Skip to comments.Pakistan parents doused daughter in acid honor killing for looking at boy
Posted on 11/13/2012 4:51:47 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
Offers Pakistans Daily Times: Doctor Mohammad Jahangir of the state run Kotli hospital confirmed the death, saying the girl was brought to hospital in a very critical condition with almost 70 percent burns.
The parents have confessed, saying that they suspected the girl had illicit relations with a boy, Local police officer Tahir Ayub said. We have registered a murder case against the girls father and mother.
Said the father, Muhammad Zafar who along with the girls mother who were arrested and charged with murder:
There was a boy who came by on a motorcycle. She (Anusha) turned to look at him twice. I told her before not to do that, its wrong. People talk about us because our older daughter was the same way.
Describing the aftermath, the childs mother Zaheen offered the following: She said I didnt do it on purpose. I wont look again. By then I had already thrown the acid. It was her destiny to die this way.
At the time when the parents initially took the daughter to hospital they told medical personnel that the acid wounds were self inflicted but later relented when confronted by authorities.
Reports the UKs bbc: Anushas father is reported to have taken his daughter inside, beaten her and then acid was poured over her with the help of his wife. Officials say that the couple did not take their daughter to hospital until the following morning.
(Excerpt) Read more at scallywagandvagabond.com ...
Damned, he and all like him are damned!
The Religion of Peace strikes again.
How can any civilized culture think that peace or reason works with “people” like this?
Death by slow torture for the parents is too good.
Where do these people get all this acid ? Any acid strong
enough for this wouldn’t be a household item.
And did they have it in hand just in case ?
And why acid ? Some odd Pakistani custom ? This seems just too specific a thing to be random. Its always acid.
Why not fire, or knives, or blunt instruments ?
This is a job for a real reporter. The answers would have won a Pulitzer in the old days.
I’m sure Eva Longoria, Ashley Judd, Scarlet what’s her name, are right on top of this WAR ON WOMEN! /s
Now they win a Pulitzer Prize for whoever called an election first.
How long before we wake up and realize these knuckle-draggers are anything BUT our “allies”?
A**holes need to burn in Hell.
A story for which Napier is often noted involved Hindu priests complaining to him about the prohibition of Sati by British authorities. This was the custom of burning a widow alive on the funeral pyre of her husband. As first recounted by his brother William, he replied:
“Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.”
General Sir Charles James Napier, GCB (10 August 1782 29 August 1853),
***===-—| Hussein Is Happy! |-—===***
Google “first cousin marriage Islam” and you will know why they are all mad. Madness is in their blood.
Hell....We just kill the babies....no problem.
Now THIS is sickening.
the religion of stupid
So this incident begs the question: do all good Muslim parents keep a jar of caustic chemicals around the house just in case one of daughters make the fatal mistake of looking at passing motorcycles piloted by young male Muslims?
Honey did you put a jar of acid on the shopping list? Fatima has been looking at boys again.
The fallacy of petitio principii, or "begging the question", is committed "when a proposition which requires proof is assumed without proof", or more generally denotes when an assumption is used, "in some form of the very proposition to be proved, as a premise from which to deduce it". Thus, insofar as petitio principii refers to arguing for a conclusion that has already been assumed in the premise, this fallacy consists of "begging" the listener to accept the "question" (proposition) before the labor of logic is undertaken.
Here is an example:
Paranormal phenomena exist because I have had experiences that can only be described as paranormal.The conclusion of this argument is that paranormal phenomena exist. The premise assumes that the arguer has had paranormal experiences, and therefore assumes that paranormal experiences exist. The arguer should not be granted the assumption that his experiences were paranormal, but should be made to provide support for this claim.
So shoot me. lol.
That is the historical meaning, but the modern meaning/usage also includes, “asking what begs to be asked.”
Look it up. The language/meaning has changed.
Look it up. The language/meaning has changed.
I'm a conservative. This is a conservative website. That means I like to "conserve" things, like the meaning of the language I use.
If a whole lot of people misuse an expression, that's not a "change in the meaning of the expression." It's just a whole lot of ignorant people.
Are you one of them? Or are you a conservative?
Thy statement on thine conservativness of language dost resonate with robust ignorance. Thou conservith phrases in an arbitrary way, like thou art frozen and closed of mind. Thou usith many phrases and words in thy daily life that have changeth over time. Again, I refereth you to a dictionary in an unabridged state to dispel thine narrow-minded notions about language. Thus, I reject thine proffered false choice and exhort thee to learneth proper definitions before correcting others on English usage. Thine obsessions are not the obsessions of others.
Thine incorrect definition of the phrase begs the question as to who is truly the ignorant one here.