Abdel-Qader Ali killed his daughter after he learned that she had fallen in love with a British solider, even though she was still a virgin and did little more than admit infatuation. Her brothers helped him kill her. According to father, police congratulated and released him. His only regret? That he did not kill Rand Abdel-Qader, 17, as a baby.
Abdel-Qader Ali gives an insight into the society that we are fighting to preserve in Iraq. When asked about any regrets, he said: “If I had realised then what she would become, I would have killed her the instant her mother delivered her.”
A government employee, Abedel-Qader, 46, gave the shocking interview sitting in his garden as a free man.
His daughter was studying English at Basra University when she met a British soldier while she worked as a volunteer for displaced families.
When her father learned that she had been seen in public with the soldier, known only as Paul, he choked her to death with the help of her brothers. Her mother had actually called her brothers Hassan, 23, and Haydar, 21, to restrain Abdel-Qader but they ended up helping him kill her instead.
When they dumped her body, her uncles spat on her grave and the father later said: “Death was the least she deserved, I don’t regret it. I had the support of all my friends who are fathers, like me, and know what she did was unacceptable to any Muslim that honours his religion.”
Abdel-Qader, a Shia, says that the police supported and “The officers were by my side during all the time I was there, congratulating me on what I had done.”
This is only the latest story of how we are preserving a system that continues to abuse women in this fashion, for a story from Afghanistan click here.
For the full story, click here.
Patty C,
I have no idea what I did to evoke your strong penchant for territoriality round these parts; nonetheless I’m sure someone with such a keen literary acumen such as yours would realize that your puzzling disdain places you in a minority.
I bring attention to your ‘literary acumen’ since I originally thought you were calling me “Thingum’ as a slang form of objectifying me in some obscure vernacular. But, thanks to Google, I eventually discovered you borrowed the name from a story written by a man who lived in the same town as I once did. Nice house.
Anyway, I’m sure Edgar Alan Poe himself would be quite disappointed in your failure to comprehend an argumentation/rhetorical metaphor normally targeted at those bereft of conscience.
http://jonathanturley.org/2008/05/11/father-kills-daughter-for-falling-in-love-with-british-soldier-police-congratulate-and-release-him/#comment-13106
Let’s review; shall we?
“That’s exactly what you don’t do to a dog, Thingum. The only thing a dog learns from that experience is that you are angry, but has no idea why. Congratulations.”
Actually, I was exaggerating a bit, part of that metaphor thing, since any form of the tactic of ‘rubbing the dog’s nose in it’ and expressing disapproval necessitates CATCHING THE DOG IN THE ACT so he associates the act with the disapproval.
Moving on.
“You should know never to drag or hit an animal-especially in the face,”
Actually, when a large dog is disobeying orders while threatening to harm an individual on your premises, that’s exactly what you do. However, if you’re referring to the swat on the snout in connection to the defecation in the living room, it’s the tone and volume of the voice in combination with the long winding threat to slap the snout that delivers the message. Mind you, I rarely ever hit an animal, and if and when I do, it’s never harder than a normal knee butt down to remind the dog that it’s impolite to jump up on you or others. Should you have a problem with that one, perhaps you should contact the AKC.
“and if I saw you do it, I’d probably slap you with an animal abuse complaint.”
About ten years ago, I had to stop one of our dogs from attacking one of my sister’s friends who, having never visited the house, walked in as a stranger. In frustrating the dog’s attempted attack on my sister’s friend, who the dog saw as an intruder (i.e. one who was not pre-approved by the family in front of the dog), the dog bit my wrist so hard that its eye-tooth nearly punctured my steel watch band.
Would ya sue me then?
“Read up. Choke collars are used for correction in training by some qualified trainers. Otherwise, a safe, comfortable dog collar should be worn.”
They wear both; with all the attendant tags.
But thanks again for attacking the metaphor, and me, in lieu of appreciating the point I was making.
You have a nice day.
Dunder:
“But seriously, I’m not sure how you could argue with me that if the U.S. moves out, Iran moves in and that that both presents a national security threat and engenders a very negative market reaction reflecting the instability of the region. Are you with me?”
*******************
Iran is a very real threat but the point is that the Iranians are not stupid and it serves no purpose to collude with the Russians to bring us down since we provide the market for most of the MidEast oil and gas. We do have military superiority and our bases there insure our commitment to keeping the oil flowing and militate against a power vacuum. I advocate a NATO-like coalition by the U.S., moderate Arabs and European powers to administer Iraq as a protectorate until the parties reach some resolution. Murtha’s plan to stand down from the cities and protect border integrity makes sense to me and a lot of military people. This trip-wire strategy is what I think McCain is inartfully advocating as the basis for our long term presence and it may make some sense when fully fleshed out. We have no business patrolling a war zone in a clash between civilian factions. Our guys are not cops despite Bush’s willingness to make them so.
Haha, you thought I was serious. He’s definitely not an authority for me, but notice that the article says that Porter “said HE WAS TOLD on a trip to Iraq that ended this week”; so you’re right, if the Iraqis “told him,” I wouldn’t put much stock in what they said. And if it’s his own assessment, he’s not adding much. I concede, the article is poorly written but reading ahead it seems that maybe Petraus or Crocker authored the grim prognostication. And the clarification right before the headline supports this: “A headline in Thursday’s Review-Journal attributed to Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., a suggestion that a premature withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq could result in the rise in the price of gasoline to $9 a gallon. In fact, Porter merely was relaying such a suggestion, which originated with officials with whom he spoke during his recent trip to Iraq.”
So you asked for some support and I found this dated article. And I think it made a splash then because it was an official prediction made to him with specific numbers ($9 a gallon!).
But seriously, I’m not sure how you could argue with me that if the U.S. moves out, Iran moves in and that that both presents a national security threat and engenders a very negative market reaction reflecting the instability of the region. Are you with me?
Dunce:
Well, at least you concede we’re there for multi-nationals and not you and me. While we may disagree on the predicted outcome, I suppose we can agree that the subject of your article, and the dire prediction, (Jon Porter R-NV) has less expertise than you or me since his credentials on the subject are that he is a former insurance executive who apparently hates veterans (he voted against expanded health benefits for them–ok, ad hominem, I concede) and is an arch-conservative. Here’s his profile:
“Porter’s assignments have included chairing a subcommittee looking into alleged falsified documents on the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump, which he opposes. He also serves on Education and Workforce; and Transportation and Infrastructure committees.
He also plays keyboards in an all-congressional rock and country band known as the Second Amendments.
The American Conservative Union gave Porter’s 2005 voting record 84 points out of 100. The liberal Americans for Democratic Action gave him a 5.”
If I was looking for an expert on Led Zepplin, I might cite Porter, but not petro-politics. You can judge an advocate by the sources he cites.
If by black and white you mean that I hate when people evade responding to points I make, correct. Usually someone who sees things in black and white is said to have difficulty dealing with complexity and indefinite answers. That’s not me.
As for your skepticism that the region would fry and oil prices would leap out of control if we left Iraq, it’s really not that difficult. Take a class in economics, basic military strategy, or even game theory. You’re saying crazy and irresponsible things. You’re obviously very smart but your hyper-skepticism has eroded your common sense.
And here’s the “proof” you wanted: http://www.lvrj.com/news/9466252.html
…”Ya see, when a dog craps on the living room rug, ya grab him by the choke collar and drag him back to the mess he made saying “What did you do?” Then you rub his nose in his own pile of shi+ and say “Did you do this?” Did you?!” And then ya smack him across the snout and say “Bad dog.”…
*****************
That’s exactly what you don’t do to a dog, Thingum. The only thing a dog learns from that experience is that you are angry, but has no idea why. Congratulations.
You should know never to drag or hit an animal-especially in the face, and if I saw you do it, I’d probably slap you with an animal abuse complaint.
Read up. Choke collars are used for correction in training by some qualified trainers. Otherwise, a safe, comfortable dog collar should be worn.
dunce:
Since you are a black and white kind of guy, let me specifically address the points you raised which I believe are worthy of reply:
“We’re still in Iraq to protect our own interests, not for some selfless freedom-for-all campaign.”
If you mean “our” in the sense of global multi-nationals that have some presence in the US,I agree that we are spending blood and treasure to protect their interests. If you mean the American people, you’ll need a lot more explaining to prove that. Freedom-for-all has always been a vaporous, slogan-based con job by Bush to justify his imperialistic designs formulated by Cheney, Wolfowitz et als in the Office of Strategic Plans, and just another example of his Unitary Executive claptrap. You are precisely right that the humanitarian excuses are just that, and never were the real motivation.
“Further conflagration in the region would affect the stability of the greater middle east–oil prices, embolden Iran etc.”
If you have some proof that our leaving that hell hole will somehow create instability in world oil prices I want to see it. The expressed reason for 9/11 was our presence there, and I see nothing to believe that these radicals are anything but blatant in their motivations. It may lead to open conflict if we leave, but that is the constants state of affairs there, and eventually a winner will emerge. Further, you seem to fear that oil will somehow be cutoff. If so, what will the Arabs do with it? Eat it? Their economies are just as dependent on dollars, or yen or Euros, or whatever, and the leadership has to financially appease their radicalized citizenry to maintain power. Unless we believe they are so motivated by hate as to be willing to wreck our economy and that of Europe and Asia by destroying theirs, and thus inviting a world war to occupy their lands, I must conclude your fear is misplaced. If they are bent on such self-destruction, so be it. They will have few options in such a struggle and a world united in its quest for critically necessary resources has never been denied same by any single confederacy of countries, much less religious fanatics of any stripe or armament.
“Global politics are not all that hard,” a professor of mine used to say, “once you get beyond all the false ideology and focus on the money.” Amen to that.
I never knew it would be so hard to make a simple point on this blog. You guys aren’t having a debate; JT’s the pied piper and you, his rats. You can be disaffected with this war and criticize the hell out of Bush and his cronies. I’m here (well, when I grace you with my presence) to curb the excesses and point out when you make misleading statements.
dunce: “I don’t get you guys. We’re still in Iraq to protect our own interests, not for some selfless freedom-for-all campaign.”
Oh, oh…. And let’s not forget all those people jumping from the Twin Towers on 9/11 screaming “Free Iraq!” Right?
Ya see, when a dog craps on the living room rug, ya grab him by the choke collar and drag him back to the mess he made saying “What did you do?” Then you rub his nose in his own pile of shi+ and say “Did you do this?” Did you?!” And then ya smack him across the snout and say “Bad dog.”
“What song is it you wanna hear?”
“Free Iraq!”
“Play it pretty for the suckups.”
dunce:
When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
-Will Rogers
Got your point but I am more of a Will Rogers man myself since I cannot make the assumption that our presence will make the situation any better, or any worse for that matter.
I don’t understand your skepticism over alternate fuels. At $4.00 a gallon they are feasible,and the oil is going to run out some day. Then what do we do?
And that ‘$’ should’ve been an ‘&’ instead. Chocolaty fingers.
Mespo, you’re not really addressing my post. Not once did I say that invading Iraq was the right move. What I did say was that leaving it in the disarray we created would be calamitous. I also never said I agreed with neocon dogma that democracy works universally, just that even according to them the platitude about liberating humanity is only tangential; the real reason they care to spread democracy is because it serves OUR interests, or so the thinking goes. Either way we’re in Iraq NOW because its in our own interest, not because we’re doing the women-abusing Iraqis a favor. That’s where I took issue with JT.
Also, I understand your frustration with the war and its ridiculous human and economic costs but you’re not very sensible with your alternate fuels solution. If the Iraq war wasn’t legitimate then, yeah, all that money was wasted and could have been used to fix everything that’s now wrong with our economy. I got that. But if there was a legit war that we had to fight in the volatile Mideast, I would not want to throw all my eggs into one basket by instead funneling all that money into energy R$D, letting the region fry. That would suck.
“What song is it you wanna hear?”
“FREE IRAQ!”
“Play it pretty for Atlanta….”
mespo, G.W. is from New Haven, CT, not Maine OR Texas
– just other fine examples of ‘urban myth’, like most things
associated with this presidency.
dunce:
Had we taken the trillion or so dollars we spent and put it into alternate fuels, oil would still be $19.00 a barrel like when Clinton was in office and 4500 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi’s would still be around. You’ve missed the point– the oil barons like Bush et als want oil at $150.00 a barrel and no alternative fuels which looks remarkably like what we have.
BY the way, why do you assume that every country desires or is capable of democracy? The Founding Fathers didn’t but our grand leader Bush thinks so–no doubt after years of thoughtful deliberation with the aid of booze and coke. Where did this idiot Bush come from? Oh right, he’s a compassionate conservative elite from Maine, or is that Texas, or is that really never-never land.
Defending the indefensible is an unending task, dunce. Good luck.
I don’t get you guys. We’re still in Iraq to protect our own interests, not for some selfless freedom-for-all campaign. Further conflagration in the region would affect the stability of the greater middle east–oil prices, embolden Iran etc. Even the neocons never advocated liberating countries for the sake of liberating them; it was thought that by magically transforming dictatorships into democratic regimes WE would benefit. So the criticism that we’re “preserving a system that continues to abuse women in this fashion” misses the mark; Bush’s liberating-the-people rationale was always a fallback. We could care less about the Iraqis; it’s the regional instability and the inevitable $1000 a barrel oil prices that scares the bejeezus out of us.
Mespo, I honestly believe that we WOULD see more Christian countries where police stand idly by or even participate if they believed they could get away with it.
Also, what about JT’s column around Easter, concerning that hideous display of cruelty and barbarism in the Phillippines; the crucifixion of the young 15-year-old boy? I couldn’t get THAT horrifying image out of my mind for days after reading that! I have a son around that age. Isn’t the Phillippines largely a Catholic country?
Susan:
Agreed. But I see few Christian countries where the police stand idly by or, worse, participate.
I couldn’t agree more, Mespo, but to be fair, I have read such despicable thoughts in favor of such barbarity, sadism and cruelty coming from so-called “christians” as well. Especially “christians” who are cruel and sadistic enough to believe that homosexuality should be a capital offense, and their sons or daughters who are “guilty” of such an offense be either flogged or stoned to death, as their biblical punishment demands. Religious hatred of this magnitude isn’t restricted to the Islamic faith only.
Makes me very proud to know we are spending billions and wasting lives to defend these fine people. Wonder if Bush, Cheney, et als will cite this fine Iraqi citizen as the reason for “why we fight”! Barbarism hiding behind (as?)religion seem to be the watchword of this crowd.