Honor killing victim predicted her death in video

Twenty-year old Banaz Mahmod, whose father and uncle have just been found guilty of her murder, had told British police her life was in danger from her own family because of her relationship with a young man of whom they did not approve. (The two stories I’ve read have not explained what precisely made the young man unacceptable, since from his name, Rahmat Sulemani, he is also a Muslim. Today’s journalism is so great.)

Two points beyond the usual points about the evils of Islam and the insanity of importing this religion into the West: One, when the police, after initially doubting Banaz’s story, offered her a safe house, she instead went back to her family’s home, where she was promptly murdered. Two, despite the fact that she believed her life was imminently threatened over her relationship, she apparently did not consider ending the relationship. There is something about many young women today that almost draws them into situations where they will be murdered.

- end of initial entry -

David B. writes:

You see on the news constantly stories of young women who put themselves in dangerous situations. As you write, sometimes they are murdered. Natalie Holloway, on vacation in a strange place, stays out drinking after midnight with strangers and is never seen again. None of the enormous coverage of this story that I have seen has mentioned this fact. Miss Holloway was supposed to be headed to medical school. Did she think this made her invulnerable?

LA replies:

This kind of thing happens steadily. It’s as though there were a vast maw in the world that consumes young women.

But as striking and disturbing as the phenomenon itself is that it is never mentioned as a phenomenon. Each murder, each disappearance, each body found six months later, is treated individually, as though it bears no resemeblance to innumerable other instances that have occurred. And I think this is connected with a major feature of liberal society, the lack of desire for conceptual thought, the instinctive rejection of larger categories, which in turn is connected with the liberal imperative to avoid judgmentalness.

Daniel writes:

The family and killers are Kurds, the “good” Muslims. The ones, at least partially, on whose behalf we have waged this destructive war. Oh brother, with allies like these…

Kurds are no less committed to the retrograde ways of Sharia Islam than Pakistanis or Arabs. [LA replies: I don’t know that that is true.] When Kurds commit some awful atrocity in Europe (take your pick, German, Sweden, Britain) the telling fact of their national origin is blurred by a reference to Turks. I don’t know if this obfuscation is intentional on the part of the media but it certainly works to make Americans unaware of just who these people are, the ones for whose sake we have spent so much money and blood.

Conservative Swede writes:

“I don’t know that that is true.”

Oh yeah. Most of the times I read about honour killings, it’s done by Kurds.

Kurds want to kill and dominate the Arabs. This is their dream.

LA writes:

Here are more details on the honor killing of Banaz Mahmod, from the London Times. The police were more culpable than first appeared. Banaz appealed to the police four times for help. Her father had already attempted to kill her once. But the PC (don’t know that that means) thought she was being melodramatic. The story says that she comes from Iraq, so she was an Iraqi Kurd. The family was angry because she broke off an arranged marriage and started a relationship with another man. But the story still does not explain what was objectionable about her new boyfriend. Perhaps he was simply not a Kurd.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 11, 2007 01:33 PM | Send