All three killers deserve islamic punishment--- stoning to death.

Posted by: iqbal at November 5, 2005 9:21 AM

There's an interesting twist to this horror story: the male lover was killed instead of the female lover (the family member). And the fury directed at him speaks of uncontrollable rage and hate. How can such fury be turned on, seemingly at will? And then is it turned off as the perpetrators go to school or work the day after the killing?

Violent rage such as this can't just momentarily materialize. It must be the product of years of indoctrination: lessons in violence, hate and male entitlement. The Qur'an would fit the bill for these purposes.

I hope the sentences are severe, so severe as to absolutely dissuade those who would contemplate so called "honour killings."

I hope the young woman, who sounds as though she's courageous and trying to think independently, is given refuge far from her murderous family.

Posted by: Jen at November 5, 2005 9:23 AM

There is a lengthy video report worth watching about this story.

The 'honor' of this killing was given to the girl's youngest brother because they expected him to receive leniency due to his age (15 yrs.).
It appears she aborted the pregnancy.

Posted by: justamomof4 at November 5, 2005 9:32 AM

justamomof4:

Thanks for that video link - I've saved it for future reference.

I find several things interesting:

They choose the youngest to do the murder - only because there is an expectation of him receiving the shortest sentance. Some honour - cowards seems more like it.

British police suspect there have been over 100 honour killings in Britain in the past 10 years - possibly a dozen or so per year. This does not include those girls lured back to Pakistan to be killed there.

The suicide rate among young women of Pakistani (i.e. Muslim) origin is 3 times the national average.

The constant reference to Muslims as "victims" particularly after the Sept. 11 attacks. 3,000 infidels murdered and the Muslims seethe and whine about being victims.

Personally, should any of the three receive unduly light sentences, I rather hope the victim's Iranian family take justice into their own hands. Primitive response? Maybe, but these people are primitive themselves.

Posted by: johnb at November 5, 2005 9:55 AM

Johnb,

You mention over 100 honor killings . . . the segment in the video where they opened a vault chock FULL of shelf after shelf after shelf of unresolved case files suspected of being 'honor' killings - in Britain! Sigh.

Yes, the video was very telling indeed. Unfortunately, I was not able to save it (technically challenged as I am) and the server seems to be overwhelmed now. Hope others get a chance to view it.

Sad to think about this poor girl's future. With the potential for further threat from any male relative - Does she even have a future? If she considers apostacy - she's mark for death anyway.
Islam, such is the benevolence of the merciful religion of peace. SPIT.

Posted by: justamomof4 at November 5, 2005 10:35 AM

justamomof4:

I just checked the link and it seems OK to download.

Right click the "watch the report" button on the link and select "Save Target As" and it should save to disk.

Posted by: johnb at November 5, 2005 11:06 AM

Jen writes:How can such fury be turned on, seemingly at will? And then is it turned off as the perpetrators go to school or work the day after the killing?
Thats what Tolstoy wanted to know ("Kingdom of God is Within You", i884). Just how can a young man who has been raised a Christian, believes in 'thou shall not kill, love your enemy, ect, but can somehow suspend that, and go out and kill people, sometimes women and children...And then go home and bounce his own children on his knee and talk of brotherhood and peace. A lot of Tolsoys book explains just how the clever manage to do that to the gullible. He was talking about war, but the same kind of mental suspension is prevelant, and permanent in Islam. Most soldiers are temporary, but jihadists are forever. A soldier can shut off his fury and only activate during battle. A muslim is carrying his fury around all the time, covered by a thin veil, just waiting to burst out. A person who cant shut his fury off is psychotic. But according to the literature, "fury" is a blessing from Allah, so why cut that off? If you are furious, murderous, out of control, committing horrorific acts, you have Allah on your side. How can you beat that?
Actually this question, 'to kill or not to kill, is very complicated and has zillions of variables, but the ability to enjoy your killing is not all that complicated, it's just plain psychotic...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 5, 2005 11:41 AM

Here's a link to the original article:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1019/p04s01-woeu.html

One item that caught my attention:

Many see investigations into honor killings as an implied criticism of their faith.

Both the article and the video noted, as Jen has today, that this particular case is unusual in that the daughter's husband was murdered rather than her.

At least one item differs between the video report and the original Christian Science Monitor report, which stated that:

The two had been married for three months.

Note, too, the British woman reporter, refers to the deceased as an Iranian Muslim, but his uncle believes that his nephew did not understand the full implications of his relationship with the Muslim girl.

Hmm.

She also stated that he was killed by people he knew. "People who had their reasons, however questionable."

However questionable?

Is there no end to press stupidity?

Posted by: PRCS at November 5, 2005 12:15 PM

And what does the average non-Muslim Brit think of all this?

Posted by: PRCS at November 5, 2005 12:18 PM

duh_swami:

Thanks for the comments and the mention of Tolstoy's book. It sounds like one I should read. Yes, it's all extremely complex, no simple issue this, but 46 stab wounds bespeaks a fury far beyond that required by the terrible mental acquiescence to become a killer, for "honour" or for war. And this fury of Muslim males against their straying females can be activated almost at any time, even in daily life, it seems, whereas, war fury is built up with provocations, attacks, and other aggression, but is shut off once the soldier is home. Not so with the type of Muslim male in this article. His fury must be just under the surface of everyday behaviour, as you say.

PRCS:

I read the original article. Thanks. Lot's there to comment on. I was surprised to see the July 7 bombings entering into the report and statements that the Muslim community feels "threatened." I see these as veiled warnings to the police and the press to treat this subject/crime lightly, for the Muslim community is already in a fragile state of actual and impending victimhood!

Also there was reference to the fact that South Asian immigrants are determined to reject Western lifestyles and maintain their own identity, apparently. Does this mean we should tell Blair not to worry any more about his attempts to integrate them into British society?

And of course, we read the usual excuses that "honour" killings are cultural not religious. But excuses don't bring back the dead. It must be significant that these killings mostly occur in Islamic cultures.

Posted by: Jen at November 5, 2005 1:44 PM

duh_swami

as a matter of fact Christians do not believe that 'thou should not kill'. Rather they believe that they shouldn't *murder*. Big difference.

Self defence is justified for anyone, and if one kills in self-defence, or kills enemies whilst invading Nazi Germany, for example, there's no reason to expect the person doing it to do it with a long face. Especially if the person doing it is a soldier willing to lay down his life for those at home unable to fight.

Christians believe in the immortal soul and life everlasting. Killing an enemy gives God an opportunity to pass judgement. It's not necessarily the end of things for the dead person.

I don't think Tolstoy understood the Christian position.

Posted by: RunningDog at November 5, 2005 2:45 PM

This is the report from The Times newspaper.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1857887,00.html

A poster above asked "what does the average non-Muslim Brit think of all this?"
We are not impressed. It happens in all cultures, although the classic crime of passion of Western European society (and US, Commonwealth etc) is more likely to be a wronged spouse killing the cheating variety, but it is seen as an aberation, wrong, not normal.
Except in Islam where it seems to be eminently respectable. Thankfully the police are now starting to take these more seriously. 1 a month is pretty serious, in my opinion.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at November 5, 2005 3:07 PM

I dont agree with what Numera Khan at all.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1019/p04s01-woeu.html

"According to Khan, honor killings are not Islamic at all, but because they are integrated into traditional culture they are seen as something Islamic."

Who but Muslims, say that this type of killing is cultural; then why are the Buddhists, Hindus, Christians and members of other religions that live in South East Asia and the middle Eastern countries do not follow this horrible practice? He is another pathetic apologist for the evil ideology of Islam. They can never accept the truth; but hide under various ruses.
This practice of 'honour killings' are purely ISLAMIC, where the women are the property of men and its an Islamic paractice used from the time of the evil prophet Mo. The Muzzies are the only ones who (honour) kill their own women. In Muslim countries males who kill for honour go unpunished, as its accepted by the general Islamic public and the authorities.

Posted by: faqi at November 5, 2005 3:17 PM

I'm just thinking of how our societies were in the West before we were blessed with the cultural richness that is Islam. What on earth did we do in those dark and unenlightened days before honor killings, subway bombings, FGM, jihad, halal food and riots became a way of life?

There we were, happily reading our kuffar pig stories, putting pennies in our kuffar piggy banks, and erroneously believing that women have a right to walk around in public without being dressed like the Grim Reaper.

We must show our gratitude to Islam for sharing the blessings of their wonderful cultural richness and enlightened viewpoints with us.

Posted by: Suzan at November 5, 2005 3:50 PM

GW,

But was the average non-Muslim Brit (a)unaware of this practice before the trial (b)somewhat aware, or (c)quite aware of it?

Has the trial exposed the practice to the general public?

What does the MCB have to say about it?

And for other posters, I believe that it IS practiced in some non-Muslim cultures (Hindu? Sikh?)

Posted by: PRCS at November 5, 2005 5:32 PM