The Jordan Times Oct 7, 2001

LINK Father confesses to killing daughter

By Rana Husseini AMMAN –– A 58-year-old man surrendered to Ajloun police late Saturday night saying he killed his married daughter for reasons of honour, official sources said on Sunday.

The victim, Subhieh Mohammad, 27, was killed with a sharp object similar to a meat cleaver in her house in Kufranjeh town. The source said she received several blows to the head.

The victim's father told interrogators that he killed his daughter to cleanse his family honour, the source added.

According to the source, the victim was wed almost two months ago to a Sudanese national.

Four days prior to the murder, the source said, the man returned the woman to her family “claiming that she was not a virgin.”

Subhieh is the 17th woman reportedly murdered this year in the Kingdom for reasons of family honour.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001

Answers

Gloria, let's hear some outrage.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

You mean there is a warranty? You can return them? Why was I never told about this?

-- Jack Booted Thug (governmentconspiracy@NWO.com), October 08, 2001.

Lars, this has been the norm in a lot of the middle-eastern countries for decades, if not for hundreds of years. These are the kind of stories that were exposed by MS magazine 30 years ago. What we consider barbaric actions, have been considered social behavior. Girls as young as 13 are married off to men they have never met, and should their husband die, the wife is supposed to throw her self on his funeral pyre. Women are considered less important than the cattle, they actually think women are sinfull because they cause the men to be weak by their desire for them.

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), October 08, 2001.

Lars, get with the program! This took place in the Hashemite Kingdom of Trans-Jordan, better known simply as Jordan. They are our honored allies in this war.

Also, our Maximum Leader George W. Bush has given us all the definitive word - this is not a war against Islam or against "swell Muslim practices". Our honored allies are quite happy with their ancestral religion and we are quite happy with our honored allies. We just want to persuade the evil brethren of our honored allies to stop killing us. Then the USA will resume being the Happiest Place on Earth

(Damn! Those pitbull Disney lawyers will be chewing on my ass by express mail any minute now.)

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), October 08, 2001.

I’m amazed that the regular ladies on this forum are not screaming their outrage over these barbaric Muslim customs. These are people who treat women worse than animals and nary an angry word. Even Cherri, who would have President Bush banned to purgatory, speaks of these things in such a mild, clinical way. Disappointing to say the least.

-- So (cr@t.es), October 08, 2001.

George W. Bush has given us all the definitive word - this is not a war against Islam

I know that this is what Pres Bush has said. He is obliged to say it. He may even believe it. I don't. I am a-feared that we are at war with Islam, at least a large corner of it. It is a war they have declared.

Why is it OK for them to say "jihad" and not OK for us to say "crusade"? (even when "crusade" no longer has the meaning of "Christian holy war")?

Have any "moderate" Muslim "leaders" anywhere publically condemned the Sept 11 atrocity? In strong terms? I must have missed it.

Cherri, I know that "honor killling" is an old story and that Feminist leaders have condemned it. But as this article shows, it is still happening. IMO the Feminists should be leading the charge against reactionary Islam and I don't see that they are. They still seem to see Western Civ as the main enemy.

BTW, suttee (the funeral pyre for the widow) is Hindu, not Muslim. Credit where credit is due.

This is a religious war because they saY it is.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

"This is a religious war because they saY it is."

In this case, "they" don't have the authority to speak for all Islam, any more than the Patriarch of Istanbul (or Pat Robertson for that matter) has the authority to speak for all Christianity.

Moreover, it is greatly in the interest of "them" for this pronouncement of religious war to acquire a measure of reality, since "they" are few and Islam is legion (about 1 billion souls and 2/3 or the world's oil). If we treat it as a religious war, we lend them strength they don;t have and we don't want them to have.

Taking the "jihad" thing at face value is kind of like rising to the bait of a troll. They put it there for you to swallow. It contains a hook. Once the hook is set, they can play you.

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), October 08, 2001.

Socrates,

We have to pick and chose our battles. There are women in the U.S. who are still beaten regularly by their husbands. I have always preferred to help local women because I can't take care of the world. (Nor do I want to.)

Eventually, the women of those countries will learn how we got out of the dark ages, and will start making demands themselves.

As for the other women, don't expect eve to ever reply to a thread on sexism. She is a wimp and a coward and only wants to cover her own ass.

-- (LadyLogic@....), October 08, 2001.

LN--

Where is the great voice of moderate, compassionate Islam that is condemning the terror attacks?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

As for the other women, don't expect eve to ever reply to a thread on sexism. She is a wimp and a coward and only wants to cover her own ass.

Laura--

Try re-reading your posts before you hit SUBMIT. This sentence is ugly.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

Lars, I don't have the time to look up those voices for you. I presume they exist. Hell, even Fidel Castro condemned the attacks of 9/11 with some fairly strong language.

But even assuming the worst, that such voices have been lukewarm or vacillating in their support, this is war. In a war, you judge an ally by their actions more than their words. In WWII, we managed to stay allies with the USSR right to the end. If Pakistan is letting us use their airspace and Saudi Arabia cuts off diplomatic relations with Afghanistan and continues to pump oil and sell it to us, then they are not pursuing a jihad against us... it is a prima facie case.

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), October 08, 2001.

Personally, I've been down this path with you before, Lars. My guess is that it was right around the time that you posted the "Neanderthal" thing which led me to words that I'd rather not repeat. I'm really sorry that you were hurt somehow by a feminist, but get over it.

In the meantime, President Bush has apparently asked that Moslem customs not be questioned.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

I just calls 'em as I see's 'em.

Woman who are too cowardly to say something is wrong with sexist statements are ugly.

Don't make me link. I want to go shopping :o)

-- (LadyLogic@....), October 08, 2001.

I'm not hurt by Feminists Anita. I can whup two Feminists with one hand. I think that Feminists are finally beginning to prioritze their enemies. I saw Eleanor Smeal on TV in the last few days and she was taking a strong line on Islamic treatment of women. This is appropriate. Why has that taken so long?

If Feminists put half as much energy into publicizing Muslim treatment of women as they did in opposing Clarence Thomas, they would have more credibility to many of us. To date, they have come off as the Women's Auxilliary of the Democrat Left.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

Lars: I have no idea who Eleanor is, or who she represents. I DO suggest that you give up this quest to find feminists on this forum who might agree with you. The women who AREN'T feminists [which would include ME] see you as a Neanderthal on issues relating to women. Why would you think that feminists would cater to YOUR thoughts of importance when you can't even rally non-feminists?

Nah...I STILL think you were bit somewhere along the line by a feminist, Lars. You've thrown these statements about feminists about ever since I've READ your posts. It's okay if you don't understand what they're doing, Lars. Venus, Mars, and all that, ya know.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

Wait a minute.

Why is it we should be the one's guilted into responding to this thread. Why is it we (women) are the one's expected to do something about what happens on the other side of the earth? Why don't you ask forum males to express outrage also? Is humanitarianism one-sided?

-- (LadyLogic@.....), October 08, 2001.

Beneat h the Veil

May I suggest this be required viewing.

-- (not@feminist.org), October 08, 2001.

I've seen Beneath the Veil, or at least huge portions of it. It WAS/IS a great documentary. Since Sunday's bombings, it seems that a British Journalist may/may not get out of the country alive. She was captured by the Taliban and her release was promised on Sunday or Monday, but her situation is unclear now, since the reprisal. She has no passport, and wore the traditional garb to fit in.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

It would be of little value for American women to lead a ... wait, we aren't allowed to use the word "crusade" any more ... consciousness-heightening series of public statements condemning the treatment of women in other countries.

Should we impose the same type of economic sanctions on these countries that we did against South Africa? Can you say oil embargo? What if Muslim countries decided to deny us oil until we cover Madonna permanently?

-- helen (uh@huh.yeah), October 08, 2001.

British journalist has been released by the Taliban after 10 days in detention

-- Rich (living_in_interesting_times@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

Thanks for that, Rich.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

Anita, I am shocked that you do not recognize Eleanor Smeal. You are not as widely read in the literature of the Left as I had thought. She is or was president of NOW.

I use a capial F in "Feminists" to indentify the left-wing women who disguise themselves as advocates for all women so as to advance their own politics. People such as Gloria Steinem, Patricia Ireland, Eleanor Smeal, Susan Faluda, Naomi Wolf, Susan Brownmiller come to mind. My prefence for female spokesbabe is Camille Paglia.

I have twice posted the link to RAWA. I posted this long before Sept 11.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

Haven't heard anything about the 8 aid workers. Anyone?

-- (not@feminist.org), October 08, 2001.

I'm QUITE familiar with RAWA, Lars. What do they have to do with the feminist movement or even issues of the "left"? Heh...or are you suggesting that the Conservatives that you hold so dear would close them down in a New York minute? [We may be gaining progress here. I'm not sure yet, however.]

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

IMO, a good screening test for a Feminist is whether you would vote for a male hack or sexist male Democrat before you would vote for a strong female Republican.

For example, what if Elizabeth Dole had run against Clinton in 1996? Would a Feminist have voted for Dole? No way.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

notafeminist, I don't think they were released. A journalist was release to Pakistan, but that's all I've heard.

-- helen (no@go.there), October 08, 2001.

My only point Anita is that Feminists should have been beating the drum against mistreatment of women wherever it happens. There has been relatively little attention paid to Talibanesque sexism, African female circumcision, Muslim female-slave trading, etc. Until now.

IMO that is because these things were happening in countries that the Left thought they had some common-cause with. "No enemy on the Left", remember?

The Muslim radicals want to kill Liberals as much as Conservatives. Maybe more. Glad to have you onboard.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

helen,

I fear for their safety.

The turn of events has possibly made their up-coming trial a non- existint event.

-- (not@feminist.org), October 08, 2001.

should have been...

Lars, feminist or NOT, there are countless people who tell us all what we "should have been" doing. There are ALSO countless people who tell us that had we been doing what THEY wanted us to do X would have happened versus Y. Maybe Y wasn't a bad thing [to US], but Y was a bad thing to THEM. Give free will a chance, Lars, and stop judging others by YOUR criteria.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

You don't see the hypocrisy of the Feminist whining about alleged pubic hairs on coke cans while ignoring deadly abuse of females in other countries? Excuse me, I must need "sensitivity training".

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

Lars: Had *I* been Anita Hill, I would have pondered a while before coming forward with what I knew about Thomas [having worked with him.] Gee...she DID ponder that. He was up for a Supreme Court Justice, Lars. I've heard all these arguments before, Lars, like "Why didn't the feminists support Paula Jones?" Well, because feminists knew her background and they ALSO knew the background of Anita Hill.

Anyway, the people involved in the atrocities you mention here are NOT being submitted as Supreme Court Justices. It's unclear to me why you bring up these old cases unless to say that they stuck in your craw.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

"There has been relatively little attention paid to Talibanesque sexism, African female circumcision, Muslim female-slave trading, etc."

Lars, the very fact that you are aware of these issues at all is because feminists "beat the drum" about them. You may have heard about them through your church group or somewhere else in the past few years, but the first folks to get out there in front on thes issues, a couple decades ago, were feminists. Give them credit, not blame.

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), October 08, 2001.

I think I can "blame" Debra for having enlightened me to those horrifying issues, LN. Thanks Debra.

-- Rich (living_in_interesting_times@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

Also, there's a certain wine of intoxication with the whole concept of war, and I think that this wine has gone to YOUR head, as well as Stephen Poole's, Lars.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

I we having fun yet Lars? My point about the lack of outrage has been wonderfully demonstrated by, of all people, Anita. She has managed to post SEVEN times to this thread with over 500 words, and not once did she even COMPLAIN about the mistreatment of females in the Muslim culture. Incredible!

-- So (cr@t.es), October 08, 2001.

Well I just now saw this thread (about 8pm in Michigan) and of course I'm outraged. But I'm not at all surprised, as you've got murderous, sick psychotics all over the world who do things like this.

I will say this -- I just don't have the time to check every thread all the way through for something to be outraged about and respond accordingly; sometimes I don't have time to check any other threads at all, even when I might post an article. In any case, I've got plenty of surplus outrage to pass around just from this New York thing.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), October 08, 2001.

Make that EIGHT times!

-- So (cr@t.es), October 08, 2001.

Barry: There might have been a time when I was outraged by this, or even American women accepting the cruelty served to them by spouses. That time passed when the women wouldn't file charges. It's AGAIN a case of what *I* would like for you versus what YOU would like for you.

Regarding the customs of Moslems and their women, there have been many TV shows dedicated to this thought. I remember one, offhand, about a girl being circumcized by her father. She showed up on Law and Order Special Victims Unit. Everyone tried to help her, but she KNEW her culture, and felt that what had been done to her was in her best interest. Do I think it's stupid? Yes. Do I think I can do anything about it? No.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

LN--

I honestly don't know where I heard of these things. Several mainstream sources I'd say. Maybe "the mainstream sources" heard of them from Naomi Wolf. Maybe. I don't routinely read Feminist literature.

My point remains---until recently, those who purport to represent female concerns (ie, the Feminists) have had relatively little to say about the abuse of females in exotic locales.

Do you think that might just have something to do with what benefits the Feminists most directly? I do.

Anyway, now that such abuse is widely known, I expect the Feminists to prioritize their concerns if they want to salvage any credibility.

The Femimists might also want to note that Muslim fundamentalists opppose abortion. That fact alone should make them consumate hawks.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

Lars, there are collectivist feminists and individualist feminists. The collectivists hold up the importance of the group and would be more likely to be the ones who'd support cultural relativism -- where each culture has its own standards of the good and thus whose acts or "customs" can't be criticized by a member of another culture.

I see things in an individualist perspective, which is why I see the father in the initial post as an individual perpetrator and a murderous psychotic -- rather than hiding behind a veneer of cultural "respectability" or acceptability as he's cleaving up his daughter.

If an act is anti-human life, the fact that it might be a cultural thing means absolutely nothing to me. The individual is responsible. Period.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), October 08, 2001.

Anyway, now that such abuse is widely known, I expect the Feminists to prioritize their concerns if they want to salvage any credibility.

Lars, you're really being THICK on this one, and we've been down this path before. It isn't the JOB of The National Organization of Women to get involved with things that happen at the International level. Certainly, there are other chapters for that, of which you're aware. NOW concerns itself with female-related happenings in the US [which is the nation represented by the N. NOW won't lose any credibility [except in YOUR mind, and you didn't honor them from the start.]

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 08, 2001.

Socrates, I don't think I have time to be a feminist -- too busy working, hauling rocks, skinning mules, etc -- but I'll try to answer your question about why we aren't screaming about the treatment of females in other countries.

The cultures that forbid women equal rights are not all Muslim. There are Christian cultures that circumcise, for instance. The suppression of rights is so entrenched in their cultures that the women themselves often help to perpetuate the customs. They've never known any other way of life.

Sometimes they make it out of their home cultures and into Western culture. Some of them adapt very well. Others are not able to assimilate the tremendous difference in lifestyle and attitude.

Then there's that little stumbling block to change: their men kill them for trying to do anything outside of the prescribed norm.

What am I personally supposed to do about the treatment of women in other countries? Women's rights struggles here led to social changes that are not all positive. Unintended consequences. We don't circumcise women, thank God, but we have a high rate of out of wedlock births and single women heading households in poverty. So when we go to these other countries, what are we supposed to tell them about how they should change?

And what do we do about their men? I got kicked out of the crisis hotline center for asking a woman complaining of abuse if the guy ever went to sleep and did she have any rocks handy? Apparently here, as well in third world countries, what I was about to suggest next is not kosher. >;)

-- helen (cut@my.WHAT), October 08, 2001.

NOW homepage.

"Global" link on NOW's homepage.

NOW does have an interest in International issues. On their "global" page are 12 "top stories", ONE of which actually deals with Muslim maltreatment of women (a Turkish "honor" killing). The honor killing story is featured adjacent to a very important description of "Sweden an Eden for Working Parents". Ah, the Scandinavian model! At least they could have done Norway.

The home page is of interest. I could find no date reference but apparently it was updated after Sept 11 because there is a heading "NOW denounces religious extremism in wake of terror attack; urges unity, not bigotry".

WOW, what a bold statement!

Where is the outrage?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 08, 2001.

Re the wine of war. Ya really got me Anita. Yup, I've got to admit that I get-off on this war stuff. I orgasm every time they rerun the WTC attack. I can't wait til the nukes be flyin'. Yeeeha!

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 09, 2001.

Eve, I can't believe you had the nerve to post to this thread.

Abuse begins with nasty ideas and those ideas sometimes lead to action. The only intervention I know of is punishment or addressing the idea. Since there is no "punishing" Internet people, other than words, you had your nerve for just waltzing past a couple of sexists in this thread. You can't deny you didn't see it because I directed your attention to it. You were only concerned with "getting back on track" and saving your pathetic little butt.

Maria demonstrated her character that day - and so did you.

-- (LadyLogic@......), October 09, 2001.

This one.

-- (Ladylogic@......), October 09, 2001.

While we're on the topic, here's a fascinating site on individualist feminism (the good kind of feminism)...

ifeminism

By the way, y'all, I'm not responding directly to the troll above who's been lavishing me with attention lately, but if anyone feels she/he happens to raise a pertinent point somewhere, feel free to take it up with me separately, through your own post, and I'll be happy to respond.

-- Eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), October 09, 2001.

Lars I see your point even if Anita refuses to see it. Feminists aren't for women's issues unless it advances the left causes. Dole (Elizabeth) wouldn't be promoted no matter what.

Anita, I find that article on 'wine' echoing chants of yesteryear. Do you still wear flowers in your hair? (sorry, just making a joke) Like it or not war keeps peace. Sometimes bullies on the playground don't understand anything but a punch in the nose. Making the bully feel good and promoting his self esteem just doesn't cut it.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 09, 2001.

Thank you Maria. Sometimes Anita is so THICK.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 09, 2001.

Funny, guys.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 09, 2001.

Killing Osama bin Laden will only create a martyr. Holding him prisoner will inspire comrades to take hostages to demand his release. Therefore, I suggest we do neither. Let the Special Forces, Seals, or whatever covertly capture him, fly him to an undisclosed hospital, and have surgeons quickly perform a complete sex change operation. Then we return her to Afghanistan to live as a woman under the Taliban.

-- .... (....@....), October 10, 2001.

Anita once again you show your unrelenting stupidity.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 10, 2001.