Sad Story: The Killing of Zahra al Azzo, 16

Pure

Fiel a Verdad
Joined
Dec 20, 2001
Posts
15,135
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...930A1575AC0A9619C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
PHENOMENON; A Dishonorable Affair

By KATHERINE ZOEPF

Published: September 23, 2007

The struggle, if there was any, would have been very brief.
Fawaz later recalled that his wife, Zahra, was sleeping soundly on her side and curled slightly against the pillow when he rose at dawn and readied himself for work at his construction job on the outskirts of Damascus.

It was a rainy Sunday morning in January and very cold; as he left, Fawaz turned back one last time to tuck the blanket more snugly around his 16-year-old wife. Zahra slept on without stirring, and her husband locked the door of their tiny apartment carefully behind him.
Zahra was most likely still sleeping when her older brother, Fayyez, entered the apartment a short time later, using a stolen key and carrying a dagger. His sister lay on the carpeted floor, on the thin, foam mattress she shared with her husband, so Fayyez must have had to kneel next to Zahra as he raised the dagger and stabbed her five times in the head and back: brutal, tearing thrusts that shattered the base of her skull and nearly severed her spinal column.

Leaving the door open, Fayyez walked downstairs and out to the local police station. There, he reportedly turned himself in, telling the officers on duty that he had killed his sister in order to remove the dishonor she had brought on the family by losing her virginity out of wedlock nearly 10 months earlier.

''Fayyez told the police, 'It is my right to correct this error,' '' Maha Ali, a Syrian lawyer who knew Zahra and now works pro bono for her husband, told me not long ago. ''He said, 'It's true that my sister is married now, but we never washed away the shame.' ''

By now, almost anyone in Syria who follows the news can supply certain basic details about Zahra al-Azzo's life and death: how the girl, then only 15, was kidnapped in the spring of 2006 near her home in northern Syria, taken to Damascus by her abductor and raped; how the police who discovered her feared that her family, as commonly happens in Syria, would blame Zahra for the rape and kill her; how these authorities then placed Zahra in a prison for girls, believing it the only way to protect her from her relatives. And then in December, how a cousin of Zahra's, 27-year-old Fawaz, agreed to marry her in order to secure her release and also, he hoped, restore her reputation in the eyes of her family; how, just a month after her wedding to Fawaz, Zahra's 25-year-old brother, Fayyez, stabbed her as she slept.

Zahra died from her wounds at the hospital the following morning, one of about 300 girls and women who die each year in Syria in so-called honor killings, according to estimates by women's rights advocates there. In Syria and other Arab countries, many men are brought up to believe in an idea of personal honor that regards defending the chastity of their sisters, their daughters and other women in the family as a primary social obligation.

Honor crimes tend to occur, activists say, when men feel pressed by their communities to demonstrate that they are sufficiently protective of their female relatives' virtue. Pairs of lovers are sometimes killed together, but most frequently only the women are singled out for punishment. Sometimes women are killed for the mere suspicion of an affair, or on account of a false accusation, or because they were sexually abused, or because, like Zahra, they were raped.

In speaking with the police, Zahra's brother used a colloquial expression, ghasalat al arr (washing away the shame), which means the killing of a woman or girl whose very life has come to be seen as an unbearable stain on the honor of her male relatives. […] Under Syrian law, an honor killing is not murder, and the man who commits it is not a murderer. As in many other Arab countries, even if the killer is convicted on the lesser charge of a ''crime of honor,'' he is usually set free within months. Mentioning the killing -- or even the name of the victim -- generally becomes taboo.
---
That this has not happened with Zahra's story -- that her case, far from being ignored, has become something of a cause célèbre, a rallying point for lawyers, Islamic scholars and Syrian officials hoping to change the laws that protect the perpetrators of honor crimes -- is a result of a peculiar confluence of circumstances. […]at heart it is because of Zahra's young widower, Fawaz, who had spoken to his bride only once before they became engaged. Now, defying his tribe and their traditions, he has brought a civil lawsuit against Zahra's killer and is refusing to let her case be forgotten.

[…] Zahra first heard the rumors from a friend of her father's [and she met him]. The man threatened Zahra, telling her that he would reveal the scandal if she didn't join him outside her house, itself a grave transgression in her conservative society. That Zahra did so, disobeying her family and going out with a man unaccompanied, even under duress, is so scandalous to many Syrians that advocates working on Zahra's case have tried to obscure this fact, preferring to describe what took place as a simple kidnapping. They also say that at 15 she was naïve in the extreme, so young for her age that she took a teddy bear to bed every night in prison.

Zahra was frightened by the man but apparently believed that if she came out with him, briefly, she could ensure her family's reputation and safety. Instead, says Yumin Abu al-Hosn, a social worker at the prison, she was taken to Damascus, held in an apartment and raped. Terrified, in a strange and crowded city she had never visited, Zahra didn't try to run away. […]The man was taken to jail, where he now awaits trial for kidnapping and rape. Zahra, meanwhile, was taken to a police station for a so-called virginity exam, the hymen examination that, however unreliable at establishing virginity, is standard procedure in Syria in rape cases and common when women are taken into police custody.
[…]
---
For girls like Zahra, prison is only a temporary solution. Even the most murderously inclined families often issue emotional court appeals to have their daughters returned to them. Judges usually try to extract sworn statements from male guardians, promises that the girls, if released, will not be harmed. But those promises are often broken.

Among Syria's so-called tribal families -- settled Bedouin clans like the one that Zahra belonged to -- first-cousin marriage is common. So it wasn't a shock when her family, looking for someone who could marry her while she was in prison and help secure her release, turned to one of her cousins, Fawaz. But Fawaz hadn't intended to marry a cousin, he told me recently, and was startled when Zahra's brother Fayyez showed up one day at his home.

''Fayyez started telling us that his sister, Zahra, had been kidnapped,'' said Fawaz's mother, who is usually addressed by the honorific Umm Fawaz, meaning ''mother of Fawaz.'' […]
The mere fact that Zahra had been taken from her home for a few days signaled dishonor for the family. '' 'Oh, Auntie, I don't know what to say,' '' Umm Fawaz recalled Fayyez saying as she adjusted her hijab with one hand and dabbed her eyes with a tissue in the other. ''I said: 'Don't be ashamed for your sister. Even in the best families, something like this can happen.' '' Fayyez claimed that despite having been kidnapped, his sister was still a virgin. Slowly, he broached the subject he had come to discuss. Would Fawaz consider marrying Zahra in order to secure her release?

At first, Fawaz, a shy, wiry man, politely demurred. He felt sorry for Fayyez, he told me, but he couldn't help recoiling a little at the story, which in his community constitutes an ugly sexual scandal. Besides, he was already engaged to another girl. […]

''I liked the girl,'' said Fawaz, who seemed embarrassed to have admitted such a personal thing in public, and he quickly corrected himself. ''I mean, here we fall in love with a girl after we marry her. But I decided to leave my fiancée for Zahra. I felt that a normal girl like my fiancée would have other chances. With Zahra I thought, my God, she's such a child to be stuck in this prison.''

Fawaz's father disapproved, suspecting from the outset that Zahra's family would kill her once she left prison[…] Zahra and Fawaz were married in a civil ceremony at the prison on Dec. 11, 2006, and then a week later in a formal celebration for the neighborhood, held in the bride's new home. […]

The marriage, by all accounts, was happy. ''Zahra used to call me even after her wedding,'' Ali, the lawyer, recalled. '' 'How is Fawaz?' I'd ask her. And she'd say, 'Oh, Auntie Maha, we're spending all night up together, talking and having fun.' […]

---
Fawaz told me that, according to his interpretation of Islam, he was ''honoring Zahra again'' -- restoring her lost virtue -- by marrying her. In this decision he was supported by his sheik, or religious teacher, who according to Fawaz subscribes to a progressive school of Koranic interpretation. Fawaz and his immediate family, though not well educated, are proud of their open-mindedness, and he boasts about Zahra's intelligence and literacy. […]

According to Fawaz, Zahra had been married just five weeks when her brother, Fayyez, arrived on an unannounced visit, saying he planned to look for work in Damascus. Zahra was happy to see her brother, but Fawaz described feeling painfully torn between his duties to hospitality, a cardinal virtue in Bedouin culture, and his feeling that Fayyez -- sleeping just upstairs in Fawaz's parents' apartment -- was a danger to his wife. On the morning Zahra was attacked, Fawaz recalls going upstairs before leaving for work to find Fayyez awake and tapping nervously at his cellphone.

''He couldn't afford to have a mobile,'' Fawaz said. ''I'd been wondering about that. It turned out that his uncle had given him the phone so that he could call and tell the family that he'd killed his sister. We learned later that they had a party that night to celebrate the cleansing of their honor. The whole village was invited.''

======
Most honor killings receive only brief mention in Syrian newspapers, but Zahra al-Azzo's death has been unlike any other. Dozens of articles and television programs have discussed her story at length, fueling an unprecedented public conversation about the roots and morality of honor crimes.
[…]
Yet the notion that Islam condones honor killing is a misconception, according to some lawyers and a few prominent Islamic scholars. Daad Mousa, a Syrian women's rights advocate and lawyer, told me that though beliefs about cleansing a man's honor derive from Bedouin tradition, the three Syrian laws used to pardon men who commit honor crimes can be traced back not to Islamic law but to the law codes, based on the Napoleonic code, that were imposed in the Levant during the French mandate. ''Article 192 states that if a man commits a crime with an 'honorable motive,' he will go free,'' Mousa said[…]


''Article 242 refers to crimes of passion,'' Mousa continued. ''But it's Article 548 that we're really up against. Article 548 states precisely that if a man witnesses a female relative in an immoral act and kills her, he will go free.'' Judges frequently interpret these laws so loosely that a premeditated killing -- like the one Fayyez is accused of -- is often judged a ''crime of passion''; ''witnessing'' a female relative's behavior is sometimes defined as hearing neighborhood gossip about it; and for a woman, merely speaking to a man may be ruled an ''immoral act.'' […]

Syria, which has been governed since 1963 by a secular Baathist regime, has a strong reputation in the region for sex equality; women graduate from high schools and universities in numbers roughly equal to men, and they frequently hold influential positions as doctors, professors and even government ministers. But in the family, a different standard applies. ''Honor here means only one thing: women, and especially the sexual life of women,'' Mousa said. The decision to carry out an honor killing is usually made by the family as a group, and an under-age boy is often nominated to carry out the task, to eliminate even the smallest risk of a prison sentence.

---
[…] The United Nations Population Fund says that about 5,000 honor killings take place each year around the world, but since they often occur in rural areas where births and deaths go unreported, it is very difficult to count them by country[…] it is widely agreed that honor killings are found disproportionately in Muslim communities, from Bangladesh to Egypt to Great Britain.

The Grand Mufti Ahmad Badr Eddin Hassoun, Syria's highest-ranking Islamic teacher, has condemned honor killing and Article 548 in unequivocal terms. […]The commonly held view that Article 548 is derived from Islamic law, he said, is false.

[…] In downtown Damascus, one man I interviewed on the street declared that the grand mufti was not a ''real Muslim'' if he believed in canceling Article 548. ''It's an Islamic law to kill your relative if she errs,'' said the man, who gave his name as Ahmed […]
 
Last edited:
This sad story did not exactly make my morning any brighter. There are idiots amongst us.
 
Last edited:
i guess this stuff is 'ho hum' around here.

factoids: every couple months, there is an 'honor killing' in Germany, despite fairly strict laws--sometimes life sentences.

a grandmother in Britain was recently heavily sentenced for arranging the honor killing of her daughter in law.

UK grandmother guilty of 'honor' killing

Topic: Violence Against Women
Source: Eircom

A 70-year-old grandmother was facing the prospect of dying behind bars yesterday after a landmark case in which she was found guilty of plotting the "honour killing" of her daughter-in-law. Bachan Athwal, one of the oldest women in Britain to be convicted of murder, decided to "get rid" of Surjit Kaur Athwal (27) by luring her to India after she had an affair.

(07/27/07)
— Friday 27 July 2007 - 06:20:17
 
Last edited:
Pure said:
i guess this stuff is 'ho hum' around here.
No, there's just nothing to add. Obviously enforcing our will in other countries isn't going to work, so what possible answers are there? Hopefully humanitarian agencies will continue to find ways to work with countries who allow this, but I don't hold out much hope for change in the near future.
 
An interesting thread especially after the thread about honor.

They call these Honor Killings, and yet to my way of honor it would be her defense that would be important.

I also find it interesting how the source of this "Honor" is pointed out to be not based in the Muslim Religeon but in the outside influences pushed upon this society. (Not that I find this surprising, but many who think they know and understand Islam would.)

Thanks for an interesting and sad read.

Cat
 
there are, of course, xian honor killings, though usually in the middle east.

this points toward an obvious conclusion.

the related concept, in the west, is 'crime of passion' (as in the Napoleanic Code), the idea being that 'seeing' the woman in the arms of another drives one crazy. this would seem to be a pole away from 'honor killing,' since it's on the spot and NOT premeditated.

however as the article points out, and i'm sure has happend in the US, the criterion of "seeing" can be stretched so that hub gets that image in mind upon *hearing* about the act, or indeed upon hearing untrue gossip alleging the act. In one actual case, the husband *dreamed* of the unfaithfulness, and acted upon it.

here are a some news items; the first is a about a book researching a Sicialian American honor killing. second, some figures for Pakistan; third is an account of how Hollywood producers deleted an honor killing scene from the movie "Crossing Over", since Iranians were offended.

http://www.karentintori.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=22

Unto the Daughters: The Legacy of an Honor Killing in a Sicilian-American Family, will be published by St. Martin's Press in hardcover on July 24, 2007. It is the harrowing true story of a family secret held for more than eight decades.

[publishers weekly, summary]

Tintori's poignant memoir of the recent discovery of her great-aunt's murder deeply underscores her Sicilian culture's troubling subjugation of its women. Tintori (Trapped: The 1909 Cherry Mine Disaster) recounts how in 1993 her aunt and mother reluctantly told her of an obliterated name from her great-grandfather's passport to America. Gradually Tintori discovers the fate of the missing youngest daughter, Francesca, by working backward in time to when the Costa family first made its way to Detroit from Corleone, Sicily, in 1914.

The family settled into comfort in Little Sicily: the girls enjoyed scant education and were married off early, while the boys worked at the Ford factory and ran with rum-runner gangs. Although her sister Josie made a successful love match, Francesca pined for the barber's son, but was forcibly engaged at 16 to a scion of the Mafiosi in order to better her family's fortunes.

Francesca eloped, to the family's dishonor, and was probably murdered (shackled, dismembered and thrown in the waters of Belle Isle) by her brothers when she dared to return. Because of her family's wall of silence, Tintori finds no sense of catharsis here, only a harrowing tale of sorrow and shame

====


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0212_020212_honorkilling_2.html


In a National Geographic documentary (which airs beginning Wednesday, February 13 [2002]), Michael Davie investigated honor killings in Pakistan, where it is estimated that every day at least three women—including victims of rape—are victims of the practice.
The case of one of the victims Davie examined is heartbreaking but also hopeful. Zahida Perveen, a 29-year-old mother of three, was brutally disfigured and underwent extensive facial reconstruction in the United States. She is one of the only survivors in Pakistan to successfully prosecute the attacker—her husband.
===

[honor killing scene removed from Hollywood movie, in the name of good relations with other cultures]

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2007/08/exclusive_the_m.html

[blogger debbie schlussel wrote]

Brilliant blogger Sultan Knish drew my attention to the latest such cave-in: "Crossing Over," starring Harrison Ford and Sean Penn and produced by the Weinstein Brothers. I've been writing extensively about this movie and have a copy of the original script.

Muslim Iranians were upset that a scene portrays them committing an honor killing. Late last week, they succeeded in getting it removed from the film. No worries, though, about the anti-Semitic scenes in the movie. Those remain. The Weinsteins and Writer/Director Wayne Kramer are Jewish, and we can't expect them to cave on those the way they did for the "more worthy" Muslims. It's politically correct to attack Jews, not so--these days in Hollywood--to attack those who attacked us before and on 9/11 and repeatedly try to again.

In the movie--about immigration, illegal aliens, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents--Hamid Baraheri is a Muslim Iranian ICE agent in his early forties. Predictably, he is Hollywood's version of a kind, decent, hard-working, loyal American agent, much unlike the real-life Muslim federal agents, many of whom have been the subject of insubordination and tipping off targets in federal terrorism investigations.
But Baraheri's brother, Farid, murders his sister, Zahra, in an honor-killing, and ICE Special Agent Hamid Baraheri is in on it. After all, Zahra is dating non-Muslim men and sleeping with a Latino. An honorable Muslim family cannot allow her to live and continue to shame them with her existence.

And though you will never get to see that scene, my spies in Hollywood got me the script, so I'm reposting the scene below (scanned from the script).

**** HERE IS THE MUSLIM HONOR KILLING SCENE, recently deleted from the "Crossing Over" script:

[Farid discovers Zahra naked in the arms of Javier; Farid shoots her and says, "May Allah have mercy on your soul."]


In their successful campaign to get the scene removed, Iranian Muslims whined that Iranians don't commit honor killings. But they should tell that to the Iranian Supreme Court, which--only four months ago--acquitted a gang of six men who brutally murdering a woman because she was holding hands with a man to whom she was engaged. And there have been many other instances of honor-killing in the country (including here and here). To claim that Iranians don't commit honor killings is like saying Americans don't eat at McDonalds.

It appears that the part which most offended Muslim Iranians was not the honor killing itself, but the invocation of the name in the script that we all know comes with most honor killings
 
Last edited:
Honor is always about women, when it isn't about grudges. The word is badly blown upon, and I don't use it of anyone I feel friendly to. Madness.
 
one organization that's working and accepts donations

in case anyone wants to do something, besides support your *local* women's shelter,

the story of WADI; gives a donation method

http://www.wadinet.de/projekte/frauen/khanzad/women-brief.htm
===

WADI - Association for Crisis Assistance and Development Co-operation
Headquarter: Herborner Str. 62, 60439 Frankfurt/ M, Germany
Tel ++49-69-57002440, Fax: 57002444, Email: wadi.org@epost.de

WADI Branches in Iraq:
Sulaimanyah: wadisul@yahoo.com Tel: 00964-770-1588173
Arbil Office: wadiarbil@yahoo.com Tel: 0044-22331349
Homepage: www.wadinet.de
 
Last edited:
cantdog said:
Honor is always about women, when it isn't about grudges. The word is badly blown upon, and I don't use it of anyone I feel friendly to. Madness.

These are not honour, they are perversions. If your gonna kill someone for deflowering your family member, kill the man who did it.

Women are part of my honour, but as beings worthy of utmost care and respect. I would never hit a woman with the intent to harm, let alone kill one.

But if a man raped my sister, He would most surely die either my hand or the hand of my brother.
 
SeaCat said:
I also find it interesting how the source of this "Honor" is pointed out to be not based in the Muslim Religeon but in the outside influences pushed upon this society. (Not that I find this surprising, but many who think they know and understand Islam would.)
Many who know and understand the region and cultures therein would say the origin is not religious.

Exactly the same thing goes on, presently, and reportedly just as often, among for instance Christian Kurds and Assyrians. Niether muslims. And sure enough, they find ways to justify it through their faith too.

But whatever the source is, the solution is probably in the hand of the various churches, that today either condone or look the other way. I don't think any other influence could affect generations of partiarchal cancer.
 
Last edited:
rengadeirishman said:
These are not honour, they are perversions. If your gonna kill someone for deflowering your family member, kill the man who did it.

Women are part of my honour, but as beings worthy of utmost care and respect. I would never hit a woman with the intent to harm, let alone kill one.

But if a man raped my sister, He would most surely die either my hand or the hand of my brother.

I can understand your point of view, but personally I would prefer to castrate and blind the son-of-a-bitch.
 
rengadeirishman said:
But if a man raped my sister, He would most surely die either my hand or the hand of my brother.

I, for one, would prefer (in this hypothetical instance) that you let the legal system operate- that's not to suggest such a course will satisfy your justifiable rage, but I think you owe it to society to give the justice system a chance.

Failing that and if you insist on taking the law into your own hands, I hope that you would, at the least, be very, very, very, very certain that you've got the right target. Murder isn't reversible.


 
Last edited:
ok, renegade

RIThese are not honour, they are perversions. If your gonna kill someone for deflowering your family member, kill the man who did it.

Women are part of my honour, but as beings worthy of utmost care and respect. I would never hit a woman with the intent to harm, let alone kill one.

But if a man raped my sister, He would most surely die either my hand or the hand of my brother


Pure: Fine, but riddle me this. You find that your wife is having an affair with someone you're very slightly acquainted with. You even have a transcript of their IM sessions in which they mock you as a fool, a limp dick, etc, and cyberfuck each other silly.

Assume, IOW, you are very angry. Which are you most angry with? Which one would you be most tempted to kill? Explain.
 
Last edited:
as for castrating and whatnot, i never said i would kill him flat out.

and If my sister tells me she was raped by this man, then she was raped. Plain and simple.

Pure said:
RIThese are not honour, they are perversions. If your gonna kill someone for deflowering your family member, kill the man who did it.

Women are part of my honour, but as beings worthy of utmost care and respect. I would never hit a woman with the intent to harm, let alone kill one.

But if a man raped my sister, He would most surely die either my hand or the hand of my brother


Pure: Fine, but riddle me this. You find that your wife is having an affair with someone you're very slightly acquainted with. You even have a transcript of their IM sessions in which they mock you as a fool, a limp dick, etc, and cyberfuck each other silly.

Assume, IOW, you are very angry. Which are you most angry with? Which one would you be most tempted to kill? Explain.

I would be tempted to kill both of them. But i would kill neither. Their act was consensual, and even if it dishonours me, It is not a grounds for taking either ones life. What would happen is that i would most likely beat him to a bloodied mess, and would merely leave her. I would not even make her adultery public. I would simply call the police or my lawyer and take my children, if there were any, and leave. Most likely go to the home of my brother or sister or mother. I would call the police so they could witness that i took my children peaceably, and to avoid charges of kidnapping.
 
As an ex religious education teacher I was sickened by the story. While Islam as a religion has much to be said for it (the fundamental worthy and spiritual values are much more liberal then say, catholicism, for example), Islamic society has become so sick at heart through the perversions of its leaders that I begin to wonder how anyone with any sense of morality can proudly claim to be Muslim anymore.

Islam needs to be re-codified under an Islamic Martin Luther to sort the whole mess out or it will collapse under the weight of its own sickness.
 
thanks, renegade

What would happen is that i would most likely beat him to a bloodied mess, and would merely leave her. I would not even make her adultery public. I would simply call the police or my lawyer and take my children, if there were any, and leave. Most likely go to the home of my brother or sister or mother. I would call the police so they could witness that i took my children peaceably, and to avoid charges of kidnapping.

i feel for this answer, though i would be inclinded to be more angry with her, since she had made me some promises; the other guy does NOT owe me anything. as you point out, (her) breaking promises is NOT a capital offence, nor one somehow requiring 'vigilante' action. and certainly fucking an eager wife of someone is not an offence, else lots of us would be in jail.

one thing gives me pause
"Take my children." YOu don't necessarily have a right to. And suppose she is around and protests. The police will NOT hand them to you. With respect, that sounds like an act of spite that has no legal sanction.

In our area, when the matter goes to court, the 'fitness' of the parent is assessed: and it is generally NOT determined according to adultery (unless it was on the living room floor in front of the kids). IOW the old rule of thumb from 100 years back (or Saudi Arabia or Iran, right now), that the adultress will lose her children is NOT in force any longer.

So, if we are civiliized, the disposition of hte children has to be discussed and some kind of shared access arranged: neither spouse can cut the other out atavistic emotion notwithstanding.
 
SFwriter said:
As an ex religious education teacher I was sickened by the story. While Islam as a religion has much to be said for it (the fundamental worthy and spiritual values are much more liberal then say, catholicism, for example), Islamic society has become so sick at heart through the perversions of its leaders that I begin to wonder how anyone with any sense of morality can proudly claim to be Muslim anymore.

Islam needs to be re-codified under an Islamic Martin Luther to sort the whole mess out or it will collapse under the weight of its own sickness.
Its always much easier to stand as a moral beacon in someone else's church. One needn't live with the consequences, so one may be as stoutly unbending and righteous as necessary.

The post reminds me of the people from Texas who came to Maine to work on passing an amendment to the state constitution which would result in no protection for GLBT people in matters of housing and employment. They too were beacons of moral justice. And they were hardliners.

I suggest you speak with people who have lived among Arabs (or Persians or Pushtun) and listen to them. Try reading Robert Fisk, Pity the Nation. The region is under enormous political and military pressure; the religious aspect is only a tithe of the problem.
 
Honor is one thing, and it follows this form all around the Mediterranean. If you were paying any attention, you'd have seen that honor killings and such tripe happen in S. Europe, too. The Islamicate culture finds that aspect more congenial right now, but it has little relation to Islam itself.

Henry was interviewed recently (here). Henry has his head straight and he's been there for years at a time, speaks the language. Gus Norton spent a lot of time in Afghanistan and Pakistan while the Taliban were starting up and slowly swallowing the place, and in Lebanon and Palestine. Take a course; it'll get you in a position to talk with people who know.
 
cantdog said:
Its always much easier to stand as a moral beacon in someone else's church. One needn't live with the consequences, so one may be as stoutly unbending and righteous as necessary.

The post reminds me of the people from Texas who came to Maine to work on passing an amendment to the state constitution which would result in no protection for GLBT people in matters of housing and employment. They too were beacons of moral justice. And they were hardliners.

I suggest you speak with people who have lived among Arabs (or Persians or Pushtun) and listen to them. Try reading Robert Fisk, Pity the Nation. The region is under enormous political and military pressure; the religious aspect is only a tithe of the problem.

I would be surprised if you knew, coming from Maine, but the job of an RE teacher over here is to teach the background and the morality of the six major world religions as represented in the UK. I am not a representative of any particular faith, indeed I, myself, am agnostic.

I am not here to promote any particular faith. What I am saying is that from a purely sociological point of view those practising the Islamic faith are doing things in the name of it that are so antagonistic to those both inside and outside that they daily sow the seeds of their own destruction. It is perfectly possible for Islam to work properly, in some places Shariah law works better than the traditional more western version, but the society that practices it has become so twisted that it borders on insanity.
 
In this country....someone rapes one of my sisters. I would get a knife and go find him and maybe I bring him to the police. When I hear stories like that I know we can't lose against these people that pervert Islam.

:rose:

Almost cried over that one......
 
rengadeirishman said:
These are not honour, they are perversions. If your gonna kill someone for deflowering your family member, kill the man who did it.

Women are part of my honour, but as beings worthy of utmost care and respect. I would never hit a woman with the intent to harm, let alone kill one.

But if a man raped my sister, He would most surely die either my hand or the hand of my brother.
Put the sword in her hand, and teach her to use it. Give her the ability to uphold her own honor.
 
SFwriter said:
As an ex religious education teacher I was sickened by the story. While Islam as a religion has much to be said for it (the fundamental worthy and spiritual values are much more liberal then say, catholicism, for example), Islamic society has become so sick at heart through the perversions of its leaders that I begin to wonder how anyone with any sense of morality can proudly claim to be Muslim anymore.

Islam needs to be re-codified under an Islamic Martin Luther to sort the whole mess out or it will collapse under the weight of its own sickness.
As Cat Stevens found out.
 
Pure said:
What would happen is that i would most likely beat him to a bloodied mess, and would merely leave her. I would not even make her adultery public. I would simply call the police or my lawyer and take my children, if there were any, and leave. Most likely go to the home of my brother or sister or mother. I would call the police so they could witness that i took my children peaceably, and to avoid charges of kidnapping.

i feel for this answer, though i would be inclinded to be more angry with her, since she had made me some promises; the other guy does NOT owe me anything. as you point out, (her) breaking promises is NOT a capital offence, nor one somehow requiring 'vigilante' action. and certainly fucking an eager wife of someone is not an offence, else lots of us would be in jail.

one thing gives me pause
"Take my children." YOu don't necessarily have a right to. And suppose she is around and protests. The police will NOT hand them to you. With respect, that sounds like an act of spite that has no legal sanction.

In our area, when the matter goes to court, the 'fitness' of the parent is assessed: and it is generally NOT determined according to adultery (unless it was on the living room floor in front of the kids). IOW the old rule of thumb from 100 years back (or Saudi Arabia or Iran, right now), that the adultress will lose her children is NOT in force any longer.

So, if we are civiliized, the disposition of hte children has to be discussed and some kind of shared access arranged: neither spouse can cut the other out atavistic emotion notwithstanding.

I understand your position, but allow me to clarify. She would have rights to the children. But i would take them that night, tell them they're visiting their grandma or uncle or auntie. My reason, while partly in spite, i won't deny, is also that i wouldnt want my children to wake up to hear their mother say "daddy left us" cause that would be a grossly misleading statement that, unfortunately, children would quite possibly believe if their mother says so.
 
Stella_Omega said:
Put the sword in her hand, and teach her to use it. Give her the ability to uphold her own honor.

my sister can uphold her own honour, shes a little hellion. lol. But at the same time, as her older brother, and especially since our father is dead, it is my job to protect her.
 
hi stella, to SF writer.

not sure of your ref to Cat Stevens; as far as i know he's still a Muslim.

Rolling Stone summarized his recent years, thus:

RSIn 1975 Stevens began studying the Koran and later converted to the Muslim religion. In late 1981 the rechristened Stevens announced, “I’m no longer seeking applause and fame,” and auctioned off all his material possessions, including his gold records. By then he had married Fouzia Ali; as of the late ’80s, they had five children, and he was running a Muslim school outside London.

In 1987 10,000 Maniacs covered “Peace Train,” and the following year Maxi Priest hit the U.K. Top 10 with a version of “Wild World.” What might have grown into a Stevens revival, however, was nipped in 1989, when the media reported that the singer supported Iran’s death-sentence condemnation of Satanic Verses author Salman Rushdie, whose book had blasphemed the Muslim faith. American radio stations observed an airplay boycott of Stevens’ material; 10,000 Maniacs removed “Peace Train” from later pressings of the album on which it appeared.

In the mid-’90s Yusef Islam founded his own label, Mountain of Light, on which he released spoken-word albums. The double-CD A Is for Allah contains several songs for children in addition to spoken performances. In 2000 Islam, who has supported humanitarian efforts in Bosnia, oversaw the release of a Cat Stevens retrospective and resurfaced in the music press. He claims to have been unfairly vilified and misquoted about the Rushdie incident.

---

P: Is there info you have that i don't?
---

SF Islam needs to be re-codified under an Islamic Martin Luther to sort the whole mess out or it will collapse under the weight of its own sickness.

P: We in the west are not well aware of the writings of a number of progressive Imams and high officials in various locales of Islam. It is not a unity (parallel to Roman Catholic Xendom). If you google for Morocco, Egypt, or Indonesia and islam reform, modernization etc. there is lots of material.

IOW a bunch of mini Luthers have already been active, including muslim feminists for the last fifty or more years.
 
Back
Top