Muslim Honor Killing in Kingston

Argus · July 24, 2009

Shady,
Then what in blazes are you saying ? I keep reading these posts from people who talk about the Muslim problem. Ok. So what are you proposing ?

Honour killings in and of themselves are merely a horrific event for the family - mainly the female victims involved. However, they are indicative of a mentality which is quite common among Muslims. That mentality says that women are inferiors in every concievable way, and must be as obedient to their men as a well-trained dog is to its master. Absent that, they should be beaten into submission. Quietly, in Canada.

Honour killings get big press, especially when done by the car loads. But even social service agencies admit that domestic violence is rarely reported from immigrant communities, especially from Muslims. How many teenage girls are beaten by their familes for daring to try to embrace some aspects of Canadian cultural freedoms? How many are sent "home" to Turkey or Pakistan or Iran or Lebanon for a year of "conditioning" and to find a proper husband, before returning to Canada properly subdued and submissive?

And why are we even bringing people into Canada by the hundreds of thousands who have this kind of stubborn, backward attitude towards women?

To put it another way. How comfortable would the Left be if we brought over tens of thousands of members of the KKK every year, complete with their attitudes about blacks and Jews?

Wild Bill · July 24, 2009

Honour killings in and of themselves are merely a horrific event for the family - mainly the female victims involved. However, they are indicative of a mentality which is quite common among Muslims. That mentality says that women are inferiors in every concievable way, and must be as obedient to their men as a well-trained dog is to its master. Absent that, they should be beaten into submission. Quietly, in Canada.
Honour killings get big press, especially when done by the car loads. But even social service agencies admit that domestic violence is rarely reported from immigrant communities, especially from Muslims. How many teenage girls are beaten by their familes for daring to try to embrace some aspects of Canadian cultural freedoms? How many are sent "home" to Turkey or Pakistan or Iran or Lebanon for a year of "conditioning" and to find a proper husband, before returning to Canada properly subdued and submissive?

And why are we even bringing people into Canada by the hundreds of thousands who have this kind of stubborn, backward attitude towards women?

To put it another way. How comfortable would the Left be if we brought over tens of thousands of members of the KKK every year, complete with their attitudes about blacks and Jews?

All generalizations are dangerous, Angus. Including this one!

We may be bringing hundreds of thousands of Muslims into Canada but that is not the same as bringing the same number who have this attitude towards women. Not all Muslims have that attitude!

I worked with two young Somali teenagers once, a young man and a young girl. They were dating but secretly. Both were resisting arranged marriages. They told me how their parents had appealed to the imam, or 'minister' at their mosque to tell them that the Koran insisted on arranged marriages.

They were both disappointed and upset when the imam refused! He told them that to his knowledge the Koran said no such thing and that the idea was solely a cultural issue, not a Muslim one.

Not all Muslims practice radical or fundamentalist beliefs.

That being said, perhaps we should be screening better those immigrants who come from those SPECIFIC COUNTRIES that DO have non-Canadian values in their culture, regardless of their religion!

After all, to my knowledge there have been no honour killings amongst Irish Catholics or Scottish Presbyterians.

We have no obligation to take everyone from everywhere. Immigration should be screened solely and only for Canada's benefit. Those who can help Canada should get in. Those who can't are someone else's problem. Race and country of origin are irrelevant. Culture may be relevant, in some aspects.

Moreover, when we charge someone for murder over an honour killing, we should absolutely send a clear message by following the maximums of the law in sentencing. Religion should not be allowed to be introduced as a mitigating factor.

Edited July 24, 2009 by Wild Bill

M.Dancer · July 24, 2009

I'm sorry but my Canada doesn't include honor killings.

Good for you. Your okay with other kinds of killings then?

M.Dancer · July 24, 2009

Sorry, it isn't unique. It's happening more and more in Canada nowadays, becoming common place even. It isn't racist to post on the truth that is happening. Attack my facts if you can. Not me, thank you very much.

Define commonplace. More than .....say ...5?

Your facts are easy to attack seeing you usually inflate, deflect and make stuff up.

Of those 5000 honour killings you claim, how many are in Canada?

M.Dancer · July 24, 2009

Unfortunately, it's far from a unique story. It wasn't long ago that that a man in Toronto killed his daughter for not wearing a hijab. Take your head outta the sand.

so that would be 2 events in one year....

M.Dancer · July 24, 2009

Hmm, a quick search brings up 3 in 2004 alone.
- A 14-year-old female rape victim is strangled to death in March 2004 by her father and brother because she has supposedly tarnished the family name.

- In April 2004, a man brutally kills his wife and daughter after finding out that his brother had previously molested them.

- A teenage girl with a Turkish background has her throat cut by her father after he learns she has a Christian boyfriend.

All three cases -- taken from a study by Memorial University psychiatry professor Dr. Amin Muhammad and resident Sujay Patel -- involve unspeakable acts against females. And all were considered appropriate by the killers based on long-standing tradition and cultural beliefs.

Link

You should reaserch before you post, those killings didn't happen in Canada.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=29427

Perhaps you should look before you leap.

M.Dancer · July 24, 2009

So now we're to four, perhaps five. Before you leap into claming those tragedies are common place, look at the possibility of using logic. It would be a change.

Those happened in the US.

M.Dancer · July 24, 2009

One honor killing on Canadian soil is 1 too many. How many did we have 30 years ago? ZERO.

Mind if I attack your facts?

Okay, you're making facts up, we have been through this before that last tiome I made you lookmlike an idiot (which I admit you readily help) There have alsway been "honour killings". the difference now is there are new comers to Canada who do it too.

Jerry J. Fortin · July 24, 2009

Define commonplace. More than .....say ...5?
Your facts are easy to attack seeing you usually inflate, deflect and make stuff up.

Of those 5000 honour killings you claim, how many are in Canada?

There is an interesting kind of murder for you. One you need to commit to defend your honour. What century is this?

I am very sorry for having to describe a citizen in the manner I feel compelled to, but this is how I feel. The savage who committed this crime needs to be made an example of. Perhaps with being treated in like manner according to their own traditions.

madmax · July 24, 2009

Some people miss a good witch burning.

August1991 · July 24, 2009

How many are sent "home" to Turkey or Pakistan or Iran or Lebanon for a year of "conditioning" and to find a proper husband, before returning to Canada properly subdued and submissive?

A feature of this case is that the father was planning to have all the daughters and his first wife return to Afghanistan and this may have provoked the murders.

To put it another way. How comfortable would the Left be if we brought over tens of thousands of members of the KKK every year, complete with their attitudes about blacks and Jews?

Argus, that comparison is odious - and wrong.

----

Domestic violoence (directed usually against women) is deplorable. Each culture has its own form of such violence. As Lily noted above, maybe we should see this incident properly in that way.

Jerry J. Fortin · July 24, 2009

Some people miss a good witch burning.

Or a good hanging. This is a very troubling scenario. One that I don't think very damned many citizens in this nation care to see go without our own form of justice being interposed.

Jerry J. Fortin · July 24, 2009

Some people miss a good witch burning.

Or a good hanging. This is a very troubling scenario. One that I don't think very damned many citizens in this nation care to see go without our own form of justice being interposed.

M.Dancer · July 24, 2009

There is an interesting kind of murder for you. One you need to commit to defend your honour. What century is this?
I am very sorry for having to describe a citizen in the manner I feel compelled to, but this is how I feel. The savage who committed this crime needs to be made an example of. Perhaps with being treated in like manner according to their own traditions.

It is only in the past 25 years or so that in the west many countires finally squashed the Crime of passion defense, which is what we called "honour killings" back then, crimes of passion. They are new, what is new to us is that muslim immigrants are doing them. When a white husband or wife kills their spouse over adultry we simply call it murder.

Like OJ

Hydraboss · July 24, 2009

Argus, that comparison is odious - and wrong.

No it isn't. It is factual, and that you disapprove of the content does not make it hate-based.

Domestic violoence (directed usually against women) is deplorable. Each culture has its own form of such violence. As Lily noted above, maybe we should see this incident properly in that way.

If society suddenly discovered the cause of domestic violence and developed a "cure" you would be all over it as would we all. In this case we have unearthed one of the causes...a specific use of a religion. Maybe we should see this incident properly in that way.

Hydraboss · July 24, 2009

However, a post like yours can't lead to any type of policy discussion, and as I have seen over the years it only leads to discussion about the discussion, and the [sic] discussers.

Well Michael, here's a policy discussion for you:

No more Muslims allowed to immigrate to Canada. Is that enough of a stance for you? We identify a problem and then we take steps to implement corrective actions.

I'm not saying that Muslims are the one and only cause of the woes in Canada. I am, however, saying that since we know they are a problem, we should take steps to fix it. Sure there are murders committed for all sorts of reasons, and some of those are "inherent" to existing Canadian culture. It doesn't mean they should be ignored but they already exist so we get rid of the problems where we find them. The radical Muslim issue is growing worldwide (see: EU countries) and we need to address it before we end up like England or France.

I notice that no one wants to address Argus' "KKK" question. Not palatable?

Dave_ON · July 24, 2009

Ah, there's the rub. The Left has adamantly refused to allow crime statistics based on race to be collected.
We keep tabs on "immigrant" crime only as long as the immigrants are immigrants, that is, for the three years it generally takes before they magically transform, as these people did, into Canadians.

However, my perception is that most violent crimes in Canada are commited by immigrants. That perception arises from discussions with others in the community, and from the steady stream of arabic and east indian names and faces on TV and in the papers whenever murder, armed robbery, pimping, drug dealing and sexual assaults are reported.

There is no proof, of course, because unlike in the US and other countries, we keep no official statistics. Occasionally, things get out, as in the Citizen almost inadvertently reporting that more than half the juveniles in custody in Ottawa are Somalians, or Macleans mentioning, almost in passing, that almost all street gang violence in Toronto is commited by Jamaicans, or the Gazette incidentally mentioning the prevelence of Iranians in the drug trade. But no, there is no proof.

Why does the Left insist on no statistics? Because it says such information could be used by racists to support their anti-minority speech. How could such statistics be used by racists for that purpuse unless, of course, those statistics show the prevelance of minorities (read immigrants) in violent crime? Clearly even the Left feels that is likely the case.

I would postulate that your "logical" conclusions are arrived at based on your point of departure. By this I mean your preconceptions are tainting your fact finding abilities, you notice the crimes committed by foreigners because you are under the impression that by far and in large they are committed by foreigners. Therefore you will only focus on those stories that support your notions. If you look at it objectively and do a quick internet search you can find how many people in Canada have been convicted of murder you'll find that the majority of them are in fact Canadian born white males. Shocking, that the majority of murderers could potentially directly correlate with the majority demographic in this country! It's almost as if those who commit murder do so in about the same numbers across all demographics!

This list is far from comprehensive but it does contain some of the more heinous cases. It funny as I was reading your tirade the first person that came to mind was Paul Bernardo, probably one of the worst cases in recent history and he’s all ours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Peop...urder_by_Canada

You really hit the nail on the head when you said there is no proof to support your claims, yet logic would dictate you should abandon them in the absence of such evidence. However, we both know that you didn’t arrive at these conclusions from a logical or objective point of departure, so to justify your illogical adherence to them you blame those “liberals” for preventing you from proving your erroneous claims.

capricorn · July 24, 2009

What is intriguing in this case is the question of motive. Why was one of the father's wives killed along with the teenage girls?

She was his first wife, though he had concealed that fact since the family of three adults, all natives of Afghanistan, and seven children moved to Canada two years ago and settled in Montreal.
----

Kingston Police also disclosed they believe Shafi had misrepresented Rona Mohammed.

Shafi told police investigators that she was his cousin.

"Investigators would later receive information that would cause them to believe that she was, in fact, Mr. Shafi's first wife," Begbie said.

The couple had never divorced. Shafi took a second wife because Mohammed could not get pregnant. Shafi's second wife Tooba gave birth to seven children.

Shafi's second wife Tooba gave birth to seven children.

They say Shafi destroyed documents that provided proof of the marriage.

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/s...html?id=1822943

The Montreal-area businessman, charged along with his second wife and eldest son with the murder of the couple's three daughters and his first wife, bought a commercial mall in Laval, Que., in 2008 for $2-million, land registry records show. He provided $1.6-million of the purchase price in cash. Mr. Shafia listed his wife as Tooba Mohammad Yahya in the agreement to purchase the mall. The sales deed says the couple married in Afghanistan in 1988. Her name was also listed with Mr. Shafia's in Quebec business registry records when he closed a company in July of last year after two months of operation. Mr. Shafia also owns a real estate management company and La Gestion Amanat Inc., which is listed as an importer, distributor and vendor

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/s...html?id=1822943

According to reports, Shafia was also having a new house constructed.

Now imagine if Shafia feared deportation if it was found out he provided false information to settle in Canada. His eldest daughter had filed a complaint of child abuse with local authorities. Now imagine if that daughter (and other daughters) threatened to publicly denounce her father's duplicity with regard to the status of the murdered wife. Shafia may have feared he could be deported and lose all his assets which totaled at least $2M. His fear could very well have been shared by his surviving wife and eldest son, and he convinced them to join in his nefarious plan.

It was disclosed that the murders were planned. Money may well have been the determining motive in this case. If so, it points to the father as the mastermind behind the plot.

Yes, there was domestic abuse with cultural undertones in the Shafia household. Yet, I wonder. If Shafia had been a regular, hourly paid working stiff, would murder have come into the picture?

Argus · July 24, 2009

30 years ago, nobody was killing their wives, daughters, sisters for looking at a man the wrong way, or wearing the wrong clothes?

No.

M.Dancer · July 24, 2009

No.

yes

Argus · July 24, 2009

I found it more important to challenge those who found it an ample opportunity to promote the teaching of hate.

See, this is something you ultra leftists never have figured out.

Dissaproval of a given group or culture based largely on its demonstrated behaviour does not in any way imply "hate" of that group.

Argus · July 24, 2009

There is nothing disriminating about it. Something as small as seperating men and women doesn't make a person sexist. There are plenty of Islamic women who don't care or prefer to to be seperated from men at certain times.

There is nothing racist about it. Separating Blacks and Whites doesn't make a person racist. There are plenty of black men who don't care or prefer to be separated from white men at certain times - like when sitting on a bus or drinking from a fountain or going to the bathroom for example....

JerrySeinfeld · July 24, 2009

One victim was a wife, yes, but he called her his cousin. The other 3 were their daughters.

That's because first cousin marriages are commonplace in that culture.

On that note, I read something really strange not too long ago. Apparently one of the busiest air corridors in the world is between some Pakistani village and some mid-size community in England. They continually come back and forth going there to marry youn g girls (cousins) and then bringing them back to England. As well, apparently the honour killing incidence in mid-sized English communities - being overrun by new Muslim arrivals - is unusually high.

My question is this: All the young (and old) hippies get hot and bothered by multi-national corporations and "corporate globalization" - usually referring to a McDonalds or an Exxon refinery in Mumbai. But what about the cultural imperialism in the reverse?

What's more dangerous? A Big Mac in Cairo? or scores of 14-year old girls being thrown off balconies in West Hampshire?

It's cultural imperialism on a global scale. What to do? Who knows. But isn't it worth discussion?

The left wing thought police would have us all shut up. "Nothing to see here".

Edited July 24, 2009 by JerrySeinfeld

Argus · July 24, 2009

Mind if I attack your facts?
Okay, you're making facts up, we have been through this before that last tiome I made you lookmlike an idiot (which I admit you readily help) There have alsway been "honour killings". the difference now is there are new comers to Canada who do it too.

Crazy jealous assholes who kill their wives in a drunken haze, or because she's leaving them, are a universal problem and Canada has certainly had their ilk in the past - and still does.

Honour killings, however, are not, to my knowledge, something Canada has any experience with.

Jerry J. Fortin · July 24, 2009

Crazy jealous assholes who kill their wives in a drunken haze, or because she's leaving them, are a universal problem and Canada has certainly had their ilk in the past - and still does.
Honour killings, however, are not, to my knowledge, something Canada has any experience with.

Or limited experience at best, I agree.