Islam and Hijab-Murder in Canada

#97 Posted by laddu,

Laddu Mian, there's no such thing as a 'Hindu'.

It is all mythological nonsense of 'take your pick' out of monkeys and rats and elephant nosed eunuchs and six-armed goddesses with tongues sticking out.

Re: # 95

"laddu, it IS a great system. Please open your eyes..."

Yes Yes.....even Nazism IS a great system. Stalinism was even greatest. Perhaps the greatest system was Spinoza's.

If your eyes are 'open' then perhaps you need to recite the kalima..otherwise if you are a hindu then can you negate the kalima on this board??

Eklavya,

Neembu ji, is a full-time and tireless jihadi (of whatever she considers jihad is.:)) ... Yet you judge them all totally stupid! ... You cannot even get shoresahib to go along with you on your 'let's make fun of all religion' ... it IS a great system.

LoL ... Water carriers and flag-bearers ... Quartermasters ... :)

But you missed CliftonJi. Guess she stands right up somewhere near the Vanguard protecting the flanks!

But the 'super intelligent ones' wouldn't have a clue ... would they?

laddu bhai, hope that is just admiration, not dhimmified admiration.

laddu, it IS a great system. Please open your eyes. It is different from what you and I have. Or prefer for ourselves. And, since we are so different, most of the times it does not look pretty to us. But that is strictly our problem.

Re: # 77

Sati was actually a reference to Sati , Shiva-s consort, who immolated herself out of protest against her father's . It is a puranic allegoric story about other heavenly deities.
Incidently, this was almost like a suicidal protest.
This suicidal protest was followed when the moghuls came and follwed their prophet in raping and making sex slaves the hindu idolator women folk. To save themselves from that ignominy upon defeat of their men folk women preferred to follow the Sati than allow their bodies to be sexually abused and their spirits enslaved by the momeen followers.
The act was specifically given religious connotation because it was a result of Jehadic warfare against hindus and it infuriated those momeens who fought in anticipation of beautiful hindu female booties!!!

On 11th of December, in Mississauga Canada, Aqsa, a 16 year old Canadian girl was choked to death by her Pakistani father, Muhammad Parvez, for not wearing hijab. “She wanted to live her life the way she wanted to, not the way her parents wanted her to,” her classmates told the reporters. “She just wanted to be herself, honestly she just wanted to show her beauty, and not be pushed around by her parents telling her what she has to be like, what she has to do. Nobody would want to do that.”

Yes, nobody would want to do that, but sadly many girls born in Islamic families are forced to do that.

One day after the death of Aqsa, I received an email from an 18 year old girl from UK. She said that she has been reading about Islam and had decided not to be a Muslim. However, her Muslim parents force her to wear hijab and her sister told her that if their mother learns about her views, “she would either kill you or she’ll kill herself”.

I sent her the story of Aqsa and what her father did to her. She wrote back and said, “What an animal! Anyways, I don’t think my mom cares about my beliefs, as long as I don’t have a boy friend, [and don’t] take off my hijaab.”

The truth is that Aqsa’s father was not an animal either. He was just a devout Muslim, who had worked hard and had built a nice home for his family in an upscale neighborhood. He was an ideal immigrant, a real “success story.” However, he had no choice but to kill his daughter. He did what he had to do. As one friend wrote, “In a way there are two victims in this case. This man like any other father must have loved, nurtured and cared for his daughter for years. It is so unfortunate that he finds himself turned into a monster that ate his own progeny.” Then this friend asked “What kind of ideology was it that turned a simple hard working family man into a revolting image of himself?”

What the westerners do not understand is that Muslims have different values, which are diametrically in contrast with western values. Western societies are guilt based. In guilt based societies individuals base their conduct on “right” and “wrong”. They try to do the right thing and if they do something wrong, they feel guilty. Muslim societies are shame based. In shame based societies individuals base their conduct on the opinion of others about them. What really counts is to look good. In shame cultures, if you do something wrong, as long as no one sees it and knows about it, you are okay. You can still keep your head high and act as an honorable member of the society. It is the image that you project of yourself that matters. You must do everything to protect that image. It is all about keeping the appearances.

In guilt societies, how you dress or don’t dress is your business. You can practice nudity and even promiscuity and have no shame. As long as you don’t violate someone else’s rights you can do whatever you like. Such a thing is inconceivable for Muslims who come from shame societies where everybody's life is the business of everybody else. This makes the western and Islamic cultures essentially incompatible. If this problem is not resolved soon, it will result is a major clash and dire consequences.

In a subsequent email my young British friend wrote, “My mom has noticed a change in me, ..and she said today, ‘I hope you haven’t done anything because so an so aunt will laugh.' Jesus! Who cares about so and so aunt who doesn’t even care about us?”

This is the crux of the problem. In Islamic societies people live in function of the opinion of others about them. That is the only thing that really matters to them. Muhammad Parvez was devastated by the fact that her 16 year old daughter wanted to dress like her classmates and show off her beauty. How could he look into the eyes of his Muslim friends with such a daughter? Muslims call western women “sluts” for not covering themselves. For Mr. Parvez his daughter’s western clothing was a major source of shame and dishonor. He had no choice but to kill her. There is hardly anything for which we humans are willing to die for, or kill, like our honor. This is far truer in shame based societies, where guilt plays virtually no role and everything revolves around shame and honor.

Millions of girls living in Muslim families in the west are abused, beaten and face death by their own loved ones because of honor. Don’t assume that these girls are the only victims. Their families are also victims. They are left with no choice, but to kill the apple of their own eyes. Everyone in these tragedies is a victim. It’s the government that is guilty!

The government is guilty for letting down its Muslim citizens and particularly its most vulnerable members, the Muslim girls. There was no need for Aqsa to die. If hijab was baned she would be alive today. If hijab is banned, no Muslim can look down at other Muslims for not observing it and no one will have to feel shame. Muslims hardy wear hijab or observe any Islamic custom when they live in places where there are few Muslims. They start behaving Islamicly when they congregate together and build their shame based communities.

The 20th century Pahlavi ruler, Reza Shah, knew how to handle this problem. He banned the chador (Iranian style of veil) in 1936. He ordered the police to arrest woman wearing chador and forcibly remove it. Although this policy outraged the mullahs, the average Iranians were relieved. The ban allowed them to be free without having to deal with the burden of shame. The historian Mir-Hosseini writes, “this move was welcomed by Westernized and upperclass men and women, who saw it in liberal terms as a first step in granting women their rights." She continues, 'between 1941 and 1979 wearing hejab [hijab] was no longer an offence, but it was a real hindrance to climbing the social ladder, a badge of backwardness and a marker of class. A headscarf, let alone the chador, prejudiced the chances of advancement in work and society not only of working women but also of men, who were increasingly expected to appear with their wives at social functions. Fashionable hotels and restaurants refused to admit women with chador, schools and universities actively discouraged the chador, although the headscarf was tolerated. It was common to see girls from traditional families, who had to leave home with the chador, arriving at school without it and then putting it on again on the way home'." (cited in El-Guindi 1999 pp. 174-175)

Despite his flaws, Reza Shah is hailed as the father of modern Persia by many Iranians because he banned the hijab. He was a Muslim and was keenly aware of the Muslim mind. He knew that only with the fist of the law Muslims can be rescued from their backward customs. He broke down the power and prestige of the clergy, discarded the Islamic law, closed down Islamic madrassahs, forbade religious processions, and replaced the Islamic calendar with the old Persian-Zoroastrian solar calendar. He prohibited the Islamic call to prayer and discouraged the pilgrimage to Mecca. He even forced the mullahs to shave, take off their robe and engage in honorable professions. The majority of Iranians welcomed his reforms. He was seen as a liberator. He set Iran free from the oppression of the culture of shame. It is this shame that inhibits Muslims to take the first step and stand out of the crowd. It is because of this shame that no reform can ever happen in Islamic societies unless it is imposed on them by force.

Western governments have a duty towards their Muslim citizens and particularly their women that traditionally have been the most disadvantaged members of Islamic societies. If hijab was banned in Canada Aqsa would be alive today and a hard working good father would not have had to choose between his daughter and his honor. The government failed both Aqsa and her father.

There are millions of Muslim families in western countries who share Parvezs' predicament. The girls in these families are under greater pressure and bigger danger than those living in Islamic countries. In Islamic countries everyone wears the same clothing. It is much easier for Muslim girls to conform and comply there than in the West where they are forced to be different. The government owes these girls protection.

Aqsa is dead. Her beauty will be devoured by a cold grave. That bud was nipped before blossoming. Will we let her death go in vain or will we ban hijab and set millions of Muslims free in her memory?

We must ban hijab, save innocent lives, end this abuse, and absolve the poor Muslim parents from having to make such difficult choices. Muslim parents are not animals. They are torn apart between the love of their children and their honor. Only the government can take that burden away. The only people who would not welcome this ban will be the mullahs who will see their power reduced. The average Muslims will be grateful and relieved, even though to keep the image of faithful believers, may publicly oppose the decision. .

Now that Muslims are living in the West in such a large numbers, politicians must make an extra effort to understand the Muslim mind. Only the hand of law can put an end to this culture of shame and help Muslims to integrate. If we let this division stand, a clash between Islam and the West will become inevitable. This means civil war.

Re: # 84

"Even so, claims of exclusivity (finality and perfection) on behalf of Prophet Muhammad and his message do set them apart from others.

LOL, be that as it may, yes, it is a common ailment of Hindu liberals - They are totally convinced Muslims cannot remain Muslims unless they are also born brain-dead."

Bhai jaan,

Khul ke baat karo.......this veiled dhimmified admiration of Islam and stereotyping 'Hindu liberal' looks spot on from Pak Studies......

Some ignorant fools act on their ignorance to sanction violation of their mores, such "justice" works in a community type setting, a gemeinschaft or a community defined by mechanical solidarity. Remnants of this survive in an urban, gesellschaft type society as well and so we see in the US and in many European countries stories of wives killing their husbands over preceived infidelity, boyfrieds killing girlfriends, mothers to be abort their offspring at whatever level of development to protect their "reputation and honor", or position in the marketplace (which has replaced honor compared to a rural community), and so on. Yet these acts of these ignorant fools do not get translated in moral generalizations about either their society, their religion or their race, unlike the exceptions about Muslims that get translated as such because of propaganda purposes to carry on a global agenda that is more barbraic than all the so-called "honor killings" all over the world put together....because it affects tens of millions, even billions more....

anil ji, agreed.

aslam writes "Tragic though it is, the death of aqsa should’t go in vain, Canadian social services and civil socirty groups should devise some plan of action so that similar tragedy should not happen again."

They would better spend their resources to check abuse against women and children as well as rape in Canadian society, rather than worry over a quite unusual and uncommon incident, that by the way has absolutely nothing to do with Islam but is used for propaganda purposes towards that end. Instead of crying fake(crocodile) tears over that one girl because her death soothes your bigotry against Islam, cry over the hundreds of thousands of young girls killed in Iraq through this barbaric US war as well as the sanctions that preceded it.....

Re: # 80

Eklavya:

On sati as religious sanction. If it is verbal, I know, in Today's India that person will be in Jail. It is a written sanction, that book will be banned in Today's India. Hinduism is a strange creature - loosely a common law of religion - if people believe accept it, if they don't reject it. There is no authority in Hindusim that comes from a person, priest or book. I for one believe that Ramayana is wrongly written. Sita's sacrifices were greater, and instead of eulogizing Ram, who accept for not having luxuries of a palace had everything with him.

Do think about it, chalta. You cannot even get shoresahib to go along with you on your 'let's make fun of all religion' high! At best your mirzai friends would join you but that's only because you don't know enough to say things offenseive to them.

Don't you think you should seriously consider stopping tilting at windmills? What's the point of all this intelligence if you don't?

:)

Someone said I reminded him of Sridhar Shukla. That would make me more a religious racket scientist than a rocket scientist. :)

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

I am an unbeliever. But I just don't think believers are less intelligent, or less logical than unbelievers. Believers - all, without any exception - do have a very different type of intelligence, totally differnet type of logic than yours. That much is true.

You socially, regularly, interact with proud believers. An honorable friend of yours, Neembu ji, is a full-time and tireless jihadi (of whatever she considers jihad is.:)) Yet you judge them all totally stupid!

Eki, it is because there are more muslims here that I say Mohammed. the common ailment of religious rocket scientists like yourself is that you think numbers equate validity of concept. having 10 kids doesn't mean that the message of islam is the right message of humanity. that just means that 10 more kids will be ingrained int he stupidity of that religious doctrine. same goes for hindus. Your logic is completely devoid of well.....logic. But PHD's in religiocity leave that concept at the door of faith.

CA, it does seem unfair to focus exclusively on Prophet Muhammad and his message. It is mighty stupid as well to be running behind a god riding a rat.

Even so, claims of exclusivity (finality and perfection) on behalf of Prophet Muhammad and his message do set them apart from others.

LOL, be that as it may, yes, it is a common ailment of Hindu liberals - They are totally convinced Muslims cannot remain Muslims unless they are also born brain-dead.

And all the while, the numbers of Muslims keeps increasing worldwide (not just from different birth-rates).

There are normal people, who listen to god, allah, and hanuman; and then there are super intelligent Hindu liberals. :)

Ek, the amount of squirming in defining simplicity will leave simplicity as the most uncommon virtue.

If gods and prophets have a blog, I can bet you dollar to donuts, you would have termed them newswallahs.

Simple people can see through stupidity. Why do you think stupidity prescribes that the last prophet came 1500 yrs ago? God sends a hundred thousands prophets in the first 10K years of civilized human existence and then all of a sudden stops because any prophet in this day and age of wider humanly knowledge would smack them into the bunghole from where they came.

Mohammed would be no better than the guy in the subway offering aphorisms on life. People are smarter now than before and god and prophets have outlived their usefulness. To ridicule religious sentiment is the duty of humans greatest leaps have been made in human knowledge when god was slapped around intellectually. Simple people understand that. Phds and rocket scientists try too hard to understand simple people.