Daniel Pipes just called my attention to something a reader of his blog recently shared: There is another case which resembles that of Muzammil Hassan’s. It took place in India. Mohammed Suhaib Ilyasi, “is a famous journalist who started the TV Show “India’s Most Wanted.” He also married a non-Muslim, Anju Singh, and converted her to Islam. She became Mrs.Anju Ilyasi. He took all her property, cash and jewelry. She came to know his real face and his connections with the Muslim Mafia. So he managed to murder his wife by slitting her throat with a blade. He was caught by Police and was in prison. But he managed to escape as his father is leader of the All India Islamic Cleric Association.
Now he is released with the help of politicians who are begging for Muslim community votes in elections. He is back in the media. Anju lost her life…and people forget.”
American and European feminists, with a handful of exceptions, argue that domestic violence is much bigger than femicide–which it is. I say that domestic violence is not necessarily femicide, that the two phenomena are different and may require different analyses, different prevention strategies and different remedies. American feminists are also invested in not being seen as “racists,” and therefore, easily become outraged, scornful, extremely nervous when anyone raises the ethnicity, religion, or immigrant status of the batterer or the killer.
Especially when he might be Muslim or a man of color. Yes, even if the crime is a Muslim-on-Muslim crime.
This is similar to those Americans (politicians, intellectuals, media), who absolutely refuse to “profile” Arab-speaking men from the Middle East at airports or in terms of immigration policies and who are more concerned with the civil rights of enemy combatants, (some of whom, they believe may be innocent), than with America’s right to defend herself from jihad.
Even though the Buffalo honor killing might strongly resemble western-style domestic violence/femicide, the gruesome and signature nature of the murder method strongly links it to Islam. Daniel Pipes, on his blog, points out the following:
A Middle East Quarterly article, Beheading in the Name of Islam by Timothy R. Furnish in the spring 2005 issue, is enlightening. Furnish establishes that “ritual beheading has a long precedent in Islamic theology and history.”
He begins with the Koranic verse 47:3: “When you encounter the unbelievers on the battlefield, strike off their heads until you have crushed them completely; then bind the prisoners tightly” and notes how both premodern (Tabari, Zamakhshari) and modern (Yusuf Ali, Khatib, Mawdudi) commentators of the Koran interpret this verse literally. Furnish also notes a second Koranic verse, 8:12: “I will cast dread into the hearts of the unbelievers. Strike off their heads, then, and strike off all of their fingertips.”
A quick survey of Muslim history, starting with Muhammad and continuing through the Almoravid Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and various mahdist movements, shows that this precept was carried out in practice. In modern times, Furnish notes that decapitation is standard practice in the Saudi kingdom.
He concludes with two points:
First, the practice has both Qur’anic and historical sanction. It is not the product of a fabricated tradition.
Second, in contradiction to the assertions of apologists, both Muslim and non-Muslim, these beheadings are not simply a brutal method of drawing attention to the Islamist political agenda and weakening opponents’ will to fight. [Al-Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi and other Islamists who practice decapitation believe that God has ordained them to obliterate their enemies in this manner. Islam is, for this determined minority of Muslims, anything but a “religion of peace.” It is, rather, a religion of the sword with the blade forever at the throat of the unbeliever.”
I wonder if the prosecution can, for the first time ever, consider arguing a “cultural” offense/defense-like argument. Muzammil (which means “covered, hidden,” in Arabic, or so I’ve been told) Hassan, has been charged with second degree murder. In New York State, only the killers of police officers or those who torture their victims before they die are eligible for execution.
Surely, beheading is “torture.” Surely, it is premeditated murder. Surely, it takes a while to saw off a woman’s head. Surely, she is conscious for some time. Surely, he must be tried and, if convicted, sentenced to death. Yes, under American laws. But I do not want the defense to be allowed to claim that, according to Muzammil’s culture, Aasiya’s departure normatively unhinged him and led to the beheading. Rather, Aasiya’s departure unleashed in him a cultural-religious imperative to control the situation by killing his wife in a barbaric fashion.
Surely, Muzammil beheaded poor, tragic Aasiya, not only because he was a western-style domestically violent man, but also because he believed, psychologically, culturally, religiously, that beheading is an accepted, even an approved way of executing a disobedient wife.
I believe the phrase we infidels seek is:
“He went full Muslim on her.”
Any Muslim readers disapprove? Then QUIT BEING APOLOGISTS. QUIT SPLITTING HAIRS!
And what would you like to be done? Whats this “cultural” defense-like argument, would you like to see sharia courts in NY? capable of understanding Islam and its methods?
Let him be tried as a westener in western courts. All this islam material is to establish intent, premeditation thats all
If you bring the `cultural understanding of religion’ into it, especially a religion with so many grants and donations to give, and money to be had, what value is this life compared to a new library or studies endowment? The same as the Daniel Pipes character, Hassan will be free in a few years to continue his work spreading the word of his prophet.
Take religion out of it and paint him as a sicko who cut off his wifes head (while still alive?!) then you can get somewhere.
Most American and European feminists consider violence a greater crime than murder???!!!
Well, as I always say, anti-Zionism takes precedence over all other issues.
I’m not sure that that would be so bad, when you consider that if one accepts that argument one also has to concede that it is a powerful argument against allowing mohammedans to immigrate. If that is a normal response to agravated stress, then who needs or wants such people around.
===========
In general however, I’m not sure how much value there is in agonizing over whether or not this murder fit’s 100% neatly into the category of honor killing.
If one must reach a conclusion about this sort of thing, I expect that it’s reasonable to assume that there is a whole super-category of ritualized or perhaps conventionalized civilian murder, into which honor killing fits as a sub-category. There are probably a few other varieties covering revenge in business affairs, terminal punishment in marriage, etc, etc …
I would be willing to offer a small wager that a little bit of investigation would reveal that several types of interpersonal strife are regarded as resolvable by killing, and that the method of killing in those cases is loosely subject to convention, with some regional variations.
It will be difficult to collect the data anywhere outside of the western countries where police keep somewhat reliable statistics about such things.
In any case, there can however be no doubt whatsoever that mohammedans have a particular emotional excitement about decapitation, amputation and mutilation — but decapitation in particular.
The simple facts that even our 5th column press must admit are that decapitation is rare among everybody else, and common among mohammedans.
The association with mohammedanism is pie-in-the-face obvious.
WE are dealing in a time of twins now more common than ever – and as such multiple births which Western technological enterprise enables. Interestingly, we have an unprecedented “success” story that of an Arab woman in America conceiving and birthing octuplets. The price to be paid by all of us – the American taxpayers!
Reminds of the Biblical story of Sarah, Abraham and her handmaid Hagar. Sarah unable to bear children recommended to her beloved husband, Abraham, he have a child with Hagar. Hagar indeed had a son, Ishmael. Sarah subsequently conceived Isaac. However, Hagar militancy and major disruptions of the household – seeking to displace Sarah seeing herself entitled to being the wife of Abraham. The threat to Sarah and her son Isaac was inestimable.
Sarah saw she had to send Hagar away to preserve herself, to save the life of her own son. Abraham, on the other hand, did not want to send Hagar and Ishmael away saying Ishmael too was his son and felt pity for Hagar. Sarah prevailed.
The question remains however is there a lesson in all this in our day?
How many nations represented by those artificially induced children of Ms. Suliman? And at what price?
Nadya, the mother giving no forethought to the consequences for the children – not satisfied with the 3 sets of children she already brought into the world thanks to the most sophisticated reproductive technologies in this our day – unprepared to care for them financially and otherwise -has America paying the full price now and one can only wonder the implications for the future?
I agree that he should be tried as a westerner; that is, tried under our western law, with a western penalty if/when he’s found guilty (and let’s not be afraid of “offending” muslims by carrying out that penalty). But let us not forget, and — more importantly — let us make certain that our courts,and especially our lawmakers understand that his actions were carried out according to Islamic law/culture, and that this law/culture is incompatible with American law/culture; that its acceptence/tolerance in any form, however slight, will spell the death of America.
Yes, many forms of femicide are carried out in the US; but, these actions are perpitrated by(mostly) men with no unifying system of beliefs (unless “death to women” qualifies). I support the death of Islam in the US — they can convert or they can leave, and that goes for American-born/converted muslims as well as the “imports” — because their entire belief system is in direct opposition to American ways of life, however varied, insufferable and/or at odds with each other many of those ways may be.
More from the Buffalo News on this case: http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/story/585874.html?imw=Y
“Aasiya Z. Hassan was stabbed several times before being beheaded Feb. 12, and authorities still aren’t sure whether she was alive when she was decapitated.”
a href=”http://www.wkbw.com/news/local/39825477.html?video=YHI&t=a”>And to think that this has anything to do with Islam is just shameful
OK That didn’t work, so here is a link to WKBW-TV (Buffalo) video. Draw your own conclusions.
http://www.wkbw.com/news/local/39825477.html?video=YHI&t=a
When we accept that “Muzammil Hassan’s ‘alleged’ beheading of his wife, Aasiya Z. Hassan, does not fit the profile of a classical honor killing–and, of course, that Islam has nothing to do with it”, I think we are allowing Islamists to define a situation we know little about.
All we know is that Aasiya’s beheaded body was found in the offices of Bridges TV after her husband reported her death to the police at 6:20 pm. We do not know if her husband committed the act alone.
To me, it seems highly unlikely that one man, even a big, strong one, could behead a vibrant, young woman, with adrenaline flowing, in a public place without anyone hearing the commotion and coming to her aid. This act apparently took place on a weekday afternoon in a business establishment and her body was discovered in the hallway, a common area. Where were the workers? Was she actually killed there or somewhere else and brought there? Could Hassan manage all that on his own? In the middle of the day?
Also, we don’t know if she was killed first and beheaded later. Only an autopsy can confirm that.
Then there’s Hassan’s report to the police. I would imagine that beheading someone is a very messy undertaking. Did Hassan do the deed and then clean himself up and change his clothes before going the police station? Did he have the time to do that?
There are many logistical questions left unanswered that suggest accomplices were involved and until we get more evidence, including an autopsy, I don’t think we should relinquish naming this atrocious murder an honor killing so easily. Rushing to call it an ordinary domestic violence death, does not honor Aasiya’s life.
Everyone keeps saying that this killing, and other “honor” killings, are part of Islamic culture. In fact, in reality they’re part of the culture of some Middle Eastern countries, not of Islam. Islam is used by the people who commit these murders as an excuse, but in the Muslim world the religion is the excuse for everything that anyone does, that’s objectionable to anyone else.
Think about it. In the above article, Chesler cites a passage from the Koran that starts out talking about meeting enemies on the battlefield. She then relates this to the guy’s actions when he killed the wife who was divorcing him. But was she an enemy on a battlefield? I don’t think so. She was instead the guy’s wife. Now the Koran does at one point encourage wife-beating, but it never says anything about killing wives or daughters, at least not that I’m aware of.
Think again of what these killings are called. “Honor” killings. Not “Religious” killings, but “Honor” killings. What’s going on, frankly, is that if your 15 year old daughter is flirting with non-Muslim boys at a local McDonalds, it *shames* a man in front of his friends. If a powerful TV executive has three wives leave him in turn, because he beats them, it’s *embarrassing*, *humiliating* to him. A person in such a culture has a reputation, and it can be drastically influenced by the behavior of family members, especially the women. If they do things which the community doesn’t approve of, it reflects badly on the men who are supposed to be responsible for the women of the family. Those men need to act swiftly, to restore the family honor. There’s no religious aspect to this, whatsoever, beyond perhaps the sorts of behavior that are prohibited. It’s more about what those in the Hispanic community refer to as *machismo* and much less about religion. The problem is that here in the states, religion has such a bad reputation that if any mention of religious practices is made, around an incident like this, everyone assumes it’s the sole, or at least the major, component to what happened.
Trust me, when he did this the guy was saying to himself “A man can only take so much…What did she expect me to do?”
I heard that the instrument used was not found on the scene.
Would this indicate help in the execution?
This seems to me to be an act of domestic violence done according to a Muslim pattern of killing. The misogyny that so infects Islam is very present.
It is less clear to me that it is a classic (dis)honour killing.
There should be only one common law for all the people of the world. There should not be any religious feelings or religious laws. All the religious laws except moral and spiritual should be banned. Rules,laws and acts are nothing. We have made it by applying our common mind and common sense. Sharia Law is also one of them framed by the earlier people for their own interest. In the instant case, in my opinion, if a husband try to rape her wife forcible, create violence, it will be better for them to be separated. If a wife/husband feel dissatisfied, and involved themselves in cruel activities,separation should be the latest solution for the sake of peace. Ladies/women are equal to men. Hence, they should not be neglected. It does not mean that a women knowingly black mail his husband. We should proceed on the basis of truth.
Advocate/Lawyer
President cum Managing Trustee
Lord Jesus & Mother Mary Foundation
Bhubaneswar(Orissa)India
91- 9777816178