Saudi sisters' suspicious "suicide"

Amidst all the fuss about pipe bombs and the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre, the lamestream meeja seem to have pretty much ignored the strange case of Tala Farea and Rotana Farea, two sisters whose fully-clothed bodies were found on the bank of the Hudson River in New York on October 24th.

The girls, aged 16 and 22 respectively, had been bound together, face-to-face, with the handyman's secret weapon -- duct tape. The medical examiner's office is investigating the cause of death. The absence of any obvious signs of physical trauma cast doubt on the coppers' original theory that they jumped into the river from the George Washington Bridge in a suicide pact.

The Farea sisters moved to the USA from Saudi Arabia with their mother in 2015, settling in Fairfax VA, about 225 miles from where their bodies were found. Rotana was enrolled at George Mason University, but left in the spring. Police said the sisters left the family home and were placed in a shelter after an earlier disappearance, in December of 2017. They were reported missing again on August 24th.

New York police said their mother told detectives the day before the bodies were discovered, she received a call from an official at the Saudi Arabian Embassy, ordering the family to leave the USA because her daughters had applied for political asylum. The Saudi Consul General said embassy officials in Washington had contacted the family and "extended its support and aid in this trying time." It said the sisters were students "accompanying their brother in Washington."

The cops sent a detective to Virginia to learn more about the sisters. Chief of Detectives Dermot Shea said they were particularly interested in finding out what happened since they were reported missing and what led them to New York City. "We are looking at all clues in their past life," Shea said.

Walt suggests that the police consider the girls' ethnicity and religion, and the sad fate of other Muslim girls who have come to western countries with their parents, and then been killed for wanting to adopt western customs, like wearing western clothes and (horrors!) dating. Three cases, reported here on WWW, come to mind.

In 2009 there was the murder, in Ontario, Canada, of Aqsa Parvez, aged 16, whose father and brother killed her because she dared to change out of Islamic garments into western clothes when she went to school. See "Honour killings, family values and 'accommodation'", WWW 23/7/09.

There was an echo from Britain in 2012, when a jury found the Pakistani parents of 17-year-old Shafilea Ahmed guilty of her murder. According her sister, her mother and father suffocated the girl with a plastic bag for "being too western". See "Parents kill rebellious teen to preserve family honour", WWW 3/8/12.

That same year saw the horrific Shafia case, in which three sisters and their mother were locked in a car which was pushed into a canal near Kingston ON by the girls' father, his second wife and their brother, all of whom were convicted of murder and are (suprisingly) still guests of Her Majesty in Canadian prisons. See "GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY in Shafia honour killings", WWW 29/1/12.

There's also [That's enough Islamic honour killings. We're running out of space! Ed.] OK then, let's just leave it at my suggestion that the police have a word with the Farea sisters' brother. Perhaps he can explain how it's possible for two people to duct-tape themselves together, face-to-face, while allowing sufficient freedom of movement to jump in a river. Stay tuned...

Canadian Islamophiles plan National Hug-a-Muslim Day

The timing of hijab hoax girl's bathetic [There is such a word.* Ed.] little stunt last Friday seems to have been a little off, as it has cast something of a cloud over plans for a "National Day of Remembrance and Action on Islamophobia", to be held across Canuckistan on January 29th.

That's right, folks. Canadian Islamists (read: the National Council of Canadian Muslims), aided and abetted by well-meaning politicians and friends like (((Shari Schwartz-Maltz))) in government, the (((controlled media))) and the human rights industry, intended to cap off "Islamic Heritage Month" (read: hug-a-Muslim month) with a day of action in Ottawa and Toronto to "memorialize Islamophobia".

January 29th is the first anniversary of an attack on a Québec City mosque that left six dead and several others injured. This is what the NCCM wants "memorialized", while certain other events, like the October 2014 killings of two Canadian soldiers -- Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent -- by two "radicalized Muslims" or "homegrown jihadis", are forgotten.

In "Canadians don't need a 'National Day' scolding us for being Islamophobic", (National Post, 17/1/18), Barbara Kay writes, "We deplore the horrific Quebec City mosque murders. Nevertheless, an annual day of national atonement sends the wrong message." She points out that Alexandre Bissonnette, the alleged perpetrator, had no known ties to violence-promoting groups, nor was he ever charged with terrorism. His motive remains unclear to this day. But, Ms Kay argues "an official Day of Remembrance focused on Muslim victimhood would receive funding to perpetuate in schools and other institutions the notion that Muslims are systemically targeted for hatred."

And that, dear readers, is the whole point of the hijab hoax girl's publicity stunt and the NCCM proposal. Ms Kay reminds us that the NCCM pushed for the inclusion in the Toronto District School Board [Again with the TDSB! Ed.] guidebook to Islamic Heritage Month of this definition of Islamophobia: "Islamophobia refers to fear, prejudice, hatred or dislike directed against Islam or Muslims, or towards Islamic politics or culture." Once the telling phrase "Islamic politics or culture" came to public attention, attracting forceful criticism that embarrassed the TDSB (Hello again, Shari Schwartz-Maltz!), the definition was narrowed.

Does the NCCM really want to talk about Islamic culture -- the culture that includes honour killings like those of Aqsa Parvez and four female members of the Shafia family? How about we have a memorial day for those victims of Islamic culture?

The highlight of National Be Nice to Muslims Day is supposed to be the tabling in Canada's House of Commons of the Standing Committee on Heritage report on Motion M-103. M-103 isn't a law and never will be. It's only a motion. Here, copied from the web page of Iqra Khalid, MP (and a Muslim, in case you didn't guess), is the text of the motion.

M103 - Systemic racism and religious discrimination
That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear; (b) condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination and take note of House of Commons’ petition e-411 and the issues raised by it; and (c) request that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage undertake a study on how the government could (i) develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia, in Canada, while ensuring a community-centered focus with a holistic response through evidence-based policy-making, (ii) collect data to contextualize hate crime reports and to conduct needs assessments for impacted communities, and that the Committee should present its findings and recommendations to the House no later than 240 calendar days from the adoption of this motion, provided that in its report, the Committee should make recommendations that the government may use to better reflect the enshrined rights and freedoms in the Constitution Acts, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Buried in all that jargon and verbiage is some pretty dangerous stuff, e.g. "collect data to contextualize hate crime reports". How would such data be collected? Why, through "social media surveillance", of course! Canucks, better watch what you write on FB or in the comments section of news websites -- the few that still allow commenting... sometimes... as long as you don't offend Muslims. And how about "conduct needs assessments for impacted communities"? Don't be surprised if the "impacted community" (read: Muslims) needs money for its mosques and schools where young Canadians can be taught how barbaric cultural practices like female genital mutilation, honour crimes and the killing of infidels are all right and good for followers of the Religion of Peace.

The most objectionable feature, though, of M-103 is its singling out of the Muslim community as the one minority group most in need of protection from "system racism" and "Islamophobia". What about the (((Jews))), asks Barbara Kay. What about indigenous peoples, especially indigenous women who keep being found dead along roadsides and river banks? What about the "black community"? Never mind BLM; don't all lives matter? Errr, no, not according to M-103 -- just the lives of Muslims.

Even though it has not yet been officially approved by Canada's Parliament, M-103 is already being used as the basis for self-censorship remarkable even for the politically correct Canuck lamestream media. Some people have asked by the CBC and other major networks didn't call BS on the hijab hoax even as the girl was speaking at the TDSB-arranged presser. The answer is simple. No-one wanted to be the first to cast doubt on the story told by a young, female member of the oppressed Muslim minority. Even the Toronto police were guarded in describing the false report, saying only that "it didn't happen."

Contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, M-103 is already being used to curtail freedom of speech. The term "Islamophobia", with its multiple and sinister meanings is, in itself, an example of "fake news", and should not be recognized as a "thing"... because it isn't! To state that there is systemic hatred and racial discrimination in Canada, is bogus and to single out one religious group for special treatment is divisive. If there's going to be some sort of "day of action" in the Great No-longer-white North on January 29th, Walt suggests something along the lines of the demonstration pictured here.

Canadians! Stand up for free speech! Write or e-mail your Member of Parliament! (Click here to find out who's supposed to be representing you.) Or e-mail Justin Trudeau Himself. Tell them what you think... while you still can!

Québec dad beats daughter for not wearing Islamic head covering

What's a good "Muslim Canadian" girl to do? If she lives in Québec and covers her face with a niqab (or, Allah help her, a burqa) while being served at a library, she could get into trouble with the Law. See "Québec enacts law banning face coverings in public places", WWW 17/10/17. If she doesn't cover her face, or at least her hair, with proper Islamic dress, i.e. a hijab, she could get beaten... or worse... by her father and/or brothers for bring dishonour upon their family.

Buried in the back pages of today's lamestream media is a sad little story from Gatineau, Québec, just across the river from the capital of Canuckistan. A Muslim man has been charged for (allegedly) beating his teenage daughter over the course of more than a year because she refused to wear a hijab. According to Inspector Clouseau [Ed., please check name] of the Gatineau police, the 35-year-old follower of the Prophet is facing one count each of assault, assault with a weapon and uttering death threats.

In what police described as a case of so-called "honour-based" violence, the father began the series of assaults upon learning his daughter had removed her religious head covering when she left the family home. Gatineau police said they hope the courage the young girl showed would motivate others to speak out against similar incidents.

Walt would add that any daughter, sister or wife being abused by her too-strict Islamic father, brother or husband had better speak up right sharpish, before she suffers the fate of the late Aqsa Parvez, of Mississauga ON, who was killed by her father (with help from her brother) just over five years ago for... wait for it... taking off her hijab when she went to school. See "Parents kill rebellious teen to preserve family honour", WWW 3/8/12.

Further reading: If you're still not sure of the difference between the three types of Islamic head-coverings, check out "Hijab, niqab, burqa -- what's the difference?", WWW 28/7/10.

Parents kill rebellious teen to preserve family honour

One of the first topics Walt wrote about, in the first month of this blog's life, was honour killings. The case that prompted my comment -- "Honour killings, family values and 'accommodation'" -- was the murder, by her parents, of Aqsa Parvez, age 16, in the predominantly "south Asian" community of Mississauga, Ontario.

Aqsa was killed by her father, assisted by her brother. The family had immigrated from Pakistan some years previously, and Aqsa's heinous crime against the family honour was wanting to fit in with her Canadian schoolmates. She didn't want to wear the hijab. She wanted to hang out with the other kids, maybe even date a local boy, like the other kids. And she paid with her life.

The Parvez case was echoed last year in the now-infamous Shafia case, another example from officially multicultural Canada. You could say the Shafia case is four times worse than the Parvez case, in that three rebellious teenage daughters were murdered, along with their father's first wife. The perps were the father, his second wife -- it's OK for a Muslim to have up to four wives -- and their son.

This year we have another echo, this time from Britain. Earlier today, a jury in northwestern England found the Pakistani parents of a teenage girl guilty of her murder. According to the girl's sister, who gave evidence for the Crown, her mother and father suffocated Shafilea Ahmed, aged 17, with a plastic bag for "being too western".

Here, according to the Daily Mail, is what the judge said: "Your concern about being shamed in your community was greater than the love for your daughter." Like the Shafias, Iftikhar and Farzana Ahmed were sentenced to life in prison with no parole for a minimum of 25 years. The Ahmeds are expected to appeal... like the Shafias.

The Crown prosecutor told the court that Shafilea was only 10 when she began to rebel against her Muslim parents’ strict rules. Like Aqsa Parvez, she would change into western clothes at school, and change back before her parents picked her up. She often went to school crying, he classmates said. Her mother used to slap her and throw things at her, Shafilea told them.

It got worse. As she got older, Shafilea began seeing boys, which prompted her parents to keep her at home more. Between November 2002 and January 2003 the assaults increased in number and intensity. Then, in February 2003, she ran away with her boyfriend -- as did the eldest Shafia daughter -- and asked the town council for emergency accommodation as her parents were trying to force her into an arranged marriage with her cousin.

In the same month, her parents took her to Pakistan where she drank bleach in protest against the arranged marriage. When she returned to Britain in May 2003, she was admitted to a hospital because of damage done to her throat. Later that year, her parents beat her, stuffed a thin white plastic bag into her mouth and held their hands over her mouth and nose until, as her sister testified, "she was gone".

Did I mention... did I need to mention, that the Ahmeds are Muslims? The highest incidence of reported forced marriages in Britain is in Muslim communities. AP reports that British authorities investigated hundreds of cases of forced marriages last year. Some of the cases have ended up in so-called honour killings where relatives believe girls have brought shame on their families -- sometimes for refusing marriage, other times for being too westernized.

So we could say that the Ahmed case is not an isolated incident. Nor were the Parvez and Shafia cases. Honour killings are all too common in the "south Asian community". Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs immigrate to Britain, Canada and the USA, and are told that we value multiculturalism and diversity and they are entitled to keep their heathen religions and barbaric customs and cultures.

"Told" is the wrong word in that last sentence. I should say the "south Asians" are encouraged to bring to our countries the prejudices and problems of their homelands. Then we profess to be surprised when these "problems of cultural adjustment" manifest themselves.

Honour killings in Canada now average nearly 1 per year

By the sheerest coincidence, the Montreal Gazette and Toronto Sun have just brought to the attention of the Canadian public the results of a study by Marie-Pierre Robert, a law professor at the Université de Sherbrooke.

According to Prof. Robert, the number of honour killings committed in Canada has increased, along with the numbers of immigrants from the Middle East and South Asia. Since 1999, she writes in the Canadian Criminal Law Review, there have been 12 honour-killing victims in Canada, an average of one (1) per year. Between 1954 and 1983 there were only 3, an average of less than one every ten (10) years.

The study shows that all of the cases involved at least one female victim, and all of the killers were immigrants, usually of Muslim or Sikh background. . Most of the perpetrators were men. The average victim was 21 years old. Aqsa Parvez, shown here, was just 16 when her father killed her in December of 2007.

The Toronto Sun lists three more examples.

Hasibullah Sadiqi, sentnced to life in prison for shooting his sister and her fiance in Edmonton on Sept. 19, 2006. He claimed they had brought dishonour on his family.

Rajinder Singh Atwal stabbed his 17-year-old daughter Amandeep to death in 2003 for insisting on living with her boyfriend. Atwal found guilty of second-degree murder in 2005 and sentenced to life in prison.

Adi Abdul Humaid stabbed his wife, Aysar Abbas, 23 times in the neck and once in the heart on a lonely stretch of B.C. road on Oct. 14, 1999. He said he thought she was sleeping with her business associate. Sentenced to life in prison.

Murders such as these and the Shafia case -- see previous post -- have sparked calls for a separate section of the Criminal Code of Canada to deal specifically with honour killings. Professor Robert said such a move isn't needed because honour killers are always prosecuted "to the maximum" under Canadian law.

But, since Canada has no death penalty, the "maximum" can mean life without parole for up to 25 years for first-degree murder, or as little as up to 10 years for second-degree murder. What would the penalty be, Walt wonders, in India or Pakistan or Afghanistan.