The baggage is huge. I mean 1400 years of violence in the name of Islam and Sharia is hard to get rid off. But hey lets get them into the United State we have enough police officers to handle these things. I mean we got the time and the money to keep an eye on these things. Guard our airports, monuments our citizens our laws. Hell we have enough money to give to the UMMAH as well.

Posted by: savsiv at July 7, 2008 10:21 AM

oh that islamic love and tolerance ...
straight from the prehistoric caves

Posted by: TINBH at July 7, 2008 10:24 AM

Toronto, Dallas, Atlanta. And perhaps many others unreported or unrecognized as honor-killings. At least they caught this guy before he could flee back to Islamistan.
Get used to it, North Americans. Like the Antiques Roadshow, it's coming to your city before long.

Posted by: ebonystone at July 7, 2008 10:31 AM

Reading the rest of the article, I can't say it's a bad idea to try to get to know your neighbors.

But you can't necessarily use someone's willingness to make small talk as a good basis for trust.

Posted by: George guy at July 7, 2008 10:39 AM

People - the names of the father and daughter sound Indian - Chaudhry Rashad and Sandela Kanwal. Are they Hindu or Mohammedan?

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 10:42 AM

Because I was going to send this comment to one of the reporters of the article:

"Question: Why can't you say that this is a Muslim family, and that the murder of the daughter is called an Honor Killing, or Daughter-Slaughter, and is a commonplace in Islamic culture? Why can't you say that due to Mohammedan immigration to the U.S. we now have barbaric Islamic Honor Murders in America? Such as the Honor Murders last year in Dallas of sisters Amina and Sarah Said by their Islamic dear old dad? Who is named, appropriately, for a murderer, Mohammed, and has fled the U.S. like the coward he is for Egypt. Where of course he won't be condemned for his Daughter-Slaughter (hey, two at once!) but rather praised and assured that his killing of his own daughters was justified. Allahu akbar!

Muslims. Islam. Honor Killings (Daughter-Slaughter) barbaric culture - why can't any of these 100% apropos words and phrases be included in your article? Political Correctness? Ah, yes, that's it. Don't you know that everybody sees through your PC charade? As transparent as onion-skin paper.

I have to be sure that this family of "Pakistani descent" is Muslim , even though they have Indian-sounding names.

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 10:47 AM

Are they Hindu or Mohammedan?-Posted by: darcy

Darcy,

If Chaudhry Rashad and Sandela Kanwal weren't muslim, why would the

local Islamic leader, Shahid Malik

portray this murder as a consequence of "depression."

Posted by: justamomof4 at July 7, 2008 10:49 AM

The idiocy of our press is just amazing.
He was depressed.
How many cases like this are they going to excuse?
The AP (I won't link to the story because I might get a bill from them) has an article about our military bombing a "wedding party" again. Every time we kill jihadists, it was a wedding party.
How many years has this been going on?
But I forgot, the left thinks we are the Nazis now.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at July 7, 2008 10:54 AM

Until we are willing accept that Islam is not a religion, then this sort of cultural expression will continue. Seriously, does anyone honestly think that the outrage of dhimmis will have any effect on the behavior of muslims?

We are being conquered through Islamic Imperialism just as the Persians were conquered. Just as the Byzantines were conquered through Islamic Imperialism.

There are pragmatic solutions to ending Islamic Imperialism and the Jihad that currently eats away at our defenses. Sadly, I am not able to share these simple but effective methods anymore.

We dare not name the enemy.
We dare not attack the enemy.

Sad.

Posted by: mike trivisonno at July 7, 2008 11:00 AM

I got you, justamomof4. Because of the Indian-sounding names I just wanted to be sure. I'll now send my comment to the AJC reporter.

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 11:01 AM

"The family is very upset and stressed," said Shahid Malik of the Pakistani American Community of Atlanta.

Yep, she made a mess as she died.
Probably interrupted those prayers we hear about.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at July 7, 2008 11:01 AM

Looks like the face of permanent anger to me.

Posted by: Sounder at July 7, 2008 11:01 AM

Darcy,

They are Muslims. They have Hindu names because you have to remember that some of them were converted and kept their Hindu names. Another such example is Vora that is a Hindu name but are also converted Muslims who have kept their Hindu names.

Posted by: savsiv at July 7, 2008 11:07 AM

What a scary looking man! Imagine having a father that looked like him.

If the man says he strangled his daughter "as a matter of honor", why does Shadid Malik suggest it was all due to depression? As always, the taqiyyah and the excuses immediately fly.

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at July 7, 2008 11:11 AM

I can consider a Muslim to have had any moral gidance. The natural humamity is gone.

Posted by: Ruebacca at July 7, 2008 11:12 AM

People, here's an article about this where you can e-mail the reporters with your comments.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/clayton/stories/2008/07/06/claymurder_0707_web1.html?cxntnid=amn070708e

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 11:13 AM

I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 11:15 AM

Darcy,

You can tell they are Muslims because of his other name "Rashad" that is a Muslim name. The Chaudry name is a Hindu name. Just at Iftkhar Chaudry the Pakistani lawyer. His name Iftkhar is Muslim and Chaudry is Hindu.

Posted by: savsiv at July 7, 2008 11:19 AM

People, this is the Chief of Police of Clayton County, Jeff Turner's, e-mail if you want to comment on this as an obvious Islamic Honor Killing, and no excuses for "depression" by the "local Islamic leader" Shahid Malik:

jeff.turner@co.clayton.ga.us

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 11:32 AM

Darcy,

Chief Turner doesn't decide whether it's tried as an honor killing, nor does he decide what it's called as trial approaches.

There are no laws on the books here in the US that deal with the phenomenon of honor killing as defined and committed by Muslims.

There appears to be prima facie evidence that the elements of proof for the crime of Premeditated Murder have been met in this case.

The law doesn't allow for a Muslim extrapolation.
Nor should it.

Leave Chief Turner alone.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 11:41 AM

"Things like that don't happen in this neighborhood," Hannah [a neighbor] said.

They do now, Mr. Hannah. And they will happen more and more as long as our clueless government continues to follow our current insane immigration laws.

Posted by: ebonystone at July 7, 2008 11:51 AM

Chief Turners' job ended when he arrested this piece of garbage..Now the courts will deal with him. I am sure the "seizures" this indivudal suffered after the attack was actually a panic attack --of the realization that he would be in an America prison for a very long time..

Posted by: Ladywolfnl at July 7, 2008 11:56 AM

Uh, excuse me, undaunted, don't tell me what to do! There's absolutely nothing wrong with a citizen commenting to the police, including the Chief. Nothing. So, don't "command" me ever again.

Here's my comment to the Chief:

Dear Chief Turner,

Our family just read about the Islamic Honor Killing by one Chaudhry Rashad, who murdered his daughter because her divorce would "dishonor" the family.

An Islamic Honor Murder took place in Dallas last year. The father murdered his two daughters, Amina and Sarah Said, because they were too "Westernized." He fled back to Egypt. Great you have Rashad in jail where he belongs. A previous Honor Murder took place in Toronto last year when a father murdered his daughter, Aqsa Parvez. We hope you will read about those two cases and see how this one is the same - all Islamic Honor Murders.

We also read that your local Islamic leader is trying to fob off the murder as "depression." No. This is an obvious Honor Killing, also called "Daughter-Slaughter," and should be named as such. Honor Murders of girls and women are a commonplace in barbaric Islamic culture.

As Muslims have immigrated to the West, they have brought their barbaric customs with them - Honor Killings of girls and women being among the most heinous of those customs.

We hope that the victim, Sandela Kanwal, slain by her own father just for wanting a divorce, will eventually receive justice in the Atlanta court system.

Sincerely, and Best Wishes,

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 12:04 PM

A pattern is developing here that will be repeated again and again in this country by Muslim men, deeply confused human beings that so many of them are. All the more reason to prosecute each and every time to the maximum extent which the law allows. No excuses.

I have to wonder too whether such a heinous Islamic custom won't have the long-term salutary effect of insuring that many young women raised in a Muslim family here in America will eventually leave Islam completely once they have the chance. A silver lining here perhaps in this very dark cloud.

Posted by: Wellington at July 7, 2008 12:07 PM

Yea, that'll show 'em.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 12:07 PM

Imagine a beautiful cruise liner floating on the blue sea. Looks great, clean, roomy enough to accommodate the paying customers.
Then small boats come at the liner from every direction. The people aboard help the poor refugees aboard, it's getting a little crowded.
The small boats keep coming, the deck now is littered with cooking fires and garbage. There is no room for the paying customers to enjoy what they paid for. The luxury liner now looks like a slum.
http://www.cis.org/NewCase

Posted by: interestinconundrum at July 7, 2008 12:11 PM

Wise words as always, Wellington.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 12:12 PM

Yea, that'll show 'em.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 12:07 PM

What's wrong with you, you jerk?

I just took the time to not only enlighten the Chief about Islamic Honor Killings, but also to express outrage at this crime.

Meanwhile, you haven't done jack.

So, here's my command to you: LAY OFF.

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 12:15 PM

These people need to be deported where possible and do not allow another one to step foot here.

Posted by: Exposing Islam at July 7, 2008 12:26 PM

Honor killings are symptomatic of a larger problem. That of Muslims having a tendency to violence and murder, where another's life has no value, unless it is a brother, and even then it is a shaky proposition. The idea may come from the Quran or Mohammad, but the individual personality carries it out. 'Killing is no problem for us', is about right.
Murderous psychopaths for Allah, are too numerous to count...

Posted by: duh_swami at July 7, 2008 12:30 PM

undaunted: Thanks for your kind words. Have gone to your website and I recommend anyone posting here to do so. Impressive. Oh, by the way, watch out for "darcy." She gives no quarter but I have no doubt her heart is in the right place and is definitely someone to have on your side and not against you if at all possible. She's actually grown on me over the past half year or so.

Hi, darcy! Appreciate your passion. Hey, for what it's worth, you should make up with "undaunted." We all have bigger fish to fry--------Islamic fish. Take care.

Posted by: Wellington at July 7, 2008 12:33 PM

I'm with you Darcy...Enlightenment wherever possible is a valid concept. Keep up your good work... :)

Posted by: duh_swami at July 7, 2008 12:33 PM

Darcy;

Writing in the imperative does not amount to giving commands.

My blog is witness to anything I may or may not have done ~ over on the left margin, viz scared Muslim girls.

Have a nice day.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 12:36 PM

Darcy, good question. But I think there are a number of signs that the Rashad family is Muslim--the involvement of the local Imam and the Pakistani-American community, and this:

"I would see the young lady outside every once in a while dressed in the traditional Muslim gear," said neighbor Jack Hannah."

This is almost certainly some form of hijab--hard to tell how extreme, but it may well have been more than just a headscarf for it to catch the neighbor's attention. Hindus generally either wear Western clothing, or, if traditional, tend to wear saris--this probably would not be confused with "traditional Muslim gear", even in small-town Georgia.

from above:

"The family is very upset and stressed," said Shahid Malik of the Pakistani American Community of Atlanta.
...............................

More equivocation. *Why* is the family upset? Because young Sandela Kanwal was brutally strangled by her own father--which is what most Westerners would feel--or because of the "disgrace" that she was about to bring to the family, and the fact that Chaudhry Rashad is now in trouble for his actions in "cleansing the family honor", due to the laws of Infidel America? It's impossible to tell from this.

Posted by: gravenimage at July 7, 2008 12:36 PM

Mom, is that you? (the photo)

Posted by: HotSpur at July 7, 2008 12:41 PM

Well, I'm on Darcy's side, too.

Sarcasm off.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 12:51 PM

"Oh, by the way, watch out for "darcy." She gives no quarter but I have no doubt her heart is in the right place and is definitely someone to have on your side and not against you if at all possible. She's actually grown on me over the past half year or so."

Wellington, you are a condescending pipsqueak. Just who do you think you are? BTW, glad to see you used my own words from my comment to the Chief, i.e., "heinous Islamic custom." Why don't you get your own words?

As far as my wierd antagonist goes, he "makes up" with me. HE started this whole wierd misogynist commanding me what to do thing. What's your problem, ud? Of course the imperative is a command.

*
I'm with you Darcy...Enlightenment wherever possible is a valid concept. Keep up your good work... :)

Posted by: duh_swami at July 7, 2008 12:33 PM

Thanks, swami. Always a good and supportive friend. Have a great day!

Note to ud and W - if you two Islamic bullies don't stop with your wierd condescending and bullying of me, I'm going to wonder just what misogynist mental problems you have.

Oh, by the way, watch out for Wellington! He's a condescending, patronizing, jerk!

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 12:57 PM

How many more young women will have to die before Muslim immigration into the U.S. is ended?
by RS

Answer: millions.

All you will hear from politicians and from law enforcement (CAIR is a given!) is that most murderers know their victim and that familial murder is quite common. Given those facts, how can we deny "peaceful law-abiding Muslims" entree to America?

Posted by: PMK at July 7, 2008 1:04 PM

"I would see the young lady outside every once in a while dressed in the traditional Muslim gear," said neighbor Jack Hannah." --posted by graven image

Right, graven image. That neighbor's remark wasn't in the first article I read, which was much more generalized. In fact, the word "Muslim" wasn't mentioned at all in that first article. Yep, they're Mohammedans, allright.

Poor Sandela, who only wanted a divorce.

Does anyone know if GA has the DP? Or will it be Life for this Barbarian Rashad?

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 1:07 PM

Speaking of CAIR, PMK, I wonder what al-taqiyya they're going to use to whitewash this specific type of murder endemic to Islamic cultures called "Honor Killing?"

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 1:12 PM

"Speaking of CAIR, PMK, I wonder what al-taqiyya they're going to use to whitewash this specific type of murder endemic to Islamic cultures called "Honor Killing?""

Oh, that one's easy. "Domestic violence is present in all cultures"/"The Koran doesn't permit this kind of thing, it's a remnant of pre-Islamic behavior" (that 1400 years of Islam hasn't managed to stamp out -- Ed.)/"he was mentally unstable due to the pressure of decadent American society on his cultural norms"/etc., etc.

I think CAIR and the imams have a playbook, and this particular page is well-thumbed.

Posted by: Marwan'sDaughter at July 7, 2008 1:20 PM

Well, my friend Wellington; it appears we've been handed our walking papers.

And with such... erudition.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 1:21 PM

darcy: I'm sorry you feel the way you do. I was actually praising you. As for using your words, I can assure you that I meant to do no such thing and, if you look above, my phrase differs from yours to some extent and is not a verbatim quote. In any case, I can assure you that I seek out my own words, and only my own, when I write here or anywhere. What occurred above is pure coincidence and nothing more. I will continue, though, to fight the same fight you do respecting combatting Islamic supremacism.

undaunted: See what I mean? Oh well, I still think darcy's heart is in the right place and will just let it go at that.

Posted by: Wellington at July 7, 2008 1:27 PM

I can just imagine the long line of islamic clerics circling the block and waiting for visiting hours to start so they can go in and tell this guy how wrong his actions were.

JLP

Posted by: John Lee Pedimore at July 7, 2008 1:27 PM

Note to ud and W - if you two Islamic bullies don't stop with your wierd condescending and bullying of me, I'm going to wonder just what misogynist mental problems you have. - Darcy

This is entirely unnecessary; it is quite possible to disagree without being disagreeable, let alone accusing those with a differing opinion of being crypto-Muslims or mentally ill. That's true even when one finds the opposing opinion to be utter baloney. But Undaunted's point about taking care to direct criticism where it is most effective is well taken.

It's worth keeping in mind, as others have noted, that we're all in this together. And differences of opinion here 1.) are most often not advanced in a malicious spirit, and 2.) even if they were malicious, condescending, and so forth, they provide an opportunity to strengthen one's position by dealing with another aspect of the discussion. Refuting them civilly might win friends, or in another case, drive a provocateur up the wall because they were not able to provoke you.

Posted by: MarisolJW at July 7, 2008 1:31 PM

"She was under depression too and the father was very stressed and under depression," said Malik." And, he is a qualified diagnostitian because...?

I can't comment on what cultural elements might be involved in Muslim depression.

There must be something different there, though. Depression typically causes one to lose interest in family, friends, previously enjoyable activities, etc. If this man were really depressed, his attitude toward his daughter's desire for a divorce would have been one of uninterest (or would that be more correctly "disinterest?"). Daddy's only interest would be in his own problems.

Seldom do clinically depressed people break into rages and come to blows (or stranglings). They don't have the energy.

Take it from someone who knows. Depression not only robs you of your enjoyment of life, it steals you energy. You don't want to talk, let alone fight.

I'm sure Daddy is depressed now-- He got arrested, and may even do time for his murder.

Posted by: Abscedere at July 7, 2008 1:36 PM

Huzzah, Marisol... huzzah.

Darcy; your heart's in the right place.

Wellington, old chap; let us retire to the Casbah.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 1:38 PM

You just can't stop with your condescension, can you Wellington? You must feel mightily inferior to me to feel compelled to continue your 2-man verbal assault on me with ud. You really are creeps.

I wonder what RS thinks of your unrelenting assault? And for what? Why have you two ganged-up on me? It's really shocking how you two are continuing to verbally assault me. The funny thing is that somehow you apparently think you're superior. That's a joke. Well, I'm glad to see you know a big word like "erudition," ud.

Now, are you two going to continue with your misogynist verbal harassment, or are you going to stop? I'd like to know.

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 1:38 PM

undaunted: Handed our walking papers indeed. You know, I think darcy alone could constitute an entire second front against radical Muslims (I improvised this last line, darcy, from "Casablanca" and just wanted to make note of the fact lest you accuse me again of plagiarism).

Posted by: Wellington at July 7, 2008 1:38 PM

Okay, the ad hominem is off the charts. I'm off the net for the rest of the day.

Wellington; the Casbah, then ~ for gin and tonic.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 1:42 PM

OK----All Jerks, Pipsqueaks, Creeps, Superior/Inferior individuals etc....let's move on---I believe Robert has posted a new item of interest. (hee--heee) I hope I got the last word in!!

Posted by: Ladywolfnl at July 7, 2008 1:45 PM

I've had enough, and have notified RS.

They started this verbal campaign against me, Marisol. I'm sorry you didn't see that. If their condescending harassment campaign continues on other threads, I will be once again notifying JW.

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 1:57 PM

How many more young women will have to die before Muslim immigration into the U.S. is ended?

Does this mean that Robert Spencer is now finally advocating that all Muslim immigration into the US be halted?

Posted by: anonymous at July 7, 2008 2:20 PM

Fellas, ladies, whomever! Quit bickering amongst yourselves!

Darcy, if you feel led to write to the police chief, by all means do so. God knows PDs get tons of complaints, but not enough compliments.

Although, having previously worked as both a reserve police officer an Administrative Secretary to my former Chief of Police, I have to agree with undaunted that, while well-intended, your letter will not do that much in terms of justice.

Undaunted is right in that the police are out of the equation at this point, having already arrested this turd. If you really feel led to write to somebody, find out which DA is prosecuting the case, and go to town. (And that suggestion is meant for EVERYONE on this forum, hint hint.)

But darcy, you are right to pass along this information. Most small-town PDs don't have a clue as to what Islam and the Qur'an are all about. So brava for taking the initiative. Maybe this case will shed light on some previously unsolved cases, and/or prevent others from happening.

So the two of you, shake hands, and let's focus on the real enemy - Islamofascist thugs.

Posted by: Lori B. at July 7, 2008 2:27 PM

After all the polemicists for Islam have finished their blather they have to admit one thing -- Muslim societies produce a remarkable share of brutal killers.

Posted by: Rahman bin Rahman at July 7, 2008 2:31 PM

anonymous:

Does this mean that Robert Spencer is now finally advocating that all Muslim immigration into the US be halted?

This is what happens when you swallow uncritically Lawrence Auster's relentless misrepresentations of my position.

In reality I have said nothing new in this post. I said the same thing on June 30:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021584.php

See also June 21:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021477.php

And April 25:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/020779.php

And January 28:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24684

And March 13, 2007:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/015623.php

And February 16, 2007:

http://jihadwatch.org/archives/015296.php

And December 2006:

http://jihadwatch.org/archives/014629.php

Etc. etc. etc.

And now you come in here again and claim that this is something new? Don't you even have the decency to do a search first?

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at July 7, 2008 2:33 PM

Darcy wrote: As Muslims have immigrated to the West, they have brought their barbaric customs with them - Honor Killings of girls and women being among the most heinous of those customs.

Dont forget FGM - yet another fruit of diversity that we must all celebrate.
--------------------------------------------
Mr Spencer is absolutely right,"How many more young women will have to die before Muslim immigration into the U.S. is ended"?

Exactly. And on this anniversary of 7/7, how many more non-Muslims have to die when the next bomb goes off? If Muslim immigration and internal growth continues at the current high rate, I doubt even the US has the security forces sufficient to monitor every lone Jihadi?

Robert Spencer has done all the necessary work that is required to make a strong and watertight case that Muslim immigration has to be stopped as a first step. It is now up to politicians brave step up, and use the academic work of Robert Spencer to make this a public issue.

Posted by: DP111 at July 7, 2008 2:46 PM

Kudos to Fox news for headlining this story.
A quick search of CNN, MSNBC & CBS News show nary a word of the murder, much less use of the term "honor killing".

Posted by: USorThem at July 7, 2008 2:46 PM

Posted by: anonymous at July 7, 2008 2:20 PM

You can respond to Robert's supporting evidence as soon as you finish collecting your teeth off the floor.

We'll be waiting, patiently.

Posted by: awake at July 7, 2008 2:49 PM

awake:

I doubt we will hear from Erich again, but maybe he will surprise us with some integrity.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at July 7, 2008 2:56 PM

"But darcy, you are right to pass along this information. Most small-town PDs don't have a clue as to what Islam and the Qur'an are all about. So brava for taking the initiative. Maybe this case will shed light on some previously unsolved cases, and/or prevent others from happening." --Lori B

Exactly why I wrote the Chief. Exactly. Of course I know his role is over once the suspect is arrested! I commented to convey information about the Islamic phenomenon called "Honor Killing," that he probably, as you said, "doesn't have a clue" about. Now, he does. And to express a citizen's appropriate outrage concerning this Honor Killing crime.

Thanks, Lori B!

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 3:00 PM

Darcy wrote: As Muslims have immigrated to the West, they have brought their barbaric customs with them - Honor Killings of girls and women being among the most heinous of those customs.

Dont forget FGM - yet another fruit of diversity that we must all celebrate. --DP111

Thanks for quoting that sentence from my comment to the police Chief, DP111. Oh, yes, you are right - but, I thought that since the Chief probably knew nothing about Honor Killings, I'd just stay focused on those.

Thanks, DP111!

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 3:04 PM

At first, I wondered if I was looking at a snapshot of "Hannibal Lecter"--nah, no mischievous charm, just Chaudhry's cold, dead eyes.

Posted by: John C at July 7, 2008 3:08 PM

I am sure if the Chief was unaware of this phenomenon ("Honor Killing") he most assurdely got a crash course today as to what it is all about. Fox News ( as well as other News outlets-National & International) at the moment are covering this story in depth. The more aware all law enforcement are of Islam, the more they will come to the realization that there is nothing "peaceful" to it at all

Posted by: Ladywolfnl at July 7, 2008 3:17 PM

Do they have the "Death Penalty" in Georgia, at least one monster will not harm another innocent soul!

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at July 7, 2008 3:17 PM

Re: Picture

You can just feel the love.

Posted by: Spot on at July 7, 2008 3:26 PM

This is what happens when you swallow uncritically Lawrence Auster's relentless misrepresentations of my position.

Posted by: PRCalDude at July 7, 2008 3:32 PM

"Does anyone know if GA has the DP? Or will it be Life for this Barbarian Rashad?"
Posted by: darcy
and
"Do they have the "Death Penalty" in Georgia. . . ?"
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess

Yes, GA has the death penalty. The state has executed 40 murderers since the penalty became legal again in 1976. There are currently 107 on death row.

Posted by: ebonystone at July 7, 2008 3:35 PM

The multiculturists are busy building a utopia for all of us in which to live. A world free from racism, ethnic intolerance, religious intolerance (except for christians), and on and on. My only question is how far will they go before they realize that Islam will not fit their model world. I have a deep suspicion that they are totally blind, have no common sense, and will continue until they drop.

Posted by: Spot on at July 7, 2008 3:36 PM

Speaking of CAIR, PMK, I wonder what al-taqiyya they're going to use to whitewash this specific type of murder endemic to Islamic cultures called "Honor Killing?"

Posted by: darcy

darcy,

Easy. No whitewashing necessary. In fact, it makes Muslims look like all Americans. Family trouble that got out of hand. It's happened before in non-Muslim households. It will happen again. It's unfortunate but it happens. An argument over the budget or the car results in murder. Here it just happened to be about divorce and it just happened to be a Muslim family.

54-year-old Chaudhry Rashad was so outraged at his daughter, Sandela Kanwal, and her plans for divorce that he killed her after a heated argument at the family's home.

Not only was it an arranged marriage, but it was long-distance as well. Hubby lives in Chicago while the wife is in Georgia? I wonder how many girlfriends he had in Chicago while the wife was forced to maintain her "honor".

Malik said arranged marriages are not uncommon for Pakistanis. He said the marriages are usually accepted and successful, although young people living in American might develop problems with them.

"Their minds are changed when the live here due to this system," said Malik.

Malik: here it's a woman's prerogative to change her mind. Pakistani men should consider that before moving here and raising daughters in America. They learn what freedom is.

Posted by: PMK at July 7, 2008 3:48 PM

Clayton County, Georgia is not a small town. It is about 145 square miles, with about 250,000 residents. It is a suburb of Atlanta. I know from my training and experience that the cops down there are some of the best in the country.

It therefore seems highly unlikely that the Chief of Police is just a country bumpkin in dire need of "enlightenment" on honor killings.

The greatest need for knowledge on this topic is among "civilians", those we meet every day. But knowledge of the topic won't suffice. We have to DO things. These women must have a place nearby they can run to if necessary.

I'll politely stand by my assertion that writing to Chief Turner is a presumptuous waste of time.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 3:51 PM

Hannibal Lecter my rear. This is obviously a Klingon.

As for muslim immigration, I and my descendants do not want to have to fight them for the territory. So no more muslim immigrants, thank you very much.

Posted by: Henry at July 7, 2008 4:13 PM

In reality I have said nothing new in this post.

Since Spencer according to himself has said nothing new in this post, and since a quick glance at the pages he links to indicates that he has not explicitly called for the cessation of Muslim immigration in those articles (unless I've overlooked something), one might assume that Spencer does not want to explicitly call for a cessation of Muslim immigration in this article either. Which leaves the original question intact.

However, rather than letting Spencer evade the question by having him hide behind the usual references to the vast archives of Jihad Watch, leaving it up to the person asking the question to find the correct answer (assuming it can be found and assuming that Spencer has not changed his mind after writing about the issue), I'll instead encourage him to answer the following question with a simple yes or a no:

Does Robert Spencer recommend that all Muslim immigration into the US be halted?

Since the answer will consist of only one word, there is no need for Spencer to reference the archives this time.

I'm looking forward to Spencer's one-word reply.

Posted by: anonymous at July 7, 2008 4:17 PM

anonymous Erich:

since a quick glance at the pages he links to indicates that he has not explicitly called for the cessation of Muslim immigration in those articles (unless I've overlooked something)

Oh, you have. You have.

But I'll indulge you. Here are some of my statements from those posts:

What if it announced that Muslim immigration should be stopped (which it patently should, given the impossibility of distinguishing actual or potential jihadists from peaceful Muslims)?

And:

Begin to regard Muslim immigration as a national security issue, and take steps to limit it and end it if possible. (And of course all illegal aliens should be made to leave immediately.)

And:

And now, courtesy of our mad failure to halt immigration from Muslim countries despite the fact that no attempt is even made to determine the attitudes toward jihad and Islamic supremacism of the Muslims entering the country (and such efforts would be extraordinarily difficult anyway, although a screening process would at least allow for prosecution and deportation of Muslims who renounced Sharia principles when entering the country and then agitated for them once here), we see this ancient hatred imported into the United States.

And:

Australian pol calls for moratorium on Islamic immigration, Muslims helpfully demonstrate why this is needed

Fred Nile's call is sure to be opposed by the suicidal multiculturalist element of Australian media and politics, but, as I noted in my book Onward Muslim Soldiers, immigration is a national security issue, and should be treated as such. The need for Fred Nile's recommendation is illustrated by the reaction to it.

So Erich -- is it a reading comprehension problem, or something else?

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at July 7, 2008 4:25 PM

Also, Erich, one other question:

Why all the time and energy spent on defaming me, rather than on doing what you think should be done the way you think it should be done? Why is it that all you can do is carp -- and inaccurately -- rather than act?

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at July 7, 2008 4:27 PM

Erich

I am aware that the above quotations explode your whole enterprise. You have been guilty of carelessness, and of trusting authorities who were pursuing their own agenda at the expense of accuracy.

Time to own up. And maybe actually to do something positive.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at July 7, 2008 4:31 PM

Yea, what Robert said.

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 4:34 PM

Robert,

The Auster sycophants are maddening. You need to first agree with Larry's position, provide overwhelming physical evidence to show that you support Larry's position and then clarify in a particular way that Larry deems appropriate for it to be accepted by him. And even then, he and they still won't accept it for what it is.

I admire your mettle to deal with this dishonest adversity on a regular basis.

Posted by: awake at July 7, 2008 4:36 PM

Awake,

What is disheartening about it is that there are so few of us. I do not spend my time sniping at those who are working to defend the West but do not agree with me 100% on how it should be done. Those who do are pathetic.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at July 7, 2008 4:39 PM

"Does anyone know if GA has the DP? Or will it be Life for this Barbarian Rashad?"
Posted by: darcy
and
"Do they have the "Death Penalty" in Georgia. . . ?"
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess

Yes, GA has the death penalty. The state has executed 40 murderers since the penalty became legal again in 1976. There are currently 107 on death row.

Posted by: ebonystone at July 7, 2008 3:35 PM

Great. Hopefully Rashad will be convicted for the specific crime of Honor Killing, which would be a brand-new event in Georgia criminal history. So glad I enlightened the police Chief, who most probably knows zilch about Honor Killings. Since most Americans are ignorant about Islam, Mo and Qur'an, as well as Islamic culture, every little bit helps! About FGM, as well.

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 5:04 PM

>>Hannibal Lecter my rear. This is obviously a Klingon. --Henry

My husband took a look at Rashad's face and remarked, "that is evil."

Indeed.

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 5:07 PM

darcy,

As did my wife, too!

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at July 7, 2008 5:16 PM

Lori

seconding your remarks.

There are very few regular posters here whom I do not like. I like all the persons who have taken part in the current spat and it made for unpleasant reading.

Darcy's general point is good. Given all the taqiyya that has been lavished by Muslim spin-doctors upon our police, civil service, journalists and politicians - all that 'sensitivity training' - we can't be entirely sure that any given police person or other public figure, whether in the USA, the UK, Australia or anywhere else, does in fact know about Islam all they need to know in order to do their job with a clear head.

If, whenever they do what we the informed regard as a good thing - e.g. catching a wannabe jihadi [like those highway cops who caught the Muslims with explosives in the boot of the car], or sharia-killer [as in this case] or standing up to Muslim demands for alteration of kafir law [as when Australia's attorney-general said a very loud NO to Muslim demands for recognition of Muslim polygyny] - they receive brief, appreciative letters from members of the public, salted with relevant nuggets of hard information about the Islamic context for the crime, or the demand, etc, that can only be a good thing.

If they already do know what we're telling them, well, a little repetition doesn't hurt (and they know they're not alone in their uncomfortable knowledge).

If they don't, or if they have been told lies by Muslims, it may help to clear the fog.

I should add that whenever we read a news story that does accurately report an Islam-related incident, using the M-word or the J-word and not whitewashing, and perhaps even throwing in a little accurate background info, the journalist responsible and their editor should receive appreciative correspondence. Newspapers and TV channels that tell the truth should find that their subscriptions and viewing figures go up.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at July 7, 2008 5:22 PM

The Muslim community and CNN are already in full on damage control; attempting to say that it was just a spat between a father and daughter that ended tragically....

The Muslim damage control is HERE.

The CNN Headline News, Prime News segment hasn't been released on the transcripts web page, yet. But, my wife and I did just catch it about ten minutes ago and the reporter/apologist they had commenting on it does his best to say that it's only cultural - not religious - and he doubts this was a true "honor" killing, etc. etc.

By the time he was done, however, my wife and I were even more convinced that this was in fact an "honor" killing...

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at July 7, 2008 5:27 PM

The picture of dear old dad sure gives me the warm fuzzies, How about you?

What 'religion' and what 'honor' demands and then rewards the slow strangulation of a child by a parent?

That 'honor' is the height of demonic depravity.

Posted by: guide inside at July 7, 2008 5:39 PM

Maybe just a side note to this article but...

'Police said the victim had been in an arranged marriage and hadn't seen her husband, who lives in Chicago, for months....'

Shouldn't they check him out. What's he up to?

Posted by: Dataflush at July 7, 2008 5:40 PM

>>Darcy's general point is good. Given all the taqiyya that has been lavished by Muslim spin-doctors upon our police, civil service, journalists and politicians - all that 'sensitivity training' - we can't be entirely sure that any given police person or other public figure, whether in the USA, the UK, Australia or anywhere else, does in fact know about Islam all they need to know in order to do their job with a clear head.
--dumbledoresarmy

Exactly. Thanks, dda.

BTW, did you go to that public meeting yet, ready to take on the PC crowd with your informed knowledge of Islam, Mo, Qur'an? I've been wanting to hear what happened.

Plus, regarding this tragic event of strangled Sandela, do you think the PC media will even voice the phrase "Honor Killing?"

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 5:45 PM

>>The Muslim community and CNN are already in full on damage control; attempting to say that it was just a spat between a father and daughter that ended tragically.... --Doc Bulldog

A "spat?" That ends in strangulation? By a father on his daughter? Good Grief, America, don't buy this utter al-taqiyya crap.

Speak out, People, about Islamic Honor Killings. To everyone, far and wide.

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 5:51 PM

E.D. Hill (Fox News) just had two Pakistan appologists on, of course they said this is not practiced in Islam as Islam forbids killing. They did go on to enlighten E.D. that this ideiolgy is still practiced in "only" people from poor sections of the countries that they immigrate from.
I do wonder myself if all this is in vain, I sometimes think they (Muslims) have more people on their side promoting their "Peace" and more & more people believing and listening to them and people like us are just discounted as racists. It is so frustrating..

Posted by: Ladywolfnl at July 7, 2008 5:51 PM

"...as Islam forbids killing."

WHAT? As we all know, that is such an out-and-out lie it defies description.

"I do wonder myself if all this is in vain, I sometimes think they (Muslims) have more people on their side promoting their "Peace" and more & more people believing and listening to them and people like us are just discounted as racists. It is so frustrating.." -- Ladywolfnl

Which is why we MUST keep speaking...

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 6:12 PM

Wow...

Posted by: undaunted at July 7, 2008 6:18 PM

People, check out this News video from Jonesboro, GA.

Not one word about Islam, Honor Killing, or Muslim. All we get is "Pakistan."

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=8704271&ch=4226713&src=news

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 6:22 PM

Ladywolfnl: Your frustration is understandable and Islam is certainly counting on having loads of uninformed, malleable dhimmis endorse its deceptions and obfuscations as truths. But everyday more and more non-Muslims are seeing what Islam really is about. Take heart. You have the truth on your side and the truth is a very powerful and constant friend.

Posted by: Wellington at July 7, 2008 6:33 PM

darcy -

I did get to the meeting. It took place on the premises of a theological college, and was run by an ecumenical Christian body in my region.

It was a presentation by one of the World Council of Churches 'Ecumenical Accompaniers for Peace in Palestine [sic] and Israel'.

Said 'accompanier' was a nice, somewhat naive lad from Northern Ireland, who had spent three months in the village of Yanoun, within spitting distance of Nablus, last year.

So, basically, a session of 'palestinian' propaganda presented by a classic Useful Idiot. And it *was* propaganda, slanted so blatantly against the Jews that it was frightening. Anyone who went in there knowing nothing about the conflict, or about history, would have come away from the chap's 'historical introduction' thinking that the Jews were always and exclusively the aggressors from 1947 onward. Most interesting omission - in a summary of the history beginning in 1945 and ending in the present day, he managed to avoid ALL MENTION of the 1973 Yom Kippur war. I wonder why?

Fortunately, the number of guests was not large - about 20 people, so the number of brainwashed or of potential brainwashees was correspondingly small.

The silly lad didn't even have one word of Arabic or Hebrew beyond the few 'polite noises' he had been taught in the course of a few weeks just prior to going in to his 'posting'. That was the first question I asked in the post-session question time - 'do you speak Arabic or Hebrew?' Simple answer: virtually none.

Which, of course, throws into question the validity of all his observations, since it placed him entirely at the mercy of his 'minders'.

I do not think he had read the Quran. I raised the matter of the Quran and Islam - the format was such that I had to be extremely brief - and got the impression that he had been told to ignore this issue (he dodged it with the usual line about a few extremists). I only wish I had thought to say, 'so you think the religion of the vast majority of local Arabs is completely irrelevant to what is happening?'

I am kicking myself for not having made better use of the 'light refreshments' period that preceded the presentation. That was my big opportunity - question time afterward was much too rushed to be any good.

Given the small number of guests, if I'd had my wits about me I could probably have gotten hold of the guest speaker and turned him inside out. *THAT* would have been the time to ask him about al-taqiyya, etc.

Instead, I got into conversation with a nice couple whose daughter had married an Algerian Muslim (but had, luckily, after 5 years, gotten divorced from him, and who, equally luckily, had had enough commonsense NOT to convert to Islam during the marriage...and had had no children, either.). I think I was able to explain to them just how lucky their daughter had been, and tell them some very unpleasant facts about the contents of the Quran. They at least will go home knowing a little more than they did before they came.

Going back to the post-session question time: when talking about his pre-trip 'training', the lad said he had been sent 'a box of things to read'. Question I wish I had asked, and didn't - WHAT WAS IN THAT BOX? WHICH BOOKS? WHO BY? I'd bet my bottom dollar that the Quran was *not* in that box...

So, essentially, darcy, I am *kicking* myself for flubbing my catches, and am sorry to disappoint your hopes and those of others here. Still, I do not think this will be the only such event, and next time, I will have a better idea of how to go about my business.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at July 7, 2008 6:36 PM

Thank you Wellington, that is at least a comfort.
I do hear more & more people saying" I never knew that" when they are told the truth about the religion of peace. I thank God for people like Robert who do take the effort to educate themselves as well as others & have learned alot here.

Posted by: Ladywolfnl at July 7, 2008 6:44 PM

The handsome man in the picture has six holes in his head, humans only have five...

Posted by: duh_swami at July 7, 2008 6:54 PM

dda - thanks for your update concerning the meeting. I'm sorry to hear about the Palestinian propaganda and the deliberate omissions. Well, the speaker was a Useful Idiot, like so many here in the U.S.

I think the "rushed" question-time after was deliberate. So no hard-hitting questions could be asked. Such as yours would have been.

Well, you didn't know what to expect. Now, you do. Next time another Dhimmi presentation is scheduled, you'll be better prepared! That's how to look at it.

I watched the 3 main news channels a short while ago, no Honor Killing, of course. But, Charlie Gibson does have "Small World" in which the theme is that we're all alike. Tonight was weddings, and we got one from Lahore, Pakistan, and one from Jeddah, SA. All was festivity and cheer. You think an Islamic Honor Killing in America is going to be on the "Small World" channel?

No. Way. They are not even saying "Honor Killing" in GA.

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 7:12 PM

Here is an update which I also posted on another thread.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/clayton/stories/2008/07/06/claymurder_0707_web1.html?cxntnid=amn070708e

Posted by: darcy at July 7, 2008 8:09 PM

Now that they have caught the suspect, what is the likelihood of a successful conviction and a just punishment?

Posted by: norman at July 7, 2008 8:54 PM

The Muslim damage control is HERE. [link to TRCB.com]

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog

Dr. B., I just took a look at the link you provided, and the writer, one Mohammed Zaheer, was fair enough as far as he went. Yes, people from other cultures have family disputes that end in death, and many arranged marriages turn out quite well, and divorce is too commonplace in non-arranged marriages, etc, etc.
But Mr. Zaheer only went so far. He omitted to say that fatal marital disputes in families from other cultures usually consist of one spouse killing the other. Only in Islam does it so often take the course of a male of the household (father, brother, uncle, or combination of these) killing an adult (or nearly adult) female of the household.

Posted by: ebonystone at July 7, 2008 9:06 PM

ebonystone,

Yeah, it's not only those omissions that clue me in to his "damage control" attitude, it's that glaring second paragraph in which he says,

"The neighbors of the family speak highly about the family but others have started maligning Pakistan and issuing judgments on the practice of "arranged marriages" prevalent in Pakistan and Pakistani-American community. This is shear ignorance and prejudice about a culture and tradition that has more positives than negatives."

Arranged marriages have more "positives" going for them than un-arranged marriages?

Really? Maybe for the guy...

And, did he just call us all "ignorant" and "prejudiced" because we Americans don't fancy arranged marriages and are critical of such old-fashioned notions?

And, how did you miss the following?:

"Until the facts come out one can only guess that the father and the daughter had a heated argument when the father could not control his anger. How the girl actually died is also unclear - it may be an accident since the father suffered from a seizer and was hospitalized. Now he is awaiting his "day in court" and let us hold our judgment."

THAT is DAMAGE CONTROL if I ever saw it!

Cheers

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at July 7, 2008 9:44 PM

ebonystone,

P.S. - That was a nice catch in identifying what he omitted. Kudos!

Cheers

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at July 7, 2008 9:47 PM

Robert

Why is a simple yes/no response, as anonymous requested, so complicated? I accept your contention from the earlier quotes that you are opposed to Muslim immigration, but when somebody unequivocally stands for something, such simple responses shouldn't be difficult.

Of course, given political realities on the ground, we all know that no moves are likely to happen that even limit, let alone eliminate Muslim immigration, and it's fine to suggest as an alternative qualifying criteria by which to filter out which Muslims to keep out, such as your suggestions that immigration forms have questions regarding one's loyalty to the US constitution, et al. But that's different from the question in principle being asked above - 'Does _______ recommend that all Muslim immigration into the US be halted?'

If asked of me, I have no hesitation in responding an emphatic 'yes' to the above question, with no further qualifiers required. Don't you? (This question too can use a simple yes/no answer)

Posted by: Infidel Pride at July 7, 2008 10:39 PM

And, how did you miss the following?:

"Until the facts come out one can only guess that the father and the daughter had a heated argument when the father could not control his anger. How the girl actually died is also unclear - it may be an accident since the father suffered from a seizer (sic) and was hospitalized. Now he is awaiting his "day in court" and let us hold our judgment."
THAT is DAMAGE CONTROL if I ever saw it!

Cheers

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog

Dr. B.,
Thanks for noting that paragraph. I had skimmed over it too rapidly. Note how he say that one can only guess; and then he goes on to do just that -- guess! Maybe it was a heated argument that got out of control, or maybe not. If one wants to play guessing games, then I can guess that Papa laid in wait for her, and killed her in cold blood. Likewise he can guess that it resulted from Papa having a seizure and going out of control, but I can guess that it was the other way around, that the seizure resulted from the stress of the murder.
It will be interesting to follow the trial.

Posted by: ebonystone at July 7, 2008 10:59 PM

ebonystone,

"It will be interesting to follow the trial"

Agreed!

Cheers

Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at July 7, 2008 11:04 PM

If/when he is found guilty the death penalty should be invoked on this Muslim predator...

Posted by: Dobra Dyen at July 7, 2008 11:12 PM

Posted by: Infidel Pride at July 7, 2008 10:39 PM

IP,

The reason Robert did not provide a 1-word response is becuse in light of the multitude of examples that Robert put forth, the facts if you will, he seems to still get challenged, and it is merely a power play attempt by the Auster sycophants, basing their desriptional position of Spencer on his adjusted words and an imaginary figure, for the hard data refutes that ass-clown known as Lawrence Auster.

The truth hurts, more often than not.

Posted by: awake at July 7, 2008 11:28 PM

On the "darcy/undaunted/Wellington" brouhaha up above: from what I can see, darcy initially simply announced her intention to email Chief Turner. Then undaunted told her in arrogant terms to leave Chief Turner alone. Then darcy rightfully responded to undaunted that it is in effect none of his beeswax what she does and that it is the right of every American citizen to complain to, and educate, any one of our employees (those who work in any capacity of government, whether local, state of federal).

At this point, undaunted should have either kept silent, or responded without a shred of supercilious arrogance -- thought I doubt that is humanly possible for him.

From this point, in fact, undaunted escalated his passive-aggressive arrogance against darcy, and Wellington joined in with an attempt at being more subtly slippery about it. And because darcy simply continues to stand her ground to defend the initial insult to her, her ground-standing becomes the fault, while undaunted and Wellington somehow escape blame.

As for darcy's initial "error" -- writing to Chief Turner, who cares if he's not directly involved in the legal aspect of the culpability of the Muslim here? Any and every public official needs to be pestered and annoyed by us as much as possible about Islam, that's my philosophy. Throughout history, that's how the People have gotten things done.

Posted by: DenverRodeo at July 8, 2008 12:47 AM

Dear Mr. Spencer,

I appreciate what you are doing on this website and wish you a speedy recovery from your recent stroke.

Nevertheless, I have to take issue with this comment.

"How many more young women will have to die before Muslim immigration into the U.S. is ended?"

If you are seriously calling for an end to immigration from Muslim countries based upon the fact that honor killings are a part of Muslim culture, I have a huge problem with that. I don't want any of the bastards who will commit any honor killing in the US any more than you do, but face the facts, it's a small minority of Muslim immigrants who engage in this. It would be more appropriate to prosecute them than to deny all Muslims admittance. I would take the same position for those from countries that have a culture that encourages such things as clittoral mutilation.

Young women will die. That's true whether they are in the US or not in the US. But young women will also have more opportunities to live full and rich lives. Let's not be so quick to call for a stop to immigration.

Again, the best for a speedy recovery. You are a voice that needs to be heard, although I disagree with you in this instance.

Posted by: callback at July 8, 2008 2:41 AM

Robert had a stroke? Glad to hear he's recovering - Robert, get well soon!

Anyway, Callback, there a gazillion reasons more than mere honor killings for which Mohammedan immigration needs to be ended, and which is why anonymous and I were pleasantly surprised to hear Robert call for it. Those reasons are to be found in JW and DW pages everyday, and are as applicable to countries like Australia, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Spain, et al as they are to the US. They are the desire of Mohammedans worldwide to bring the entire world under Shariah to one degree or another, coupled beautifully with the impossibility of Infidels to determine how many, let alone which of them, advocate the replacement of Infidel norms with Islamic ones in the countries they dominate. For an example, just look at Malaysia, which 50 years ago had a Mohammedan plurality, today has a Mohammedan majority, and is involved in posthumous conversions in order to legally rob Infidels of inherited property, among other excesses.

I repeat - it's not the job of Infidel societies to determine which Mohammedans are lethal and which ones aren't, while coming into this country. Let's say there is an outbreak of mad cow desease, and the source has been traced to 5% of cattle in Farm X belonging to company Y. Typically, the FDA issues an advisory on all meat produced by company Y, even though only 1% or less of its meat might come from farm X, and what's more, grocery chains throughout the country quarantine Company Y. They do not bother going through the trouble of determining which of the meat is from farm X, let alone which of the farm X meat is contaminated. Typically, company Y beef is off the shelves as long as the advisory is in effect, and company Y does whatever it has to to get its products back on store shelves, including excluding farm X altogether, while farm X does whatever they think they need to. Bottom line: society is not expected to take unnecessary risks with their health.

By ending Mohammedan immigration, the onus is then put on the ummah - assuming that it is serious about getting back in the good books of the Infidel world - to clean up its act. Just as we don't worry about segregating the beef from farm X from the rest of the company's inventory, similarly, it's not our business to find out whether a potential immigrant is a Sunni, Shia, Wahabi, Salafist, Ahmadiya, Sufi, whatever. Just ban them all, and clean up the ones already here.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at July 8, 2008 3:28 AM

Infidel Pride:

Why is a simple yes/no response, as anonymous requested, so complicated? I accept your contention from the earlier quotes that you are opposed to Muslim immigration, but when somebody unequivocally stands for something, such simple responses shouldn't be difficult.

I didn't give a "simple yes/no response" because it seemed to me that the answer was abundantly clear from the posts linked above, and the quotations from them that I provided.

If you can't figure out the answer from them, I would question your ability to read and understand anything. But I am not going to feed the perception that they are in any way unclear by saying anything more than what they say. If the yes/no request had come from anyone else besides this prosecutorial individual who refuses to read what I say before condemning me, I would not hesitate to answer. But I don't like being bullied.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at July 8, 2008 6:16 AM

Callback and Infidel Pride:

Apparently there is a reading comprehension problem.

I did not have a stroke. Please read the piece again, carefully, and you will see who actually did have one.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at July 8, 2008 6:18 AM

That is, read the piece about the UNHRC, above this one.

Cordially
RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at July 8, 2008 6:32 AM

I actually assumed that you had one after reading callback above, and thought he was someone who knows you: I hadn't read the original David Littman article, since nothing about the UN remotely interests me any more than the inner operations of the Aryan Nation, or the OIC, or the Arab League, or the Non Aligned Movement.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at July 8, 2008 7:50 AM

On the "darcy/undaunted/Wellington" brouhaha up above: from what I can see, darcy initially simply announced her intention to email Chief Turner. Then undaunted told her in arrogant terms to leave Chief Turner alone. Then darcy rightfully responded to undaunted that it is in effect none of his beeswax what she does and that it is the right of every American citizen to complain to, and educate, any one of our employees (those who work in any capacity of government, whether local, state of federal).

At this point, undaunted should have either kept silent, or responded without a shred of supercilious arrogance -- thought I doubt that is humanly possible for him.

From this point, in fact, undaunted escalated his passive-aggressive arrogance against darcy, and Wellington joined in with an attempt at being more subtly slippery about it. And because darcy simply continues to stand her ground to defend the initial insult to her, her ground-standing becomes the fault, while undaunted and Wellington somehow escape blame.

As for darcy's initial "error" -- writing to Chief Turner, who cares if he's not directly involved in the legal aspect of the culpability of the Muslim here? Any and every public official needs to be pestered and annoyed by us as much as possible about Islam, that's my philosophy. Throughout history, that's how the People have gotten things done.

Posted by: DenverRodeo at July 8, 2008 12:47 AM

DenverRodeo - THANK YOU.

You described yesterday's very unpleasant situation exactly. You're completely right, and thanks again. I appreciate your defense:

"And because darcy simply continues to stand her ground to defend the initial insult to her, her ground-standing becomes the fault, while undaunted and Wellington somehow escape blame."

Yeah, that was so unjust. Thanks for setting things straight. I have no idea why those two attacked me as they did.

Posted by: darcy at July 8, 2008 8:16 AM

I thought this stupid thing thing was over but darcy's last post made me want to set the record straight from my perspective. All I attempted to do was smooth anything over between undaunted and darcy. I did so, in part, by what I thought was praise of darcy's feistiness, which I think is a good thing. I did think undaunted had the better point of view about not writing to the police chief, but I have not conveyed that till now. But reasonable minds can differ here. I also thought undaunted was not extra rough on darcy. After all, if you can't take a little criticism now and again (including the use of the imperative), then how are you going to stand up to jihadists? But again, reasonable minds can differ here.

Darcy, however, began to namecall both me and undaunted, for instance calling him a "jerk" and me a "pipsqueak" and so on. I was at first quite surprised but then concluded that the woman is just way, way too sensitive and doesn't like to be contradicted and I believe undaunted and I, after some gentle kidding, let it go. Darcy, however, acting like a baby in my view, then wrote about informing JW about how nasty the two of us were. Holy hell, I thought. This is ridiculous. We should be focused on destroying Islamic attempts at conquering the West, not this, and I let it go till now because I didn't care all that much----until I read darcy's last post, which painted herself in the rosiest light and wrote about us attacking her, etc. I wasn't attacking anybody. Islamic radicals attack, not me or undaunted. What rubbish. I will not respond again about this matter. Period. I'm movin' on.

Posted by: Wellington at July 8, 2008 9:54 AM

LOL! You're in the wrong. DenverRodeo above painted a perfect picture of what happened yesterday.

Mr. Spencer instructed me to ignore you, so that's what I'm going to do.

However, if you persist in harassing me, I will contact JW again as I've already stated. Also, I would ask you to refrain from commenting on my post's in the future. I will definitely be ignoring yours. Thanks for your cooperation.

Posted by: darcy at July 8, 2008 10:18 AM

My final thoughts:

I agree with every word Wellington wrote above. He has accurately captured my thoughts, feelings, and intent viz yesterday's exchange.

The flash point of this incident seems to have been my "command" to Darcy, which was offered in the imperative. Imperatives can be offered as orders, or warnings, or simply as advice.

Look it up.

Darcy decided to take my advice, based on years of experience in criminal law and police work, as a command and then commenced tossing pejorative nonsense. But it wasn't enough for her to slam me for an imagined arrogant command, she had to go after Wellington as well.

I tried to be civil and even express my agreement with her as much as I could do so honestly. I dropped humor into the mix to try to ease the tension, but she would have none of it.

I backed out of the chat to try to give her time to settle down but she just sniped throughout the day to the point that her self-approbation was annoying.

I am done with this thread. This is Robert's blog and any comment anyone wishes to make to me may be done directly to me at my blog email.

Now, let's all get back to saving the world, eh?

Posted by: undaunted at July 8, 2008 10:24 AM

LOL again! Talk about self-delusional!

Let me repeat what I said to your co-hort:

LOL! You're in the wrong. DenverRodeo above painted a perfect picture of what happened yesterday.

Mr. Spencer instructed me to ignore you, so that's what I'm going to do.

However, if you persist in harassing me, I will contact JW again as I've already stated. Also, I would ask you to refrain from commenting on my post's in the future. I will definitely be ignoring yours. Thanks for your cooperation.

Posted by: darcy at July 8, 2008 10:18 AM

Posted by: darcy at July 8, 2008 10:40 AM

Wellington, Undaunted,
Lady's too sensitive.

darcy,
They did not attack you. Both are old JWers and so far I have not seen them ganging up or attacking any fellow blogger (trolls are fair game). Do not feel hurt or insulted, since it is apparent from their posts that they neither meant to hurt, insult or command you.

I hope I don't get the Wellington treatment. Peace. :)

Posted by: arjun.sevak at July 8, 2008 11:04 AM

Sorry, you're wrong in every way, arjun. Please re-read DenverRodeo's post, above. But of course the co-horts will fall about themselves with glee after reading your post.

No offense intended at all, arjun, 'cause I like you a lot. But, in this instance, you're wrong. Really blind. It doesn't matter that they're "old JWers" or that you haven't seen them doing such a thing previously. They DID do it yesterday. Of course their posts are arrogant, hostile, patronizing and demeaning, it's obvious. If you can't see that, well, I don't know. But, as perhaps you can see, they can't leave me alone. And that speaks volumes.

Sorry, but I'm not being overly "sensitive" to outright personal attacks which are arrogant, hostile, patronizing and demeaning. As DenverRodeo affirmed in his comment.

Don't worry - you WON'T be getting the "Wellington treatment," which, by that phrase, shows you do know that his behavior was rotten. Just what IS the "Wellington treatment" that you "hope you don't get?"

Posted by: darcy at July 8, 2008 11:19 AM

"Just what IS the "Wellington treatment" that you "hope you don't get?"

Posted by: darcy "

I should have used "the treatment you gave to Wellington".

Posted by: arjun.sevak at July 8, 2008 11:33 AM

LOL, yeah right, arjun. You mean "defending myself from their arrogant and hostile comments?"

I hope I don't get the Wellington treatment. Peace. :)

Posted by: arjun.sevak at July 8, 2008 11:04 AM

That's what you said. That's what you meant. Obviously.

Question: What are you doing down here wasting your time? I know why I'm here - defending myself. Why are you here?

Posted by: darcy at July 8, 2008 11:46 AM

anonymous Erich:

Just to set the record straight, I am not "Erich", and I am in no position to answer Spencer's many questions to him, for him.

Though I'm positively surprised by the quotes Spencer provided, I must admit I'm growing tired of his unnecessarily defensive tone. I hope that he the future Spencer will consider wasting less time voicing his indignation at those asking questions, and instead spend some time actually answering the questions he receives, in good faith.

That's all from me for now.

Posted by: anonymous at July 8, 2008 12:44 PM

undaunted wrote--

"The flash point of this incident seems to have been my "command" to Darcy, which was offered in the imperative. Imperatives can be offered as orders, or warnings, or simply as advice.

Look it up."

I looked it up. The imperative mood refers not to "advice" but either to 1) a command, or 2) a plea or request.

A "plea" is an earnest request that someone do someting. A "request" is simply asking or entreating someone to do something. Both imply some manners, usually appended with "please". (Or if you can't say "please" because something's stuck in your throat, then it would be better to rephrase it as a suggestion.)

If undaunted's original imperative to darcy were a "plea or request" it was a rude one, without a shred of "please" and an overall tone of arrogant dismissiveness -- sort of like someone asking you in a gruff manner, "Shut the window, it's cold", after also having lectured you about how leaving the window open is stupid.

Here's how undaunted could have re-phrased his original comment to darcy in a way that would have spared this thread all the subsequent hashing over this (with my changes/additions in bold):

Darcy,

Chief Turner doesn't decide whether it's tried as an honor killing, nor does he decide what it's called as trial approaches.

There are no laws on the books here in the US that deal with the phenomenon of honor killing as defined and committed by Muslims.

There appears to be prima facie evidence that the elements of proof for the crime of Premeditated Murder have been met in this case.

The law doesn't allow for a Muslim extrapolation.
Nor, in my opinion, should it.

Because of the above, I would say that sending any emails or letters to Chief Turner is really a waste of time, but again, that's just my opinion.

Posted by: DenverRodeo at July 8, 2008 1:10 PM

"If undaunted's original imperative to darcy were a "plea or request" it was a rude one, without a shred of "please" and an overall tone of arrogant dismissiveness" --Denver Rodeo

Right. As were all of the rest of he and his co-hort's comments to me.

And as Lori B posted:

"But darcy, you are right to pass along this information. Most small-town PDs don't have a clue as to what Islam and the Qur'an are all about. So brava for taking the initiative. Maybe this case will shed light on some previously unsolved cases, and/or prevent others from happening." --Lori B

Exactly.

Posted by: darcy at July 8, 2008 1:41 PM

"Though I'm positively surprised by the quotes Spencer provided, I must admit I'm growing tired of his unnecessarily defensive tone."

Posted by: anonymous at July 8, 2008 12:44 PM

So, read this site more and stop buying into Auster's baseless crap and then you won't have to experience an indignant tone for suggesting Robert stands for something he explicitly states otherwise.

It really is that simple. An apology for misspeaking wouldn't hurt either, or are you from the same litter as Auster and hence blessed with the gift of always being right?

Posted by: awake at July 8, 2008 2:00 PM

darcy,

Simply put, you seem to dislike the suggestion that preaching to the choir isn't the most productive route of awareness.

I just took exception to the idea, that out of all the outlets you could choose to educate, you implored a large online community to respectfully inundate the one man who is doing his job correctly!

What about the media? What about the DA's office? What about local women's advocacy groups? What about immigration lawyers? What about a local congressman who advocates a "let 'em all in, the poor huddled masses" immigration policy? What about social workers charged with the understanding of familial dynamics in Pakistani families in America? What about an atta' boy to FoxNews for calling it an honor killing, copying CNN, ABC, etc. on the email?

Your heart and passion is totally in the right place.

Did you notice how the reporter used the neighbors' quotes to convey the Muslim angle (garb, cricket, Pakistani, prayer)? He didn't have the courage to refer to the faith directly in the narrative. Is it forbidden somehow to report empirical info? How about a half-atta' boy to him? Kind of got to it sideways, but good job, Mr. Molineaux!

All the other posters were trying to say is not to send a good message down a rabbit hole.

Your mention of mysoginistic intention was out of line, in my view. I never would have known if you were a woman unless you mentioned it. Wh