Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Tuesday, September 2, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version Print | Comments

Document Pakistan investigates 'honor killings' of 5 women

by The Associated Press

Thanks to Ryan Hill for the link.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hv9MoFLO2i_-GpreobzRAw-VCbHQD92U2N9O0

Pakistan investigates 'honor killings' of 5 women

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — Pakistan opened an investigation Monday into the killings of five women who tried to choose their own husbands, after a provincial lawmaker defended their deaths as a "centuries-old tradition."

The women, three of whom were teenagers, were shot, thrown into a ditch and buried alive more than a month ago in what authorities have said they suspect were "honor killings." Authorities say they have arrested three relatives of the women in connection with their deaths.

It is considered an insult in some conservative regions of Pakistan for women to have affairs or marry without consent, and rights groups say hundreds are killed by male relatives every year.

The killings — which apparently occurred after the women defied tribal elders and asked a civil court to marry at least three of them — was raised in Parliament on Friday, prompting a lawmaker from Baluchistan province to claim that "only those who indulge in immoral acts should be afraid."

"These are centuries-old traditions and I will continue to defend them," Israr Ullah Zehri, who represents the province where the women died, told the chamber on Saturday.

His remarks — even more than the killings themselves — outraged his fellow lawmakers and spurred protests as well as promises of an investigation.

The highest court in the largely tribal region ordered an inquiry Monday as Parliament demanded that the perpetrators be brought to justice. Asif Warraich, Baluchistan's police chief, announced the same day that three suspects were arrested, adding they were related to the victims and had allegedly confessed.

About 60 activists demonstrated outside the federal Parliament in Islamabad on Monday, shouting "Burying women alive is no honor!"

"We condemn this barbaric act," said Mohammed Ibrahim, a senator for the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party. "This is against Islam, against humanity and against civilized culture."

Sanaullah Baloch, a nationalist leader from Baluchistan, denied that such brutal justice was embedded in local culture.

He blamed the government for failing to provide better health and education services to women and girls in the southwestern province, which remains impoverished despite rich mineral resources.

"Socially and economically marginalized society is always frustrated," Baloch told Dawn News television Monday.

Human rights groups say the women were abducted at gunpoint by six men in the remote village of Baba Kot, forced into a vehicle and taken to a field, where they were beaten and shot. Rights activists say they were then covered with rocks and mud while they were still breathing.

The deaths took so long to investigate, rights groups allege, because members of a powerful political family in the province were involved.

Though many honor killings are believed to go unreported, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said at least 174 women were victims of such crimes nationwide in 2005, 270 in 2006 and 280 in 2007.

The figure in the first five months of 2008 alone stands at 107, it said. Rights groups complain that few of the culprits are convicted.

Associated Press Writer Zarar Khan from Islamabad and Abdul Sattar in Quetta contributed to this report.
submit to delicious Add to del.icio.us Posted: Tuesday, September 2, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 217 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #241178 by Quetzalcoatl on September 2, 2008 at 1:24 am

avatarAbsolutely disgusting.

prompting a lawmaker from Baluchistan province to claim that "only those who indulge in immoral acts should be afraid."

"These are centuries-old traditions and I will continue to defend them," Israr Ullah Zehri, who represents the province where the women died, told the chamber on Saturday.


What an absolute fucktard. This is the kind of guy who would happily butcher his own sister in the name of "honour".

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

2. Comment #241179 by HunterZolomon on September 2, 2008 at 1:25 am

avatar
Sanaullah Baloch, a nationalist leader from Baluchistan, denied that such brutal justice was embedded in local culture.

He blamed the government for failing to provide better health and education services to women and girls in the southwestern province, which remains impoverished despite rich mineral resources.


So... these women were brutally murdered because the government fails to provide "health and education services" to them? I'm curious to know just exactly what this "education" is all about?

Dishonoring your family can be dangerous to your health. In fact, according to health regulations, anyone found *accused* will be brutally tortured and killed. God is Great!

Other Comments by HunterZolomon

3. Comment #241180 by EarthChild on September 2, 2008 at 1:25 am

How about building a LHC in Pakistan and making sure something goes wrong during the test. Now I see Richard's problem with "moderates" in any religion. They just go on propping up these fundies and go on making excuses for them.

"We condemn this barbaric act," said Mohammed Ibrahim, a senator for the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party. "This is against Islam, against humanity and against civilized culture."

Yeah Fucking right!!!!!!!!!!!!

Other Comments by EarthChild

4. Comment #241182 by utelme on September 2, 2008 at 1:26 am

We condemn this barbaric act," said Mohammed Ibrahim, a senator for the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party. "This is against Islam, against humanity and against civilized culture."

A candlelight of hope in the darkness of cultural barbarism. At last we hear of someone in the muslim world trying to do something about stone age ignorance and depravity. If only it had been 60000 or more instead of only 60, but at least it may be the start of something bigger.

Other Comments by utelme

5. Comment #241183 by Quetzalcoatl on September 2, 2008 at 1:27 am

avatar
"Socially and economically marginalized society is always frustrated," Baloch told Dawn News television Monday.


And "frustrated" people often go and kill members of their own family, don't they?

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

6. Comment #241193 by epeeist on September 2, 2008 at 1:41 am

avatarComment #241179 by HunterZolomon

So... these women were brutally murdered because the government fails to provide "health and education services" to them? I'm curious to know just exactly what this "education" is all about?
The one thing that this article doesn't say is how educated the women were. My supposition, based purely on the fact that they wanted to choose their own husbands, would be that they had at least some education.

I suspect this, as much as their standing up for their own rights, would be seen as a threat by the likes of Israr Ullah Zehri.

Other Comments by epeeist

7. Comment #241202 by Vaal on September 2, 2008 at 1:53 am

avatar
These are centuries-old traditions and I will continue to defend them," Israr Ullah Zehri, who represents the province where the women died, told the chamber on Saturday.

Did this cretin actually have a mother? And what other centuries-old traditions would this brain dead waste of a human being like to bring back, burning wives alive with their dead husbands? I almost wish the Raj was back as this vile excuse of a man would be dancing from a rope. I wouldn't have any problem whatsoever with that.

Good to see Islam actually condemning this disgusting tradition, maybe there is hope for it yet.

Other Comments by Vaal

8. Comment #241205 by bugaboo on September 2, 2008 at 2:00 am

Vaal

Estimated population 172,800,000
Demonstators 60

But i suppose its a start

Edit: foul mood after reading this shit.

Other Comments by bugaboo

9. Comment #241206 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 2:06 am

And this ghastliness goes on right on our own streets. Wonderful. Ain't multiculturalism grand?

I wonder whether there is any depravity known to man that is no sanctioned & practiced by Islam.

EDIT: On that note:

"MPs too scared to talk about forced marriage 'in case they lose Muslim votes'"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/2661385/MPs-too-scared-to-talk-about-forced-marriage-in-case-they-lose-Muslim-votes.html

Our politicians in action. What a wonderful system.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

10. Comment #241210 by Laurie Fraser on September 2, 2008 at 2:14 am

avatarFanusi - that article is from the Telegraph. Enough said?

Other Comments by Laurie Fraser

11. Comment #241211 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 2:17 am

Laurie - so it's not true, because it's from the Telegraph?

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

12. Comment #241212 by John Locke on September 2, 2008 at 2:19 am

avatarcorrection laurie; Torygraph

Other Comments by John Locke

13. Comment #241213 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 2:22 am

avatarComment #241210 by Laurie Fraser

Indeed. The title seems a bit ironic, considering the article is an interview with the politician Ann Cryer, who is speaking out against arranged marriages, and has the support of the Prime Minister. Her Forced Marriage Act will come into effect this month. Some politicians are afraid, she suggests, but she isn't and she is criticising them quite clearly.

So, instead of "politicians" being too afraid, it shows that some senior politicians are not afraid, and are prepared to take significant and important action.

I don't see how passing a bill against Forced Marriages can be condered "inaction" or a "poor system", but then I guess I have forgotten to put on my Right Wing Blinkers today.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

14. Comment #241214 by epeeist on September 2, 2008 at 2:22 am

avatarComment #241206 by Fanusi Khiyal
MPs too scared to talk about forced marriage 'in case they lose Muslim votes'
A little disingenuous of you since the main thrust of the article is about Ann Cryer and the bill to regulate arranged marriages, which she doesn't think goes far enough. She has also raised the problems of first-cousin marriages and domestic violence in Asian families.

More details of her campaigns at http://www.anncryer.com/campaigns.php

You will note that she is strongly left wing. I seem to remember comments from various people about the lack of concern of the left on this kind of topic.

Other Comments by epeeist

15. Comment #241215 by John Locke on September 2, 2008 at 2:24 am

avatarno fanusi

that would be an exaggeration.

however, it is a well known conservative paper and so will quite often feature stories in that vein.

having read the article, the title "MPs are too scared..etc" should really have been "retiring West Yorkshire MP thinks that MPs are too scared...etc..."

whether its right or not is the issue but all we know for sure is that its one persons view.

to give the torygraph credit, it places the alternate view at the bottom.

Other Comments by John Locke

16. Comment #241217 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 2:29 am

Actually, eppeist, I already knew about Ann Cryer. I don't see what's disingenous about this; she herself says that the problem of forced marriages is being ignored by politicians.

Now is she, or is she not, telling the truth here? If she is, then there's nothing disingenuous about reporting the article.

For the record, I think that gutlessness about Islam is pretty evenly distributed amongst the various parties here in Europe. However, I will just note that I did a search in Google News for her name, and this story only showed up in the Telegraph.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

17. Comment #241218 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 2:33 am

avatarComment #241217 by Fanusi Khiyal

she herself says that the problem of forced marriages is being ignored by politicians.


Oh, for goodness sake Fanusi! She has put a flipping bill through to help deal with the problems of forced marriages! Perhaps you could explain how, in your reality, that can be called "ignoring the problem"?

Or does it so shatter your worldview that a liberal left-winger actually gives a damn and has done something significant at the highest levels, that this has hit some kind of mental blind spot?

Other Comments by Steve Zara

18. Comment #241222 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 2:36 am

Addendum: I've just looked further and found, yes, an article about forced marriages in the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/21/islam.religion

Roughly speaking, it's by the assistant of the Muslim Council of Britain talking about how great it is that the Muslim Marriage Contract will gain legal force. Her article is written in response to a much more honest one by Ed Husein about this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/20/islam.religion

Amina (not her real name) had fallen in love with an Asian Muslim man. She was also Muslim and they both came from a similar ethnic background in Pakistan. Like so many of their generation, they were caught between Britain and Pakistan, between their parents and themselves. Amina's father refused to consent to her marriage and, as a Muslim daughter, she needed him as a "wali" or guardian to oversee her marriage. The local imam refused to conduct the ceremony without her father's consent and the presence of two male Muslim witnesses.

When I met Amina she was still in love with this man but her father insisted she marry her cousin from Pakistan, who happened, rather conveniently, to be visiting England. Her father also had a heart condition and used his illness to emotionally blackmail her. Eventually Amina gave way. She sacrificed love to south Asian culture and married Mr Pakistan.

White, liberal eyes reading this article will be astounded to know these things happen in Britain. I am sorry, but they do. And it gets worse.

Amina was repeatedly raped by Mr Pakistan, but her mother told her that a Muslim man has such rights over his wife, and in Islam there is no such thing as marital rape


Etc.

Now, the question I put to you is: Which is more important? That these ghastly happenings go on? Or that this or that paper has a certain political slant?

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

19. Comment #241225 by John Locke on September 2, 2008 at 2:39 am

avatarno no nothing disingenuous at all fanusi

not living in the uk at the mo ive been a bit off the pulse so was unsure of cryer's background until now.

i think the point still stands about not just taking a story for granted though.

we were wrong to pull you up on this article though, appologies.

i do personally tend to read the telegraph, i find it gives the best information/own agenda ratio. that is to say it is easy to dodge its relatively definitive but conservative (small c) agenda and see the basic facts IMHO.

theres a lot of gutlessness by politicians agaisnt any group that theyre afraid of losing votes from. tough job trying to slime your way up to everyone eh?

Other Comments by John Locke

20. Comment #241226 by Logicel on September 2, 2008 at 2:41 am

avatar...prompting a lawmaker from Baluchistan province to claim that "only those who indulge in immoral acts should be afraid."
_____

This lawmaker does not personally accept this stance as he has indulged in immoral acts and he is not afraid, in fact he is preening about his immorality. These people are so mentally damaged that they might as well not have brains.

Steve Z @#13 writes: I don't see how passing a bill against Forced Marriages can be condered "inaction" or a "poor system", but then I guess I have forgotten to put on my Right Wing Blinkers today.
______

Oooooh, I like how you do snark. Go, baby!

epeeist, nice to see your posts, have missed them.

Other Comments by Logicel

21. Comment #241227 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 2:42 am

Steve cease your whining for once.

She herself says that's being ignored by her fellow MPs. Now, I'm not in the House of Commons and neither are you. I simply think that she might have a better view of the situation than either of us, hmmm?


You may have noticed that I wrote:

For the record, I think that gutlessness about Islam is pretty evenly distributed amongst the various parties here in Europe.


I also pointed out in the past that Pim Fortuyn was very far to the left - though he's now being called a right-winger for his views on Islam. You can file Bruce Bawer under that heading; ditto Sam Harris.

But hey - speaking as a right-winger myself, please feel free to define all those who talk sense about Islam as right-wing. We couldn't ask for better publicity.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

22. Comment #241229 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 2:47 am

avatarComment #241227 by Fanusi Khiyal

What you seem to not understand, for whatever reason, is that the title of the article is "spin", as was your response. You manage to spin an article about the introduction of a Forced Marriages bill as political inaction, and "politicians" (note the generalisation) being too scared to do anything. That is quite an amazing feat. I hope politicians show an equal "lack of courage" in other areas.... they might actually get something done.

Go Fanusi! You should have a great career in advertising or politics!

(Oh, and next time you talk about the left wing not doing anything about the problem, we can say you are "Cryer"ing wolf!)

Other Comments by Steve Zara

23. Comment #241230 by Quetzalcoatl on September 2, 2008 at 2:48 am

avatarHaving read the Telegraph article, it seems that she was mainly talking about politicians who have constituencies with high Muslim populations.

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

24. Comment #241231 by John Locke on September 2, 2008 at 2:51 am

avatar(in peace!)

no steve you're missing the point i think.

the original point fanusi made was referring to the torygraph article about HER saying how there is political inaction.

he wasnt (as far as im aware) saying that SHE was the inactive one.

i havnt been on here long enough to know your entire history (the pair of you!) but what happened? you really dont ever seem to see eye to eye....

Other Comments by John Locke

25. Comment #241234 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 2:54 am

avatarComment #241231 by John Locke

I was referring to was this statement:

Our politicians in action. What a wonderful system.


This "wonderful" system is currently working on introducing legal measures to protect women against forced marriages, so to imply that the system is failing, and that politicians in general are not taking action is clearly wrong.

Fanusi is a bright guy. He clearly realises the implications of such a generalisation, and that it isn't justified by the article.

It is a constant drip-feed of spin to imply that the liberal left are helpless, and doing nothing, so as to encourage people to support his right-wing agenda.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

26. Comment #241235 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 2:56 am

John Locke, thanks. The reason I believe this is that the article is the statements of a left wing politician reported in a right-wing newspaper, which agrees with what was reported by the classical liberal Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and also by Bruce Bawer, a gay American liberal who moved to Europe to get away from the Christian right.

This is a completely non-partisan issue. It isn't a matter of left vs. right, its a matter of right and wrong. Of basic human decency.

Steve on the other hand seems to think he knows more about the political system than those who are actually politicians.

The politician in question having written the following:

Five years ago, when I first raised the question of forced marriages in the House of Commons, I was accused of "demonising" the Asian community and was met with a wall of denial from some quarters. We now see government guidelines for Police and Social Workers to tackle forced marriages and an almost universal condemnation of the practise. Three years ago I suggested that immigrants to the UK ought to have an understanding of English and was described as seeking "Linguistic Imperialism" by many


Now this sounds a lot like what Ayaan Hirsi Ali faced when she was trying to get the Dutch parliament to face up to the number of honour killings that were going on.

---------

Quetz, of course it is.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

27. Comment #241236 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 2:58 am

avatarFanusi-
The politician in question having written the following:


And now has succeeded in passing a major bill on the issue with the support of the Prime Minister. What part of that simple concept eludes you?

Other Comments by Steve Zara

28. Comment #241237 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 3:04 am

And now has succeeded in passing a major bill on the issue with the support of the Prime Minister. What part of that simple concept eludes you?


After what appears to have been a rather long fight. Also, if she is telling the truth about these politicos attitudes - and I believe she is - then the law in and of itself won't be enough. Murdering teenage girls for honour has always been against the Law, and it still goes on. Surprise, surprise. What is needed is the political will to make the law work.

What is difficult about the statement that if a politician describes the attitudes of her fellow politicians she probably has a better handle on that then you or I?

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

29. Comment #241239 by John Locke on September 2, 2008 at 3:06 am

avatarsteve:

i see your point, but still think fanusi is correct on that. maybe "our politicians in action" wasnt the best choice of words because it implys that none are doing anything, but in the context of his post and the article i dont think its wrong.

on fanusi's "right-wing agenda", cant say i know the guy, or at least have not been here long enough to see any evidence of it.

people who dare criticise religions, particularly muslims are often accused of being right wing or closet racists. it is hard to criticise faiths especially when the majority of followers are also ethnically diverse. perhaps rightly so, because it makes sure you say exactly what you mean and that you word your citicisms very carefully and much more thoughtfully than you would otherwise.

Other Comments by John Locke

30. Comment #241240 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 3:08 am

avatarComment #241237 by Fanusi Khiyal

What is difficult about the statement that if a politician describes the attitudes of her fellow politicians she probably has a better handle on that then you or I?


I am sure she has, and she has had a long fight, and I congratulate her.

Buy my congratulations is in stark contrast to your smearing of politicians in general and the "system". There is a long fight ahead in many areas, and this article shows that we can make progress. But people like you aren't helping if you don't recognise the victories.

Why don't you join me in recognising that the current goverment is actually doing something important and praiseworthy, instead of trying to spread nothing but gloom and doom?

Other Comments by Steve Zara

32. Comment #241242 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 3:11 am

*dryly* John Locke, 'our politicians in action' can imply most politicians, not all politicians. As I said, from reading her site, this looks like she managed to push the bill through after facing considerable opposition, and I'm worried about the bill, once on the books, not being properly enforced.

As regards my 'right-wing agenda' - you may notice that here I have been talking about a completely non-partisan agenda. I have one and only one political agenda at the moment and that is to stop the Jihad.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

33. Comment #241243 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 3:15 am

Why don't you join me in recognising that the current goverment is actually doing something important and praiseworthy, instead of trying to spread nothing but gloom and doom?


To be specific, I think it's her triumph and she deserves the credit for that. If she pushed the bill through in the face of opposition, then good for her. She's the one who deserves the credit not those that opposed her. And it is she who says that there was and is widespread opposition from her fellow MPs. Now either she's telling the truth about this, or she is not. I have explained why I think she is. I fail to see how agreeing with someone who has the facts is a bad thing.

EDIT: Once again, here is what she said:

Mrs Cryer, 68, said: "There still is a nervousness to talk about this, especially those MPs in constituencies affected by these issues.
"They should be fighting on the front line, but they are the ones keeping quiet on the issue because they don't want to lose votes.
"Some of the Muslim leaders in my area are doing their communities a disservice and trying to keep them in the backwoods. They don't seem to have any understanding about the importance of having integration and cohesion, or to promote women to leadership roles in the community."


Now I think she's telling the truth, and that is why I said what I did.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

34. Comment #241244 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 3:20 am

avatarComment #241243 by Fanusi Khiyal

I fail to see how agreeing with someone who has the facts is a bad thing.


You are a bright guy, careful with words.

What you did was to cherry-pick from the story, to clearly imply that "the system" was failing to confront forced marriages, whereas the story shows a major victory - "the system" has produced this important bill. I would expect that of a journalist with an agenda, but not someone who posts at a site for rationalist and clear thinking, and wishes to support those values.

Things aren't black and white. They aren't all gloom and doom. If you make the hill we have to climb look too steep, many will give up. We have to celebrate victories, and not try and spin everything in the worst way.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

35. Comment #241245 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 3:21 am

Steve for the last time, she herself said that. I agreed.

And yes I do have an agenda, which is for this madness to stop. I don't see how bellyaching about how I phrased this or that helps it.

Could we please drop this hairsplitting?

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

36. Comment #241248 by Diacanu on September 2, 2008 at 3:44 am

avatarHere we fucking go again.

Fanusi, can I just cut to the chase, and assume you're going to grace every thread on Islam abusing women, and skip 'em?

Other Comments by Diacanu

37. Comment #241249 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 3:46 am

avatarComment #241248 by Diacanu

Don't worry, I will provoke no more, so things may quieten down. I think I have made my points clearly and often enough!

Other Comments by Steve Zara

38. Comment #241251 by Quetzalcoatl on September 2, 2008 at 3:48 am

avatarDiacanu-

I'm disappointed that you've succumbed to peer pressure and switched your avatar back. At least with my potential change (see my blog) I'm putting it to the vote and will abide by it!

Steve-

No, I'm afraid I don't quite understand your position. :)

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

39. Comment #241252 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 3:48 am

Diacanu,

I raise the issue of what is going on right here in the United Kingdom. You apparently care more about the fact that it's me who's posting it than about the horrors going on.

How you managed to live with yourself is beyond me.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

40. Comment #241253 by epeeist on September 2, 2008 at 3:50 am

avatarPerhaps people ought to read the parliamentary proceedings for the bill, this will give you some insight as to who supported it - http://www.epolitix.com/legislation/legislation-details/newsarticle/forced-marriage-civil-protection-act-2007/

Other Comments by epeeist

41. Comment #241254 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 3:54 am

avatarComment #241251 by Quetzalcoatl

Comment #241234
Comment #241240
Comment #241244

Other Comments by Steve Zara

42. Comment #241255 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 3:55 am

avatarComment #241248 by Diacanu

PM for you.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

43. Comment #241256 by Verylee on September 2, 2008 at 3:57 am

avatarComment #241248 by Diacanu
Here we fucking go again.


Suffering as well?!....I already have a bad dose of "peak oil post fatigue syndrome"! As with donor fatigue, I avoid reading Tera's posts in case I get this sudden urge to rush out and buy the biggest 4 X 4 I can find and tear up the countryside! :)

Other Comments by Verylee

44. Comment #241257 by Ian on September 2, 2008 at 3:59 am

Fanusi, you've lost this and Steve is quite right.

This is a victory for parliamentary democracy and should be presented as such.

Yes, there was a five year fight to achieve this, but nevertheless people changed.

The headline writer and you both mislead me into assuming this was bad news when it is good. That's a 180 degree falsehood and neither Steve or any rationalist worth his salt will tolerate that sort of folly.

Other Comments by Ian

45. Comment #241259 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 4:03 am

Ian, I praised Cryer's triumph. This is falsehood - how? I also said, as did the article's headline, said that many politicians were dragging their feet about this because they were afraid of loosing Muslim votes. This is what Ann Cryer said. Now is she, or is she not, telling the truth?

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

46. Comment #241262 by John Locke on September 2, 2008 at 4:09 am

avatarwell put ian but a few things:

as i pointed out it was a very misleading title.

i agree with fanusi on his initial point, to paraphrase, that it was HER who was criticising other MPs for being to scared to act. as a statement in itself you cant argue with that. its her opinion on the matter.

havign read into it i agree that the bill should be seen and presented as a victory, so his initial post and thereby the article are too negative and focussing away from the good points, in a wider context. the article in itself isnt false however it is a contemporary article
reporting what she said, and is not reffering directly to the bill that was passed last year.

it was after his post that such a connection was made, and not made in the article either.

Other Comments by John Locke

47. Comment #241263 by HunterZolomon on September 2, 2008 at 4:11 am

avatarCome on guys, anyone here can see the article is a positive one. The Forced Marriage Act is a step in the right direction. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a problem with politicians who cater to barbaric Muslim behaviour to gain votes.

The article is meant to create awareness, I'm sad to see it causes such division between people in this thread who should stand shoulder to shoulder on issues like this.

Other Comments by HunterZolomon

48. Comment #241264 by Steve Zara on September 2, 2008 at 4:12 am

avatarComment #241257 by Ian

The headline writer and you both mislead me into assuming this was bad news when it is good.


This is a general problem in the media - it isn't restricted to any particular political stance. Journalists tend to be after the most exciting angle they can find in a story, and "we are making progress" doesn't shock you into reading the story. This usually isn't too bad, if the more complex situation is presented in the article, but the headline can be the thing that sticks in the mind, and influences people's thoughts.

I believe even some reputable publications are guilty of this. Even New Scientist tends to publish quite complex stories with misleading headlines like "Black Holes don't exist!" or "The end of Relativity?"

Other Comments by Steve Zara

49. Comment #241265 by Fanusi Khiyal on September 2, 2008 at 4:14 am

Come on guys, anyone here can see the article is a positive one. The Forced Marriage Act is a step in the right direction. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a problem with politicians who cater to barbaric Muslim behaviour to gain votes.


Thank you, HunterZolomon. That's exactly what I have been talking about.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

50. Comment #241266 by HunterZolomon on September 2, 2008 at 4:17 am

avatarFanusi Khiyal
"Thank you, HunterZolomon. That's exactly what I have been talking about."

Ever the watchdog, eh Fanusi :)

Other Comments by HunterZolomon
Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 3 4 5 | Next | Last

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: