Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Muzzammil Hassan and Islamic Primordial Violence

Yesterday's entry on the beheading of Asiya Hassan in Orchard Park, New York, brought out the representative trolls of the anti-American left. The meme at the comments, following Melissa McEwan at Shakesville, is that Muzzammil Hassan is a "moderate" Muslim and his wife's murder was a routine case of patriarchical domestic violence against women (can there be such a thing?). This refusal to see the genuine and unique brutality in Islamic culture is found in the inherent anti-Americanism on the radical left.

The truth is that Muzzammil Hassan is no "moderate" Muslim after all. Robert Spencer,
at FrontPage Magazine, sets the record straight on this medieval killer (via Jihad Watch):
Last Thursday, a woman named Aasiya Z. Hassan, 37, was founded decapitated in Orchard Park, New York, a village near Buffalo. Her husband, Muzzammil Hassan, 44, was charged, rather oddly, with second-degree murder in the case. But the specter of someone who beheaded his wife being charged only with second-degree murder was the least of the oddities in this case: Aasiya Hassan’s body was found in the offices of the cable channel, Bridges TV. Aasiya Hassan was the inspiration for Bridges TV, and Muzzammil Hassan was its founder.

Muzzammil Hassan founded Bridges TV in 2004 to
combat the negative perceptions of Muslims that he thought were dominating the mainstream media. According to a Reuters story at the time, Aasiya “came up with the idea in December 2001 while listening to the radio on a road trip.” Muzzammil Hassan explained: “Some derogatory comments were being made about Muslims that offended her. She was seven months pregnant, and she thought she didn’t want her kids growing up in this environment.”

Bridges TV originally declared that its intention was to “fuse American culture with the values of Islam in a healthy, family-oriented way.” However, there were indications at the outset that it might not have been as moderate as many assumed. Bridges TV from the beginning
had ties to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case, and Islamicity.com, which retails rabid anti-Semitic literature. In 2006 Arab News reported that Hassan was trying to raise money for the network from Saudi investors.

And now comes the clearest, most harrowing indication of all that Bridges TV’s founder was not the moderate he appeared to be, but was rather a man who had imbibed deeply the traditional Islamic understanding that women are possessions of men, to be punished severely when they get out of line. Of course, this singular lesson of the beheading of Aasiya Hassan, who apparently had raised Muzzammil’s ire by filing for divorce, is the one that the mainstream media and the American Muslim community is doing its best to obscure. Immediately after the killing, Khalid J. Qazi of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) chapter of Western New York, declared: “There is no place for domestic violence in our religion — none. Islam would 100 percent condemn it.”

Unfortunately, all too few Muslim men seem to share Qazi’s view. The Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences has determined that over ninety percent of Pakistani wives have been struck, beaten, or abused sexually — for offenses on the order of cooking an unsatisfactory meal. Others were punished for failing to give birth to a male child. Dominating their women by violence is a prerogative Muslim men cling to tenaciously. In Spring 2005, when the East African nation of Chad tried to institute a new family law that would outlaw wife beating, Muslim clerics led resistance to the measure as un-Islamic.
Spencer's essay continues with an explanation of the intrinsic brutality among Muslim men, indicating that primordial violence against women is a central component to "Islamic tradition."

See also, "
Beheading in New York Appears to Be Honor Killing, Experts Say."

14 comments:

shoprat said...

This is a religion whose leadership argues over how big of a stick the Koran allows a man to hit his wife with.

Norm said...

I am not surprised by all the left wing people who are so quick to argue that this murder was not a honor killing. This is the same left wing who are so quick to find our American soldiers guilty of war crimes before any trial. What a bunch of jackasses...no pun intended.

cracker said...

repsac3;

Great link, hot, sexy, christian, eros....(check out, London Tanners or Bethany's Woodshed in their links)

but relevance????

Donald Douglas said...

Cracker: Repsac3's comment was deleted as spam.

cracker said...

Well then delete mine too....

Or everyone will think I've flat out lost it ; )

Average American said...

Hey cracker, are you talking to yourself? HAHA

Religion or not, beheading anyone is sick and perverted. Do they get to kill the sick bastard twice because this must have been a "hate crime?" He has a real unique way to demonstrate that Islam is the religion of peace, that's for sure.

repsac3 said...

Spam?

The relevance of the link Donald deleted was to shoprat's comment, cracker.

That site is no joke. That little group of Bible literalists really believe that corporally disciplining one's wife occasionally to keep her in line is the true Christian way of marriage. And just like shoprat's Muslims, these folks will tell you how many strikes are appropriate for which infractions.

Shoprat might also wish to research where many believe the phrase "rule of thumb" comes from... If true--& I don't claim to know either way, but there are many references no matter which side one falls in the argument--it certainly wasn't the result of Muslim teachings, but Christian ones.

I'll repost the link in less "discriminatory" enviorons, just in case anyone's curious enough to want to see for oneself what it is Cracker & I are discussing.

Tom the Redhunter said...

I love how Melissa McEwan at Shakesville writes:

"Particularly in comments threads on posts about this story, there are a lot of jokes about how Hassan sure isn't improving Muslims' reputation by beheading his wife, all predicated, of course, on that most basic foundation of prejudice: The insistence that one member of a group represent the entire group."

Ah yes, we don't ever read about Muslims beheading anyone, do we? Nothing at all about violence towards women, either.

As for repsac3, we had to deal with his type during the Cold War.

He's of the sort who could never let criticism of the Soviet Union go by without an equal criticism of the United States.

So today he cannot stand to see Islam criticized unless it is matched by a criticism of Christianity. As if there was a Christian equivalent to al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Khomeinists, Islamic Jihad....

It takes a special sort of moral idiot to think that way.

Donald Douglas said...

"As for repsac3, we had to deal with his type during the Cold War.

He's of the sort who could never let criticism of the Soviet Union go by without an equal criticism of the United States."

That's right ... Repsac3 hates the United States, just like Soviet sympathizers during the Cold War. Now he sympathizes with Islam.

cracker said...

respac;

I appreciate it....

but comparing an open agreement between consenting adults that starts with a lifestyle submission but stops at spanking in the woodshed.....is well

ONE HELL OF A STRETCH......

to an agreement to a be-heading, There is NO WAY...... get this in your head......that SHE allowed HIM to be-head her......it didnt happen that way, guy.

If in accordance with a personal covenant between two adults OR ones covenant to their own faith.....she would have left a note exonerating her husband.

Her be-heading was rooted in the empowerment his faith allowed him.

It was an honor killing, it was a message to Muslim women. It is domestic violence, it is also terrorism.

(by the way, put your hands around your neck, feel the muscles, sinew ....thick eh....it takes time, tools and definitly conviction to cut through all that....my man)

cheers

repsac3 said...

Tom & Donald's comments are not even worthy of reply.

But Cracker... You're still missing it (which is surprising, as I generally find your comments pretty incisive)... The comparison I made was to Shoprat's comment, which like mine, wasn't about anyone's beheading, but about the corporal punishment of errant wives by religious husbands.

(But since you so enjoyed the site, you ought to dig deeper before stating too much about the consent angle... They speak more about it further in, I'm told... The folks pushing these ideas practically come out & say "We have to say that, for legal purposes... ...but we also believe that all good Christian women will consent, if they value their immortal hides."

Sweeping generalizations & tossing rocks at them glass houses can be a bitch, less you're sure no one you may know lives in one.

There are some really bad (& some really good & devout) people in every religion. No religion or culture is all evil. (To put it another way, since I find myself back here, explaining something that was quite obvious to folks who read it elsewhere, Donald's "intrinsic brutality" theory is no better than Jimmy the Greek's old theory of why blacks made such good football players.)

Nothing I've seen yet has proven that this guy is anything more than a really vicious killer who's also (in word, anyway) Muslim. There's alot of spouse on spouse violence & murder, & I can even point out several non-Muslim beheadings that've taken place in just the last month or so here in the US.

As I said at Donald's previous offering about this, maybe it will turn out to be the honor killing so many on the right are already pushing it as (in furtherance of some "all muzzies are evil & deserve it" meme, or something), but the fact of it being a brutal murder of a wife by a Muslim man just isn't enough to sell that angle to anyone who isn't predisposed to believe it in the first place.

Mark said...

Murderous monkey ends up on top of beheaded woman

Check the screenshots of Google News news counts!

AFiaz said...

A man isn't allowed to even hit his wife with a toothbrush, so please, before you speak, get your facts straight. Oppression in Islam doesnt against, people (extremists) twist the words of the Holy Book to justify their doings.

Nowhere in Islam does it say to take justice into your own hands. Clearly this man is ill minded and deserves to be punished. He misinterpreted the Quran. He, in my eyes, is an infidel. It clearly states in the Quran that unjust killing of one man (or woman) means the killing of the whole mankind. Yes, he very much deserves to be punished. But this is NOT part of Islam. Killing and beheading a woman for filing a divorce or "order of protection" is NOT part of our religion.

How the media attacks Muslims for there wrongdoings is atrocious. Yes the man killed his wife, but why linger on the fact that he is muslim? How many other people of different religions abuse thier wives and children? Isn't that just as bad? Yes their are extremists in Islam, and they surely will be punished. But this negative attitude that builds prejudice and racism towards Muslims is wrong. Land of the brave, Home of the free??? There is no bravery in what is happening.

Thousands of innocent people were killed in Gaza, did America do anything? NO. So please, next time (hopefully there never will be) focus on the story and not the religion.

Naseem said...

I am a Muslim women & in answer to the comments in the above article about Islam, Our beloved prophet Mohammad (May peace be upon him) & our holy book Quran. I want to say that Islam is the religion that bring humanity out from preIslamic barbaric society of killing daughters upon birth by burying them alive. Our Quran & Prophet conveyed/taught people Allah’s message about the honor and pride for a women. It identified the role of women in the society & how she should be cared & treated. Our Prophet conveyed the message of Islam as peace & only peace for the whole society including muslims non muslims, neighbors, and even the prisoners of war. There is no place in Quran in which this kind of act is justified and no such example in the life of Prophet. Please read Quran & Islamic history before making such comments. If you are not sure where to look in Quran about the commandments for women let me know & I will walk you through it but please do not publish something about someone’s religion which do not make any sense just by looking at some individual’s crazy actions.

Here are some quotations from Chapter AL Nisa ( The Women). This gives you some idea on how Quran commands about Women, marital relations & to fight for protecting weak from cruelty.

Surah 4 - Al-Nisa’ THE WOMEN

004.019 O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower ye have given them,-except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good.

004.075 And why should ye not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is: “Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!”

004.076 Those who believe fight in the cause of God, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble in deed is the cunning of Satan.

004.079 Whatever good, (O man!) happens to thee, is from God; but whatever evil happens to thee, is from thy (own) soul. and We have sent thee as a Messenger to (instruct) mankind. And enough is God for a witness.

004.084 Then fight in God’s cause - Thou art held responsible only for thyself - and rouse the believers. It may be that God will restrain the fury of the Unbelievers; for God is the strongest in might and in punishment.

004.085 Whoever recommends and helps a good cause becomes a partner therein: And whoever recommends and helps an evil cause, shares in its burden: And God hath power over all things.

004.086 When a (courteous) greeting is offered you, meet it with a greeting still more courteous, or (at least) of equal courtesy. God takes careful account of all things

004.090 Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If God had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: Therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then God Hath opened no way for you (to war against them).

004.093 If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (Forever): And the wrath and the curse of God are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him.

004.128 If a wife fears cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part, there is no blame on them if they arrange an amicable settlement between themselves; and such settlement is best; even though men’s souls are swayed by greed. But if ye do good and practise self-restraint, God is well-acquainted with all that ye do.

004.130 But if they disagree (and must part), God will provide abundance for all from His all-reaching bounty: for God is He that careth for all and is Wise.
.