Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Muslim father chokes daughter to near death


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 809
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ok another insult....

I will try again for you.

How bout this wording:

"He flew into a rage because she would'n't listen to him when he told her to wear her head covering."

Better? Do I get "it" now? Do I get a gold star? Oh please please I want a gold star!

:lol: frig

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok another insult....

I will try again for you.

How bout this wording:

"He flew into a rage because she would'n't listen to him when he told her to wear her head covering."

Better? Do I get "it" now? Do I get a gold star? Oh please please I want a gold star!

:lol: frig

Nope. I don't think you even begin to get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strangling someone in a drunken rage is completely different that strangling your teenage daughter while completely sober.

The fact that he called the police to report that he had killed his daughter before she was even dead tells me that he intended to kill her. If this wasn't a deliberate killing, why didn't he or his adult son call the paramedics or even try to revive her themselves? Most family members who see another family member being choked to death would intervene and try to stop the assault. The son has been charged with obstruction of justice. This speaks volumes to me as to the mindset of both of them. I would even go so far as to say that he most likely knew what the consequences would be, but his belief in his right to carry out an honour killing outweighed any fear of those consequences. This is a culture few of us will ever understand. Part of it being "sacrifice for honour".

Edited by Carinthia
Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to you Keng;

You stated;

"It's funny how whenever a person has an opinion that doesn't suit a left-wing agenda, that this opinion manifests because of some supposed "fear". "

Uh Keng the fact I disagree with your generalizations as to women doesn't make them left wing.

"So the fact that women are increasingly violent and that immorality is on the rise really isn't the product of extensive reading, observation, and contemplation--it's just a knee-jerk reaction based on (unfounded) "fear"."

This is a post about a tragic act of male on female violence fueled by fundamentalist religious beliefs that in this specific case are Muslim fundamentalist beliefs but could just as easily be caused the religious fundamentalist beliefs of many religions. You have now seen fit to use it as an opportunity to make negative generalizations about all women and assuming because some women have become violent (presumably you are talking about teen-age girls) this gives you a platform to suggest women are immoral. For that Keng you are in my opinion someone who tries to use once again his version of what he thinks Christianity is, to label all women to justify coontrolling them and demonizing them if they do not agree with you and so yes Keng your very words lead me to believe you fear women and in particular women who you can not control. I have no other way to try rationalize an alleged grown man talking about women in such simplistic negative generalized terms describing them as immoral.

"Moreover, I'm not sure how simply holding an opinion on a subject somehow leads you to consider that I think of myself as an "expert" on any topic."

Because quite simply Keng you have repeated on numerous occassions as you insult others that you are an expert.

" I base my opinions on the findings of experts,"

And yet you will not reference your opinions to where you get your information from and time and time again have been shown to make statements that are clearly your subjective feelings but subjective feelings you want people to accept as fact. A fact Keng is not what you feel, its what is proven by neutral third party sources.

"but I read about a wide variety of topics and tend not to focus on any specific one to the point where I consider myself an expert."

So now we are back to you being an expert. So I again say to you-you claim to be an expert, state your religious denomination and academic training and area of expertise and site your academic references you claim to be reciting.

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest American Woman
The fact that he called the police to report that he had killed his daughter before she was even dead tells me that he intended to kill her. If this wasn't a deliberate killing, why didn't he or his adult son call the paramedics or even try to revive her themselves? Most family members who see another family member being choked to death would intervene and try to stop the assault. The son has been charged with obstruction of justice. This speaks volumes to me as to the mindset of both of them.

That's always bothered me, too. That they called the police rather than the paramedics. Even if someone thinks a loved one is dead, they hope someone can revive them. They want them to at least try. There were 11 people living in that house, from what I've read. I can't believe none of them were around to see what was happening. Obviously the 26 year old son was. I've linked to an article about honor killing and domestic violence being a big problem in Pakistan, the country they had recently emigrated from. I feel they may have grown up with the mindset that honor killing in such a situation is justified.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No one can make women be more virtuous, unless it is other women readopting virtue as a norm, and that won't happen until we as a society readopt some of the virtues we've lost. The trouble is that since the 60s we've been practising hedonism and pretending it's freedom, and one way or another we'll return to a stae of civilzation. One way is to allow the inroads of 7th century barbarians; my prefered way is to rediscover western Virtu ourselves.

"Hedonism"?

I would argue that just as the pusuit of materialism in our Western society has also taught us to value things by how much we can control and as expendable objects which one "buys" and therefore "owns and controls" until we discard them and start the cycle again, so have we learned to treat relationships as we do material objects.

Our relationships have become expendable and easily thrown out just as we do objects. In the material world we are conditioned to discard so we will buy again and refuel the economic cycle and it creates huge piles of garbage. We do the same with people trying to buy and control them until we throw them out like refuse.

I think or pursuit of materialism is responsible for how we deal with each other. Sorry I do not subscribe to any alleged Christian such as Keng or anyone such as yourself lecturing me on what is or is not morally acceptable and claiming to know what is.

This issue has to do with men being violent and trying to control the free will of women using the same exercise you are-claiming to know what is morally acceptable.

In this specific case men moved to a society whose freedom of choice dealing with lifestyle issues was not acceptable to them and they felt they could impose their restrictions on a family member based on their religious and gender beliefs.

Its bullshit whether it comes from them or you or any one else claiming to know what is right or wrong.

Men pretending to be Gods. How quaint.

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post, Carinthia.

Well American and Car you two make some interesting points and Car's postulations as to manslaughter are legally correct as to how manslaughter is defined in the criminal code. That I can assure you as a lawyer. However as you 2 may know the key element in crime is mens rea, whether the Crown can show there was criminal intent.

You may be dead on in respect to the fact that if the Crown can show this was not an isolated act, but attached to earlier threats of death, this goes to evidence or show the state of the father's mind and suggest its premeditated and therefore not manslaughter but homicide.

However it is still possible the defense will argue he lost his temper and was shaking her.

We just don't know what happened. A defense lawyer's most likely tactic is to say he went into a rage and had no idea what he was doing and therefore did not have the capacity to form criminal intent in which case we could be back to manslaughter.

See the problem here is the son is not going to be a reliable witness and there are no third party witnesses and you can be sure the defense will as a tactic try to use the discrimination card.

Domestic violence is often hard to prove when the person is dead. Sometimes it will depend on the kind of marks left on her neck and whether the pathoplogist can determine the cause of death from that.

What you should also know is 95% of these kinds of cases are plea bargained and do not go to trial.

The police will first try to get statements from the father and son who are lawyered up. It will be difficult because of the language differences, cultural differences and the fact that the son and father will be coached and be careful as to what they say.

I am afraid I can not tell you the legal system works in a smooth way.

I am sure you two would agree none of us is suggesting we do this any way but in a fair way to find out what happens.

For me as a lawyer having mediated domestic violence for years, I can only tell you what all women should know, that violence is violence. Religion, family honour does not excuse it.

When all is said and done this comes down to an issue of violence against a woman by men feeling they have the right to control her body. So with due respect I am no raving feminist but I do believe it is a gender relation issue and it flows from how men perceive their rights with women.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've seen the family and the friends that she stayed with before she died are saying that this had nothing to do with religion, although I guess that's what one should expect them to say. Whatever the case, I saw the family's nice big house on TV the other day, so if the guy was concerned about his daughter becoming too westernized, he wasn't exactly setting that great of an example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This issue has to do with men being violent and trying to control the free will of women using the same exercise you are-claiming to know what is morally acceptable.

In this specific case men moved to a society whose freedom of choice dealing with lifestyle issues was not acceptable to them and they felt they could impose their restrictions on a family member based on their religious and gender beliefs.

Exactly. Early on I said here this is a case where the control issue by the father over the daughter is central. IMO men who lose control over the women in their life to the point of committing murder are sociopaths. The motive for this murder has not been positively established because most of the evidence is unknown to us. Therefore, I cannot conclude that this is a so called honor killing.

I have a serious problem with the term "honor killing". The word honor usually inspires positive, feel good feelings in its usage. E.i., he/she is honorable, it's the honorable thing to do, in his/her honor. Heck, we call judges "Your honor". Murdering for religious reasons is that the murderer perceives that he and/or the family has been "dishonored". I have the same problem with the term suicide bomber. It's not the suicide that is significant but the resulting maiming and murder of innocent people. This may sound like a trivial point but terminology plays a role in how situations and events are interpreted and perceived by the subconscious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
muslimness may have not played a role at all -- just a volitile dad who'd kid would not follow his rules
Just a Muslim father killing his daughter for not following HIS religion to the degree that he demanded.

I mean, other than that... sure it might not have been a Muslim issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Strangling someone in a drunken rage is completely different that strangling your teenage daughter while completely sober.

The fact that he called the police to report that he had killed his daughter before she was even dead tells me that he intended to kill her. If this wasn't a deliberate killing, why didn't he or his adult son call the paramedics or even try to revive her themselves? Most family members who see another family member being choked to death would intervene and try to stop the assault. The son has been charged with obstruction of justice. This speaks volumes to me as to the mindset of both of them. I would even go so far as to say that he most likely knew what the consequences would be, but his belief in his right to carry out an honour killing outweighed any fear of those consequences. This is a culture few of us will ever understand. Part of it being "sacrifice for honour".

I don't necessarily know if this should even be considered an honour killing, rather than just a father who felt justified in abusing his daughter. Further to the point, it's a man who felt that it was his "God given right," due to his religion and culture, to abuse his daughter to get her back in line and following their chosen religion. Do we even need to have a conversation on whether religious beliefs are justifiable, reasonable or even rational? I think the situation here answers that question clearly. It should also go without saying that any meme that considers thoughtless acceptance of ideas as a virtue is a very dangerous problem.

Some people are going to say that it is not religion, but culture that created this mindset, but I would argue that religion in that area of the world is inseparable from the culture. Something North Americans, with our pop culture , customs and religion being all separate things, have difficulty understanding.

Anyway, honour killing. In the way that honour killings are carried out in the middle east (usually publically and in groups), I don't necessarily think this fits the bill. I think this is a man whose concepts of morality, right, wrong, good and evil have been twisted by thoughtless religious conviction.

Edited by cybercoma
Link to post
Share on other sites
If the above comment means what I think it means, I find this to be ignorant and offensive. I do believe I will skip over anything you post in the future. Grow up!

I would suggest that you read any of her posts, and if you don't find them to be ignorant and/or offensive, then I could tell you a thing or two about your level of intellectual development. I don't even know who you are, so you're mistaken if I have any concern about not reading my posts in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I would suggest that you read any of her posts, and if you don't find them to be ignorant and/or offensive, then I could tell you a thing or two about your level of intellectual development.

Insults a poster before they even respond! As Bugs would say "What a maroon!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
Insults a poster before they even respond! As Bugs would say "What a maroon!"

It was a deserved slap in the face to the "morners" for the girls funeral to have the family privatize the burial and cut these vacarious emotional jerks out of the ritual - getting real tired of candles and teddy bears and frinking ballons being put at death sites and on graves by this silly pagan youth culture that feels important when someone dies - as if death gives their pitiful lives meaning. Much like a rave - that my kids would attend - it was not a success unless some kid over dozed and died on the dance floor - then it was important - such drama - and what the hell does a teddy bear or ballons have to do with our state religion regarding funerals? Oh yes - the state religion of immature liberalism - instead of Jesus - they have a cruxified teddy bear - pathetic - the family was right to chase off this crowd of "morners" - My kids have a term for weak liverals - they are called - EMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the family wanted a private funeral that is certainly their right.

But a little sympathy for her friends who are also mourners, would be in order. After all, when it is your friend who has died, it hurts just as much as a loved one, and people need a way to get over their grief.

I can't blame the family for changing it though, because of the intense media scrutiny alone.

I think this murder case is being handled the way it should be, under Canadian law. There is no hint of amnesty by sharia law being granted so far. All islamophobes can rest assured, their WASP heritage remains pure and unsullied.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is not a killing committed by a sociopath.

Pliny, I am not trained in psychiatry. So I looked up the accepted medical description of a sociopath and I agree with you. I was looking for a term that would describe a type of person who rejects the norms of the society they inhabit to the point of committing murder against someone close to them.

This would be the normal course of events in Pakistan, wouldn't it? We should accommodate multi-culturalism, shouldn't we? He should not be made to feel guilty.

It concerns me that too many Canadians seem to make excuses for or rationalize these so called honor killings on the basis of other countries' laws and customs. It seems much of the sympathy these murderers attract is based on this factor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If the family wanted a private funeral that is certainly their right.

But a little sympathy for her friends who are also mourners, would be in order. After all, when it is your friend who has died, it hurts just as much as a loved one, and people need a way to get over their grief.

I can't blame the family for changing it though, because of the intense media scrutiny alone.

I think this murder case is being handled the way it should be, under Canadian law. There is no hint of amnesty by sharia law being granted so far. All islamophobes can rest assured, their WASP heritage remains pure and unsullied.

In "old Canada" - we as kids did not have 'grief councilors" nor did we have a funeral a week for a peer that was shot or stangled. Little to much mourning going on here and not enough thinking to why violence takes place - to bad they did not have an educational system that taught the kids the truth about how systems operate and how some become dysfunctional - this type of repeated teenage "mourning" gets to be a bit much after a while - whether it is some single black mother leaning over the grave of her eldest son who was shot in the head for not paying up on a crack deal - or this incident - where a father go nuts because no one has bothered to tell him when you come to Canada you have lost the thousand year old tradition and authority that is patriarchy...As far as Sharia Law is concerned - Judiac law took a hit also last year if you remember - and Christains are now refered to in the court as "nominal" - the secularization that hides under the cloak of mulit-culturalism should be addressed - and it should be made known that if you come to canada - leave your heritage and authorship over that thing called family at the door - the state now owns your ass and your offsprings ass.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jus'' catching up:

Ol' Argybargy:

You're implying that this sort of thing happens a lot. Can you find another case that didn't involve an immigrant? I'm speaking about a father deliberately murdering his daughter - with nothing else involved. No divorce, no crazed suicide, just deliberately murdering his daughter because he didn't approve of her behaviour. Banal? I can't think of another case. Ever. Some drunk throwing his baby maybe, but a stone cold sober sane man murdering his daughter for her behaviour? No, that doesn't happen here.

So a guy who kills his kids because of a acrimonious divorce is crazed, but this guy is not? I would argue that someone willing to murder their daughter over the demands of his invisible sky god can scarcely be termed stone cold sober and sane.

What's more, you are strongly implying that this is commonplace phenomenon here. In which case I'd like to see the numbers.

Of course I'm not gonna dispute that misogynistic cultures and religions will produce misogynists. What I do dispute is whether this is a representative sample.

Or perhaps that due to the race of those involved you and those others who profess to care about violence against women don't give two shits about this case.

I do care about this case, hence my posting about it. Duh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
She only gets it in certain positions.

Well Keng your role on this forum of holier then thou Christian preacher gets a bit difficult now doesn't it? The comments Keng appear t evidence you couldn't control yourself and in a discussion about the homicide of a young girl made sexually abusive comments ridiculing women.

Now if you try defend yourself and laugh it off it will only reinforce the fact you are anything but what you have claimed to be preaching. If you ignore it, its not going away either. So what do you do now Keng? How does the man who preaches about morality to others preach his way out of this one?

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...