

"It's something well worth looking into," Officer Tull told WFAA-TV (Channel 8).

Officer Tull said at a news conference that the mother of the victims is cooperating with police and that she and her 19-year-old son are in a safe place. He believes the couple is married, but he didn't know whether they had been living together.

Lewisville police responded to a call at the residence on Dec. 26 on a report of a missing person, Capt. Kevin Deaver said. He did not know who was reported missing or what action was taken to resolve the situation.

Mr. Said, who is from Egypt, has lived in the Dallas area since at least the mid-1980s, records indicate.

Officer Tull said police have received no tips about Mr. Said's whereabouts but said numerous law enforcement agencies are involved in the search. "There's a long investigation ahead of us," he said.

It's unclear which of the sisters called 911 from a cellphone around 7:30 p.m. Tuesday. She said she was dying, according to an Irving police report. She did not provide her location, but police traced the call to O'Connor Road and Riverside Drive.

They couldn't find the caller but an hour later, police received another call about two unconscious females inside a taxi at a service entrance of the Omni Mandalay Hotel. Police located the vehicle and found the sisters.

"The victims' mother provided information that pointed to the victims' father as the suspect," the Irving police report stated.

Friends describe Amina and Sarah as quiet but well-liked students at Lewisville High School. They played tennis and soccer and were enrolled in many Advanced Placement classes.

"They were extremely smart – like geniuses," said Allison Villarreal, a senior at Lewisville High, where Amina was a senior and Sarah was a junior.

Liz Marines, secretary of the Lewisville High School Student Council, had classes with both of the sisters and also remembers their scholastic abilities.

"Amina was very nice with everybody. She helped me in [Advanced Placement English] class," she said. Sarah was a sophomore when she took an Algebra II class with Liz, who was a junior at the time.

She said the sisters, who wore typical American clothes, didn't talk much about their family. "I didn't know they were Muslims until she told me they were Egyptian and Muslim," Liz said.

She said the Student Council is organizing a prayer vigil at 6 tonight at Lewisville High. Students are being asked to wear pink to school today to honor their friends.

"It's because pink was their favorite color," Liz said.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 11:36 PM

I draw no moral equivalency at all. Go back and read my first *historical* post. The very fact that I included it was apparently a grievous sin, as on this board one must NOT say anything other than to point out the problems of Islam, which I most wholeheartedly agree is the MAJOR problem on this planet for women right now.

The conversation was then dragged off course with a wrist-slap that I had committed said grievous sin. And the rest is a history of another kind.

You can accuse me of moral equivalency when you spend as much time doing research in service of Islamic feminists and lawyers who fight these cases as I do.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 11:40 PM

Coward is probably trying to hop a jet back to Egypt.

Posted by: Prickzilla at January 2, 2008 11:41 PM

Check in the armories.errr, mosks.

Posted by: Prickzilla at January 2, 2008 11:42 PM

Prickzilla ...

Somebody asked a question about the mother. The report above said:

"The victims' mother provided information that pointed to the victims' father as the suspect," the Irving police report stated.

Well, since the mom wasn't at the shooting, I would imagine she DID have some inkling about how bad things were, unless the 5*(&er came home with blood all over himself and confessed.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 2, 2008 11:42 PM

Robert's apparently gone to bed, but I'm still hanging around on this thread to see if Morgaan carries through on her threat to leave.

I just knew she wouldn't.

Hell hath no fury.

Posted by: Haid Dasalami at January 2, 2008 11:43 PM

Awake says,

She is more than welcome to form her own unvisited blog...

Thanks for your spot on post Awake.

I don't mean to pile on here, but I had a similar exchange with Morgaan a while back when I simply questioned her stats concerning the number of Congolese who died because of Belgian colonialism.

If I would have known that such sensitivities would arise to the point of all hell breaking loose, I wouldn't have bothered to "play her game" with a response.

But, I have to agree with your aforementioned statement about Morgaan forming her own blog.

So Morgaan? What about it? Do you have your own blog or any intention of creating one?

Posted by: Aiken Bryce at January 2, 2008 11:44 PM

interestinconundrum said:

"Did you see the comment beside her picture? "I don't want to become a memory.""

Also, the smiley face after her name is strange. It's not a frown but a smile, yet it is reversed from the normal ":)" smiley face emoticon people tend to use. So it stands out...

"AMINA (:"

And then there is her quote: "Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive."

It is easy to read into it, but perhaps she was expressing her unhappiness at being trapped under that Islamofascist "father." Very sad.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 11:48 PM

Morgaan, I served with Napoleon Bonaparte. I knew Napoleon. Napoleon was a friend of mine. Morgaan, Napoleon never sanctioned child killing.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 2, 2008 11:55 PM

"She is more than welcome to form her own unvisited blog, displaying her self-proclaimed divinity."

HerHeiness.Snob.com may be a suitable site name, and then she can ban & sue unsuspecting nuisance posters at will. Enter at your own risk!

Posted by: champ at January 2, 2008 11:56 PM

Wimbledon Wombie ...

Well, since you served with Napoleon and can vouch for his attitude towards children (we'll leave off those Russian kids he shelled), that settles it.

However, that is a French code, no matter how you slice it, but the fact it's still there is PURELY Islamic. Period. When they tried to get rid of 340, the imams said it was UNISLAMIC to do so. So there you have it.

Meanwhile, the police found those girls in the father's cab, parked in front of a hotel. So he never went home apparently, which means to me could well have had an escape planned. So the police stake out the house for 5 hours and then find out he's not there.

Meanwhile, looks like Lewisville is a good ways from the Mexican border, but he could maybe have made it in that time. But it sure looks 100% premeditated, and I think whoever said he's on his way to Egypt might be right.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 12:02 AM

What Hugh said.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at January 3, 2008 12:03 AM

Morgaan Sinclair: Thanks for your reply but I wish you'd just summarize what Warwick or Eastwick or Northwick or Peacewick maintained rather than referencing most every contention that you make. There's a time for research and there's a time for just spittin' stuff out in plain English. Now is such a time for the latter.

Hey, how about a straight and simple answer to my last queries to you? Here they are again: How come the Napoleonic Code didn't allow for or excuse honor killings in France but apparently did so in the Middle East? Doesn't this argue for the culprit being something other than the Code? If you reply, I want YOUR THOUGHTS and not someone else's.

Posted by: Wellington at January 3, 2008 12:03 AM

There was a poster here in the early days of JW named Havoc....he was right.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at January 3, 2008 12:05 AM

When I heard that the bastard was not at his home my first thought was that the police should start working the judges to get warrants to enter area mosques. Anybody want to take bets on whether or not he scadaddled to a mosque after murdering his children?

Also, it was asked if the DA would use the sorry sack of pig droppings' religion against him. I believe Robert said it was unlikely. I'm going to add my 2 cents worth. I'm no lawyer but that would be a big no. It is dangerous for the DA to introduce a perps religion. It could backfire by giving reasonable doubt and make the DA look like he/she is on a fishing expedition. Better to fry the fatback with the secular law and let the defense bring it up so as to look like he's grasping at anything to save his worthless hide. Then the DA could go for the jugular and point out that ignorance does not excuse one from the law, etc. Not to mention, why run if you believe you are in the right? Don't forget, prosecuting a case isn't only about the law, it's about courtroom strategy and tactics. CAIR will come out and say it's not an islam problem, blah blah blah. Don't be surprised if the defense goes with a temporary insanity defense. Oh, yes, the Dallas County DA should make sure that the idiot who derailed the Federal HLF case is no where near the courthouse. Also, don't be surprised to hear for a change of venue.

Posted by: Kevin at January 3, 2008 12:07 AM

Wellington ...

I have a friend saying that in Jordan it's Articles 340 AND Article 98.

Article 340 states that "he who discovers his wife or one of his female relatives committing adultery with another, and he kills, wounds or injures one or both of them, is exempt from any penalty".

It adds that "he who discovers his wife, or one of his female ascendants or descendants or sisters with another in an unlawful bed and he kills, wounds or injures one or both of them, benefits from a reduction of penalty."

When there was an attempt to rescind it, the Muslim Brotherhood were the ones who issue several fatawa saying its excision would be unIslamic.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 12:10 AM

I wonder how many other young people throughout the world live in fear of being murdered by their parents for abandoning strict forms of Islam. There must be tens of millions.

It is not enough to protect our freedoms in North America. We must take the fight for liberty to humanity enslaved by Islamic tyranny. A new long cold war against Islam must begin. We defeated the evil of communism and we can defeat the evil of political Islam. They have inferior cultures which, without oil, produce little wealth. They have few weapons. Many within Islam, when they learn that Mohammad was an evil tyrant and that much they have heard about Islamic superiority is a lie, they will abandon it. The mullahs know this, which is why they must control what their people see and hear.

It is time to take this long culture war to the enemy with all the determination we used against the evil of Communism. Islam is nothing but a petty projection of Arabic ideals and will fall to dust when exposed to the light of truth and the convictions of free humanity.

Posted by: James Martel at January 3, 2008 12:15 AM

Kevin,

Not to worry. That worthless piece of shi'ite is on a plane back to the pyramids. In fact, he's probably already landed and has been picked up by his extended family and they are on their way to celebrate the joyful return of the effing hero.

What courage. What wisdom. What the hell are we doing still letting these people into our country?

This guy has been in Texas for about two decades. Earth to the drive-bys and bleeding heart Islam apologists: he just ain't going to assimilate. Sorry.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 3, 2008 12:16 AM

Happy Granada Day!

Posted by: senatortombstone at January 3, 2008 12:21 AM

Isabellathecrusader said:

"This guy has been in Texas for about two decades. Earth to the drive-bys and bleeding heart Islam apologists: he just ain't going to assimilate. Sorry."

You got that right. And what economic benefit does he or most other Muslim immigrants bring to the US?

This folly of mass immigration, particularly from Muslim countries, must end.

Let CAIR keep pressing the issue of supposed immigration delays of Muslims (if only) with the Justice Department or whomever else they choose. If they keep pushing it, maybe one day the government will be more motivated to break up the CAIR entity.

There is not humanitarian or economic justification for mass immigration, especially from Muslim countries where huge numbers of people are inherently hostile to the West.

The killer of Amina and Sarah was a Muslim cabdriver from Egypt. The killer of Aqsa was a Muslim cabdriver from Pakistan. Do we really need more killer Muslim cabdrivers in the West?

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at January 3, 2008 12:30 AM

Isabella ...

>This guy has been in Texas for about two decades. Earth to the drive-bys and bleeding heart Islam apologists: he just ain't going to assimilate. Sorry.>

No, he's not going to assimilate. But I don't think the sun will come up tomorrow morning before the Muslims at the Wahhabi mosques start whining that they are being profiled or discriminated against.

They'll say it's not Islam.

My question is: If it isn't Islam why is Muzammil Siddiqui putting out videos telling women how to be women in Islam, and why does the head of CAIR in Phoenix stress that he gave his wife a *choice* about whether she wore a scarf (like it's HIS choice to make), and why are all the imams preaching "purity" for women from the masjid.

But that's not what we'll hear, and I don't seriously this guy would be convicted in Texas. Those guys planted a jury member or two at the HLF trial and destroyed the trial. And people are too chicken to convict. Finding a jury with a collective spine these days is hard.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 12:32 AM

Maybe the police should check with the airlines to see if the father purchased a one way ticket to Egypt in the last couple of months which would lend credence to premeditation.

Posted by: dms at January 3, 2008 12:36 AM

Yo Isabellathecrusader,

You may be right. However my gut says he's hiding in the Dallas area. Very easy to hide there. Bunch of small towns like Richardson, Plano, Mesquite, Carrollton, Addison, well you get the picture. As far as him hopping on a plane, I would think he would be weary of airport security, no matter how ineffective it can be. Why risk it? How did he vacate the area? So many questions.

Posted by: Kevin at January 3, 2008 12:37 AM

hey y'all, this is interesting but i have to point something out, i dont post here alot because i fear being out of my league but this needs to be addressed

Morgan, i have mad respect for you, your post the other day on how the male dominince role is sytemic throughout islam was well put together, I showed it to several lady friends of mine.

But the problem is your histography is very tilted towards feminism. In some cases things need to be looked at through this view, but not always. It is much like marxism that can't look at anything without bringing up classism.

Also this quote by yourself was discrediting towards yourself.
"Fine. I'll leave, which is clearly what you want. But don't accuse me of "enabling the Islamic evasion of responsibility". I don't spend half my time standing these guys down and defending you to take that one lying down. And I think you know what I mean. Or you should."

While you do not have problems bashing men and their "stupid" honor, I have to say in this quote of yours you sound like a petty woman who is just too upset and railing back to calmly contimplate fully what Mr. Spencer was saying.

Agian i have respect for you, but take it easy on the male bashing cause its the american machismo that will also save this country.

And dont attack me, cause i grew up next to Berkely Ca, raised by an self empowered mother who is herself a femminist whom i love dearly. I am fully aware of the ways to view history and the feminist views are as flawed as any "ism" views, rather we should look at all history with objective, reasoned views that takes the events in each of their own contexts.

Posted by: 19thgenamerican at January 3, 2008 12:39 AM

Robert was right...some battles are not worth fighting...So I only have one thing to say to you Morgaan...Thank you for fight for womens rights everywhere. Everywhere needs more strong women to get involved...

I wonder how much apostasy ideology plays in muslim honor killing. After all, the shame on the family, is do to the daughter(s) unmuslim like behavior.
That's nearly always the case, is it not?
Unmuslim or not muslim enough. Violating any laws in the book of Sharia, could make you an apostate in someones eye's. And most of the scholars and schools agree, that if the death penalty cannot be carried out by an Islamic authority, it is the duty of individual muslims to do it with no penalty.
Who better than a father, uncle, brother, or all of them killing the shameful apostate.

Maybe that's a stretch, but some of it fits...

Posted by: duh_swami at January 3, 2008 12:40 AM

19thgenamerican...I lived in Berkeley CA for seven years, leaving in 1984. A very colorful place...

Posted by: duh_swami at January 3, 2008 12:44 AM

Well Kevin,

He wouldn't have to worry about airport security because nobody's going to profile him while the security people are busy patting down elderly nuns, my grandma, and Pamela over at Atlas Shruggs.

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/12/homeland-securi.html

His passport doesn't say Yaser Abdel Said anymore but something a little more innocuous, like Billy Bob Sneed or John Smith, or maybe even Rico Suav-ae. And since all the dhimmis have had their sensitivity training, he probably spit on them as he passed through security and they ran after him bowing and exclaiming, "Oh thank you, sir."

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 3, 2008 12:48 AM

Duh_Swami ...

I think it's real complex. As must be obvious, I read psychicatrist Jerrold Post a lot, and several other psychicatrists. Here's a composite from several points of view.

In Islamic culture, from the time a boy is very young he is trained to believe two things:

(1) His religion is superior. Therefore Muslims SHOULD be at the top of world culture. BUT they aren't. Therefore he experiences "shame" (ego shame, not real shame) because he should be exalted but is not. And therefore he also feels rage that he is being "done wrong" by a world culture that does not appreciate his superiority. That's the first problem, and it's ALL projected outward

(2) As a man he is superior to a woman. Particularly if he has been raised in a madrassa, he has probably been removed from all female contact by the time he is 7, and he will not have female contact again until he is a fully grown man. He will have no idea what to do. In order to assauge his anxiety he will adopt a bullyish attitude toward women, and maybe even hate them. But mostly he will have an ongoing crisis in which he substitutes control over EVERYTHING in her life to try to prove to himself that he has everything under control.

(3) In Islamic philosophy, a man's VALUE is established by how well his women are under control. Hence, the shame he feels if one of the women in his family is independent or "slutty". That's, of course, the worst. A slutty woman is the worst thing on the planet and a TOTAL shame.

This guy NEVER got out of this culture, and, in fact, because Muslim men have such an extraordinary amount of control over women, it's very convenient, and they don't want to give it up. AND, his standing in his little nonassimilated enclave supports and reinforces this all the time.

Meanwhile, the psychiatric profile is that the male is stuck in the genital phase, in which all women are a form of mother, and rage attends her every smallest failure.

Put another ways, these guys are going through a permanent limbo of "terrible twos" while weilding all the power, unable and unwilling to take any responsibility for their sexuality, about which they have no clue what to do. That women are attractive just engenders more rage, more sense of worthlessness, and more sense of being out of control. So they cover them while dreaming about virgins in heaven.

And for sure, they DECLARE any woman an apostate or heretic who doesn't comply, and it's OK to kill her if she doesn't.

But most of the psychicatric stuff I've read seems to indicate that what you have here is a man whose arrested development is so severe that it is extremely difficult to get him out of it, and mostly such a narcissistically self-centered outlook doesn't bode well for the man WANTING to deal with his problems.

And there's the sons of the father thing: it takes generations, and that's not even going to get it if people aren't even remotely willing to try to assimilate.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 12:54 AM

"...but take it easy on the male bashing cause its the American machismo that will also save this country."

You better believe it, and I'll take a great big helping of it here, anytime. In this fight against Islam, there is nothing like a great big double macho-man burger with cheese!

Beef-ey!!

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 3, 2008 12:55 AM

19thgenamerican ...

You might want to go back to the other thread and read how I said that the entire feminist movement failed.

However, I do think that women's rights is a huge issue. That's because I believe that radical societies are calmed by the influence of women when they are allowed into all segments of the culture. I tend actually to take a more traditional view of women, far more traditional than feminists, with whom I do not agree. The women's movement failed both for women and for children. It may have been bad before, but it is far worse now in terms of the way young girls are treated, and in the way that children aren't cared for by mothers or fathers in the way they need.

As for men, I happen to really love them. But I don't take any crap off them either. So I tend to have long-term men friends who are spectacularly honest and extraordinarily beautiful. So those are rich relationships, many of them decades old, and the newer ones are a profound joy.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 1:00 AM

19genamerican ...

I think you're not getting me at all. I have a son whose an Afghan war vet, and two surrogate sons in the military (they don't have moms), both chopper pilots, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan right now. My husband was the XO for the flagship of the 9th Fleet at one point in his career, and my father is former Air Force, and flew 22 straight months out of India to Mongolia and Japan. My house is full of men with some kind of sports equipment all the time, and you'll do fine in here if you don't get tangled up in a hockey stick or trip on one of those little handball rubber things.

Yes, beefy is good.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 1:05 AM

Isabella,

I grew up in Texas. He couldn't even pass for a Juan Valdez let alone a Billy Bob.lol Besides, don't you know we Texans are just the biggest bunch of redneck, beer swilling, cow-tippin', overall wearin', racists ever known? The boy don't stand a chance.lol Oh yes, gun rack truck drivers. Please feel free to add. A true Texan can take it.

Posted by: Kevin at January 3, 2008 1:12 AM

Isabellathecrusader...don't start cracking me up, I'm trying to be serious here...:) I have enough problem being serious as it is...

Morgaan...From what I have read, added to my psychiatric experience, I agree with that completely. #1. Seems like a good case of cognitive
dissonance...also that the fantasy of Islam is better than the reality of Islam...I also agree that taken as a whole it is very complex...Thanx...

Posted by: duh_swami at January 3, 2008 1:14 AM

OT but relevant
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080102/tv_nm/nbc_dc

Posted by: interestinconundrum at January 3, 2008 1:17 AM

LOL Isa! Beef-ey is best with EXTRA cheese!! Yum!

Posted by: champ at January 3, 2008 1:19 AM

Duh_Swami ...

Well, thanks for the gentle conversation. I appreciate it. ... Yeah, I think that cognitive dissonance is just huge.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 1:21 AM

Oh wait I am feeling the love ... of Islam wait ... wait .... oh the peace filling my heart with love ... wait wait ... oh yeah feel the peace. funny thing no major news outlet covered this ... wait wait ... I feel the love, tolerence, and peace of Islam.

Posted by: ethoman at January 3, 2008 1:57 AM

Kevin darlin',

I know a little bit about Texas 'cuz I lived there for a year during the Sesqucentennial (spelling?) and I'll bet most people here don't know what that is! My recollection of Texans is that they were polite and reserved, good humored and patriotic, didn't stick their noses in your business but were always happy to lend a helping hand. Oh, and they wore very cool western clothes, with cowboy boots and BIG hats. (And BIG belt buckles, only I never looked. Honest!) My concern about nothing being done to this person (I'm trying to be good this year, not call people names and not use the F-word) comes from the mistrial in the Holy Land Foundation case, although I'm pretty sure that was a one time deal and the prosecutors won't allow that mistake again. (The bully juror.) I hope I'm wrong, wrong, wrong about this guy catching a plane. It just so fits the M.O. of the cowardly Muslim man, thinking he's all that because he took care of his little honor problem.

There I go again. I can't stop crying for these girls.

Duh Swami, why, whatever do you mean? ; ) ; ) ; )

Champ and Morgan,

All my friends and family know I have a thing for Mel Gibson. He is my little Mel-burger with cheese and always will be. And even though I'm single and celibate due to my religion and a husband that is still breathing somewhere in the U.S., I loves da' men, and have the utmost respect for the physical strength they have that I don't. It will come to that someday, because history has shown us that these damned interlopers want what they can't have and go into automatic mode and kill/and or are killed in their pursuit to get it. Why you would be willing to kill yourself to get something that you can't have if you are dead is just beyond me. But the discussion here tonight has shed some light on the different way we view things.

The thing that we've got to get across this year is that those people who commit those crimes, for any reason, are damaged goods and they need to be punished or destroyed accordingly. This is self defense. But it needs to go further than that. James Martel said it on some thread this evening that we can't just sit here and fight defensively. We've got to take the fight to them, on their ground, where they live, not to do the Bush nation building thing but to destroy this foe, once and for all.

I'm not sitting by on this one. Sara and Amina, along with Aqsa, are too precious to just write off as three more poor Muslim girls who got killed by their fathers. I am spitting bullets mad about this and I intend to let everyone know what these cowards did, int he name of THEIR honor. Isn't honor something you are supposed to be willing to die for, not to kill some innocent for to take your sorry ass place?

Okay, I was planning to be in bed 3 1/2 hours ago, But you guys are just too much fun. But so that I don't completely screw up a fact finding mission I need to go on tomorrow, I'm going to get some sleep. Nighty-night everyone!

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 3, 2008 2:00 AM

Morgaan’s web, what a mystery to behold!

Morgaan said,
“But this little Napoleonic anachronism has wreaked havoc with a number of Islamic feminist lawyers who have tried to get these cases convicted.”

“Do you actually think that the people trying to stop this phenomena should be required by you to divide their list between honor killings by Muslims and honor killings — which are CALLED THAT by the people who do them — by others? If you don't think so, go ask any of the Muslim feminist lawyers you know, and they'll tell you.”

“You can accuse me of moral equivalency when you spend as much time doing research in service of Islamic feminists and lawyers who fight these cases as I do.”

“I have a friend saying that in Jordan..”

“I have a son whose an Afghan war vet, and two surrogate sons in the military (they don't have moms), both chopper pilots, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan right now. My husband was the XO for the flagship of the 9th Fleet at one point in his career, and my father is former Air Force, and flew 22 straight months out of India to Mongolia and Japan”

So many people she knows, so many places she has been, so many things she knows that you and I do not. Who knows so many “Islamic feminists and lawyers” who fight the good fight as she does? But wait, we are awaiting news from a dear friend she has in Turkey, Gulen the renowned Islamic scholar who will reform all of Islam and allay all our fears – she know him personally.

Can YOU follow this thread – I confess I cannot!

XO for the flagship of the 9th Fleet? 22 straight months out of India to Mongolia and Japan? If you’re gonna tell a lie…

I dunno, pretty much a head spinner she is!

Posted by: Davegreybeard at January 3, 2008 2:08 AM

Davegreybeard, I'm putting on the NBC gasmask to wade into this thread, to tell you I'll walk point for you any day. And if you need an extrication operation, I got you covered. oao.

Posted by: special_guest at January 3, 2008 2:26 AM

My husband was the XO for the flagship of the 9th Fleet…

Wait a second. I served in the 2nd Fleet I think (Atlantic). We transferred to the 5th Fleet (Persian or Arabian Gulf depending on who you were addressing). The 3rd Fleet is the Pacific if I remember right. My Dad was in the 7th (Japan). The 4th I think is Europe.

We don’t have a 9th Fleet.

When I Googled it Star Trek came up.

I knew she reminded me of the ex-wife.

http://www.9thfleet.com/

Back on topic: No man would ever shoot his daughter.

Posted by: pez at January 3, 2008 2:29 AM

Another mystery, what exactly is an “Islamic feminist”?

What beliefs would she hold to qualify her as a feminist and how would these mesh with Islam. Is she subject to beatings at the whim of her husband (or father) (4:38)? Or does the feminist part trump Islam and if so then does she still qualify as Islamic?

Amina would like to know Morgaan, what exactly will an “Islamic feminist” do to protect the next daughter of Islam?

Posted by: Davegreybeard at January 3, 2008 2:30 AM

Isabella,

Native Texan here, temporarily displaced from the greatest state ever allowed into the Union. BTW, sesquicentennial(just as hard to spell as say). I don't disagree that he could be on a plane over the ocean now, I just think he stayed in Texas. Seems like he acted pretty hastily, murdering them in his own cab. Granted that can also suggest he planned every aspect in advance, gut says no. Or that could just be dinner talking.:) I don't fear another HLF incident in this case. A double murder case is a bit different than the HLF case. Naturally it will all depend on the evidence they can gather as to whether he gets to rest on the bed in Huntsville. But this is all putting the cart before the horse, gotta catch the murder first. Ooops, sorry, don't mean to offend any apologists, suspect. Wait, yes I do.;)

Posted by: Kevin at January 3, 2008 2:30 AM

special_guest

Thanks buddy, I am in need of help quite frequently!

Posted by: Davegreybeard at January 3, 2008 2:37 AM

"No man would ever shoot his daughter"....but a heartless, soulless monster would.

My Father loved me and I knew it, that's because he was a real man with a soul.

Posted by: champ at January 3, 2008 2:57 AM

We must find the political will and step up to the plate and DO IT.

Posted by: pythagoras at January 2, 2008 10:34 PM

The only politician/candidate to step has stepped down due to lack of support from America. Yes, Tom Tancredo would have stepped up tot he plate. Now that America has rejected him and with the Clintons, Rudys, Obamas and other running for presidency 2008, Good Luck!

Posted by: Alert at January 3, 2008 3:47 AM

i know this is late and no one will read this but i had to add that Morgan, your discription of your family reminds me of what my mother says of our household. best wishes to you and keep up the good fight for my daughters as well the same for all our children.

and by the way i get you, its just that i prefer a softer view, thats ok for the both of us i hope, good noght to us all.

Posted by: 19thgenamerican at January 3, 2008 4:23 AM

Fez,
We don’t have a 9th Fleet.

OK, so perhaps she meant 19th or 39th fleet . We all make mistakes.
But that doesn't necessarily mean that we should doubt when she tells us that her house is
"... full of men with some kind of sports equipment all the time".
, or that she tends "to have long-term men friends who are spectacularly honest AND extraordinarily beautiful".
A rare combination, I admit, but not entirely impossible.

Posted by: thomas. h at January 3, 2008 4:35 AM

Islamic supremacy, the supremacy of Muslims over non-Muslims is a core Islamic tenet.

As is misogyny.

Muslims, at least in fundamentalist Islamic nations, subordinate non-Muslims; subjecting them to all manner of what Westerners would call injustices, even 'slitting an unbelievers throat', in keeping with the teachings of their 'complete way of life'.

And they do, especially in those most fundamentally Muslim nations, treat women horribly.

But I am still left to wonder, from this long thread, if the murders of Aqsa Parvez and these two girls can be attributed, in straight line unequivocal analysis, to Islamic teachings; those teachings at the end of the abrogation line and which are unarguably agreed to by each of the traditional schools of Islamic jurisprudence.

Or are these latest murders the result of foreign cultural norms which are guided--traditionally--by loose, ambiguous interpretations and understandings of Islamic texts.

Can the behavior of those two Muslim fathers be unarguably blamed on Islam?

Or is that a battle that is, in the strategic sense, best left unfought?

Would it help or hinder to bring Islam into this case?

Posted by: PRCS at January 3, 2008 4:49 AM

And I meant Pez, not Fez.

Posted by: thomas. h at January 3, 2008 5:00 AM

"Robert, is there any, even smallest, possibility that ideology can be taken into account at the court of law in a case like this one? Any lawyer here?"

Posted by: LazarOfSerbia at January 2, 2008 9:41 PM

What if, in the course of the trial, the Dallas cabbie lets slip that he killed his daughters in accordance with his understanding of Islam? Or if the prosecution is able to make an issue of it?

Would that then shine enough light on the incompatability of Islam and our Constitution (as Pythagoras notes above)to awaken the sleeping American giant?

Posted by: pythagoras at January 2, 2008 10:34 PM

Posted by: PRCS at January 3, 2008 5:20 AM

Thomas h,

If you are the ex-pat, NZ Muslim lawyer, how 'bout it.

In the final analysis, is Islam, as it is currently written, and as it is understood by Islamic scholars, compatible with the U.S. Constitution?

Or is it anathema?

Posted by: PRCS at January 3, 2008 5:24 AM

Pez ...

My son was aboard the USS Stennis, whatever fleet that is.

My husband served aboard a fleet in World War II and again in the Korean War, surface ships in the Pacific. Whatever Fleet that was. I thought he said the 9th, but perhaps I'm wrong. All those goodies are with the kids now. Apologies but I am unable to look it up, but it's one of the fleets that operated in the Pacific in WWII and in the 50s.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 6:45 AM

DaveGreyBeard

Islamic feminists are quite a group. They are Muslim women, many of them scholars, who don't believe Islam was ever intended to discriminate against women as it does. They point to core verses and use them in their unabrogated form. They generally take the early Meccan verses which profess equality and use them in court cases in African and Middle East countries to argue that a shari'a court cannot practice unequal penalties for men and women for the same crime. Those are the women who are lawyers.

Then there are Islamic scholars among them who are going back and retranslating the Qur'an from scratch on the theory that translations and "copying" in the early days had deliberate falsehoods inserted into them and deliberate attempts made to translate verses in a way that gave warlords and men of real ill intent towards women the advantages and excuses they sought. (This is horrifically true with the hadith. By the time Muhammad had been dead 150 years there were no less than 600,000 he was purported to have said. And no tape recorder. You'd think it was the Truman Show.) This is a dicey gambit, because any retranslation of the Qur'an is likely to get some woman killed.

They are rights activities all over the world, and they include Margot Badran, Asma Barlas, Taslima Nasreen, the late Konca Kuris, the women in Iran today signing the One Million Signatures petition, Shirin Ibadi, and many other writers, lawyers, doctors, and scholars.

They don't really like the term Islamic feminists as they don't want to be associated with the group in Sudan that was basically a Marxist group, which they are not.

In the beginning, they had an ambivalent attitude toward the kind of frontal assault we would engage in on this website, but I think that opinion has changed somewhat because only in-your-face international pressure has been able to save some women (like Qatif Girl) from lashes, jail and worse, and they know that. But it also makes it harder for them to operate without harassment.

They have had some spectacular successes, particularly that of Ghada Jamsheer in Qatar, whose divorce case wound up changing the country's laws. They are the ones who saved the Nigerian "adulteress'" life when her lover was let go, and they did it based on the equality verses in the Qur'an and argued it before a shari'a court and won.

I've no doubt their work will continue and do good things, but when radicalism is spreading so fast and when the younger generation of women can't wait to get that hijab on and suck up to the imam and get a picture of themselves in the newspaper, it seems frankly hopeless.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 6:58 AM

PRCS WROTE: "I am still left to wonder, from this long thread, if the murders of Aqsa Parvez and these two girls can be attributed, in straight line unequivocal analysis, to Islamic teachings; those teachings at the end of the abrogation line and which are unarguably agreed to by each of the traditional schools of Islamic jurisprudence.

Or are these latest murders the result of foreign cultural norms which are guided--traditionally--by loose, ambiguous interpretations and understandings of Islamic texts.

Can the behavior of those two Muslim fathers be unarguably blamed on Islam?"

..........

With Aqsa Parvez, this stuff was preached straight from the Masjid. Tarek Fatah and Farzana Hassan listed a whole bunch of mosque websites in Canada that published absolute SCREED about the hijab being obligatory, mantra that were scrubbed off the internet the day she died. And the head of the ISNA that runs her mosque said at a news conference that OF COURSE it brings shame on her family that she does not wear cover. It can be argued that it is *more* desert tribal and African tribal mores, but those mores were firmly entrenched in Islamic teachings within 50 years of Muhammad's death, and then Islam spread that across the entire Islamic world.

So, at this point, it doesn't matter where it started, Islam is spreading it. FGM isn't Islamic in origin, but NOW radical Islam is spreading it to Turkey, where it's never been practiced before, and it's obligatory in shafi'i Islam.

And even if you do point to tribalism, you still have the basic, core verses that say that women must obey men and that men can beat them ... and the ones where Muhammad says most inhabitants of hell or women ... and that sort of thing.

I'll stop saying it's Islamic when they stop preaching it in the mosques. I hold those guys directly responsible, particularly in the case of Aqsa Parvez. ISNA in both Canada and the USA are directly mouthpieces of the Wahhabists, and in the USA they are unindicted co-conspirators in terrorist financing, a little piece of information that did not appear in any article I read on Parvez's murder.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 7:07 AM

Thomas H.

"... full of men with some kind of sports equipment all the time".
, or that she tends "to have long-term men friends who are spectacularly honest AND extraordinarily beautiful".

When I lived in Florida and my son was an Mayport, there was a hurricane threatening Jacksonville, so the Navy pulled all the ships out to sea so they wouldn't crash into them docked at the base. They send all the swabbies scattering. The entire crypto department wound up at my house for four days and brought hockey gear with them as I lived near the huge double-rink in Orlando that has a separate ice sheet just for hockey jocks. Pads, sticks, face masks, jerseys, skates, sox (smelly), tape, sweats, and pucks scattered amid mounds of pizza boxes. What's not to love.

And spectacularly honest and extraordinarily beautiful go together well in men. If they're good men and honest brokers, they usually are very very beautiful.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 7:11 AM

Honor killings are a crime in the US. The History lesson is all well and good but let us keep focused on the case in hand. Islam is the problem at hand. Let us not muddy the waters that allow the Fish to get away.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at January 3, 2008 7:32 AM

If you are the ex-pat, NZ Muslim lawyer, how 'bout it.

PRCS

???

I am not. What makes you think so?

Posted by: thomas. h at January 3, 2008 8:32 AM

Morgaan...I think the hostility that you are sometimes subjected to here, is due to your self confidence, and no nonsense style. As we know, a good education and a wall full of degrees, does not necessarily guarantee a decent human being. There is something else behind behind decency, because you don't have to be educated to be decent, but it may help. I perceive you as a decent person. It does not matter much if we agree or disagree on some point or other. We don't have to win all the battles as long as we win the war. I consider most all the regular
posters here the same way. I refrain from conflict with people on the same side as myself. I don't see much point to it. I want to antagonize the enemy, not my fellow warriors. Everyone has their own expertise in something, I excel in procrastination. I have developed it to a high art form.
Four people are employed full time just to keep me propped up. I admire people like you who don't have to struggle into a sitting position. And you can stand without help, I could do that also, but every time I try, laziness and procrastination overwhelm me.
At any rate Morgaan I consider you a valuable asset to the struggle against impending Islam, and your efforts to improve the lot of women everywhere...Thank you...

Posted by: duh_swami at January 3, 2008 10:32 AM

When their father is brought to a fair trial, what is the jury going to say? It is not enough to convict.
Posted by: The Resistance

They will talk a lot about honor killing, but they will convict on 1st degree murder, two counts.

Posted by: duh_swami at January 3, 2008 10:41 AM

Morgaan,

You, actually, said:

"my house IS full of men with some kind of sports equipment ALL THE TIME", - not:
"my house WAS at some time in the past full of men with some kind of sports equipment for FOUR DAYS".

I could see that you wanted to make some kind of a point with the first version, but I can't see what it is that you want to say with the second, corrected, version.
Please try to, in the posting in question, replace the first with the latter and see how completely incongruous it is.

And spectacularly honest and extraordinarily beautiful go together well in men.

Only in men?

Also, does it mean that spectacularly honest and homely is a mismatch? And if so if a well wishing person tells me to either do something about face of mine, or stop being so spectacularly honest I should heed his advice and, as my face is beyond help, downgrade my honesty from spectacular to merely plain?

Posted by: thomas. h at January 3, 2008 10:51 AM

I'm returning to this late in the day, but my curiosity is piqued. I assume that modern Jordan was subject to Ottoman law, until 1918. Was the Napoleonic Code commonly used in the Ottoman Empire?
At the end of the day, the important thing is that this crime was committed in Texas, not Jordan or Brazil.

Posted by: MP at January 3, 2008 11:03 AM

Thomas H.,

I'm sure you have a very nice face. At any rate, I'll take sincere honesty over beauty any day.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 3, 2008 11:12 AM

Was the Napoleonic Code commonly used in the Ottoman Empire?

MP

And, in case it was, where can we find well documented correspondence between the introduction of the Napoleonic Code and a surge in number of honour killings in the Ottoman Empire?

Posted by: thomas. h at January 3, 2008 11:22 AM

Some of us just love the sound of our own voice.

Doesn't make sense, really, since we're not actually speaking. But you know what I mean.

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at January 3, 2008 11:43 AM

Regardless of culture or religion, I cannot fathom the depths of insanity one would have to reach to murder your own children. If the intent is to teach them a lesson in cultural or religious mores, how does murder accomplish this goal. I cannot see how a culture or religion that encourages its members or adherents to murder their own children can possibly survive.

Posted by: HereticInfidel at January 3, 2008 12:13 PM

I'm sure you have a very nice face..

Well, while "very nice" may not be the most apt description of my face, as long as no one suggests I should use a full burqa I am happy.

I'll take sincere honesty over beauty any day.

I am greatly comforted by your priorities dear Isabella. It is very sweet of you to say so.

Posted by: thomas. h at January 3, 2008 12:30 PM

Morgaan wrote,
“my father is former Air Force, and flew 22 straight months out of India to Mongolia and Japan”

What time frame was this Morgaan? Was it during WWII and he was bombing Japan? (Guess that would be a 1-way trip so that doesn’t work) Did he have special permission from Mao to make the stop in Mongolia?

I find all this fascinating.

Posted by: Davegreybeard at January 3, 2008 12:33 PM

thomas h.

QUOTING FROM ABOVE:

You, actually, said:

"my house IS full of men with some kind of sports equipment ALL THE TIME", - not:
"my house WAS at some time in the past full of men with some kind of sports equipment for FOUR DAYS".

I could see that you wanted to make some kind of a point with the first version, but I can't see what it is that you want to say with the second, corrected, version.
Please try to, in the posting in question, replace the first with the latter and see how completely incongruous it is.

END QUOTE

There is no "corrected version".

I have seven children, plus nieces, nephews, and young neighbors, and there are people in this house all the time. I ran the famous tin-can atmospheric pressure experiment for 12 neighborhood kids YESTERDAY MORNING.

Did you have your relatives to Thanksgiving 10 years ago? Two years ago? If you tell an anecdote about the latter, does that mean that the former did not exist. Or is one allowed to have almost continuous experience (she says, moving a hockey stick to the wall).

You're not conversing with me. You're interrogating, and apparently you are trying to find something to find fault with.

Now, excuse me. I am going ice skating.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at January 3, 2008 12:38 PM

ImNoDhimmi,

Some of us just love the sound of our own voice...you know what I mean.

Are you talking, or referring to me? If so then I don't know what you mean.
But, I concede, as a general observation it is quite true.

Posted by: thomas. h at January 3, 2008 12:49 PM

"The killer of Amina and Sarah was a Muslim cabdriver from Egypt. The killer of Aqsa was a Muslim cabdriver from Pakistan. Do we really need more killer Muslim cabdrivers in the West?"

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble

No, we don't need any more killer Muslims (of any sort) in the West.

You know what I keep thinking, about this case? Aminah and Sarah were born here. I don't recall if the same is true of Aqsa Parvez, but anyway...

What kind of fool expects his children, born in the West, in America, for God's sake, to behave as though they were born and reared in Egypt?

Maybe he wasn't so strict in his dress codes for his daughters, as Parvez pere was. But one of the girls did something that offended the man, and it's almost a certainty that it had something to do with the Islamic sensibilities that formed him in his native Egypt.

The other daughter was probably killed for trying to defend her sister, if only with words. From the My Space site, it looks like they were close.

It's going to be interesting to find out what the murders were really all about. My bet? It's going to be something less egregious than a refusal to rear a hijab.

Posted by: Abscedere at January 3, 2008 1:10 PM

Morgaan,

While one, at the same time, can be "extraordinarily beautiful" and say there is no difference between having "house full of men with (or without) some kind of sports equipment ALL THE TIME", and "house full of men with for FOUR DAYS" - one can not both maintain it and remain "spectacularly honest".

Now, excuse me. I am going ice skating.

You are not only fully excused, but greatly encouraged.
I hope you will be accompanied by all these "men with some kind of sport equipment". Should be fun.

Posted by: thomas. h at January 3, 2008 1:38 PM

I wonder if this is an example of what Rosie means by "ordinary Moms and Dads".

So nice of Daddy Dearest to save his 2 Girls from the freedom the US gives them to chose a life of their own. One was and the other near, the age where they could tell dear old Dad that they were out of there. How little faith he must have had in the teaching of Morals to his children, to sink to such a level of depravity.

The sad part is in the reporting. If they were Christan, the Press would be all over the "God" aspect.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at January 3, 2008 2:28 PM

thomas. h -

I would venture to guess that ImNoDhimmi is referring to the Mouth - not you.

Posted by: champ at January 3, 2008 2:40 PM

Morgaan’s web,

“My husband served aboard a fleet in World War II and again in the Korean War, surface ships in the Pacific.”
“I have seven children, plus nieces, nephews, and young neighbors, and there are people in this house all the time.”

Makes him at least in his eighties, how old is she - with all these people and “young men with sports equipment” in her house “all the time”? Not impossible but it makes one wonder.

“I have a son whose an Afghan war vet, and two surrogate sons in the military (they don't have moms), both chopper pilots, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan right now. My husband was the XO for the flagship of the 9th Fleet at one point in his career, and my father is former Air Force, and flew 22 straight months out of India to Mongolia and Japan”

THERE IS NO 9th Fleet. Normally one is the XO for an admiral or captain not a ship. Makes one wonder.
Anyone aware of an air campaign that lasted “22 straight months out of India to Mongolia and Japan”? I study a fair amount of history but I must have missed that one.

Claimed with extreme vigor that Fethullah Gulen no longer believed in the “stealth” takeover of the world by Islamists and had not for “30 years”. Yet when a speech by Gulen was produced saying exactly that in 1999, Morgaan claimed that it was only AIRED at that time suggesting that the speech was actually given much earlier. She never produced any evidence to show when it was actually given. The issue was never resolved.

Claimed that some posters here called for “the complete subjugation of Muslims” when asked to produce any evidence of such a claim she shifted the subject and failed to respond. The matter stands as a fabricated smear of unnamed JW posters by Morgaan.

Claimed that Sharia in the M.E. was actually derived from French law spread by Napoleon. When it was shown that the law was instituted some 10 years after Napoleon was there, she turned on a massive fog machine citing many obscure references. The issue was never resolved.

From all of this and more, I can only conclude that Morgaan is either a fraud or a person who indulges in deceit with amazing frequency. I have no doubt she will have much to say about this.

(I may need some cover special_guest! )

Posted by: Davegreybeard at January 3, 2008 3:47 PM

In WWII U.S. aircraft (Army Air Force) regularly flew from British India with supplies for Chinese forces battling Japan. The route entailed flying over the Himalayas, and was known as flying over "the Hump." This massive effort at resupply lasted from 1942-45 when British military success in Burma made it redundant.

Posted by: MP at January 3, 2008 4:09 PM

"....is either a fraud or a person who indulges in deceit with amazing frequency."

Bingo! I don't pay attention to anything she says any more because she's been found out one too many times twisting facts beyond recognition; and the only degree she probably has hanging on her wall is a PhD in Fabricating Facts -- you can buy them on-line for a nominal fee.

Posted by: champ at January 3, 2008 4:17 PM

I live right outside of Annapolis which is full of Navy folks both serving and retired. One family I know is headed by a raetired admiral, aged 82 whose career spanned the last months of WWII, and continued through Korea and Vietnam. His youngest son is 35 and currently at sea in the Gulf. His oldest son is 53 and just retired this summer. Everytime someone they served with passes through town they camp out at the Admirals house so there is a frequent rotation of officers or former officers ranging in age from mid twenties to late eighties who come and go. Perhaps Morgaans household has similar guests and visitors.

Posted by: MP at January 3, 2008 4:19 PM

MP,

I am well aware of “flying the Hump”. This air campaign had NOTHING to do with flying to Japan.

But when you tell the tall tail to impress, how much "better" it sounds if you give it just a little more “kick” by making something up to add at the end. If you do it once, you will make it a habit, as seems to be the case here.

As when debating someone who disagrees with you here, how about just a little fabrication about how your opponent favors “the complete subjugation of Muslims”. There, that was pretty easy, probably go unchallenged in the heat of debate and you get the satisfaction of scoring a dirty little point.

Except some of us Kuffars are paying attention.

Posted by: Davegreybeard at January 3, 2008 5:22 PM

I would venture to guess that ImNoDhimmi is referring to the Mouth - not you.

Champ, it seems, and I hope, you are right.

And "the Mouth" is a good name. But "the Faucet" is not bad either.

Posted by: thomas. h at January 3, 2008 5:23 PM

LOL!! Good one - if only we could call a plumber to fix the problem. :-)

Posted by: champ at January 3, 2008 5:40 PM

I would say that a public execution of their father was in place.
And there is no doubt that this is a "Mo" thing.

Posted by: ElizaDoolittle at January 3, 2008 6:51 PM

What's all this chatter about the Ottoman Empire and the Napoleonic Code? Napoleon Bonaparte, General of an expeditionary army of Revolutionary France, under The Directorate, led a campaign in Egypt, Palestine, and Syria in 1798 - 1799. He abandoned that army, marooned as it was by British blockade, to its fate, returning to France, in October, 1799. He became "Emperor of the French" in December, 1804.

The Napoleonic Code, which formed the basis for Civil Law in several Francophone lands, the Low Countries, Italy and parts of Germany, was drafted and promulgated from 1804, when Napoleon was First Consul, through completion in 1810.

At NO TIME was it in force in ANY part of the then-Ottoman Empire (French rule in North Africa does not predate 1830; the French League-of-Nations Mandate over Lebanon and Syria lasted 1920 - 1944).

Posted by: John C at January 4, 2008 1:07 AM

What's all this chatter about the Ottoman Empire and the Napoleonic Code? Napoleon Bonaparte, General of an expeditionary army of Revolutionary France, under The Directorate, led a campaign in Egypt, Palestine, and Syria in 1798 - 1799. He abandoned that army, marooned as it was by British blockade, to its fate, returning to France, in October, 1799. He became "Emperor of the French" in December, 1804.

The Napoleonic Code, which formed the basis for Civil Law in several Francophone lands, the Low Countries, Italy and parts of Germany, was drafted and promulgated from 1804, when Napoleon was First Consul, through completion in 1810.

At NO TIME was it in force in ANY part of the then-Ottoman Empire (French rule in North Africa does not predate 1830; the French League-of-Nations Mandate over Lebanon and Syria lasted 1920 - 1944).

Posted by: John C at January 4, 2008 1:07 AM

One wonders if "the Plumber" fixed the "Faucet".

Posted by: Davegreybeard at January 4, 2008 3:45 PM

"One wonders if "the Plumber" fixed the "Faucet"."

LOL! I think we're experiencing the calm before the next storm -- I mean the calm before the next Hurricane. Which will take more than a plumber to restrain, but an act of God.

Posted by: champ at January 4, 2008 4:49 PM

I dunno, plumbers do some pretty insightful stuff sometimes.

Posted by: Davegreybeard at January 4, 2008 10:42 PM