These are the faces of Islamic Oppression

Odd you would cite a story that has this in it, to prove a point that nobody knows why. The family seems to be saying clearly what happened:

"Gail Gartrell, the sisters' great-aunt, said Yaser Said had physically abused the two girls for years. The girls' mother had recently fled because Yaser Said had threatened to kill the teens when he learned they had boyfriends, Gartrell told a local newspaper.

"She ran with them because she knew he would carry out the threat," Gartrell said of her niece, Patricia Said. "This was an honor killing."​

 

So now we don't need police investigations at all. Let's just hear what family have to say at that's it.
Brother of those two brutally murdered girls said it has nothing to do with Islam so why don't trust him? He isn't family?

 

but how many kill their daughters in the name of their religion.

 

I would agree all the facts are not in yet. Here is what we know.

1. Father apparently killed his two daughters.
2. Mom's aunt says it was an honor killing.
3. Victims brother says his father was not religiously motivated.
4. Son and Mother are in hiding from father.

I don't need a police report to start to form an opinion. I have not made any conclusions. However, I at this point, based on the facts, I think it more likely than not that this was an killing done because his daughters were dating. It is yet to be seen if he felt it justified by his culture or his religion or both or neither. Regardless, I will condemn this type of killing, as the work of a sick man, culture, or religion, as the facts warrant.

I find it amusing that some people reflexively take the position defending this action. The act should uniformly be condemned - regardless of the man's motivation.

 

if its an honour killing then by default it is religious as honor killings are allowed (and even encouraged) under islamic law = sharia

there has beejn several cases of this in the uk lately.
My opinion is that they are living in the dark ages if they think its acceptable to
carry out things like this.

 

So you agree with me that all facts are not in yet which means that thread title is false.

I would like you to quote those "some people" where they defended this action.

Condemning this crime has nothing to do with this thread. Intention of this thread wasn't to condemn this horrible crime at all.

 

I think this is a fair assessment. I do not see "religion," "culture," or anything else, yet, and even then, do not know that "religion" is apart from culture, anymore than the other thread, discussing a father killing a daughter for dating outside the "caste." In my experience, it isn't always easy to separate one social causal factor, say, religion, or race, or income strata, whatever, from another, and it isn't always easy, therefore, to render a tight causal analysis based on a "single causal chain" theory.

Rich folks living in the city might tend to belong to religion A and racial cluster D; and they might forbid dating poor folks living in the country belonging to religion B and racial cluster F, to the point of killing over it. What is the cause of the killing?

Just a damn tragedy.

 

I agree. This appears to be another honor killing. It happens in muslim countries all the time. It has been an increasing problem in the UK. It's happened here in the US before as well.

This one is not unlike what happened in Dallas.

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article2290050.ece

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/02/27/wturk27.xml

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=405941&in_page_id=1770

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1813149,00.html

It may very well be, that this sort of "backwards honor" is so repulsive to non-muslim westerners, that some want to believe this couldn't be possible, or is exaggerated and thus deserves more than a bit of skepticism.

 

Yes, this woman isn't being stoned because of Islam. It's because of... umm... umm... umm... lizard people. It's always the damned lizard people. And the Rothschilds. And the CFR. And the NAU.

After all, it couldn't be that these men are merely following the rules of Islam. Could it?

Yes. Yes. It could be and it is.

These men are not "crazy." You can't discount every single one of these events as the result of mental instability.

These men are followers of an ideology which states that this behavior is good and proper.

This is the face of Islamic oppression.

 

And that picture is from Turkey, right?

 

Who cares where the picture is from? Do women in some geographic areas have fewer natural rights than women in other geographic areas?

Does it matter to you whether a woman is in Dar al Islam or Dar al Harb?

Do you believe that it is morally acceptable to murder women in Dar al Islam, but not in Dar al Harb?

 

But wouldn't that violate the rights of association?

Aren't you, in effect, suggesting that Muslims can't be allowed to live where they want to live and act how they want to act?

Sticky, isn't it?

Think of it as a religious ceremony. It's the Islamic version of the Bris.

 

The problem is that the muslims dont want to interact with us western scum, they want to live in their enclaves.

 

That's a pretty broad statement. I don't think that is true. Just look at Turkey for example.

 

in my experience of uk cities, every city that has a large indian/asian/muslim population those cities have an area which is mainly inhabited by those people.
for instance in my city coventry the area in question is foleshill wher 49% are from BME communities.

 

Turkey is your example? Got it.

Here are two of the faces of Islamic oppression in Turkey.




These two men were brutally murdered for the crime of converting to Christianity.

Eschewing the theories popular among their sycophanting apologists in the west, one of the perpetrators of this heinous crime stated plainly "We didn't do this for ourselves. We did it for our religion. May this be a lesson to the enemies of religion."