Condolences for her; shame on her family and the muslim nation!

Quick to action by authorities;thank you.....this is further truth that drastic measures must be taken by the civilized world.

Posted by: chuck at February 26, 2005 6:53 AM

Big hint: "I'm not saying you should murder, but Hatin's lifestyle just didn't fit the way traditional Muslims live," he said.

But, but ... Didn't fit the way traditional Muslims live. In Germany. A non-Muslim nation. ???

Gee, you think they'll assimilate?

Poor woman. And it's always the women, isn't it? They see the light, the opportunities, a way out of the dark, dank, Islamic trap they were unfortunate to be born into, and try to escape. But nope. She's got lots of male relatives ready, willing and able to drag her back into the cesspit. Better dead than free. Brothers! What sort of sick, twisted, evil families do these Muslims create anyway? Unbelievable. Murder your own sister. Sick.

Where are our resident Islam-apologists on this one? How do you excuse this? Oh, honour-killings aren't technically, exactly Islamic, right? Maybe not created in the fetid bog of that "prophet's" mind, okay, but certainly adopted and nurtured and encouraged by Islam today. Honor-killings are such a great way to control your women, eh macho Muslim men? To keep them from being free and happy. To escape from being your sperm-spitoons and breeding more little jihadis and sperm-spitoons.

Posted by: feralee at February 26, 2005 7:37 AM

Much as I think the German authorities ought to throw the book at the perps, I don't see an embrace of the sexual revolution as good, healthy, and progressive. It's one of the things that's been rotting the Western world for years, making it more than ripe for the current Islamofascist assault.

Posted by: Kepha at February 26, 2005 8:03 AM

Kepha
I share your reservations about the western sexual revolution.
However although the Turkish boy student called her a whore there is no suggestion in the rest of the story that she was living a reprehensible life, training as an electrician while raising the child of her forced marriage. A useful trade, often overlooked as a career for young women.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at February 26, 2005 8:48 AM

At the very end of the original article, the editors asked for feedback on whether a class in democratic values would help against the repression of Muslim women. That would be some class!! German citizens need a class in democratic values to thwart murdering young women at bus stops? What's wrong with this picture?

Anyone else suspect that this wasn't an honor killing for her "whorish" ways but more likely for her apostasy?

Posted by: kelley at February 26, 2005 9:18 AM

Kepha and Granny Weatherwax-

Surely you're not implying that western sexual mores are somehow worse than Islamic polygamy with all its attendant codes concerning female sexuality. The Koran even forbids to individuals the option of celibacy. And do keep in mind that an Islamic marriage does not embody the spiritual connotations of, for example, a Christian marriage.

Give me western sexual attitudes over Islamic ones any day!

Posted by: kafira at February 26, 2005 11:07 AM

She was a beautiful girl, what a pity. She stopped wearing that damned rag on her head, you know how muslim men are threatened by killer hair rays. Note to muslim men... if you can't keep from jumping on a woman simply because her hair is visible, YOU have a big problem.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at February 26, 2005 11:09 AM

Kafira - couldn't agree more - let's not fall for the myth that Islamic society 'with all its faults' is somehow sexually more moral than Western society.

In Islamic society, for men there is legalised promiscuity in the form of polygamy, concubinage and easy divorce, rape in the form of forced marriage, paedophilia in the form of child marriage and incest in the form of cousin marriage.

But only for men. Women are beaten for showing a bit of ankle and stoned to death for being raped. Repressing women's sexuality makes Muslim men feel that their society is more moral. What they hate and fear about the West is the fact that women are sexually autonomous. It is not promiscuity per se, since they are themselves promiscuous, though generally with Kafir womin. It is not unlikely that the men who killed their sister would have had sex with the odd 'infidel whore', which would simply not be classed as imorality.

Moral? My arse (rhetorically only).

Posted by: Interestd at February 26, 2005 11:17 AM

They do feel that they can use western women as sex object with moral impunity. Period.

Posted by: Martell at February 26, 2005 11:45 AM

It was at once a series of pictures describing with photographic accuracy what the observers had seen and a mass of the most ghastly stories they had heard on trustworthy authority. They had seen dogs feeding on human remains, heaps of human skulls, skeletons nearly entire, rotting clothing, human hair, and flesh putrid and Iying in one foul heap. They saw the town with not a roof left, with women here and there wailing their dead amid the ruins. They examined the heap and found that the skulls and skeletons were all small and that the clothing was that of women and girls. MacGahan counted a hundred skulls immediately around him. The skeletons were headless, showing that these victims had been beheaded. Further on they saw the skeletons of two little children lying side by side with frightful sabre cuts on their little skulls. MacGahan remarked that the number of children killed in these massacres was something enormous. They heard on trustworthy authority from eye-witnesses that they were often spiked on bayonets. There was not a house beneath the ruins of which he and Mr. Schuyler did not see human remains, and the streets were strewn with them. When they drew nigh the church they found the ground covered with skeletons and lots of putrid flesh. In the church itself the sight was so appalling that I do not care to reproduce the terrible description given by Mr. MacGahan.

Batak, where these horrors occurred, is situated about thirty miles from Tartar Bazarjik, which is on the railway and on a spur of the Rhodope Mountains. It was a thriving town, rich and prosperous in comparison with neighboring Moslem villages. Its population previous to the massacres was about 9,000. MacGahan remarks that its prosperity had excited the envy and jealousy of its Moslem neighbours. I elsewhere remark that, in all the Moslem atrocities, Chiot, Bulgarian, and Armenian, the principal incentive has been the larger prosperity of the Christian population; for, in spite of centuries of oppression and plunder, Christian industry and Christian morality everywhere make for national wealth and intelligence. . . .

Posted by: Martell at February 26, 2005 11:58 AM

I second what Interestd and kafira said. In Islam it is taught that women's sexuality must be rigidly controlled because women are sexually insatiable (we supposedly have "nine times the desire" of men.)

But what does Islam provide for these supposedly insatiable sexual beasts? One-fourth of a husband, (or even less, if there are concubines), often an elderly old goat mated to a young lusty girl.

So under Islam, someone who supposedly has "nine times the desires" of a man gets a miniscule portion of the sexual opportunities a man gets! Does this make sense? No! (Proof enough of Islam's illogical and therefore clearly not divine nature.)

OTOH, in Islam, the man's sexual appetites are sacred. He has numerous outlets for satiating his desires -- wives; concubines; rape victims who must remain silent of his crimes or lose their lives; sexual "booty" captured in war. It's a terrible crime in Islam for a man to suffer any kind of sexual deprivation at all. His wives and concubines are cursed by angels if they dare say no for any reason.

Then of course, in the afterlife, the man gets the holy bordello with the 72 ever-virgin hookers. The wife gets bupkus.

Proof enough for me that Islam was invented by men, for men. There's nothing sacred or moral or divine about it.

Posted by: Suzan at February 26, 2005 12:09 PM

Murder in the name of family honor. Morbid is what it is! Muslims’ sense of honor is in direct opposition to the western concept and action needs to be taken across the western world to nip this in the bud before it imbeds itself in our societies.
It is apparent from the muslim students remarks that this type of thinking is still being propagated in their homes and community. Education such as “ethics classes” will help only to a small (and ineffectual) degree. What is needed in my opinion are laws specifically targeting these types of crimes. These families need to be told in no uncertain terms that murder does not bring honor but only dishonor of the most shameful kind.
Western values must stamp this out by letting muslims unequivocally know it is simply unacceptable behavior in our society and we will institute severe penalties for this type of crime. Firstly, we need to be honest with ourselves and label this crime for what it is, CONSPIRACY to murder. Then we hand down a penalty to punish the family. The family will be ostracized, humiliated, and expelled from the community. This means deportation of immediate relatives not convicted directly in the murder. Call it societal tough love if you will but only this type of action will eradicate honor killings from OUR society.
Susan/Son of Walker, perhaps this could be a project that Co-Jet could embark on. It is a small enough project that our limited resources might be able to handle-educating the pubic on the conspiracy angle and lobbying western governments to institute laws as mentioned above.

Posted by: William The Crusader at February 26, 2005 12:56 PM

Martel,

Where was that massacre? Armenian in the 1908-1922 period?

Geoff

Posted by: Geoff at February 26, 2005 1:48 PM

Amputate my foot if I'm stealing the jump on you here but I hate Islam. Is that too strong? Oh, yes then, chop through my wrist if I'm waving the flag of "Human rights imperialism."

We are going to read for years yet of the kind of atrocities above, and they will continue and grow far worse by the day as we read. The more pressure we put on the Islamic world, the worse will be their counter-reactions. So what?

I like to think that normal and decent people are disgusted and sickened by the idea of "honor killing." Most people would be if they understood that it's part and parcel of Islam itself. To get that through to the average Westerner we have to push all the time the truth about Islam till the majority of Westerners actually and virulently hate Islam. I invite you to a conspiracy of our own, as it were, a hop, a skip, a jump to our reader's web-site where you can join in to whip up some frenzy against an ideology that promotes the slavery and murder of women.

Stop in and offer some suggestions and make an offer to work on the plans you might have. Conspire. The blog is open at http://www.co-jet.org.

Posted by: sonofwalker at February 26, 2005 2:07 PM

Honour killing has made its way to British Columbia. A young girl, in trouble for dating a non-Indo-Canadian boy, was recently brutally stabbed and killed by her father.

Posted by: Farah at February 26, 2005 2:12 PM

Regardless of whether you think that the Western world is rotting, morally corrupt, etc., that is not the point. The point is self autonomy. If I want to live my life according to the tenants of a particular religion, fine. Maybe my neighbor likes to have gay sex, that is also fine. We are free to choose.

Now, any group of people choosing to live together have to have some sort of guidelines. In most European countries, and in the United States, our guidelines evolved out of Greco-Latin roots. There is a blend of other cultures, includin g Arabic cultures (see Spain) . But the West live s according to a blend of common law-civil law, and some sort of government chosen by the people (not necessarily directly), and judeo-christian beliefs. Remember that at least in the United States, GW can only be around for a maximum of 8 years.

We have not always lived up to these standards, especially in the developing world. But this is what we have chosen. If you don't like it or agree with it, too bad. You can change our style, participate and even enhance our political system, but NOT our culture. What you do in your private life (so long as its not interfering with someone else's, yes even in your own family) is your concern. But thats as far as it goes. If you can't live with that, then GTFO. (Get the Fuck Out).

Posted by: thesmilingturtle at February 26, 2005 2:57 PM

These honour killings that come to light are just the tip of the iceberg. Last week in Middlesborough UK, a muslim male was convicted of killing his wife in a "fit of rage". I suppose this last has been put in to provide a kind of justification.

In the main though, honour killings are not being reported on BBC and other media. Muslim crime, till recently, had been disguised as "Asian", but not anymore, as the public was beginning to figure it out. Now no mention is made at all.

Posted by: DP111 at February 26, 2005 3:19 PM

Kepha: I don't see an embrace of the sexual revolution as good, healthy, and progressive.

Freedom for women also means sexual freedom. One cannot have one without the other.

Posted by: DP111 at February 26, 2005 3:24 PM

I have never posted, anywhere, that Islamic morals are superior to the "decadent west". Quite the reverse.
But with freedom goes my freedom to have reservations about the desirability of certain choices in this area. But this is OT.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at February 26, 2005 3:41 PM

Granny Weatherwax:

'But with freedom goes my freedom to have reservations about the desirability of certain choices in this area. '

I totally agree. But in order to make moral choices one must be free to make 'immoral' ones, as I think you also believe.

Muslim women are not free, so arguably cannot really be moral in any meaningful sense.

By the way, where does your name come from?

(My name is Interested with 3 e's but the website spells it wrong and I don't know how to change it.)

Posted by: Interestd at February 26, 2005 7:01 PM

Blame the 'sexual revolution?'- never knew there was one! The whole thing was nothing more than a fart in the landscape!

OT, but interesting: Just saw a bunch of short flicks directed by Sean Penn about 9/11, probalbly old new, but in typical leftie fashion pointing the finger at the US for doing everything wrong!
The Arab says to the 'dead' marine: 'You have to understand the root cause of the problem...'

Perhaps Sean Penn should study the Quran to 'understand the root cause' of terror: ISLAM!

For everyone else I suggest a dose of Sheik Yer'mami:

http://www.terrorists-suck.org/fight/winds_of_jihad.html

Posted by: Terminator at February 26, 2005 7:03 PM

Terminator:

'The whole thing was nothing more than a fart in the landscape!'

So that's what Bob Dylan meant when he said 'the answer is blowing in the wind'...

Posted by: Interestd at February 26, 2005 7:53 PM

The difference between the Western and the Islamic world-views can be summed up thus:

In the West we live by the the concept "Cogito ergo sum."

In the Moslem world they live by the concept: "Coito ergo sum."

Posted by: sonofwalker at February 26, 2005 9:47 PM

Hi Interested, fellow JWer who has understood me AND can quote Bob Dylan!

You are right - we rejoice in the freedom to follow our consciences and try to make the right choices.

My name is a character from the Terry Prachett discworld novels.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at February 27, 2005 2:29 AM

So Erkan thinks that Hatin's lifestyle didnt fit in, so its ok to murder her.

According to this way of thinking, its acceptable to kill someone whose lifestyle you disapprove of.

So that should make it ok if Erkan is murdered by some pissed-off German who hates his country being invaded by people like Erkan and disapproves of their lifestyle.

Seems fair to me.

Posted by: DianaC at February 27, 2005 3:52 AM

Much as I think the German authorities ought to throw the book at the perps, I don't see an embrace of the sexual revolution as good, healthy, and progressive.

Posted by: Beagle at February 27, 2005 6:36 AM

saasdfljk;

Posted by: Kepha at February 27, 2005 8:13 AM

I raised the matter of seviant sexuality since the sponsors of the memorial were gay and lesbian groups.

Kafira and others: My jaundiced view of the sexual revolution stems from the fact that I am a very "uptight" straight, traditional Christian male who believes that the proper place for sex is in a marriage between one man and one woman (death or adultery allows an out; abuse too). One reason Islam is repellent to me is that it not only sanctions but also celebrates some of the most corrupt and sinful aspects of male sexuality (polygyny and pedophilia for starters). As for the post-Christian "liberated" sexuality (if the desperation with which it is practiced is truly "liberated"), it sanctions and celebrates the corrupt and sinful sexuality of both men and women equally. However, I wonder how long it will be before a "liberated" West that celebrates homosexuality will be able to say no to polygamy and pederasty.

Posted by: Kepha at February 27, 2005 8:19 AM

I agree with Kepha. I don't have much to say, except that, if by any chance the young woman was not herself a lesbian, then the fact that gay and lesbian groups take up her case is a fairly execrable kind of abuse. Suppose I were murdered by a Muslim for my religious views (which are Catholic), I have no desire to become a poster child for groups that promote goals that I dislike.

Posted by: Paolo at February 27, 2005 10:22 AM

You're either a free society or you're not. If you want people to be free to convert out of Islam to Catholicism, then they should also be free to convert out of Islam to atheism, become gay and embrace any number of other lifestyles that you disapprove of.

Tolerance and approval are not the same thing. In fact a poor man's version of 'love your enemies', might be 'tolerate those of whom you disapprove. For do not even the Muslims tolerate those of whom they approve.'

In a free society, of course, anyone should be able to express strong disapproval of lifestyles, including homosexuality. The anomalous situation we have now is that it is regarded as wrong to criticise homosexuality but also wrong to criticise Islam, a religion which advocates the murder of homosexuals. This is the contradiction inherent in political correctness.

Posted by: Interestd at February 27, 2005 11:37 AM

Interestd: I quite agree. I only say that I do not want anything that happens to me to be hijacked by groups in which I do not recognize myself. I do not deny their right to exist.

Posted by: Paolo at February 27, 2005 5:26 PM

Martell -

I was interested to recently read (although you probably know already) that Lebanon was set up as a Christian state in 1920. The Christians held sway there until the mid 1970's - and up to then Lebanon was rich and happy, like a small chunk of Europe in the Middle East. With increased Muslim immigration (mostly Palestinians) the Muslims began to press for their majority rights. After a lengthy civil war they got what they wanted - a Muslim government. The result in 2005? The Lebanon is now just like any other corrupt impoverished Muslim country. It's very interesting to see this Islamic talent for creating poverty. Just look at the former USSR, all the new republics were chips off the same block - yet Christian countries like Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia are developing nicely, whilst the new Muslim countries to the east have become hell holes. The same thing happened in Cyprus. Muslim Albania remains Europe's poorest and most backward country. And what about Alexandria in Egypt? In the early 50's it used to have a massive Christian (Greek, Copt, Armenian) and Jewish population. It thrived; it was the jewel of the Mediterranean: a breathtakingly beautiful and prosperous city. Then Sadat evicted all the non-Muslims, and now 50 years later it is a poor, smelly and ugly Arab city of no distinction.

I note that France is now officially a poorer country than the UK. I have no doubt that France's huge Muslim minority are to blame.

Posted by: Timbo at February 28, 2005 11:23 PM