Muslim teenage girl killed by father
 

Clash Over Religious Garb May Be Behind Attack On Teen
Tuesday December 11, 2007
CityNews.ca Staff

She wanted to be more Western.

He wanted her to be more traditional.

And that clash of cultures may have been what led a father to allegedly choke his daughter and leave her in very grave condition in hospital on Monday. Police are saying very little about what happened in a home on normally quiet Longhorn Trail in the Eglinton and Hurontario area of Mississauga. But the friends of 16-year-old Aqsa Parvez claim she was desperately trying to pull away from the strict traditions of her devout Muslim family.

And they contend that led to the attack that's left her near death. The sad story began just before 8am when a man called police to report he'd murdered his daughter. Authorities found the girl clinging to life and rushed her to hospital. She'd reportedly been choked into unconsciousness.

Her father, identified as 57-year-old cab driver Muhammad Parvez, was taken into custody at the scene. Students at Applewood Heights Secondary School, which the victim attended, tell of a troubled family life, with the teen refusing to wear the traditional head covering hijab, and preferring more Western-style clothing.

They say she'd moved out and was staying with a friend, and may have gone back to get her things when the confrontation began. "She's kind of rebellious a bit," confirms classmate Heather Bottecher. "She's supposed to wear the hijab. But she doesn't usually wear it. And she usually wears short sleeves when you're supposed to wear long sleeves. And she wears, like, low cut shirts and stuff like that."

"We noticed a drastic change in her appearance," another friend named Shianne Phillips recalls. "Like, she used to dress religiously. Now she's dressing in, like, more causal clothing, like other people."

There are reports the teen would wear the special garb to school then change when she got there to fool her father.

Parvez makes his first court appearance on the attempted murder allegation on Tuesday, but that charge could be upgraded if his daughter dies. Relatives are expected to make the difficult choice about donating her organs if that terrible tragedy happens.

-----------------------------------


They just reported a few minutes ago that the girl died this morning.

This story just completely and totally angers me. I live just a few miles from where this happened and over the last 15 years a HUGE amount of Muslim immigrants have moved into my city. There is so many now that my daughter is one of only two white kids in her class. When I went to school it was closer to half with the other half being a mixture of other cultures.

I don't mean to come across as racist here, this city has always been very multicultural and I truly think that was a great thing, the pendulum is now swinging waaay far to the other side.

When I drive around my area I am seeing just as many women in Hijab's and even Burka's as not. They for the most part seem to keep to themselves are do not try and be freindly with their non-muslim neighbors. The sense of community drops all the time.

My problem with all of this is not the ethnicity of new immigrants, if they are coming to make a better life for themselves then I wish them all of the luck in the world, but for fucks sakes we are in Canada. You need to allow your family to adapt, your children to be who they want to be.

This type of tradegy has happened before and will happen again and it pisses me off.

My arguements here are not fluid and are disjointed. I needed to rant.

Welcome to the rewards of promoting multiculturalism and rejecting the melting pot concepts of immigration.

They come to nations for a better life, while bringing the culture that made life in their lands suck to begin with.

I just heard a talk radio debate between two muslims (hosted by John Oakley on 640 AM) who were talking about this case.

The woman was supporting the father's actions as the daughter was disobeying her father while under the age of majority (19 yrs old) and she said that wearing the hijab was mandated by the Koran. She did go on to say that the father may have gone a little overboard in his actions. But this was earlier this morning before the poor girl had passed away.

The man who was debating her, also a Muslim, was appalled at the way the Koran was being interpreted, and stated that the original intent for modesty in the Koran says that a woman must keep her breasts covered. Never a mention of the face or head. He appealed to the woman's intellect in trying put forth his position that the Koran is being mis-interpreted, or at the very least there is little agreement on various aspects of the scriptures.

The entire thing is sad to see. Now the girl is dead, and the father is in jail.


hmmm. I view this statement as simplistic (sorry, no offense). I have lived in the multicultural pluralism of Toronto for most of my life and deliberately chose to send my (admittedly polyglot) children to a downtown school that has an even mixture of blend of cultures (Tamil, Cantonese, English, German, Italian, Vietnamese, Pakistani & Indian) and religions. This is instead of an area, closer to my home, which is focused in a singular culture (my area would be predominately Italian, Greek or Philipino depending on the school).

They have Muslim friends who may have been born, or who's parents are from Pakistan, Hindu from Sri Lanka, Buddhist from Thailand, Catholic from India, Protestant from France plus the normal mainstream Canadian United Church or RC.

What I think is the trend that is disturbing is the establishment of what people are calling "ethnoburbs" which is where there is a huge agglomeration of one type of cultural community taking over a large area of town. For example (locals know these areas): Chinese in Markham, Pakistani/Bengali in Brampton, Tamils in Scarborough or St James Town and to a lesser extent, Jamaican in North York (jane/finch).

To me, this isn't multiculturalism. it's a form of ghettoization, where there is a lack of mixing, of the salad that is multiculturalism. So we get a homogenous soup, an island of the old world that is a departure from the basic cultural norm of the nation, and no attempt is made to integrate which is a basic tenet of multiculturalism.

The end result are cases where the immigrants from the old world try to keep the old world "happening" in the new world to such an extent, that they lose sight of the need to integrate.

It isn't much different than the immigration spurts of America in the 1700's and 1800s. People ghettoized their neighborhoods, but there was a fundamental mindset difference wherein the culture was shed as the immigrants wanted to their children to have a better life from their homelands.

This is what Ustwo is refferring to as I understand what he wrote.

ethnoburbs...thats a new one...
the first generation hardly ever integrates. its their kids or maybe the grandkids that integrate.

Here we go again. Not gonna waste my breath on this one.

Please see the umpteen other threads on immigration...

It was two lines so I hope no one was expecting deep.

Though while as an ideal multiculturalism would be taking the best aspects of each culture and sort of blending it in, the reality of it has been isolation and conflict as practiced as of late. Pretty much since people started talking about multiculturalism as an excuse for said isolation.

My feeling for the US at least, is if you come here, thats fine, but ONLY if you accept the culture, life style, and morals. IF you want to bring your crap here and just get a better job, get the fuck out.

Yep

Well, that's the U.S. For the time being, anyway. Actually, no. It isn't, really. But, whatever.

If Canada maintained its culture, lifestyle, and morals, we'd still be British and French colonials hating one another. Now, we simply hate one another while bringing more "crap" into the mix. Because you know what? We've been bringing our "crap" over here since the start. That's the New World. I'd hate to see the U.S. get left behind in the next cultural revolution. I'd hate to see them stagnate like so many Third World Muslim countries.


Men killing women isn't a new problem. Religion is a catalyst, sure, but to say multiculturalism doesn't work is a bit ignorant. Multiculturalism has been working for decades. People can feel isolated in society even if their family has been around for generations. There are far too many success stories to uniformly criticize a phenomenon that isn't going away anyway.

I agree with this - as long as opportunity exists for the next generation they tend to blend in pretty well with the dominant culture. If people do remain ghettoized, then assimilation is less likely.

My neighbours are from Pakistan - they maintain a few of the traditions for sure, but the mother and the daughter, while they wouldn't be caught dead wearing a track suit with the word "juicy" written across the ass, also no longer wear hijabs except to more formal occasions (i.e., weddings, etc).

Yea whatever, its working just smashing in Europe right now, ask the French, and I can't wait for that sort of multiculturalism here. Riots and child strangling for all.

I don't believe the US would "stagnate" or get "left behind" but frankly, having seen first hand what a native, impoverished and ignorant muslim culture is like, I don't want it in my country in any form whatsoever. So here comes Xeph's take on this issue.

First of all, the mistreatment of women is blatant and vast. The Pashto people, who make up the majority of Afghans, have a strict culture built on top of Islam. Women cannot wear hijabs, but rather must wear full burkhas after puberty. If they are caught going outside without one, for ANY reason (and I mean ANY) they can be and almost always are shot dead by the husband or father. For the patriarch of the family to not do so would dishonor his entire family and another male family member would then be required to kill her. After having talked to guards and terps who have a good grasp on Western culture (as best as they can be expected to) and having them tell us pointedly that they would, in fact, kill their wives for doing so, it was a real eye-opener.

In fact, their disdain for the female gender often leads some tribal subgroups to take girl babies form the mother's womb to the woods to die immediately. They just don't want girls. Women and girls of all ages are abused, mistreated and killed for no good reason (by any western standard at least).

We've been told specifically by Afghans that we work with that even the best relationships allow them only to "tolerate" us infidels. That because we do not believe the teachings of the Prophet Muhammed, we are damned things and don't truly deserve this life. WTF? And those are GOOD relations.

On the note of interpretation, keep this in mind. It is in violation of Islamic Law to translate the Koran (not that it isn't done). So, in the middle east and eastern asia, most people cannot read the Arabic scripts. First, most of the people are simply illiterate, even in their own tongue. Also, despite the fact that most of these cultures use langauges with the Arabic script the language itself is quite different (like German and English, for instance). So, even those that can read their own language still often cannot read the Koran. This prevents any discovery. In the mosques and madrasas people are only taught portions of the Koran often misinterpreted or purposefully altered to suit the conceptual beliefs of the talib (teacher). Thus most Muslims in this part of the world are not very well educated in their own religion, but they are almost always devout to the point of being zealots. Sound like a recipe for disaster? Well, it is. Obviously, look at the state of this region.

Now, let's extrapolate a bit more and look at the culture and modernization of most primarily Muslim countries. These countries are in the birthplace of modern man. All scientific and historical evidence points to the middle east being where recorded history of humanity began. They've been moving forward for THOUSANDS of years. The West, and especially North American countries have been around for only HUNDREDS of years. Yet we have moved forward far more rapidly than the Muslim countries. Why? Because they do not DESIRE a forward movement culturally. That doesn't mesh well in a melting pot society like the US.

In the end, it's not a matter of racism of xenophobia, but rather an oil and water scenario. If they are willing to educate themselves about their own religion and move forward into the 21st century, I don't care WHERE they live. If they want to beat their women to death (sometimes even stone them) or choke them to death for not following a TRULY misinterpreted portion of their religion, they can all burn in hell. *shrug*

Exactly which culture, lifestyle and morals are you talking about? The thing about the US is that it reinvents itself every 20-40 years. Should we encourage all new imigrants to join the Klan? That's part of the culture, lifestyle and morals of the US. How about if we encourage them to riot when a jury finds someone not guilty that they think is? That's part of the culture, lifestyle and morals too. How about if they import tons of cocaine and get in gun battles with the police? Or join the Temperance Union?

Oh wait, you meant YOUR culture, lifestyle and morals, which I suppose would include a rejection of monogamy and toeing the Republican line. Does that mean that I have to leave too?

And in the interests of "fair and balanced":

http://knoxnews.com/news/2007/dec/11...in-child-rape/

Christians and Muslims both have their fair share of sick fucks.

Yes my politics must be adapted or you will be kicked out, and now send your wife over. :rolleyes:

I almost said "deport the bastard!" but then I realized that he'd probably be praised for his actions in his homeland. That's fucked up. I hope they nail him for 1st degree murder and he spends the rest of his miserable existence in jail.

If you live in MY country, you follow MY country's laws. Your religion and personal beliefs be damned if they conflict.

The difference is that we CALL ours sick fucks, but many of them would agree with his actions. It wouldn't even be an issue. See the above posts.

Hmmm, I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with the angle of your post. Yes, there are sick, useless fucks from every race, culture and religion. There are also wonderful and amazing people form every race, culture and religion. However, there are certain stereotypical behaviors that are, as I always say, stereotypes for a reason. Are there Muslim men who do not disallow their wives from leaving the house in a halter top and mini skirt? Sure there are. Unfortunately for those individuals, the majority of the people that share their belief system would sooner stone their wives than not for such an infraction. Where are most Muslims? The Middle East and northern Africa. Where is the largest amount of strife in the world? Oh, those same two regions. Now, I'm one to usually preach correlation != causation, so let's look into it more deeply. Those regions of the world also have the highest and most regular rates of genocide, illiteracy, warlordism (I hate Bush too, but it's not quite the same), gender-related crimes and mistreatment and hate-related crimes against others of the same base religion (Islam) as well as others of slightly varying ethnicity.

You wanna talk about the Klan? Long before American plantation owners enslaved black African natives, long before Islam or even Christianity were religions, people of that particular region of the world were far more full of hate than even the biggest douchebag American racist. Enslaving ENTIRE population or committing outright mass genocide against other tribes of the same race. Oh, and it still happens today.

So, moving forward with my above post, it's probably not Islam that is at the root. It's the cultures in which Islam proliferates. Many of them have not changed much for so many generations it's not comprehensible to most Westerners. Again, using the Pashtuns as an example, there are blood feuds that are HUNDREDS of years old. A man who killed another man in 1607 can still cause bloodshed today, right this very minute, in the name of family honor.

Look at Somalia. While the ARPCT seems to be at least somewhat sane, they are fighting other tribes of their own people, The Islamic Courts Union, who want to instill Sharia law in the country, going all burkha and disallowing things like movies and music and dancing. Did America have a civil war? Sure... but it's hard to draw many similarities to the Somalian Civil War or to the ongoing conflict between Shia and Sunni Muslims in Iraq. There is, in fact, a differing of beliefs between two groups of people from the same region. That's the definition of civil war. Beyond that, the similarities stop. Aside from a rather few incidents, the American Civil War left civilians alone. Or at least it can be said that civilians were not specifically targeted to try to gain support of other civilians using fear and terror as motivators. I'd say that's a rather vast cultural difference. But it happens in Muslim-heavy areas of the world frequently and has for much of history. Again, it happens in Western cultures (the Nazis are the most obvious example) but with far less frequency.

I guess my point is that, in my eyes, from my experience, reading and learning, I am forced to believe that people from regions of the world where Islam proliferates are anti-progress and violently adherent to beliefs they do not fully understand with far greater regularity than people from regions outside of those areas.

Are all Muslims bad people in my eyes? No! But enough of them are, from my first hand experience, to not particularly want those cultures to "blend" with my own. I don't feel this way about Hindus or Jews or Atheists or Agnostics or believers in the Norse Pantheon or other fringe religions. *shrug* And frankly, aside form Judaism, Islam is closest to my own belief system (vaguely Christian) as it is an Abrahamic religion. It's just gone terribly awry.

Wow, Parvez is a complete asshole and should be in prison for breaking the law by murdering his daughter. Nothing else? Moving on....

Well, will, that's part of the problem. An alarming number of Muslims that I've personally talked to believe that Islamic Law is above the law of man, and therefore there was no wrongdoing in this situation. *shrug* Hard to pass off such a belief for me. Maybe not so much for others? I dunno...

xephrys - I think that you and I agree more than you realize. Beyond my point that there is no common "culture, lifestyle and morals" in the US, I agree that we're talking about a cultural problem, not a religious one. We're talking about cultures that allow this sort of thing, not the religion that serves as the excuse.

As for the largest amount of strife occurring in the Muslim world, I think you've been paying too much attention to the headlines. There are active wars and revolutions going on across Asia and Southern Africa that have nothing to do with Islam. The Maoist rebels in Nepal couldn't care less about burhkas. Neither could most of the sides in the Conglese wars.

There aren't many parts of the world that have spent an entire generation untouched by war. Germany is about to accomplish that, but they're the major power in Europe that will. The US has never done it, and the Middle East is no different.

As far as your claim that there's a higher incidence of "genocide, illiteracy, warlordism gender-related crimes and mistreatment and hate-related crimes against others of the same base religion" in Islamic countries, I think you're confusing politics and religion. When the Ottoman Empire was actually a world power, none of those things happened, at least on a mass level. They had a strong central government, and it worked well. If you look at the Middle East since the Ottoman collapse, you'll see scatterings of weak and weaker governments punctuated with the occassional military strongman. Then compare that to Eastern Asia, South America or even Western Europe and you'll see about the same incidence of these things during times of weakened government. If you really want to turn this into a debate of correlation of genocide, illiteracy and warlordism between the modern Middle East and Feudal Europe, I'm happy to go in that direction, because the data supporting my argument is there. I mean, we can talk about the 100 Year War, the War of the Roses, etc. which all had lots of Christian on Christian warfare goodness along with the occassional genocide (know many Hugonauts? Or Spanish Jews?). But that's a threadjack.

As far as the targeting of civilian populations as a part of warfare, where have you been for the past 70 years? The Allies firebombed Dresden. If we had lost, those responsible would have been convicted of war crimes (assuming the same standards were used). The US targeted Vietnamese civilians on a regular basis. The entire idea behind a nuclear deterent, which was the cornerstone of American defense and foreign policy from roughly 1952 to 1995 was the mutual destruction of both the US and Soviets, military and civilian. Our hands are no dirtier or cleaner than anyone else's. It just makes us all feel better to pretend otherwise.

All that said, I am back at where we started - religion has nothing to do with this argument. It's the culture that matters. Some cultures fear change - look at the news out of Russia in the past couple of days for a fantastic example of that - but that's an unwinnable proposition. All cultures have to adapt at some point or they'll choke themselves out. We're just now starting to see waves of permanent Islamic immigrants to the US. Assimilation is a given eventually, and we've seen it with every single other wave of immigrants that have ever hit our shores. All these arguments have been made for the past 160 years about the Irish, Italians, Indians (dot, not woo-woo obviously), Germans, Jews (both Polish and Russian), Greeks, Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, French, Sicilians, Mexicans or whatever else.

Demographer checking in for the sake of numbers... interestingly, I looked briefly on Wikipedia for the global distribution of Muslims by country, and the total number of Muslims living in the "Middle East" (including Afghanistan in the ME, even though it's actually in Central Asia) and Africa is a bit less than or equal to the total number of Muslims living in Indonesia, India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh alone.

Indonesia, in fact, has a higher absolute number of Muslims living there than any other country in the world. So, out of curiosity, do you also see them as a nation full of strife, at the same level as the countries in the Middle East?

A lot of people think the 10 commandments are more important than.... well that's a concern with any fundamentalist, or any crazy person for that matter. I'm sure that Charles Manson has a code he sticks to, but who cares? He broke the law. If you brake the law of the land, you go to jail. Neither god nor allah can prevent that.

Ya, but you still find Christians who criticize Christianity and even raise question about existance of Jesus ! And write novels on it..
Tell me about few Muslim who have done it and is not given death penalty.

I hate it because they have such a low tolerance.

Not existance of self-criticism has resulted into far more problems and justifying your actions on book written centuries ago does not fit into logic.

Interesting thing about demographics in countries such as Afghanistan (or Pakistan or many of the "stans" or Somalia) is that demographics that I've seen don't take into account the large number of the populace that simply doesn't show up. Being in that field yourself, I wonder how accurate you think current CIA data is on the population of Afghanistan... say on the CIA World Factbook. What is the margin of error in a country where most people don't know how many people are in the next village over? I wonder if it takes into account the people in villages that I've visited where people had never seen someone that was not Pashtun until our unit arrived there last Spring. How accurate can demographics really be? Obviously I don't know better than the numbers, but I can say firsthand that there are more than a few reason for those numbers to be flawed. Much of western Pakistan is exactly the same, and Pakistan is a fairly modern country for this region (akin to India). in fact there is a large area of land in the mountains that sits on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan that both and neither actually claim as their own. The people who live there would also staunchly disagree that they are part of either country. The locals call is Waziristan (sp?) for the Waziri tribe that inhabits the area. Think Afghan Gypsies.

I see your point, but I also think there are gross inaccuracies with such statistics in less developed areas of the world.

To more acutely answer your questions...

As for the countries you mention, I generally don't. However, in most of the more eastern asian countries (central and east of central) the Muslims often do not follow Sharia Law and women have rights in accordance with most modern human rights agreements. Genocide happens less frequently, more akin to westenr cultures, and people are mostly treated fairly. There are small, short-term exceptions, but the variance from western cultures is not great.

As my last post mentioned, I conceded that it wasn't likely Islam itself, but many of the cultures that embrace Islam.

Because the west had the Reformation which interrupted the progression of the non-secular hegemony. Up to then, Western development was heading in the same direction.

Not all Muslims live in Saudi Arabia. I know VERY westernized Persian Muslims. Actually I know a black guy who is a very liberal Muslim. They get plenty of tolerance from other Muslims because they live in the US, and for the most part, this is an okay place to be an individual thinking Muslim. It's not a good place to go to the airport, though. If you're Muslim, that is.

This is very interesting. It would be interesting to explore why there is this cultural difference, and what the motivators are for following Sharia. It demonstrates to the lay person that Islam can work in a civilized manner.

They may do different but they do not talk/write about it in public. I don't see any arranging a conference on how the Book is all lies ...

Again, my opinion is that this is a corruption of Islam... but the truth is, whatever the middle class appeasers want to say, this corruption is growing in its strength and size... Islam has a big problem with extremism, far greater than any other major cultural or religious group.

The brute responsible should be killed.

Generally countries wealthier with high amount of industrialisation like Turkey and UAE ..

That's because there are too many Christians in the US for it to be heard. Check out ignorant piece of blatant bigotry. It's been en vogue for conservatives to hate Islam for the last decade or so, especially because of 9/11.

Not only that, but if there was an important Muslim in the US (for whatever reason), he'd be assassinated tomorrow, and Muslims know that.

I think problems are grave in UK with people becoming hypersensitive like
removing Holocaust from school curriculum ... so it doesnt offend muslims
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1600686.ece

Skada, read this article:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...JNoPuNIfx1kQyg

See, the daughter was already integrating. She didn't survive integration, but most others do. If you wait one generation, the muslim immigrants' children will probably be just as sociable/community-minded as anyone else in the US.

Bingo

Link didn't worked ...

You won't find disagreement with me on that point. However, population estimates do have to start somewhere, and I don't think the estimates are so grossly inaccurate that they are not useful for discussion.
I can understand where you are coming from on that, though I may not agree with it completely. For me, it is more a matter of political-economy that explains the behavior of those groups of people, not "culture" per se. But yes, not all cultures are healthy, that's clear. How to judge cultural health objectively, however (that is, not with the bias of our own Western context), is a very muddy matter... which is why I am not going to go further into this discussion.

While in Malaysia, many people were quick to mention the sad state of public safety and government corruption in both Malaysia and Indonesia. The Chinese people there are VERY wary of the Muslims.

Well it confirms that tolerance is zero in Islamic community. The way it impliments depends upon lot on society. Iran especially is quite economically ahead than many Islamic countries (and is Shia majority)
And their social structure is more like Turkey. Even hijab is not that mandatory.

No, it confirms that the Iranian government is having growing pains. It's a strong government that is still very religious, possibly one of the last theocracies. When it eventually changes over to a democracy-esque system, and it will assuming it isn't destroyed by the west, these types of things will continue to be less common.

What one should be paying attention to, though, is that there are protestors in Iran. Tehran is a hotbed for protest and forward thinking. Many may not be aware of it, but there are tons of underground clubs in Tehran, drinking and drug use. These kids, though, will be adults soon. These liberal Muslim kids will be running Iran.

You mean like Muhammad Ali?

Im sorry, but thats completely opposite to what is happening. Iran WAS liberalising 6 or 7 years ago. It has now lurched radically to the right and become radically more religious, and this is a movement which is being lead by the youth.

You are simply stating things which are opposite to reality.

I'm assuming you mean the boxer formerly known as Cassius Clay, who hasn't been famous for decades. Muhammad Ali was fortunate that he was not famous after 9/11. He was fortunate that, while he did face bigotry, he did not face an entire political party in power.
That's the pot calling the clean, crisp white shirt black, and I'll thank you to actually back up your claims with a shred of evidence if you're going to try and act superior. Iran IS liberalizing, though at a slower rate in 2007 than 2001 precisely because of the US government's continuing threats. They are still liberalizing, though. To think otherwise is to demonstrate a true disconnect from current Middle East affairs.

Ignorant? No. Impoverished? You would be too if some foreign country was constantly invading the United States and overthrowing the Federal government in order to get to it's uranium stocks. As it stands, the only reason you're not impoverished is because you happen to live in a country which commonly extorts/bullies other, weaker countries.

Anywho...

You own the U.S.?

Whoa. Whoa.

IL, did you have a liberal epiphany? :thumbsup:

Yeah, no kidding... I'm giving the screen a big fat :orly: at the moment. :)

You do realize that by having IL agree with you, what that makes your point?

You mean like those liberal kids after Tiananmen Square?

Wow, I missed a big one when I missed this gem. You really think this eh? After all those Muslims were killed in the US after 9/11 I mean how could you be wrong here?

Christ will (pun intended) get a grip.

Bitch shouldn't have been dressed like a hussy.


You know... Normal.

People are getting very hung up on his motivation to kill his daughter. He killed her. It's murder, end of story. Reaching out for his daughter's throat, to choke the life from her, has nothing to do with his integration. He didn't want to integrate, he wanted to keep his religion, and wanted his daughter to do the same.

He would have to be very well integrated to be swayed from a religious belief which gave him motivation to justify murder. We're not talking about a beating- it's a belief so strong and ingrained that murder is an actual solution to a problem, according to his view of his beliefs. Good luck integrating THAT out of him.

Thinking his integration had anything to do with it is, in my opinion, just silly. Second-generation immigrants are the ones who integrate because they are brought up on the values and beliefs of the first generation, but actually have the luxury to think for themselves, and in an environment that might allow it. Well, this girl's environment wasn't quite ready for that yet.

I don't have a problem with any faith system or religion- but any personal belief that gives a person justification for murder is fucked up wrong, plain and simple.

You pretty much summed up my feeling about the situation, analog.

But Baraka, do you really think we (the US) is/will stagnate? We are at our most diverse and will only continue to do so. It's what makes us great!! To me, the US greatest strength is its diversity. I don't see us stagnating at all. Our culture is always evolving and changing. We are one of the most dynamic cultures ever. Canada is also very diverse, except for maybe Quebec (there's your legacy of hate). Canada is rated very highly in standard of living and quality of life because in my opinion, it embraces diversity.

Indonesia DOES indeed have a lot of ethnic strife and is a nation of strife including ethnic cleansing of minorities (Chinese, Timorese) and intolerance of other religions. They also have extremists and terrorists as well. I wouldn't blame it on Islam though as these problems stem back a ways. But Islam does play a part.

Why? How would they know what a Muslim looks like? Muslims aren't a race, they are a religion and very diverse, like Judeaism. I think poor Hindus and Sihks get more grief at airports than Muslims.

Shaquille O'Neal is Muslim, Hedo Turkoglu, Tony Shaloub (of Monk fame), Paula Abdul, Shakira, Hakeen Alajawon, are all Muslim and they look nothing alike. Most of my Muslim friend dress in jeans and sneakers, wear make up have ipods etc. But some of their more extremist friends do wear the hijab, chador and keep themselves and are unfriendly.

Will, this is interesting. We should totally open up another thread for this. You know the largest (or maybe second largest) group of bloggers is Iranians. I would say it's moderate educated Iranians that will have a chance at running Iran someday. We missed a great chance during the Clinton years when Khatami was in power. Clinton definitley messed that up, then paved the way for George Bush to totally mess it up.

Why? Why is it so surprising that people have a diversity of thought and opinion?

it doesn't matter, the question i posted.

I certainly hope you won't stagnate. I think there are many who still hold onto the old idea of the melting pot. America hasn't been a melting pot for decades now. Actually, it was never a very good one to begin with. Even the Romans didn't even do it...much.

Quebec certainly is an interesting place. The bad that comes out of there is a direct result of constantly feeling threatened. In this way, French Canadian culture is kind of like some Muslim cultures. Hegemony is a bitch.

9/11
1) Name on the passport or ID
2) Ghutra
3) Thobe
4) Taqiyah
5) Arab or Persian descent
I couldn't agree more.
To be fair, not all Muslims are in trouble at the airport, and Shaq is only in trouble because he probably needs the overhead bin removed. What I mean to say, though, is that if you show up in a burka or a thobe, you're far more likely to be checked. You may already be on a no fly list.
Don't you love reading informed posts? I just love it. You nailed this on the head. What I meant to say is that the Iranian equivalent to generation y is starting to enter the workforce and really becoming a part of society, and I know that this generation as a whole is more liberal than the last. Even the young moderates are more liberal than the older moderates, I'd guess.

the muslim religion is a very strict and, in my opinion, an over-controlling one. i mean, many followers themselves claim that islam is not a religion, it's a way of life and i can only agree. it pretty much dictates how you should live your life. now, that's all fine and dandy if you should choose to adhere by its traditions, but forcing your kids to do what you want is ridiculous. that goes with anything, not just religion.

It is important to note the difference between the Muslim faith and certain Muslim cultures. There is little about dress in the Qur'an. It basically outlines what is modest in dress for both men and women. What you see and hear about head coverings, beatings, and murders is the product of dominant male culture, not Muslim moral reason.

It used to be a Christian practice to self-flagellate in response to committing sins. But Christianity had the benefit of a reformation. Christian culture changed, though most of the core texts and teachings remain virtually the same.

Culture.
Religion.

Let's keep these straight.

i'll admit, i know very little of the muslim faith. i have heard that it was a way of life and not a religion directly from someone who was muslim, however. this might have been due to their particular culture, i'm not sure

one of my best friends is muslim. he's of european descent and much more lax than other practioners of islam i've come into contact with. i make fun of him for drinking alcohol, but refusing to eat pork

Underground kids drinking proves nothing. Even Afgans in mid 70s consumed alcohol (privately) and I don't see them liberated anyhow.

The condition of Iran is quite different they are quite modernized already. like fourth largest bloggers, extremely high women literacy (Women today compose more than half of the incoming classes for universities, are in army , in sports and have Womens' Movement) and it's classisfied as Semi-Developed Nation by UN. And even after this we see fundamentalism.

Will, I got one better: Or if you show up to an airport in a hijab listening to Cat Stevens and your name is Ted Kennedy - No Fly List!

I think the fundamentalism is in the power structure and of course in the populace too. But it's not quite so black and white. There is definitely a large (my interpretation) underground movement like the already mentioned bloggers, students, intellectuals, exiles - in other words, Iran is not doomed to be an extremist theocracy. I believe, there is a good chance it may turn assuming certain factors fall in place (kind of a long shot I know) but it exists. From my studies and readings, there is a good amount of people who do not support the regime, don't hate the US, and even believe the gov't is building nuclear weapons. I believe there was a recent student protest (can't recall details) too in Iran. This is why I was a bit disappointed that Clinton blew the chance to engage when they did have a moderate president.

Your Afhgan reference is interesting. I think I saw something about the Taleban drinking alcohol, listening to Britney Spears, sell drugs and all sort of behavior banned by the Taleban as being unIslamic. Talk about irony. Supposedly the current regime is liberated and has allowed women to go back to schools etc.

You mean like Keith Ellison? Or is a Congressman not important enough?


First, Merriam-Webster defines ignorance as "lack of knowledge, education, or awareness". If you believe that the Afghan people are not ignorant, than you yourself are. Even post-secondary educated people, having gone to university in Kabul, have elementary-school level understanding of mathematics, geography, history, science... pretty much every subject. That's people who actually go ON to many universities in this country. Those that only go to primary school (most common) or no school at all (still more common than university grads) have less knowledge. The CIA World Factbook - Afghanistan gives the literacy rate as follows:

A solid 28.1%, eh? Nope, no ignorance there.

As for the impoverished part, except for a brief period in from roughly 1950-196x Afghanistan has always been impoverished. Back in the days of the Silk Road it was a lovely stop between two large and cumbersome deserts. Even with large caravans summering here, there was never a great deal of wealth. There are few precious resources here. They barely grow enough food for themselves and their livestock (even with relatively advanced manual farming techniques). Water supply is seriously limited in most of the country. Pretty much, it's a shithole. Oh wait, I'm sorry, they DO have one major export... opium. Awesome! The CIA World Factbook lists their exports as "opium, fruits and nuts, handwoven carpets, wool, cotton, hides and pelts, precious and semi-precious gems". Yeah, lot's of ways they can make money there (aside from the opium). No, they're impoverished because they don't have much to work with and they don't push to modernize.

Yes she does. So do I. So do you. That's the beauty of a Democratic Republic or Representative Democracy. In fact, you own a reciprocal portion to the total number of legitimate citizens of the US. We all do. Ain't ownership grand?

I think we all need to keep in mind that what we want is to live peacefully on this planet with others. Not tell others how they may live their lives around us according to our own principles. Granted, if you are in this country, you must live by our laws. But we cannot tell a country like Iran or Afghanistan that they must give up their religion and their culture.

Also, it is important to note that in regards to Sharia Law, it does not always equate with Taliban-style rule. There are Islamic scholars who believe that Sharia can be reformed to correlate with modern life.

What we need to do is encourage reform. It's the only thing we can do. And sitting over here talking about how backward and fucked up 'they' are doesn't help. Nothing is isolated on this planet. Everything that happens is the direct result of other actions. Take Afghanistan, for instance. Before the Soviets invaded, women in Kabul were doctors, lawyers, scientists, writers, activists, artists. But America enabled the fundamentalist ascendency there because of our fear (then) of the godless communists. Now those women, those who still live in Afghanistan, must wear the burkha. Now not because they have to, but out of fear.

Iran, again, we were instrumental in the fundamentalist ascendency there by meddling in their politics and installing a puppet as their shah. The resulting revolution officially ended the communist movement among the country's intellectuals and young people and installed the Ayatollah Khomeini. Big surprise.

Which in turn, as we all know, prompted us to prop up Saddam Hussein in his ridiculous war with Iran.

We all know these things, but we fail to recognize their impact on why things are the way they are in the ME/SE Asia. And we are still impacting the region in a negative way NOW.

And let's not forget that none of us really cared how Islamic societies lived their lives before 9/11. If change is to come, it's going to take a long time. What we need to do in the meantime is form alliances, encourage reform and, since we've pretty much made our bed in the world, sleep in it.

It should be noted that in the '70s, Afghanistan was changed to a republic and leaned toward Marxism. Fundamental Islamic rule came via the Taliban after a number of years.

If anything, it was Western powers that messed things up there.

We cannot look at what is going on in the ME/SE Asia today, without taking into account that we always preferred Islamism over any form of socialism/communism for these countries.

We cannot point fingers without pointing at ourselves somewhere along the way.

And just like this is OUR country with OUR laws and OUR traditions, so are our actions out there in the rest of the world. They are OURS, too.

I've never heard of that guy. I just asked three other people, and they haven't either. I'll ask later at work, but I suspect no one there's heard of him. And I roll with hardcore liberals (if there's such a thing).

Is he outspoken about Muslim rights? Is he anything other than a member of congress who happens to be Muslim?

The reason there aren't any is because they KNOW they would be assassinated. How amazingly convenient.

The only assassinations these days are character assassinations, your contention is dribble.

Your contention that my contention is dribble is in fact dribble. Or is there any other incredibly insightful commentary you'd like to add?

If they told you that, they clearly aren't Muslim. It's a religion with a clearly defined deity (who happens to be the same one Jews and Christians worship, despite what a lot of people from each group will try to tell you,) and has its own scripture, customs, and dogma. There are sects that stray from the fundamentalist view just like every other religion, and what you see on TV not representative of reality.

So, if one Muslim father kills his daughter because she won't follow his rules, is it very much different than a Western parent killing their child because they stayed out too late or refused to go to school?

Is one as indicative of a society as another?

MSD, that information is Abrahamic, and is not shared by most Jewish and Christian organizations. Just fyi. Most Jews and Christians would in fact disagree. From my perspective, they're all still praying to a variation of Zeus or Ra, but that's probably not relevant either.

On the other points I agree 100%, though. Islam is a religion. Buddhism is a way of life.

Actually, Buddhism is a religion, too. Only a non-deistic religion.

No, but how many Imams are raping little Muslim boys? Correlation isn't the same as causation.

I'd call it a philosophy.

For those who doubt that Muslims get treated differently at airports: my friend has no accent, grew up in the US, wears no distinctive clothing, but for some reason always gets "SSSS" printed on his boarding pass. You can say all you want, it's racial profiling, and it's wrong.

First, right after 9/11 I was flying all over with several Muslims in my department to various research meetings. We were not flying first class, they had no idea who these guys were, and not once were they searched after the period where EVERYONE was searched.

Second, they didn't want to die. One was upset he wasn't searched, he LOOKED like a 'terrorist', he was an Iranian national trying to get US citizenship. He was a young, single male, he grew up in Iran during the 'revolution', there couldn't be a more likely candidate. He hated what his nation had become, and rejected his religion but no way for the TSA to know that.

Third, racial profiling isn't wrong when it focuses on the most likely candidates. Once they stopped searching everyone, it makes more since to search those who are more likely to be terrorists. Having a computer randomly spew out numbers where the white haired Swedish grandmother gets searched and the 27 year old Iranian national male doesn't is a waste of resources. Sure maybe granny is a secret sympathizer, but where is the smart money? When middle aged white Christians start to blow up planes or fly them into buildings then PLEASE profile me, I don't want to die on a flight because someone was too sensitive.

I think you miss my point - people are pointing to this as a "big scary Muslim" moment. Western parents beat and kill their kids in small numbers too, but we're not freaking out over that nor do we feel that such acts are representative of western society.

But mention the word "hijab" and everyone goes barking mad.

I'd be more concerned with fighting child abuse in general than being specifically worried about the Muslim community.

You're losing your "hardcore liberal" cred. He was sworn into office using thomas jefferson's koran. He's outspoken about human rights, he hasn't made much of a big deal being a muslim, i suppose because the fact that he's a muslim has nothing to do with him being a congressman.

Though there was some outcry from some of the more ignorant folk wondering if the fact that he was muslim meant that the had some sort of allegiance to al qaeda.

lol, well you can call it whatever you like, will, but Buddhists call it their religion...they go to temple, they lay fruits and flowers on an altar, they perform rituals, they believe in life after death, Mahayana Buddhism (and others, I am sure) also recognizes some celestial gods and goddesses and other deities. It is a religion in every sense.

/end threadjack

this seems to me the central problem in this thread--as it is in any thread here that involves islam.

in the main, folk aren't talking about a huge self-evidently diverse population of people who have in common a committment to a particular way of life--they are talking about the officially sanctioned Big Other of the moment--a phantasm, a construction that says more about what the american far right sanctions as "that which you are afraid of" than anything else.

so it seems acceptable that people say whatever.
so it seems acceptable that people invert reality, make stuff up ("the muslim community in france is responsible for destroying the country"--this is neo-fascist stupidity, nothing more, nothing less) and indulge arbitrary types of argument (from the highest level of absurdity--"the trade center was attacked therefore islam is a monolith" to more peculiar local variants--"wearing hijab makes you an extremist.")

it's depressing to see this repeat every time islam comes up as a category.

What about profiling in general? I'd argue that profiling is an extremely useful tool. I'd even go on to suggest that you do it every single day of your life.
Throw the word "racial" on the front of it, and it suddenly becomes abhorant.

categorically no. Buddhism is not a religion, unless you want to set up a definition that incorporates all philosophies. In fact Buddhism incorporates aspects of religion within it's paradigm, indicating that gods too can achieve enlightenment if they practice dharma.

Believe me, time spent at temple in Sri Lanka only served to reinforce this concept. They don't pray, they meditate on dharma. Now, the offspring of Buddhism (practiced elsewhere, that isn't orthodox eg. Tibet, Japan) can take on religious trappings for sure. Orthodox or Hinayana (small wheel) Buddhism is all about achieving personal enlightenment. One cannot become a buddha if one aims to be a bhodisatva (Mahayana).


Hey guys, quite dribbling all over this thread!

Physically impossible. I've been supporting Kucinich since 2006, I've written every congressman about ending the war... I mean jeez. I cant think of anyone here who is more liberal than I happen to be.
And you knew about that because you googled him. Thanks wiki?

I've still never heard of him outside this thread. He's not an outspoken person about Islam.

I know that Buddhists don't pray, none of them do, but prayer is not in itself the hallmark of religion.

Even Theravada Buddhism has rituals and specific beliefs in regards to the nature and purpose of life that can be quantified as 'supernatural.' I believe this makes it a religion. Not that that's a bad thing. I have great respect for the Buddhist faith. But it is just that, a faith.

Thanks for commenting on this, rb. I wanted to earlier but was waylaid by real time stuff.

We are falling for the boogeyman bit again.

Even if he did...so what? This is, after all, the information age. This isn't a cock measuring contest, whereby the winner has the most useless knowledge crammed into his cranium.

Actually, you may recall...or not...that there was quite a bit of animosity stirred up over his choosing to be sworn in on the Koran, as opposed to the good old fashioned 'mericun Bible. So, quite a bit of attention was drawn to the fact of his being Muslim. I guess you could call that outspoken. I recall the incident, and I'm old and feeble. Hell, there might even be a thread buried here somewhere about it. It was news. Pointless news. But still news, nonetheless.

I'm just saying, the proof is in the pudding.

I voted for him, and i'm not even a hardcore liberal.

I think he means to let his actions speak louder than his religion. He was pretty outspoken about islam in college, though.

You can't racial profile a religion. A religion is not a race.

Racial profiling is ineffectual and lazy.

Buddhism is a religion people. The Dalai Lama is considered a living god. And yes they do "pray". I have been to enough Buddhist temples and have seen them pray. I have seen the prayer wheel.

Tell that to Mr. Singh.

This I agree with.

Buddhism can be considered both a religion and a philosophy, albeit an applied philosophy, which is basically how one can define religion.

Buddhists typically don't even want to consider themselves Buddhists at all. They avoid categorization because they intentionally let go of conceptual trappings. Any rituals, clothing, symbols, etc. used are mere aids. They aren't to be idolized or coveted as sacred. I am speaking generally, of course. There are variances between Buddhist groups.

Who is Mr. Singh?

Are you saying Muslims are a race?

No, I'm saying all Sikhs are Singhs. You want to profile Sikhs? Just look at their dress, and their passports.

And I think what biznatch was getting at was that it isn't always difficult to determine if someone is more than likely a Muslim. The look, the name, the nationality, the accent, the destination, etc. These aren't 100%, of course, but they try to profile Muslims at airports, I'm sure.

Oh, I didn't realize Singh was slang for Sihks. Thanks for the clarification.

But Sihks aren't Muslims so if you try and profile that then you have already failed. It's like all those people who attacked Indians in America after 9/11 cause they thought they were Muslim.

I think I get what you are saying Baraka, but I just don't think you can profile a religion successfully or with any accuracy (excepting extreme stereotypes). Muslims are not a racial (phenotype) descriptor. Again, barring extreme cliches, most Muslims i encounter tend to be white, wear jeans and sneakers, and are "normal" Americans. I think of all groups, Muslims would be a nightmare to profile - it is such a diverse group. Honestly, a smart terrorist should adapt a different look to beat the profilers. Blond, blue eyed, female, wearing a hooters shirt (loaded with c4), etc. Or how about all the Asian Muslims. Black Muslims. Etc etc etc.

If you really believe in "racial" profiling, well, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

been there too, done that. and as I said, the non-orthodox versions of Buddhism do have their religious trappings. But then again, semantics being what they are, many adherents these days will find comfort in the term religion.

Buddhism is a religion. Dalai Lama may or may not be considered God (or reincarnation of Buddha) depending upon you agree upro it or not. None of my Buddhist friends say he is a God. They have Temples where you go and pray, they have religious leaders and philosophy of religion just like another making it a religion.
/end hijack

I believe profiling happens with Muslims, may not be much, but yes it is there.

Oh yeah, we have lots of fun at Western airports with ktspktsp being Lebanese. He makes sure to shave very well before flying, but he still has the look, the name, the nationality, not really the accent, the destination... hell, even me being an American citizen, just because I am arriving FROM Lebanon, I get special treatment as well. No one seems to care that he is a total atheist and wants nothing to do with Islam, Christianity, or any other religion. I have never been treated so poorly in an airport as when we flew back to the US from Beirut.

What? Again? Do bears still shit in the woods or has the Pope immigrated to Jonesville and converted to Sun-God Worshipping?

During the communist days, I was invariably held up at all U.S. borders for minimum 1/2 hour and questioned why it is that my passport had so many visas from communist countries. They would always try to intimidate me by ransacking my rucksack, squeezing my toothpaste tube, and cold-staring at me while they fired childish questions at me.

It's very queer that the communist countries never once questioned me why it was that I had so many "non-communist country visas". Actually the U.S. immigrations never bothered to ask those "non-communist countries" questions either! Very queer. Those American customs/immigration people are really extremely adolescent bafoons.

Man, so much racism in the world. Yeah, we know it. We see it. We are in it (strictly speaking whether you are a victim or a offender). But yeah, I agree witht he first post that the parents has no rights in stopping their child being what they want. Didn't they ever dream to be something else while their parents tell them not to do this because etc, etc, etc.? Well it seems that they agree with their parents or they wanted to inflict the same pain toward their children because they had the same experience as well.

I hate it when I see parents like that, forcing and bossing and nagging that the child should do this or that. It's a generalization if anyone didn't notice it at first. I see this in my area as well. Not just Muslims, but several different cultures as well.

Traditionally speaking .... no, not really. Or .... yes, actually. Arranged marriages and such things are tradition to some cultures, for example. Look, in the U.S. it is fully acceptable to spank your children. In my country you'd be off to jail the moment you raise your hand to any child.

The thing is, what you consider proper treatment to your child would probably astonish me. Yet generation upon generation of Americans say things like, "It was good enough for me to get a spanking and it didn't do me any harm so my children get more of the same stuff. It's the only way to make a man of them!"

Many Arab cultures (not all, and certainly not all Moslems either) see it as a Godly sin to marry out of the Islamic tradition, ie. for a Moslem girl to have a relationship with a non-Moslem boy/man. You can call my view prejudgiced or racist, if you like, but you've got to look at the facts if you want to understand the problem.

I know that. They read his first and last name, his country of origin (Morocco), and that's enough.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ighmugshot.jpg

Maybe he didn't fly a plane into a building, but he parked a truck filled with explosives next to one, and detonated them.
He didn't do it with a plane, but he very well could have. He's pretty close to your description of people who shouldn't be profiled..should they? What about those kids who shoot up their schools, and malls? They're not necessarily arab. The mall shooter was white, the Vtech shooter was asian. The DC snipers were black. Ethnicity has nothing to do with it.
Profiling is wrong, it's useless, and it's incredibly insulting to those treated differently.

That is far too much level-headed logic than most of our small brains can grasp. Would you mind saying it once again, more slowly please, so that EVERYONE can understand it? :)

Although you have a good (but obvious) point, you seem to be way off topic. "Control of the airport" I think is the subject, yes? You seem to be talking about spotting terrorists by the colour of their skin, any minute of the day. This thread is discussing how to control terrorists who enter the U.S. from abroad. You've missed that point I think.

The point of the SSSS is not to impede only terrorists from entering, but also those who are already in. The searches are the same whether you are coming in from abroad or you are catching a domestic flight. So it doesn't matter if you've lived in the US for 20-something years, if you're skin is brown and your last name sounds middle eastern, you're a likely candidate for SSSS.
What I'm saying is that finding a terrorist based on origin/name/skin color is stupid. When the Oklahoma City Bombing happened, everyone thought it was a muslim, arab terrorist who did it, not some confused/angry average white american.
Even if you were gonna try to find a muslim person(for whatever reason), racial profiling can prove inneffective as muslims can *gasp* be of any descent/ethnicity.
So while "control of the airport" might be the subject, my argument is that Timothy McVeigh could've hijacked a plane instead of blowing up a truck, he just happened to be more proficient with explosives. Hell, the first attempt of an attack on WTC was done with a truck filled with explosives.
And if McVeigh had the means/desire to learn to fly, he certainly could've done so just like the 9/11 terrorists did, at any amateur aviation center.

xxx!!!

DOUBLEPOSTIT

Dead muslim girls have very little to do with McVeigh.
This thread is awry.

WTF? What are "Muslim rights"? Ugh! This is why liberals sicken me. There are HUMAN rights. Then there are non-rights. What exactly would a "Muslim right" be? In the US we already have freedom of religion. Is there something specific outside of that that should be applied to Muslims? Catholics? Agnostics? Atheists?

Maybe it's not your intended point, but it pisses me off to no end that so many people feel everyone needs special rights for their religion, race, gender, educational level, ailment, disability, et cetera. That's a huge part of what proliferates racism and other "-isms" in western culture today. You can't demand to be the same and then ask to be different all at once. It's bullshit.

Again, what would a "muslim" right be? The right to worship Allah (God) and believe in the Prophet Muhammed? They already have that right. The right to strangle your daughter to death for not wearing a specific piece of religious garb? They'll NEVER have that right. I don't understand...

I guess you think that the NAACP should be shut down then? I mean fuck, it's not like specific groups of people are mistreated more than others. What kinda of crazy person would think that?

willravel... as an aside, I am about 1000 miles to left of you, politically.

So you hunt down Tories and destroy them, too?