Gang-rape of teenager ordered as punishment for brother's sins

ABCNewsOnline ^ | 7/2/02 | Anon

[What Is Ain't]

A teenage girl was gang-raped in central Pakistan last month as "punishment" meted out by a tribal jury for her brother's alleged affair with a woman of a higher tribe, police said.

A Panchayat, or tribal jury, ordered four men, including one of the jurists, to rape the 18-year-old girl on June 22 in the village of Meerwala.

Meerwala lies 610 kilometres south-west of the capital Islamabad.

District police chief Malik Saeed Awan said authorities were informed of the publicly-ordered gang-rape several days after the incident.

He said four men took turns to sexually assault the girl inside a room. She was then ordered to return home naked before 1,000 onlookers.

The rape was to avenge the "insult" caused to a family of the Mastoi tribe by the girl's brother's alleged "illicit affair" with a woman of a higher social standing.

The girl and her brother were from the lower Gujjar tribe.

The Panchayat had threatened that all women in the accused's family would be raped unless the 18-year-old submitted herself to the public gang rape.

Awan said police were taking action against members of the Panchayat.

Lawyers visiting the tribal area on Sunday urged the authorities to prosecute the rapists and the jury.

[Don Myers]

I have no doubt that there are peaceful Muslims. I think that there are Muslims who want to get along with their neighbors. But, the Koran itself preaches actions against the "infidels." Who are the infidels? I am an infidel. Most of the people in the United States are infidels. The US was attacked by Islamic terrorists, and they promise more to come.

Regardless of the people who want peace, regardless of their religious beliefs or no religious beliefs, use of the sword brings only more use of the sword. And, that sword swings both ways.

Another attack upon the United States will bring things to the Muslims that they don't want. There would be no way to stop it. There are Muslims who will not try to bring peace between the East and West. Their religion does not permit them to join the infidels in stopping the "warriors" among them.

If I were a Muslim, I think that I would be very afraid of what the extremists do. When the backlash begins, there would be no way to separate the peaceful Muslims from the supporters of violence. And, there would be a backlash such as not seen before, if the extremists explode one nuke, regardless of size, or use bio/chem weapons in the US.

We can talk peace and understanding, but the end result of Muslim terrorism and use of the sword will only bring total war. And, it will be anything but pretty.

[swarthyguy]

"one would start concluding that there was some sort of religious prohibition against condemning a Muslim"

Of course there is if you are a "true" muslim. Look at the ones who condemn the nutcases; they're all under some fatwa, living in fear, or away from their home countries.

Even their sycophants in the US media, ala Ibish or Hooper refuse to condemn atrocities, and when they do, it's in such a pro-forma, mealy-mouthed, wishy-washy manner that you are left there wondering if the words meant anything at all.

[swarthyguy]

From Mullahs and Heretics -- If you haven't already read this.

"We also explored the many burned houses. How were they burned? I would ask the locals. Back would come the casual reply. 'They belonged to Hindus and Sikhs. Our fathers and uncles burned them.' Why? 'So they could never come back, of course.' Why? 'Because we are now Pakistan. Their home is India.' Why, I persisted, when they had lived here for centuries, just like your families, and spoke the same language, even if they worshipped different gods? The only reply was a shrug. It was strange to think that Hindus and Sikhs had been here, had been killed in the villages in the valleys below. In the tribal areas - the no-man's-land between Afghanistan and Pakistan - quite a few Hindus stayed on, protected by tribal codes. The same was true in Afghanistan itself (till the mujahedin and the Taliban arrived). "

"Mullahs, especially the rural variety, were objects of ridicule, widely regarded as dishonest, hypocritical and lazy. It was generally believed that they had grown beards and chosen this path not out of spiritual fervour, but in order to earn a crust. Unless attached to a mosque, they depended on voluntary contributions, tuition fees and free meals. The jokes about them mostly concerned their sexual appetites; in particular, a penchant for boys below a certain age. The fictional mullah of the storytellers and puppet-shows who travelled from village to village was a greedy and lustful arch-villain; he used religion to pursue his desires and ambitions. He humiliated and cheated the poor peasants, while toadying to landlords and potentates. "

Rest of article available here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/fo cus/news/677105/posts

[swarthyguy]

"If I were a Muslim, I think that I would be very afraid of what the extremists do. When the backlash begins, there would be no way to separate the peaceful Muslims from the supporters of violence"

Not to mention nonmuslims either.

Very valid; why they cannot see this i don't know. But american muslims credibility in the USA is at an all time low. They have managed to convince America that she must keep a wary eye on them.

[SauronOfMordor]

Even their sycophants in the US media, ala Ibish or Hooper refuse to condemn atrocities, and when they do, it's in such a pro-forma, mealy-mouthed, wishy-washy manner that you are left there wondering if the words meant anything at all.

It's something I've been noticing for a long time. Getting a Muslim to condemn an offense committed by a fellow Muslim against an "infidel" is extremely difficult. A skilled Muslim debator will dance around the topic, attack the questioner, try to shift the debate onto "what these other guys did to those guys", issue vaguely worded statements saying "it's not nice to do bad things", and most people won't notice that the Muslim never did quite make any explicit statement of condemnation against his fellow Muslim.

Now, a Muslim can safely condemn a Muslim for being insufficiently Islamic, or for being inadequately energetic in fighting the infidel -- that's OK, he won't get into trouble for that. And a Muslim can criticise another Muslim for an offense against a non-Muslim IF that offense caused trouble for Muslims -- notice the distinction, he's not condemning the offense against the infidel, only the fact that the offense resulted in problems for other Muslims.

The verbal dancing can be amusing

[Restorer]

Mullahs, especially the rural variety, were objects of ridicule, widely regarded as dishonest, hypocritical and lazy.

Interesting. This paragraph is a word for word description of the stereotype of the priest, especially monk, during the European Middle Ages.

The jokes about them mostly concerned their sexual appetites; in particular, a penchant for boys below a certain age.

Unfortunately, this one seems to be coming back.

[Restorer]

It is interesting that the most vile and feared Christian is one of these protestant Fundamentalists. What I'd really like to know is why the fear? Is there a history to support it? :-)

I've often wondered this myself. With the primary exception of Ireland, the history of serious religious persecution by Protestants is rather short and mild, when compared to that of Catholics and, especially, Muslims.

But the common perception in this country is that there are hordes of toothless fundamentalists lurking in the Bushes, just waiting for a moment's inattention on the part of the press to set up the crematoriums for the Jews.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It is a Lie that there were large numbers of Blacks lynched in the south in the 1960s. Nothing else should be expected from defenders of the Islamaniacs the "religion" of the LIE and the LIAR, Mohammed (piss be upon his head.)

Its Book is a concoction of crap filled with nothing of value, screwed up biblical stories, testimony to the illiteracy of the "Prophet."

[malakhi]

Would you care to document your claim that there were wholesale lynchings of blacks going on in the 1960's American South?

DYODR.

Sorry, strela, but "Do Your Own Damn Research" is not an adequate reply. YOU made the claim. YOU should back it up when asked, or retract it.

[b4its2late]

Unbelievable.

[swarthyguy]

"This paragraph is a word for word description of the stereotype of the priest, especially monk, during the European Middle Ages."

Stereotypes do have a basis in reality. And the Middle Ages stereotype backs up the reality of no modern day renaissance or reformation in the islamic world.

"Unfortunately, this one seems to be coming back."

Never really went away as far the the islamic world is concerned. Tariq Ali was referring to a period of time, relatively recent, the 1940's - 1950's.
"

[Restorer]

"Unfortunately, this one seems to be coming back."

I was referring to the stereotype of the priest as being sexually interested in young boys.

[xJones]

There is a slight difference. The Bible condems homosexuality in no uncertain terms. Priests that molest boys should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Catholic Christians are in an uproar about all these revelations. However, Mohammed took a different point of view:

"Al Hadis, Vol. 4, p. 172, No. 34 Ali reported that the Apostle of Allah said, "There is in Paradise a market wherein there will be no buying or selling, but will consist of men and women. When a man desires a beauty, he will have intercourse with them."

[swarthyguy]

As some of the Afghani tribesmen in the Kandahar area were quoted as saying - A women is for breeding, and a boy is for pleasure.

[FormerLurker]

Or maybe they think we really have the power of the Roswell UFO and the Republicans are keeping it to themselves...

That would explain a lot if it were true.

[Byron_the_Aussie]

...I am also disturbed about current polls showing that most Americans would readily cede their liberty for a little more safety...

Taxula, your words fall upon my soul like spring rain on the desert.

Welcome back!

[Byron_the_Aussie]

..Ok, Byron, you think that the Americans in Afghanistan go around looking for weddings to bomb...

I have not and would not say or think something like that, Don.

What I have said, on the appropriate thread, , is :

on what grounds is Afghanistan still a free-fire zone, for US airpower? They've elected a new Parliament, right?

[MonroeDNA]

Re: Post #426, thank you!

[MonroeDNA]

Do you feel that the gang rape of this woman is justified? yes or no?

Since President Bush has stated we are not at war against Islam..." etc....

Is that a yes? Do you condemn this act?

[MonroeDNA]

"It's just that you have worked yourself up to such a state, collectively blaming all Muslims for 911, when even Bin Laden said some of the terrorists didn't know their mission until after takeoff. Incomprehensible, unless something peculiar is at work...

To me, this says that even the followers of hardcore Islam have grave doubts. Keep the mission secret, from those Saudis, until they have no choice. No chance to back out. Standard ops.