I love the line from a "Muslim community leader" in the NYT story:

“This is not an honor killing, no way.”
Dr. Tabbaa added, “It has nothing to do with his faith.”

Unlike those of every other faith who've been beheading people in recent years.

though to my untutored eye things look bad

Maybe it was an *accidental* decapitation? I know *I* hate it when that happens.

For that matter, is there any proof she didn't decapitate herself? Eh?

The irony of this story is somewhat diminished when you find out the TV station was actually the wife's idea. Apparently she was more committed to overcoming stereotypes than he was.

Setting that aside, some sources have suggested that the guy wasn't even a particularly devout Muslim. So it's not automatically an honor killing or what have you. I don't think there's enough information to know whether it was a religious thing, a cultural thing, or simply a domestic violence thing. You don't have to be a Muslim to have anger issues.

You don't have to be a Muslim to have anger issues.

And if it's not possible to say that every single crime or act of violence in all of human history was committed by a Muslim, it logically follows that there can be no possible relationship between Islam and violence.

And if it's not possible to say that every single crime or act of violence in all of human history was committed by a Muslim, it logically follows that there can be no possible relationship between Islam and violence.

I would think if you're arguing that there's an inherent connection between Islam and violence, the burden would be on you to prove that connection, and not on the person who doesn't believe in it to prove it doesn't exist.

Isn't it getting pretty hard to dispute that this particular psychopathy is found only among Arab Muslims?

If I recall correctly, Daniel Pearl was beheaded by Pakistanis, and Jemaah Islamiyah in Indonesia has done beheadings as well. So I think the stereotype is Muslim but not Arab specific.

Isn't it getting pretty hard to dispute that this particular psychopathy is found only among Arab Muslims? For a stereotype, it seems pretty accurate.

Mexican drug gangs seem to be partial to beheading people



Although I suppose they could be the work of Mexican drug gang members who have converted to Islam.

The majority of beheadings may be committed by muslims, but I think it is a mistake to say this is only a behavior of muslims.

Mark Steyn's observations are, as usual, outstanding:

Headless Body in Legless Story

Kathryn, that self-pitying imam is part of a now familiar pattern: Pay no attention to that dead body; the real victim here is Islam.

Beheaded woman in Buffalo? "Shocked friend says murder damages Islam's image."

Hindus, Jews and Christians massacred in Bombay? "The recent terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India highlight the dangerously vulnerable situation of India’s Muslims."

But enough about all these corpses: Let's talk about me.

Yet we never do. Jonah writes today about the reluctance of journalists (a profession that congratulates itself on its "bravery" and "courage" far more than, say, firemen do) to speak truth to politically correct power — or, as I put it in my testimony in Toronto last week, their willingness to serve as eunuchs to the PC sultans.

Oddly enough, the one story that did decline to take spokesimams at face value came from, of all people, The Toronto Star's reporter:

Aasiya Hassan recently filed for divorce, authorities said. According to Buffalo News reports, she obtained an order of protection on Feb. 6, barring her husband from their home in Orchard Park.

Under sharia law followed by Muslims, a woman can ask for a divorce, but only a man can grant the request, and he can refuse, according to a book on sharia published last month, Cruel and Usual Punishment, by Egyptian-born American author Nonie Darwish.

Under Islamic law, crimes such as apostasy (leaving Islam), adultery, theft or drinking alcohol are punishable by beheading, stoning, amputation of limbs or flogging, the book says.

As a Canadian reader wrote: "Wow. Someone at the Star hasn't been reading the employee handbook."

But that's the point. Spousal murder is not unusual. Beheading your wife is. If Muzzammil Hassan decapitated his as an Islamic ritual, then his entire professional life — Mister Moderate Muslim — was a lie. In other words, it would be the work of moments for even the laziest hack to work up exactly the same "hypocrisy" angle that the press stampede after when some evangelical preacher turns out to have a thing for fetching young rent boys.

As I noted at the weekend, when Mr. Hassan launched his Bridges TV station to counter "negative stereotypes" of Muslims, he got the traditional tongue baths from NBC's Brian Williams, NPR's "All Things Considered" et al - even though the station was entirely unwatched. Don't they have a responsibility to revisit the story now that it's got a little more complicated - or, as old-school editors would say, "newsworthy" - than the press releases they read out a couple of years back?

From The Chicago Tribune, November 30th 2004:

Although many may welcome the channel as a vital voice missing from the mainstream media, scholars say it must transcend a number of obstacles to survive.

John Voll, director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, said some audiences might have a hard time accepting Islam and modernity in the same package, which is exactly what the network hopes to demonstrate.

Not as hard a time as Mr. Hassan had reconciling Islam and modernity.

From NBC Nightly News, December 9th 2004:

[REPORTER RON] ALLEN: It's the brainchild of Aasiya Zubair, an architect, and her husband, Muzzammil Hassan, a banker, who are disturbed that negative images of Muslims seem to dominate TV, especially since 9/11.

Ms. AASIYA ZUBAIR: I did not want my kids growing up to watch Muslims being portrayed as terrorists.

No, indeed. Instead, it's their father who turned out to be the terrorist — no different from the London School of Economics-educated British subject behind the beheading of Daniel Pearl.

That's what makes this a story rather than one family's tragedy. If you're not intrigued by the apparent fraud at the heart of this man's life and work — a fraud in which the U.S. media cheerfully colluded — you lack the elementary curiosity necessary to be a journalist.

Xanthippas - I'd think the person who wants to suggest the connection doesn't exist should refrain from tossing out trite, irrelevant factoids like "you don't have to be Muslim to have anger issues."

"you don't have to be Muslim to have anger issues."

What's an anger issue? Is this how we talk about violent crime these days? How about "he's prone to violence?" Enough with this modern psychobabble.

being an Italian American is a matter of descent while being a Muslim American is a matter of ideology.

Bill,

I take it you don't personally know any Muslim Americans and you don't have any friends who are Muslim Americans.

Then how can you speak on the matter with any authority?

Your claims do not follow from what I wrote and are completely wrong. If you wish to contest what I said, by all means give it a try, but let's have evidence and argument, not empty personal innuendo.

Ok. Why can't someone be a Muslim American as a matter of "descent"?

You have Muslim American friends? Really?

Next time you see this "friend", ask him if he's a Muslim American "as a matter of ideology."

510 F.2d 1246

The Anti-Defamation League sued the Mexican-American Anti-Defamation Committee on the grounds that the latter's name would confuse the public. The court agreed.

I wonder if the ADL ever sued the Italian-American ADL.

Anyone know?

Ok. Why can't someone be a Muslim American as a matter of "descent"?

For the same reason someone cannot be an Episcopalian as a matter of descent. Religious practice is a learned behavior, and religious knowledge a learned set of propositions. Neither one is a heritable trait.

Ok. Why can't someone be a Muslim American as a matter of "descent"?

For the same reason someone cannot be an Episcopalian as a matter of descent. Religious practice is a learned behavior, and religious knowledge a learned set of propositions. Neither one is a heritable trait.

You know how there are "cultural Jews"? There are also "cultural Muslims." They come from Muslim families, and identify as Muslim American, but aren't really practicing or very religious. Their Muslim American identity hinges more on their parentage than their "behavior" or "knowledge."

Hey Rich,

I was responding to the claim that

this particular psychopathy is found only among Arab Muslims

This statement is wrong, and I said so.

I'm prepared to accept that most videos of beheadings are made, produced, and viewed by muslims. Does it go without saying that obviously I think such things are horrible?

But AFAIK the horrific killing of Mrs. Hassan was not videotaped. I'm also not sure how killing one's spouse is intended to incite others to jihad. Videotaping of beheadings just doesn't have much to do with this particular case.

And if the stereotype is that "muslims behead people and videotape it", then this situation doesn't really fit that stereotype.

Jeez, what with this evidence, we'd better deport all the Muslims before they all go head-sawin' crazy! It's clearly going to happen at one point or another.

I think it's some kind of genetic memory of all the choppings that went on in the the Crusades that caused it.

Anderson wrote at 2.18.2009 6:30pm:

Maybe it was an *accidental* decapitation? I know *I* hate it when that happens.

Well, he was charged with second degree murder. First degree seems more applicable for a beheading. It usually requires some premeditation to behead someone.

I'm not sure how you get second degree, unless the killer was a swordsman just waving a broadsword around with wanton and willful disregard of unreasonable risk to human life, and just happened to lop off somebody's head.

Their Muslim American identity hinges more on their parentage

So if person A's parents were born in Indonesia, and person B's grandparents were from Beirut, and the A's parents had been not Hindu or Animist but Muslim, and B's grandparents had been not Catholic or Druze but Muslim, and neither A nor B were religious, they would feel some kind of bond?

I'd be curious how many of the gentile atheists and agnostics posting here identify as Christian, or feel some connection to the Pope because they had Catholic ancestors.

neuro:

another instance of a spurned male resorting to murder, something not all that uncommon here in the US

Here's a relevant stat (pdf):

1,247 women and 440 men were killed by an intimate partner in 2000

.

Obviously, the problem here is not that he killed her. The problem is that he didn't do it the way a 'normal' American would: shooting, beating, stabbing, strangling etc. If he had the good taste to stick with one of those approved methods, we would never have heard the story.

Steyn admits this shamelessly, and with no sense of irony:

Spousal murder is not unusual. Beheading your wife is.

So the problem is not really the murder. It's that he didn't do it the way one of us would have done it.

The problem with foreigners is that they're not willing to give up their un-American murder methods and learn the proper American methods.

Methods of murdering people are influenced by culture just as everything else is. Beheading seems to be a more common method of spousal killing in the Muslim world than in other parts of the world, so it's hardly surprising that American Muslims (whose subculture is affected by the worldwide culture of Islam generally) would be more likely than other Americans to pick beheading as their chosen method of murder whether or not it was a religiously-rationalized murder.

In any case, a more culturally secular-American method of spousal killing like beating her to death would not have been an improvement.

jukeboxgrad: So the problem is not really the murder. It's that he didn't do it the way one of us would have done it.

Nonsense! The question is whether it was something of a so-called "honor killing," making it a question of cultural influences, even among those born in this country, or apart from the method employed it was just another male exploding in homicidal rage. (Again, do we know if he killed her by beheading her, a method perhaps more cruel, and certainly more revulsive than shooting, or if he killed her first by some other means, then cut off her head for whatever reason(s)?)

I wasn't aware that beheading is common in "honor killings," if that is indeed true. I thought it was a method favored by Islamofascist terrorists meaning to "inspire" others to follow in their footsteps, as it seems to have done, and terrorize their enemies, which is to say the "civilized" world. (I wouldn't try to fold in here beheading by guillotining or by sword when employed as a means of execution. The subject is a husband chosing this means to murder his wife, and the question is what we can reasonably infer given what we do/don't know as far as the particulars.)

Wow. Someone who has never heard of Jews. At the VC no less.

Just because some jews believe in religion being passed down by matrilineal descent doesn't make it true. The fact that Israel also adopts this policy also doesn't make it true.

People are in a faith for one (or more) of three reasons:

1. They were raised in it.

2. They were brought or decided to believe in it.

3. They are forced to participate.

In a land without a state faith (say, America) it does not matter what faith the mother is, someone with a jewish mother can choose to attend a temple or not. They can choose to be a jew, or not. Just like I can choose to be a baptist, or not.

Part of the newsworthiness is the irony. This guy had a business model for a television station which would show Muslims in a positive light. Despite Saudi subsidies, he was losing money, which put him under stress. I guess he couldn't sell the concept. Like Air America.
It would still be a creepy story, but the irony punches it up by an order of magnitude.

If a statement can be characterized as a "stereotype," some will automatically decry it; others will react according to whether they believe it generally true (high, low, or no predictive value) and how it is used (hateful or non-hateful ends). It may be stereotyping to say that law school professors are very smart, since there must be some among the universe of law school professors who are not so smart or have declined considerably since their zenith, but who would care about such stereotyping and object.

True "honor killings" are virtually unknown among some groups, while not very surprising among others. I am no anthropologist and allow that I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that "honor killings" are more common among Muslims than most other groups. (I suppose one could call a Texan finding their spouse in bed with someone else, shooting them, and being acquitted an "honor killing" that is accepted by the community, but for a number of reasons I don't think that really pertains here.)

There is reason to wonder if this was to some extent a "cultural" expression, if you will, or not. That is, does it simply say something about the murderer, nothing about the community he belonged to. That is an entirely legitimate question and one that should be asked, IMO.

Again, I withhold judgment as to whether or not it should be seen as a so-called "honor killing" until more facts are in. I would not say, and think it nonsense to say, "So the problem is not really the murder. It's that he didn't do it the way one of us would have done it."

neuro:

do we know if he killed her by beheading her… or if he killed her first by some other means, then cut off her head for whatever reason

I agree that this is an interesting question, and I haven't seen anyone else raise it (either here or elsewhere).

The question is whether it was something of a so-called "honor killing," … or … just another male exploding in homicidal rage.

I understand your point, and I agree. But what I'm saying is that if he had used a more 'American' method, the question you're raising would probably have never been raised, and the event would have gone relatively unnoticed. It just would have been another domestic violence statistic.

Also, I think some of the people discussing this might be using the term "honor killing" too loosely. Please consider these two scenarios:

A) My brother raped my 9-year old daughter. I'm upset that she dishonored me in this manner, so we stoned her to death. Then my brother and I went out drinking (non-alcoholic beverages, of course).

B) My wife has decided to leave me, and this really pisses me off. I'm upset that she dishonored me in this manner, so I put a bullet in her head.

B can be called an 'honor killing' only if we're using the term very loosely. And the facts in this case are probably much closer to B than A. When B happens in a WASP family in Greenwich CT (as sometimes happens), no one calls that an "honor killing."

I suppose one could call a Texan finding their spouse in bed with someone else, shooting them, and being acquitted an "honor killing"

I think you're making an important point, which is that if we give the term a broad definition, we discover that it happens in our own culture.

I would not say, and think it nonsense to say, "So the problem is not really the murder. It's that he didn't do it the way one of us would have done it."

If facts come out which indicate that it was an act of simple domestic violence, and not an honor killing, I think it will then be obvious that the story got so much attention only (or mostly) because "he didn't do it the way one of us would have done it."

And I think that's already obvious. Would we have even heard this story at all, if he had used a gun? I don't think so.

=================
eager:

the circumstances are redolent of Muslim violence against women.

Your remark is redolent of prejudice.

Women are killed by their partners every day, and many of those killers are undoubtedly Christians and Jews, but those deaths are not described as 'Christian violence' or 'Jewish violence.' And if the killer is an atheist, do we describe it as 'atheistic violence?'

Anyway, it would be interesting to know if Muslims in America kill their wives more often than, say, Protestants in America. Do you know?

"honor killing" is separated from DV by the social context. It freqently is a matter of plotting by several members of the family, and some of them are accomplices. See the case in Texas where the mom and brother induced the two girls to return home where dad could get them. The community--in the west, the local Muslim community--agrees, or at least a number of them do. Few DV victims are said to get what they deserve, speaking to journalists, see a case in Germany where the poor kid's classmates--Islamic type--said she got what was coming to her.
It is generally cold-blooded, in that the vic got several performance reviews along the way, complete with threats.
If this clown just blew up and there were no family accomplices and no previous attempts at counseling with his wife to get her to change her ways, it is probably DV with an extra-gross kicker.
But the other context--his television ambitions--add a whole hell of a lot to it.

nick

Sweet. Now, where was the money to go after the employees received it? It couldn't have been a Saudi charity for unemployed television workers.

Richard Aubrey: Beheading keeps the beheadee from gaining paradise.

Really, no kidding? If true, I suppose though this one might not fit neatly into the "honor killing" box, it would still be an Islamic thing.

According the Canadian Free Press, the woman was beheaded to keep her out of Muslim Paradise, as is taught in some types of Islam.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/8648

JukeBoxGrad -- Thanks for the update.

I didn't say anything about "the beheadee's future prospects." I said something about Hagmann's credibility.

And speaking of credibility, some information about yours can be found via here.