Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Merry Mayhem From Santa

Most of us got gifts and hugs and stockings filled with little treats for Christmas. A few got stockings filled with coal (Santa sometimes does carry out his threats about knowing when you've been naughty). One family got a really big surprise. Santa appeared at the door instead of coming down the chimney and murdered mom and her daughter.

Incidentally, four other relatives of various degrees were also murdered by Santa because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Collateral damage, if you will. Celebrate Christmas, open your gifts, get murdered in cold blood. ABC, NBC, CBS, Yahoo News, and most of the mainstream media reported the tragedy in Grapevine, Texas, describing Santa as "the estranged husband." Just another tragic domestic dispute. Most were careful to mention that the couple had split up, and they were having serious money problems.

But looking at the story behind the story, it quickly becomes apparent that this was yet another attempt by the politically-correct press to cover up what is becoming a common occurrence in America. Any lawyer practicing family law will tell you that domestic disputes are among the ugliest of events. But marital problems were the effect, not the cause of this mass murder. Those who read MSM reports or listen to TV talking heads were probably immediately suspicious when the real name of Santa was revealed--Aziz Yazdanpanah. But that's because we're all Islamophobic bigots, don't you know.

Yes, Christians, Jews, Buddhists and others have committed horrible family atrocities as well. But their religions don't mainstream murder, and when the name of the religion is invoked as the reason behind the killing, it's tolerated only among a fringe group of lunatics. Not so with a considerable portion of those who practice fundamentalist Islam. But to get that information from the MSM, you have to work very hard to find the obvious.

Islam in general and fundamentalist Islam in particular have a whole list of "crimes" which bring dishonor on the man's family sufficient to result in a "righteous execution." In this case, mom was a little too friendly with her non-Muslim neighbors, celebrated "pagan" festivals such as Christmas (but not Easter), and disagreed with the pater familias frequently and openly. As if this was not bad enough, the nineteen year old daughter was seriously dating a non-Muslim in direct violation of dad's orders.

Yazdanpanah is an Iranian immigrant, who believes not only in honor killing but also the apocalyptic "hidden imam" theology of his former countryman Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But you wouldn't know that from the vast majority of the MSM reports. They immediately and almost simultaneously dubbed him the "Santa Killer." It almost seemed as if they blamed Christmas itself for the murders. We've all heard the common and mistaken statement that more suicides take place during the Christmas season than any other time of year. Add a little financial hardship and love turned to hate, and you have another typical Christmas tragedy.

What you really have is the growth of a uniquely fundamentalist Islamic trend--honor killing in America. This one was only a slight change in form with no change in substance. Who wouldn't open the door for Santa on Christmas Day? This was just a way for the follower of strict sharia law to get past the civil restrictions which restrained him from getting anywhere near the rest of the family. Those MSM reports which even bothered to mention honor killings tangentially immediately stated (incorrectly) that this was a very rare event that has nothing to do with traditional Islamic belief.

But then these are the same reporters who couldn't connect the shouting of "Allahu akbar" and the mass murder of thirteen servicemen at Fort Hood with the religion of peace. Yet these same people will immediately identify the alleged religion of any other murderer, even if the killer does not practice that religion or claim a religious purpose in performing the murder(s). Remember that the MSM immediately identified Timothy McVeigh and the Norway mass murderer Anders Brevik as Christians, though in both cases the murderers had rejected Christianity.

42 comments:

Joel Farnham said...

LawHawk,

I heard about this. Disgusting that the MSM attempted to portray it as a rampaging Santa.

Honor killings are being chronicled over at Atlas Shrugged.

Why can't these idiots (MSM) get it right?

tryanmax said...

Joel, here is a LINK to Atlas Shrugs chronicle of Honor Killings.

T-Rav said...

LawHawk, we actually had something like this to happen near where I live a few years ago. I don't remember the details of it now, though; the creep was an Arab Muslim and he killed his girlfriend and one or two of her kids. I couldn't say if religion had anything to do with it, but it's the sort of thing that would be covered up. At least there weren't any ritual beheadings.

tryanmax said...

I don't know if it is irony or not, given the twisted machinations of leftist thought, that the embrace of Islam threatens the numerous advances the West and particularly America has made in promoting gender equality, children's rights, racial and ethnic equality, and not least of all, religious tolerance.

For the life of me, I cannot understand how the leftist mind warps itself to embrace Islam. All the false fears they claim to feel for Christianity and Judaism are openly manifest in Islam. Even if that were not so, their embrace of this particular monotheistic religion is wildly out of step with their usual atheistic sniffing aimed at faithful yokels, as they are perceived by the left.

Yet they ignore Islamist atrocities such as murdered women and brutalized children and blatant hate crimes. Instead the left fusses over minor--and generally incomparable--wage discrepancies. Instead the left works feverishly to drive teenagers off of farms so they can't work. Instead the left fingers Abraham's children and Jesus' followers as haters for being audacious enough to say there is a difference between right and wrong.

AndrewPrice said...

This is apparently a problem with Islam worldwide.



(P.S. Just a reminder that there is a Star Trek article up at the film site today.)

T-Rav said...

tryanmax, this is a contradiction I too have been at some pains to understand. The only answer I can arrive at is this seems to be an outflow of the "oppression theory" which has infected the Left in recent decades, driven by such hacks as Foucault and Said. According to them, the ultimate, constant villains are white males (especially rich white males); all the inequality and injustice in the world today is ultimately their fault due to racism, sexism, imperialism, etc. Their "reasoning" is that if there are some unpleasant things happening in the Arab world, that's really the West's fault, and will go away once said Arab world is liberated from Western oppression and allowed to control its own destiny. Which is exactly as stupid as it sounds.

tryanmax said...

That does sound totally stupid. Funny how racism is totally okay as long as you call it something else. (oppression theory, eugenics, the mark of Cain, etc.)

LawHawkRFD said...

Joel: The MSM has chosen political correctness over truthful reporting, and I don't see that changing any time soon. It would be bad enough if they didn't mention religious affiliation at all, but only Islam is sacrosanct. I don't know if that's out of fear of reprisals, or just simple affinity for another form of tyranny.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: Thanks for the link. I also check JihadWatch occasionally to see how "honor" is doing among radicalized American Muslims.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: We don't have a large Muslim population in these parts, but in my years in San Francisco, there was at least one honor killing in SF and three in Oakland that even the local leftist press had to report as honor killings because the perpetrators wouldn't shut up about it. Some of them seemed totally incapable of understanding why they were being prosecuted for the crime.

BevfromNYC said...

Okay, here's a two degrees of separation. My parents knew Nasrin, the wife who was killed. She owned a salon/spa in the town where they live. Along with his estranged wife, daughter, and 15 year old son, he also killed his sister-in-law, brother in law and niece. Tragic.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: I will never entirely understand the psychology behind this massive but selective burying of the truth. Political correctness alone certainly can't explain it. I'm sure that the secular worship of "diversity" has something to do with it. Islamists try very hard not to become too "Americanized" and their very difference (without regard to its good or evil) is something the diversity pimps absolutely adore. There must also be an element of fear of a religion that retaliates murderously at any criticism of its basic beliefs.

rlaWTX said...

I had only heard about this via MSM (I've been mostly off-line over the holidays) and knew nothing about the honor killing side of it! Thanks for bringing it to light here...

The MSM is a twisted, bizarre, self-hating bunch of "useful idiots"!

tryanmax said...

LawHawk, T-Rav, perhaps it is enough to know that birds of a feather flock together. The more I strain my mind, the further I feel from grasping anything that makes sense of these strange bed (nest) fellows. It might just have to be enough to know that all ill will work together against what is good.

Individualist said...

Why does the left not want "Honor Killings" to become publicize in the media. This is because if they did people would react negatively to Islam. The threats and violence of the terrorists would be seen as religious bigotry.

Whether true or not it is a problem for the leftists for the intolerance of Islamic militants to be known for what it is. Awful as it sounds, Nero may be as responsible for the spread of the early church as the twelve apostles. By persecuting the Christians he drew many non-believers to it. The same could happen here if the true voice of Islam were being repeated.

The left hates religion and especially the Christian religion. This is because many beleivers are seeing that the leftist dogma runs counter to what they believe. Christians have an understanding that they must be replaced by the the secular state for a modern leftist to prevail. The Muslims are few in number and the left believes them to be truely backward because in the end they are they closet bigots.

A religious war between Islam and Christianity would be bad for secular beleifs especially if the Christians are only trying to defend themselves.

I don't reaqlly know but it seems this is the main reason for this Orwellian rewriting of events.

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: One of the great things about America was its ability to absorb and enjoy many religions, cultures and folkways and make them part of the American quilt. Muslims have been in this country in substantial numbers for decades without major incident. It is only since the diversity crowd and the politically correct MSM began to promote rather than report extremism that things like honor killings have been tolerated (or at least covered up). What happened in exotic foreign nations wasn't allowed to happen here until very recently in historical terms.

Assimilation into the general culture has become a thing that the pseudo-intellectuals abhor. As a result, radicalization of a previously non-violent Muslim presence in America has become ubiquitous. How dare we criticize Islamist violence in our midst? It's a cultural thing, you know. Thirty or forty years ago, most people in America didn't even know what the word sharia meant. Twenty years ago, the idea of substituting a foreign religious legal code for our American Constitution and Anglo-American law would have been laughable. Today, we see courts accepting portions of sharia law in place of our own. We are tolerating ourselves into our own graves.

tryanmax said...

You lost me a little, Indie. Are you saying that the MSM is actually trying to prevent the spread of Islam by not reporting the facts? I'm sorry if I've read you wrong.

LawHawkRFD said...

Bev: That's scary. I'd like to think I could live my whole life without knowing anyone who was murdered for such an awful reason.

T-Rav said...

One thing I will never understand, and that is why contemporary Europe, which seems bent on a totally secular, totally value-free "culture," not only tolerates these individuals but in many cases actively suppresses their critics. No matter how screwed we are, others are even more screwed.

T-Rav said...

Bev, that's pretty awful. Unfortunately, there are a lot of evil people in this world, and for whatever reason, a lot of them choose the holidays to perpetrate their deeds.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: Another facet of this kind of willful blindness is the mindless repetition of "what people do in the privacy of their own homes is nobody else's business." That's just simplistic nonsense. Murder is everyone's business in a civilized society. Religious freedom does not trump the God-given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and there are reams of Supreme Court decisions saying exactly that.

LawHawkRFD said...

rlaWTX: That's exactly what the MSM wants. Great story. Santa kills his family. Bad Santa. If the New York Times can pride itself on Duranty's coverup of the mass murders in the Soviet Union (rewarded with a Pulitzer Prize), what's a few honor killings here or there? After all, Islam is the religion of peace, and isn't peace more important than anything as trivial as a family murder?

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: Europe's history of colonization led to guilt-induced immigration from many of their foreign colonies. The result is much larger numbers of Muslims in those nations as a percentage of the population than we've experienced here. But even the Europeans are beginning to wake up. France has banned many public expressions of radical Islam, and the German Chancellor has denounced multiculturalism as a failure and a serious danger to Western civilization. Switzerland quashed the building of a megamosque as being a symbol of Islamic triumphalism. Even the weak-spined Brits are having second thoughts about the megamosque which would dwarf the Houses of Parliament in London, and are working on legislation which reverses the previous tolerance of sharia law.

Tennessee Jed said...

Hawk - great article. Guess I assumed you were posting this afternoon :) I had no idea this was what was behind that well publicized event. News I can use. The fact I was unaware is testament to exactly what the lsm is trying to do. Sadly, it is what we've come to know and abhor about them.

LawHawkRFD said...

Tennessee: I asked around my family and my circle of friends, and only one of them (political junkies all) were aware that Bad Santa was just another sharia-compliant Muslim. It's really scary how few truly intelligent people knew the story behind the story.

tryanmax said...

LawHawk, If libs really believed what people do in the privacy of their own homes is nobody's business, they'd lay off my light bulbs. @$$holes.

The label "pseudo-intellectuals" is spot on. If they really were intellectuals, they'd be able to reason out the problems with non-assimilation. As it stands, the pseudo-intellectuals cling to a set of dogmatic beliefs that are perhaps more bereft of reason than even the falsest of religions. What passes for reasoning is rather the same circular logic that spirals tighter and tighter the more you confront it.

Case in point: I challenged a lib that was excoriating the electoral college to explain why he thought direct election was better. Because it is the right thing to do, he offered. What makes it right? I asked. Because it's fair, he said. And what is fair? Fair is doing the right thing.

I'm sure I could have had the same conversation about any number of topic. It just makes me shake my head with the realization that some people think in circles and find nothing wrong with that. Then again, how could they? To do so would break the cycle.

LawHawkRFD said...

We should be thinking like the British official in India during the colonial period who came upon a sati (suttee) ritual. That ritual involved the wife or wives of a notable Hindu who had died being burned on the funeral pyre along with the husband. When the Brit asked why the wives were being burned alive, the response was "it's our culture." The Brit snapped back with "When we see innocent women being burned alive, we hang the murderers and confiscate their property. That's our culture."

tryanmax said...

LawHawk, don't mix up intelligent with informed. Anyone can be deprived of information.

T-Rav said...

tryanmax, you should set up as a street vendor for that liberal. "Circular logic! Get your circular logic here! Now with 20% more fallacies!"

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: Circular logic is the forte of liberal thinking. "It's right because it's fair, ergo it's fair because it's right."

Which brings me to another favorite topic of mine--the use and abuse of the expression "begs the question." Unlike the twenty or thirty times a day that I hear it misused, the expression does not mean "calls for the question," or "raises the question." It means "your answer has evaded the question by using a co-premise to prove the answer." "Begging the question" and circular logic are similar but not entirely parallel logical fallacies.

In your example, "it's fair" is proven by "it's the right thing to do (a co-premise)." When your lib answered "why is it the right thing to do?" with "because it's fair," he begged the question while at the same time using circular logic.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: I know better than to conflate "intelligent" with "informed." In most cases, intelligent people who are uninformed about a particular issue have either negligently or purposely avoided reading "both sides of the story." For those intelligent people I referred to, it was neither laziness nor ignorance that misinformed them. It was more the fact that there are just so many hours in the day, and the average busy intelligent person simply doesn't have sufficient time to research every headline that comes before them. The MSM relies on that fact.

tryanmax said...

Very interesting. Do you happen to know the etymology behind that phrase? Because clearly "beg" has a different connotation here than is generally employed.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: LOL

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: Rather than try to dig into my college philosophy and speech materials which are stored in the rafters of my garage, I'll commit a minor heresy here. Given that Wikipedia is often wrong or skewed, they have a pretty good discussion of the topic here.

LawHawkRFD said...

tyranmax: PS--they also offered some good advice. It's probably a good idea to avoid using the phrase entirely.

T-Rav said...

LawHawk, a philosophy professor of mine back in the day (who is strongly conservative and once opened a course on logic by taking statements from Pelosi and Reid and showing all their fallacies) used to jump down people's throats for the use of "begging the question." "It does NOT mean raising the question, people, that is something else!" he kept complaining. Thanks to his guidance, I have carefully avoided using the phrase, and it always sticks out at me whenever I see it misused, especially by people who ought to know better.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: God love your philosophy professor. Not only did he skewer the misuse of the phrase, but he then picked the two greatest faux philosophers of the day to illustrate his point.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: Said's "Orientalism" has done more to cloud the minds of college students about Islam and pan-arabism than most of the other treatises combined. My son has now lived in the real world long enough to see reality, but he graduated from UCLA with a Middle East Studies major and still occasionally slips into blaming Western civilization for the rise of jihadism in the Muslim world. But at least now he can see that misperceptions of the past do not explain most of today's realities.

And don't ask me why he chose that major. The best I can come up with is the fact that I was a very vocal proponent of the Western Civilization curriculum, and that was his youthful rebellion period.

Individualist said...

tyranmax

I apologize my comment was evidently not well written. I guess what I am saying is that Muslims in this country are an extremely small minority. From that standpoint the left is not worried about them gaining any power.

With things like honor killings and terrorist attacks the general public will be alarmed by those actions, rightly so I think. They will then look at what these extremeists state especially in places like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Palestine. what they will find is that the people that want all the Jews pushed into the Sea pretty much want the Christians to follow them.

While I know that many Muslims may not hold this view or be this extreme the fact is that there are enough Islamic extremists and apologists out there to be worried about it.

What I am saying is that the MSN knows that if these attacks become public and the hateful xenophobic and genocidal rhethoric of people that claim to be Imams of the Isloamic religion were to be known that the west would become emboldened.

Many people who were merely Sunday Christians that did not worry about what was said in church the other six days of the week would become more absorbed into their faith as they tried to defend it from people dedicated to wiping it out.

Nero publicly burned Christians in Rome to blame them for the Fire he started. His acts were so horrible they shocked even the decadent Romans hardened to watch gladiators kill each other. This led to sympathy for christians, interest in what it was they taught that was so horrible and eventually conversions.

Enough mass shootings on army bases, planes blowing up and innocent teenage girls being hacked apart for the sin of working at Burger King and people will fear the militant muslims. They will then seek out and understand the violent rhetoric which when they have time to stop attacking jewish people, starts to work on Christianity. This can cause more people to seek the church for support or to support the church.

The MSM does not want this. They want a secular society so although it is counter to ever statement about their fear of a theocracy they have to hide what the Muslims were doing. If the muslims in this country were a larger percentage then they might have to attack them.

Aslo for all their talk of tolerance any one who isn't a lily white Ivy League educated liberal from the Coasts is less than them. Ignorant arabs from the desert may tweak their faux concern for the noble savages but in the end those desert nomads must be saved by them. This is how they think. They will never state this and will accuse anyone that points out their bigotry of being Islamaphobic but this is a debating dodge to hide the projection of who they really are.

Hope I am being more clear. Sorry!

LawHawkRFD said...

Indi: I would only add that it is long past time for pastors in the mainstream of Christianity to go back to basics--doctrine and theology--and quit trying to be goody two shoes social engineers. When pastors turn the divinity of Christ, the means of salvation, and the firm belief in one God into a moral philosophy, they have abandoned their mission. A mindless folk religion can never stand up to a violent but firm religion such as Islam.

Christ preached peace and the brotherhood of man, but he also warned that he did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Any religion that is not worth dying for is not worth living for. The Muslims and their clerics know that. Too many Christian pastors have forgotten that.

LawHawkRFD said...

Tennessee: I don't get the Sony Channel, but on one of the other more obscure stations I got a chance to see Cockleshell Heroes recently. I agree with you completely. It is a much-overlooked minor masterpiece.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: Not too long ago, Pope Benedict took a lot of heat for saying in passing that Buddhism was not really a religion. He forgot that a huge number of people don't have his intellectual background, and they would therefore react as if he had insulted Buddhism. The technical definition of what comprises a religion is quite different from the common misconception that a "religion" is simply a belief system, with or without a supreme being [or divine beings]). And that is indeed the core misunderstanding which underpins what you have called "secular Christianity."

Post a Comment