Posted on 11/13/2012 4:51:47 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
Offers Pakistan’s 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 girl’s father and mother.”
Said the father, Muhammad Zafar who along with the girl’s 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, it’s wrong. People talk about us because our older daughter was the same way.”
Describing the aftermath, the child’s mother Zaheen offered the following: “She said ‘I didn’t do it on purpose. I won’t 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 UK‘s bbc: Anusha’s 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!
Disgusting animals.
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.
Pakistan.
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".[2] 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.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.