Infinite_Loser

Well, you know, when you call another person a "Primitive baboon" then you shouldn't be surprised when someone else calls you a racist. Then there's also the fact that you insinuated all Muslims are terrorists. That'd be like saying all Christians are terrorists because of the IRA. And then, on top of that, you've got the whole "Send them back to where they came from!" thing going on...

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

Hyacinthe

I find it worrying that so many of the posts in this thread seem almost an attack against other members, races or religious groups.

As I have not seen anyone say that they believe the family did the right thing (for obvious reasons) I think that maybe everyone should take a step back and calm down before coming back to the OP.

It is a fact that these killings happen and they happen in a variety of cultures, though not always in such a premeditated fashion. I believe it is the fact that these killings are planned out that makes them so disturbing.

Due to one of my jobs I work with quite a few people who are from middle eastern cultures and they do treat their women (and by extension me) in a way that I personally find quite hard to stomach. However I also understand that my refusal to cover my hair or dress in a manner they approve / act submissive is hard for them to handle. We all have to make compromises.

I think that what Infinite_Loser - mixedmedia and LoganSnake were trying to point out is that while we might not see her actions as impacting on family honour another culture / religion might.

They did not say that the actions taken were justified.

As for those commenting on the race and religion of the perpetrators of the crime, police basic sterotype of a killer is generally white male ...

__________________
"I want to be remembered as the girl who always smiles even when her heart is broken... and the one that could brighten up your day even if she couldnt brighten her own"

"Her emotions were clear waters. You could see the scarring and pockmarks at the bottom of the pool, but it was just a part of her landscape – the consequences of others’ actions in which she claimed no part."

Baraka_Guru

This is true, except Christians no longer burn women at the stake. This may not have a religious cause, but it certainly has a cultural one.

The United Nations Population Fund estimates that the annual worldwide total of honor-killing victims may be as high as 5,000 women.

Morocco: Article 418 of the Penal Code states "Murder, injury and beating are excusable if they are committed by a husband on his wife as well as the accomplice at the moment in which he surprises them in the act of adultery."

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

abaya

I really, really hope you're joking, or using satire, or something that I'm not picking up. Because if you're not, I've just lost a hell of a lot of respect for you. Maniacs? Primitive baboons? Send them back home? ALL Arabs and Somalis? (Not that it should matter anyway, but did you not notice that the family in the article is from Pakistan?!)

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Lady Sage

I think when the man in Italy is found guilty, we should give him over to the women of his culture so that they can take out all of their frustrations on his hog tied gagged body.

Thats fair enough.

__________________
If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
Minds are like parachutes, they function best when open.
It`s Easier to Change a Condom Than a Diaper
Yes, the rumors are true... I actually AM a Witch.

abaya

Just saw your post here, IL. And you know, this doesn't happen often, but I agree 100% with IL.

Fast Forward, do you seriously think it's okay to call any human being a primitive baboon? Do you think people on this forum are going to sympathize with you, especially when you are using this kind of language? And are you aware that we have quite a few Arabs on this forum, among other people groups that you seem to lump into one category of animals?

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Fast Forward

If you act like a baboon and kill like a baboon then ....

Because we send them to prison for murder?

Do you actually know what the definition of the word "fact" is? Really? Then you'll be so kind to point where it is in post that I said, "all Muslims are terrorists".

We pay for their passage to my country, set them up with living quarters, pay all of their expsenses till they've got settled, keep them on the dole with income - but if they refuse to acknowlege our laws and customs, commit crimes of murder - then they don't deserve to remain in my country or in our prisons. "Send them back to where they came from"? You bet! I firmly stand by that statment.

I said that, did I? "All Arabs and Somalis"?

If wanted to speak about Pakistanis I would have done so. I speak from experience and from my heart. My earnesty and honesty is unfetered.

You might understand, that because of your lack of reading comprehension and misquoting of my post (very similar to that of the baboon), that your respect is unwanted. In fact, I'd consider it an insult.

No. Only the human-murdering baboons of the race.

So you're saying that I should lie for fear of embarrassing someone? Never mind they are murdering innocent people. Or are you of the impression that honest, law abiding people should agree with anyone and everyone of the same cultural fabric? ie. that no Arab will agree with me that another Arab who commits such crimes in another country should not be punished by the host country?

I can see that's the way you see it but then I hope you never feel the urge to reside in my country. Stay home. All right?

abaya

In fact, you did. Go back and read your post:... or are you trying to say that it's only Muslims who are maniacs? That other kinds of Arabs and Somalis are alright with you? I'm guessing probably not... So it's only Arabs and Somalis (not Pakistanis, I suppose, even though that's what this thread is all about) who murder people in the entire world? Can you confirm that 100% of the murders in your country are committed by Arabs and Somalis? And all the people of your own country can do no wrong? No, I am saying that it would help people to understand your opinion if you spoke in a less acerbic manner. Take note that in the last quote, you are saying that "someone" (by context, you mean Arabs who are members of this forum and who are reading these posts) are murdering innocent people. That's quite a jump of logic. Now, if this was your point, then you ought to have started there. Because here, you are finally admitting that not all Arabs are the same. In my opinion, yes, immigrants ought to understand that the laws of their new country are the ones they must abide by. However, that's assuming that the people of the country are treating the immigrants no different than other denizens of their country. Which is often not the case. And which is your country, might I ask?

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Strange Famous

I think once you classify a nationality or ethnic group as "baboons" - it doesnt really matter what else your agument contains, because quite rightly no one is going to pay any attention to what you say.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

albania

I’ve been busy, and have been sort of absent from a topic I started. First, I’d like to respond to the point made by a few of you here that it is wrong to be so judgmental about this crime when the impetus behind it is related to a culture we do not understand. Where in the world does such an argument end? Can we therefore not be upset at a murderer because we can’t read his mind? No, I don’t think anyone would say that, but call him hasan and let him live 3000 miles away then maybe it’s far enough removed for us to ponder it pedantically. I believe that my right to influence someone ends at physical coercion(as an aside, I’m not too keen on causing someone emotional distress either, but I’ll leave the physical part as a general precept). This I will apply to any person living anywhere and it is by this that I will judge his or her actions. If you look at it in this fashion I think you’ll see that I don’t need first hand knowledge of someone’s culture to form a rational opinion, or be outraged. If something as heinous as murdering someone for such slight offenses is truly part of a people’s culture then it will be in their laws. Then, this would be an entirely different case in my view since government is not held to the same principle as I described above.

Next, I never intended this topic to be fodder for some Muslim bashing or what have you. My parents, though they don’t practice the religion would still call themselves Muslims. I have grown up around a mostly Muslim population(admittedly not devout) and I can’t name a single person that I know that would think murdering one’s child is justified.

I’ve had some time to mull it over, so I have slightly more to say then I had in my original post. Leaving aside for a moment the nature of this type of crime, I was thinking about the cause. The thing that struck me was the conflict between a child that has been almost fully integrated into a foreign society and parents who have not. It must be particularly difficult for Muslim people, especially those of dark skin, to be accepted. I have first hand knowledge of the deeply imbedded racism that exists in Southeastern Europe and can only imagine that, even with the high ideals spouted by some, it must not be much different in the whole of Europe. So while the older generation stands firm to ideals from the old country, and perhaps in the face of racism embraces more radical ideas, the young generation ceases to be defined by the same principles. This is an awful situation which, as I know from personal experience, leads to conflict; but, is this really enough to kill someone over?

Ourcrazymodern?

It seemed more...simple
Once upon a time, it did.
Has too much time passed?

__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

Ustwo

Thats a total cop out.

We can't relate to it because its evil and twisted. Its an archaic system that has no place anywhere today and to justify even in the slightest way by saying 'its their way' is moral cowardice. I'd also add that at least the supreme court of India has labeled Honor killings as an act of barbarism, demanding punishment for murder. I

Its evil and wrong, period.

And its still evil and wrong, period. We can understand the twisted morality which makes it acceptable, it doesn't mean we have to accept or even tolerate it. Its bad enough they do it routinely in their pseudo theocracies, but now they are doing it in our suburbs.

We can stop it in the West by dropping the multi-cultural bullshit. If you come here, you are welcome, you now will assimilate with OUR culture. If you want to kill your daughters for running off with a Christian, get the hell out.

I'm personally rather done with the concept that we can tolerate this type of thinking in our own borders. And we can stop it, without force, they can get out.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Fast Forward

You continue to misquote me so I must ask myself if you:

1). Really are terribly lacking in reading comprehension.
2). Are purposesly misquoting me for your own, personal (trolling) agenda.
3). Doing your best, but you just don't speak/read English very well.

I'm an idealist, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that English isn't your language. No problem. I speak 7 languages, 4 of them fluently and the others "good enough to get around". Tell me what language you speak and maybe we can come to an agreeable understanding with one another. I know that non-English is frowned upon on the threads but I think it is alright on the private messages. OK?

Cynthetiq

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

powerclown

Since when did slitting a young girl's throat become a litmus test of cultural tolerance? In what alternate reality does such an act fall into the realm of the acceptable? So where is the line to be drawn? If a society practiced dragging their retarded kids behind buses until they disintegrated into fleshy lumps of goop, would we approve of this too on the basis of respecting their "cultural practices"? What about if they threw all their ugly, hunchbacked, unmarriable girls into vats of boiling acid? Copout indeed.

mixedmedia

I have never stated that it was not evil and twisted. I myself stated that the act is illegal in most of home states that it is practiced in - but it is erratically enforced because of cultural standards that we can not relate to on our own terms - my exact words, more than once. I think that is a shortsighted tendency that does no more than toss a little mental 'poo-poo' over the problem. I have not uttered one word in defense of this practice in any way, shape or form and I always think it interesting when people try to paint you into a corner for not sharing one or the other of two diametric possibilities.

I have simply questioned the way we approach it. I don't understand your objection to that.

And also, since it bears clarifying one time, in the entire scheme of things, when you take in the massive Muslim and Hindu populations on the planet, this practice is not chronically widespread and there are many activists at work in the home countries where it exists who are trying to stop it.

I do not 'understand' it. I do not 'understand' this concept of family honor. Yet, I do not 'understand' people who believe it is their right to shoot someone who is running away with their television, either (they exist - I know - I've talked to them!).

I just want to make it clear that I will never support or endorse or show understanding for murder, regardless of where it is happening. But I will always assert that there are minds in the world that I can never understand due to the way I was raised and shown to see the world, and this is as much true for all of us as it is for a man with a 1000-year-old view of family honor.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

analog

Your answer to the murderer's cultural/religious "vigilante justice" is state-sponsored "vigilante justice"- and not just murder, but torture beforehand as well? That's pretty much the exact opposite of countering this atrocity with reason. That's countering one act of stupidity with another, even worse one. There's not even any "eye for an eye" argument there... that's just a revenge killing. If we expect people to not take others' lives over personal feelings, it is hardly productive to sponsor public revenge killing.

To say that the customs of another culture which indicate the killing of another human being are not capable of our understanding is shortsighted. Just because we are not of their upbringing, values, morality, religion, etc., does not mean that we do not all possess the simple capacity for the basic value of human life.

You also cannot cop-out to this behavior by admonishing it first and then just as quickly taking back any actual judgment of it, as something we can't understand, in the same sentence. It seems like a very passive-aggressive way of indicating disagreement without actually committing to a negative opinion of others' beliefs.

Killing another person is wrong- period, end of story, checkmate, BINGO, gin, and Yahtzee- and no human being on the planet, regardless of who they are, is exempt from that most basic of ideals. The guys knew they were wrong in doing it, they are just hiding behind what they call their beliefs to justify their uncontrolled, racist rage.

Saying we cannot understand the religious/cultural implications in what has happened is akin to dismissing our ability to judge the circa 1800's to early 1900's often-performed tradition of hanging black people as being unfamiliar with the culture of the American racist in that time period. Strong religious, or cultural, personal beliefs are not ever grounds for murder, and that's that.

Apples and oranges. The main issue is that with child beatings, they often go on undetected by outsiders for long periods of time, if they're ever caught at all. If they are found out, the penalties are typically pretty severe. The reason that force won't curb this behavior is that it's not operating under a belief set, it's just an asshole who thinks the only way to keep the kids in line is by beating them. I agree that these cannot be stopped by force, as they are individually motivated acts. The acts of violence we're talking about in this thread are motivated by a shared set of beliefs among some group of people.

And "honor" is hardly a banal reason. "Honor" is always part of a belief structure, and people will do just about anything, including kill or give their lives, to uphold or enforce their beliefs.

footnote: when I say "belief structure", I don't mean that it's part of the actual religion they practice, but part of some offshoot belief structure that some have subscribed to, which is not in keeping with the actual religion they claim to represent.

FoolThemAll

Not quite just that. LoganSnake seemed to be arguing that we shouldn't - or don't have the right - to intervene in such atrocities if they occur in other cultures in other countries.

Tactical issues aside, I couldn't disagree more.

My clumsy guess is that he means that it's only Muslims who are maniacs in this way, who honor kill family members.

I think he needs to realize that his post needs more precise wording, as it can easily be interpreted to be saying "not all Muslims are maniacs, but all maniacs are Muslims". Which, if that's actually what he meant, is at least naive and probably racist as well.

I do think that you leaped a little with the "all Muslims/Arabs are maniacs" interpretation. I didn't see that in his wording.

__________________
I wonder if we're stuck in Rome.

Fast Forward

”Honour Killing”is not a Christian thing. It's not a Jewish thing. It's not a Hindu thing. It's not a Budhist thing. It's a Muslim thing. Naturally, that doesn't mean that all Muslims agree with the pratice. But no matter how you look at it, it is Muslims (Arabs in particular) who commit ”Honour Killings”. To say it out loud is a exercise in the obvious. And to deny it is ridiculous. Do you really think that Arabs, or any Muslims, would take offense in that fact of knowledge? Members of this board seem to think that they would!

Had any one individual from that "culture" come forward to call me out on my original comments, the two of us would have come to an understanding whereby neither of us would have felt offended. My original comments were directed to those cultures that sanction ”honour killings” but it would be wrong to believe that all persons of such a culture would disagree with my damnation of such crimes. To believe that would be EQUALLY racist as to believe that each and every person of that culture is guilty of the crime.

I appreciate both your understanding AND your critisizm.

mixedmedia

I have committed repeatedly to a negative opinion of this belief. I am not copping out of anything.

Other than your use of the word 'racist' which doesn't belong in this context if we are talking about honor killings, I agree with you. In fact, I'll go so far as to maybe assert that I agree with this even more than you do yourself.


I have not given anyone grounds for murder. You align me with ideas that I have never written or implied.

I didn't say that 'honor' was banal, I said that people kill their children for reasons much less banal than honor.

Also, one more thing, I never compared child abuse to honor killings I compared the difficulties in forcing a solution to the problem. And in fact I said in my own post the issue was not law enforcement but changing attitudes. So all in all I think we agree on this issue more than we disagree.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

Strange Famous

normally the idea is to prosecute people who commit crimes in your country in your country.... most states fight quite hard for that principle. Simply letting them off scot free with a deportation back to a country where the crime may be treated more leniently doesnt seem to be much of a punishment. And if they are second generation, were do you propose to deport them to?

If I was an Italian citizen, I would expect my justice system to act in the full defence of the murder of one of my fellow citizens.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

abaya

I don't really care to respond to the rest of your posts. English is my first language. What's yours? I assume you're fluent in Icelandic or Thai, with all your 7 languages?... if so, feel free to PM me. I'd also appreciate you answering a couple of my questions asked earlier, such as which country you live in.

As for the rest of the posters, I don't think any one of us is condoning this behavior. Murdering people is wrong. But there is no one single ethnic or religious group who has the corner market on murder, or even on honor killings. Even Italians were doing it not very long ago. No one should get off scot-free from murdering anyone, in any ethnic group.

That doesn't mean we can't consider the bigger picture of what's going on, and to try and understand why people behave the way they do, even if you don't like it. That's called cultural relativism. It's not EXTREME relativism, which is what a good deal of you are chalking it up to be. There is a big difference between the two ideas, and anyone who took any kind of basic anthropology course worth its salt ought to have learned that. If you haven't taken a course like that, then that'll be our next area of discussion on this thread.

Just because you are trying to understand another way of thinking does not mean that you approve of it. How difficult is that to understand?

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Ustwo

I'm not saying kick them out as murderers, they stay for punishment.

I'm saying kick them out as non-citizens, and while the second generation should go if they think like the first, we can place strict rules about immigration to prevent any more from entering.

If anyone thinks its unfair, try to get a Saudi Visa some time.
And then try to immigrate.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Fast Forward

Here is where you are wrong.
Murder, whether it is out-right treacherous murder, or murder with motivation, is still murder. It's probably the same. I agree with you. But here's the catch. In most societies murder is punishable by law, that is to say murder is illegal - it is against the law. Some may make consesions to those murders comitted "without design" and Americans may give leniency to murder comitted in a fit of jealously by way of an infidel husband/wife. It is all still a crime to murder someone and some punishment is expected.

The Moslem law (as pertains to religeous rights, duties and obligations) not only allows "honour killings" but it it acutually encourages it. That law (though not in the same paragraph) also includes the obligation of every Moslem (anywhere in the world) to murder whoever is on the "Fatwa" list.

I honestly don't recall any Pope condoning (least of all demanding!) the head of any one human being on this earth.

Now, if you don't like my conclusions you may feel completely free to make your own.

abaya

I won't argue with you that EXTREME Muslims encourage honor killings and suicide bombings. However, for you to put forth a statement that every Muslim is under the obligation to be a crazy maniac is truly over the top, in terms of sound logic.

How many Muslims do you know personally?

In addition to that question, which country are you from, for the 3rd time? (I guess it wasn't Iceland or Thailand?) How much church history have you read lately? Crusades, hmm? Please see the Papal Bull by Urban II, among others who followed him in the papacy.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Baraka_Guru

Of which law do you speak? Do you mean laws of Muslim countries? I was under the impression that it was forbidden by Sharia. Could you point out some passages?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Ourcrazymodern?

Speaking as a baboon, it's just us here. I take offense at the word "them". WE have common problems and various solutions to them, some of which comprise evil, and some of which are only ineffective.
All seem to me affectations.

Any person who kills their offspring is obviously insane.

__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT

Strange Famous

I assume he's Dutch?

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Fast Forward

What I find funny, in this statement of yours, is that I have NEVER made any post resembling those sentiments. So who are you quoting (or paraphrasing), may I ask? What I really said stands fast. That is , ”... the obligation of every Moslem (anywhere in the world) to murder whoever is on the 'Fatwa' list.”

The part about ”crazy lunatic” is yours – and yours alone. So be so kind not to continue this mis-quoting of me. It's gone much too far already and it's getting irritating. OK?

I'm banking on you being honest enough to know/admit that there is a huge difference between mass ”crusades” carried out by Christians, Moslems, etc. and individual ”executions”.

Furthermore, I'm also banking on your intelligence to see that the subject is ”Honour Killings” - not attrocities committed by Irish Catholics upon Irish Protestants – Irish Protestants committed upon Irish Cahtolics – Moslems committed upon Hindus – Hindus committed upon Moslems – Moslems committed upon Sihks – Sihks committed upon Moslems – Tutsies committed upon Hutus – Hutus committed upon Tutises – Serbs commited upon Bosnians – Bosnians committed upon Serbs – Americans committed upon Cubans – Americans committed upon Iraqis – Americans committed upon Vietnamese – Americans committed upon Iranians – Americans committed upon Nicaraguans – White Americans committed upon Black Americans – etc. etc. etc.

More than I could possibly count.

I have been in about 20 Moslem countries. The majority being Arab countries. Furthermore, I live in a predominantely Moslem part of my city. I am a minority in my own town. I am a minority in my own country, you could say. I will be moving to another part of city on the 1st. of October because after 8 years of living in such an invironment, I 've had more than I can take. Believe me that I can tell you things that me and my family have had to endure that you would think are untrue. For example, my daughter is pelted with stones (by Arabs and Somalis) whenever she is seen with her boyfriend in our neighbourhood. Why, you may ask? Because she walks with him ”hand in hand”. But isn't this my country – my culture?

Worst of all (and the deciding factor in me taking my family out of this part of the city) is the ”Honour Killing” comitted upon my daughter's classmate. Her family (father, brother, and uncle) slit her throat while she was sleeping in her bed because she was ”sweet” on a local boy – a non-Moslem. Apparently, she didn't even get around to tasting ”the goods” with her boyfriend. It is enough for the family that there was a possibility of her eventually ”doing it” with him. The girl was round to our house many times to listen to my daughter's music CD's and she seemed like a nice girl, coping with the difficulities of her Moslem background yet enjoying the freedom of expression allotted to life in Europe.

My daughter is still going to therapy because of her friend's death. She now clings to me and my wife and she's afraid to go out with her friends after school. She's becoming a recluse at the age of 14 and we don't know how to help her.

abaya

So, can I get a clear, unequivocal statement from you that there are a minority of Muslims in the world who, by virtue not of their religion but by virtue (or vice?) of their own twisted version of it (combined with a number of other complex factors, including cultural and economic ones), commit murder? If you agree with that, then I have no problem with that statement.

You have not answered Baraka_Guru's question about your interpretation of Muslim law, which would be helpful for this discussion.

Thing is, you actually brought up the Catholic church, in saying that the Pope had never condoned or demanded murder on earth. You also related this to a call for a Fatwa, which can be considered a form of mass "crusade," and was off the topic of honor killing. I addressed your comment and asked you to read the Papal Bull of Urban II, which began the Crusades. And call them crusades or executions, but people died in the name of a religious figure calling for them to be killed, with the reward of eternal glory. That's Christian history 101. Can't you admit that Christians have a hellish, bloody history of murder and execution in the name of their God on their hands?

And in fact, since you point out several ethnic groups here, the subject is honor killings by Pakistanis, not Arabs or Somalis, so why did you bring those up in the first place, if we're indeed being so specific? And what country was that again, for the 4th time? We call this "white flight" in American sociological studies. I'm not surprised that it's happening in Europe... but will it really make the problem better, or make it worse? I can tell you that from observing the American ghettos, at least, it definitely doesn't improve things. Now, you know what, if you had started your posts here with the last 3 paragraphs, I would have given you a lot more credit from the get-go. You have reasons for your opinions. But you didn't present those from the beginning... you just called people baboons, which will earn no one's respect on this forum. Honest, reality-based experiences, however, will earn respect. I'm sorry for what your daughter is going through.

But the big picture is much more complicated... looking at the history of European and African (and Asian, South American, pick your developing country) politics and economics helps us get some understanding on how the current system came to be. International population movement didn't just spring up out of nowhere. Conditions were created to induce people to move away from their homes, and the only way you are going to get them to "go back home" is to endorse more ethical trade and subsidies, and to not think in terms of us vs. them. Because we are all "them." Thinking otherwise is what got the world into its current situation in the first place.

Now, this is completely off track of honor killings, but it gives some context for international migration and how these problems came to be in your neighborhood. It's complicated, and there is no easy solution... certainly not "go back to where you came from," which is entirely unhelpful and simplistic.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Baraka_Guru

This is only standing fast because I'm still waiting for you to answer my questions about what you understand about Muslim law. So far, it seems you are misinterpreting it. For example, those who are ultimately responsible for fatwas are those who issue them. Other Muslims can aid as they see fit, but it is only if they feel they can contribute. The onus is on the creator of the fatwa.

And fatwas aren't just about murdering people, any more than mitzvahs are only about coming-of-age parties.

At the risk of sounding preachy myself, you shouldn't let fundamental extremists teach you about their religion.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Willravel

Quoted for truth. Well put, Baraka_Guru|(_Obama?).

mixedmedia

Thirded with a side of amen.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

Fast Forward

"The problem"? Which one?

If we confine ourselves to "my family's problem" then moving to another part of the city is certainly "making the problem BETTER". Probably eliminating that problem alltogether. I believe in a quiet, clean invironment, where neighbours respect everyone else's peace. These are common qualities of my countrymen and I am part and parcel of that culture. Remaining where we are now is out of the question and I can see not the slightest possibilty of "making the probelm better" by staying there. The place is a bomb - ticking, ticking, ticking away. I don't want to light the fuse nor do I want to still be there when it goes off. I'd much rather read about it in the newspapers when the big kabooom(!) rattles the windows.

The very worst part of it is that I doubt I'll shed a tear when it happens. I'll probably give a smirk cause they'll have done it to themselves.

The OTHER PROBLEM, to which you hint, has gone beyond the boundaries of simple understanding and education. We have failed to educate the masses upon masses of political refugees who turn up at our doorstep. This failure has never before been a tragic event because we've had a long history of accepting refugees who (themselves) have thrown themselves into the task of learning and respecting our culture and way of life. These last years, however, have seen several thousands of refugees (weekly!) who have no interest in our way of life at all. They scorn us. They ridicule us. They sabotage the language classes by shouting down female (who such people consider inferior) teachers and critizing my countrymen, our language, our culture, our values, our religion, our system, our general non-agressive behaviour, etc. In short, that OTHER PROBLEM is beyond correcting by persons like me remaining in the midst of people who purposely sabotage my cultural and disrespect everything that me and my country stand for.

Me, my wife, my 14-year-old daughter, and our 2½ month old son are getting out and I promise you that we won't be looking back.

Anyone interested in any subject would do better to do his/her own research. Why draw any conclusion from a "second party" source - especially when that second party is unqualifed?

I would rather that "respect" is awarded to earnest observances rather than emotional ones.

Why do people persist with this useless question?

It would be like believing what Geo. W. Bush has to say about politics, democracy in particular, truth, religion, and the world - huh? Yes, I agree with you.

abaya

The reason I keep asking what country you live in, is because you keep referring to "your" country and how its culture and people are, and I have no idea how to understand what you mean until you give me the actual context for those comments: It would also be good to know the particular colonial history of your country, since most countries in Europe have invaded and taken over other countries' cultures at some point in the last few hundreds years, and that is a very salient point to be made when discussing international migration. It does not happen in a vacuum.

In fact, you could almost take the following quote and take it back 200 years, depending on your country, and I am very sure that the colonized peoples would be saying the exact same thing about the European colonizers (substitute for "refugees"). Wouldn't you agree? You are probably addressing this more to Baraka_Guru, but I must ask... Are you saying that your opinion is unqualified?... I'm confused. This seems like a bit of a cop-out on answering the question of what your source is re: Muslim law.

So, calling people baboons is an "earnest" observance, not an emotional one?

You also have not answered the question about why you have persisted in discussing Muslim Arabs and Somalis, when the OP is about Pakistanis. They are not "all the same."

Also, you have not answered whether or not you agree with my statement: If you agree with it, then we have nothing more to discuss. Which is what I would prefer, because your posts resemble tar babies...

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

roachboy

on the op: the article's interpretation of this killing is odd--decontextualized presentation of infotainment, curious rhetorical choices, etc. it kinda set up what has happened thus far here.

if you look at the op as just telling a story--and in a sense, that all it does--and telling that story in a very particular way--you can work pretty easily out what is happening both in it and in this thread. we live in fucked up times. one characteristic of these times is an obvious convergence between the discourse of "terrorism" and the paranoia of neofascist politics.

it's because these are such curious times that it pays to do react to information at a remove so you can wonder about the extent to which responses to the story are built into the story itself and so require no particular thinking--or to enable you to consider the extent to which the way a story is written pitches you into associations shaped by ideological memes.

this is gonna be a bit long.
tant pis.

the narrative is a variant of tragedy.

a) it involves a clash between rationalities, between mutually exclusive rule sets.
b) this clash generates a killing, which enacts the conflict between mutually exclusive rules sets
c) this sets into motion another conflict, a legal one, in the context of a meaning is ascribed to the killing.
as a conflict (c) repeats (a) except it 1. can be seen as itself resolving the question of which law/norms obtain and so resolves the conflict by imposing a meaning particular to one rule set onto an action carried out in terms of another.

this is how the orestia works, it is how this story works.

this kind of conflict does not mark a distinction between inside and outside a "culture" simply because you can find them everywhere--family vs. wider community, norms of inclusion/exlcusion as over against contextual norms (which community identity is primary in a situation where more than one is at play). and such conflicts arise continuously, in various forms. and these conflicts are often undecidable on their own terms. and the legal decision is often arbitrary.

the idea that a "culture" presupposes a unified or coherent single set of social rules is ludicrous. running with this idea puts you into untenable positions--like you can start pretending that such conflicts indicate the collapse of "western civilization" as if without these Others there'd be no crime, no-one would die and everything would be hunky dory. if you state this directly, the appeal goes out of it simply because stated directly, its removal from the world that other people know about, the retreat into fantasy, is obvious.

but such fiction---rooted in the implications of the word "culture" and not in reality--the idea that a "culture" is a unified or even coherent single formation --this is the stuff neofascist dreams are made of.

in principle--that is in the abstract--such conflicts can be taken as posing problems of limitations: limits of legal authority, limits of legitimacy--but (referring to an earlier paragraph here--->) if these problems are raised at the level of (a) then they are resolved at the level of (c).

this conflict between rationalities unfolds in an environment that is legally circumscribed----so the conflict between rule sets falls under the legal definitions of actions----so the outcome of this clash is murder, in this case.

but you can imagine other conflicts between rationalities that would lead a court to sanction what would otherwise be understood as murder.
war for example.

anyway two mutually exclusive sets of claims play out across the body (living and dead) of the victim. after the fact, the act is subjected to a judgment. that judgment defines the act around legal criteria and there we are.


one of the reasons tragic conflict has its power is that it generally unfolds (in the stories) during a period of political crisis. that "western civilization" is experiencing such a crisis is projection, and more stuff from which neo-fascist dreams are made. this simply because the notion of "western civilization" is even more ridiculous than that of "culture" if you think about it. where is it? where does it stop and start? who is inside and who outside? how would you determine that? who determines that?

this is another level of appeal of contemporary neo-fascism: it purports to resolve this question of "western civilization" by redefining it around the new and improved "same/other" distinction: if the new and improved Other is muslim then "we" are judeo-christian (but contemporary neo-fascism is pretty good at erasing the judeo- part)--the work of the binary is obvious. it is tedious to rehearse it all again. because believers in such political nonsense are looking for essence, in these transient inside/outside distinctions they find essence, so there is usually no sense that "western civlization" is nothing more than an abstraction that is shaped by a series of stupid oppositions on this order. they want "western civlization" to be a thing, like a toaster or a rock. so the category is not about being descriptively coherent--it is therapeutic.


back to the op: the decision on the part of the author of the op article to call this an "honor killing" is bizarre. she could have called it any number of other things, which would have been equally applicable, and this thread would not be happening as it has been.

"honor killing" obviously echoes other associations--the logic of feud as over against the logic of modern law----and because the story is set in italy and the english-language press does not devote a while lot of space to providing any detailed news about italy, the associations operate at the level of caricature--and so "honor killing" resonates with the mafia and so to a criminal conspiracy that functions as a double of state power in certain areas.

so it brings two associations without even thinking too much about it:
outmoded/anachronistic community norms, and horizontal criminal conspiracy.
this sounds like my favortie cartoon--"The Terrrorist"

and from here, we are off to the races--literally in some of the posts above.

people want to discuss this in ethical terms, but there is no attempt to do that in a serious way. to do that, you would need to actually consider the conflict itself and you simply do not have the information necessary about the family involved, who these folk are, where they are, what their situations were, what relations obtained between their assumptions concerning--say--marriage (as a flashpoint conflict between family/community norms and the norms of the ambient community--standard stuff, really). but without this information, there is no possibility of thinking about this killing as posing anything like a coherent ethical problem. folk above are using simplistic projections instead--so you dont know how it is possible that such an action could be undertaken--in what framework is might have seemed reasonable to do--but you make one up and pretend that on the basis of your projection, you can pose an ethical bind. you arent. the thing that makes ethics complicated is that you have to consider people acting in ways that they understand to be justified. the problem comes in considering this process of justification. if you frame an action as simply "primitive" or "abberant" you evacuate the ethical problem and substitute a simplistic spectator's judgment. which is not in itself a problem---it is an opinion--but dont pretend that you are resolving any grand ethical issue through it. you havent even set one up.

one of the aspects of this that makes it actually tragic is that the killing was undoubtedly an act taken en extremis. people do not generally kill their daughters as a matter of course. the people involved in this horrible situation are human beings. if you want to play the game of making "ethical" judgments, then you have to risk trying to understand the complexity of the situation. again, the problem really is in the sense of justification more than it is in the act that followed from it. the problem that ethics can get to are about bounded rationalities and their relation to wider social norms...but saying "this is bad" based on no substantial information doesn't do that. again, it doesnt even start to do that.

i am not justifying the killing, by the way.
i just think much of the response to the op has been facile.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Fast Forward

AS YOU DESCRIBE IT, IT MOST CERTAINLY DOES HAPPEN.


”DEPENDING ON THE COUNTRY”, YES. BUT IT DOES NOT APPLY TO MINE HOWEVER.


----- Originally Posted by Fast Forward -----
Anyone interested in any subject would do better to do his/her own research. Why draw any conclusion from a "second party" source - especially when that second party is unqualifed?
YES, IT IS. OF COURSE IT IS. DID YOU BELIEVE OTHERWISE?

HIS/HER QUESTION IS ABOUT ”MY INTERPRETATION”. CORRECT? MY ”KNOWLEDGE” IS BASED UPON INTERVIEWS – BOTH PERSONAL AND ”OFFICIAL” (OOOOH, BUT I HESITATE TO USED THAT WORD).

I DID A 9-PART TV SERIES BASED ON IMMIGRANTS IN MY CITY. THIS WAS A FEW YEARS AGO. ON ONE EPISODE I PARTIALLY DEDICATED THE QUESTION OF ”FATWAH” AND THEIR CONVICTION [OR INTERPRETATION(?)] OF THE ”OBLIGATION” OF ALL MOSLEMS TO KILL WHOEVER HAPPEND TO BE ON THE FATWAH.. I QUESTIONED ABOUT 25 TO 30 MOSLEMS, OF VARYING NATIONALITIES - BOTH SHIA AND SUNI THOUGH, BECAUSE OF REDUNDANCIES I ONLY TELEVISED 10 OF THEM.

ANYWAY, THE RESULT OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE INTERVIEWED WAS NOT QUITE 50/50 – THOSE WHO PROUDLY DEFENDED THE ”OBLIGATION” AND THOSE WHO FELT UNCOMFORTABLE AND AHSAMED OF IT. HOWE ER, NOT ONE DENIED THAT THE OBLIGATION IS EXPECTED. TO PUT IT INTO OTHER WORDS ALL OF THEM ACKNOWLEDGED THE OBLIGATION WHETHER OR NOT THEY AGREED WITH IT PERSONALLY.

THESE, (PLUS SIMILAR DISCUSSIONS WITH MOSLEMS), ARE MY ONLY CREDENTIALS. IF YOU WANT ME TO RESPOND TO ”MY PERSONAL INTERPRETATION” OF THE KORAN, MOSLEM LAW, THEN I'D HAVE TO READ IT THOROUGHLY FIRST.

----- Originally Posted by Fast Forward -----
I would rather that "respect" is awarded to earnest observances rather than emotional ones.
I'M NOT SURE. PROBABLY NOT. BUT SURELY YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT I'M SAYING THAT PERPETRATORS OF ”HONOUR KILLINGS” ARE ACTUAL, SWINGING IN THE TREES BABOONS. YOU DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I WAS MAKING A FANCY, ANOLOGICAL CRITISIZM?

----- Originally Posted by abaya -----
So, can I get a clear, unequivocal statement from you that there are a minority of Muslims in the world who, by virtue not of their religion but by virtue (or vice?) of their own twisted version of it (combined with a number of other complex factors, including cultural and economic ones), commit murder?


SEE ABOVE.

abaya

No. See roachboy's post. That is all.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

Baraka_Guru

Fast Forward, it sounds like your views of the Muslim faith are completely anecdotal, circumstantial, and personal. Have you considered doing some reading?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Fast Forward

Never. What would be the point? I might get brainwashed with leftist, liberalist, communist propaganda. I get all the information (the real truth) I need from Geo. W. Bush and the guys at the bowling alley on Wednesday nights.