14 Comments »It has been days since reports of a Saudi girl was murdered by her father for talking on Facebook. My initial response was to not publish the story because I hate to cater to the negative sensationalism that is media today. It is not my job to determine what to display or what not to display though, my job is instead to tell the story. Since this is a blog I also get to tell my opinion so I’ll do so in the following post after explaining what happened.
A Telegraph article posted the night before last provided details as to exactly what took place. As I stated at the beginning of this article, a girl was murdered by her father for using Facebook. What really created the story was the response of Ali al-Maliki, a Saudi preacher and critic of Facebook.
He stated “Facebook is a door to lust and young women and men are spending more on their mobile phones and the Internet than they are spending on food.” This sounds similar to the same radical ideals illustrated by the thought leaders that guided many of Osama bin Laden’s ideals. We saw what those ideas resulted in. The bottom line is this: open and transparent communication leads to a better understanding of culture and standards by individuals worldwide.
Facebook is trying to further this ideal and this is why they are translating into over 20 languages in the coming months (and possibly weeks). The critics of transparent communication are simply those that have manipulated existing communication channels. Only in a democracy could such a system be created and as such Facebook (and other social networks) will continue to receive backlash worldwide.
It is highly unfortunate that this father decided to murder his own daughter but any father that would participate in such an act is not mentally stable no matter how you put it. If you want to read more about what happened exactly go check out the Telegraph article. Do you see social networks as part of a broader global movement? Am I simply preaching idealist theories? What are your thoughts?
I don't think there is anything wrong with making this post Nick. It is very hard to believe that this could happen - however it does and it is really terrible. To suggest or imply that it is Facebook's fault for this horrendous crime would be inappropriate and sensational - (which I do not think you did by the way). It is also dangerous to make any assumption that this action is condoned in any way within Saudi culture. There are those that may be opposed to the use of Facebook but I have never read of anyone suggesting that this was an appropriate reaction.
As a father with two Daughters I cannot imagine how deranged that man must have been to commit such a hideous crime. It is just very sad.
Thank you for shedding a light on this issue.
Eric
I don’t think there is anything wrong with making this post Nick. It is very hard to believe that this could happen - however it does and it is really terrible. To suggest or imply that it is Facebook’s fault for this horrendous crime would be inappropriate and sensational - (which I do not think you did by the way). It is also dangerous to make any assumption that this action is condoned in any way within Saudi culture. There are those that may be opposed to the use of Facebook but I have never read of anyone suggesting that this was an appropriate reaction.
As a father with two Daughters I cannot imagine how deranged that man must have been to commit such a hideous crime. It is just very sad.
Thank you for shedding a light on this issue.
Eric
Honor killings are much too prevalent in tribal Arab societies where the Muslim populace is too afraid to speak against practices like these which are apparently antithetical to Islam. Of course, it's Islam that causes the populace to be unwilling or afraid to speak out, so it's no surprise there's a confusion about what's the cause of honor killings: Arab culture or Islam.
Honor killings are much too prevalent in tribal Arab societies where the Muslim populace is too afraid to speak against practices like these which are apparently antithetical to Islam. Of course, it’s Islam that causes the populace to be unwilling or afraid to speak out, so it’s no surprise there’s a confusion about what’s the cause of honor killings: Arab culture or Islam.
Deranged religious believes, breeds deranged actions.
If you 'offend' someone by saying the murder of a young woman who visiting a website is an abhorrent event, then good. You should not start worrying about posting this sort of thing either, be proud, be open, be upfront about denouncing the brutish actions of those who try to stifle free-speech.
Deranged religious believes, breeds deranged actions.
If you ‘offend’ someone by saying the murder of a young woman who visiting a website is an abhorrent event, then good. You should not start worrying about posting this sort of thing either, be proud, be open, be upfront about denouncing the brutish actions of those who try to stifle free-speech.
Unforunately, as Derek's post seems to demonstrate, there is a fair bit of Islamophobia around and Muslim-baiting is still a growing internet sport. Any sensationalist story about the Middle East brings these people out by the dozens and the only casualty are the “moderate Muslims” who are too afraid to say anything. Why? The second a “moderate Muslim” opens his/her mouth they are bombarded with ridiculous accusations of “not doing enough to stop X” as if regular people on the street can be judge, jury, and executioner or “prove an allegiance to Y” as if being Muslim and a patriot are two multually exclusive things. I applaud you Nick for wanting to be careful but I hope you can see it from our end.
@Derek: Before Islam was founded nearly 1400 years ago, honor killings were to norm in tribal Arab societies just as you stated. After Islam, it was strictly prohibited and punishments were doled out. Would you believe one of the biggest issues the non-Muslim tribal Arabs had with Prophet Muhammad was his banning of infanticide and honor killings? It's funny how this message gets lost when someone is blinded by hate of Islam. With that said your blame is misplaced for those “unwilling or afraid to speak out.” There are three major culprits. The obvious one is the oppressive Saudi regime that our country (America) supports. The second is the desire for our media to give these crazy people, such as this preacher, a voice to broadcast his hate and intolerance to millions. The third is you. Yes, you. Let me explain.
People like you are the type that still continue to claim today that Muslims didn't speak out enough post-9/11. A search of the internet will show that every major Muslim organization on both ends of the liberal and conservative spectrum spoke out and condemned the attacks. Yet, somehow no matter how loud those organizations spoke nor how many press conferences were held, these organization's messages fell on deaf ears. This leads one to ask: if a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around does it make a sound? Or in this case, if a Muslim organization condemns an act of violence and nobody wants to hear it does it still matter?
At this point, many of us in the American Muslim community are exhausted. Regardless of what we say there are too many out there who want to believe all 1.2 billion of us are the spawn of satan. Our religion is blamed from everything to 9/11, honor killings, genocide, and everything else that is evil in this world. On one hand we have a psychotic few like Osama bending scripture to fit their world view but on the other we have “enlightened” non-Muslim Westerners bending scripture to fit their hatred for all things Islam. Its interesting how psychotic terrorists and Islamophobs make for strange bedfellows.
As far as the comment above. No human can condone the actions of the father. Unfortunately, its always more complicated than the story we read. Facebook may just have been the straw that broke the camels back and set off this terrible man (animal?) to do the unthinkable. How sick and disgusting of him. I certainly hope that if this story is true then this man gets the maximum punishment allowed by law.
Tragedy is always a terrible time to bring this up but we must recognize that our cultural norms are sometimes shunned by other nations of the world. This certainly does not condone what this father did but to judge a nation because they aren't into Facebook stinks of ethnocentrism. If we are to maintain our lead in the 21st century in an increasingly connected world then we need to understand and accept that not everyone may agree with what we do here. I want to make it very clear: this doesn't mean that we accept terrible crimes like murder or honor killings. What it means is that we accept that social constructs are different for other nations and other people.
Unforunately, as Derek’s post seems to demonstrate, there is a fair bit of Islamophobia around and Muslim-baiting is still a growing internet sport. Any sensationalist story about the Middle East brings these people out by the dozens and the only casualty are the “moderate Muslims” who are too afraid to say anything. Why? The second a “moderate Muslim” opens his/her mouth they are bombarded with ridiculous accusations of “not doing enough to stop X” as if regular people on the street can be judge, jury, and executioner or “prove an allegiance to Y” as if being Muslim and a patriot are two multually exclusive things. I applaud you Nick for wanting to be careful but I hope you can see it from our end.
@Derek: Before Islam was founded nearly 1400 years ago, honor killings were to norm in tribal Arab societies just as you stated. After Islam, it was strictly prohibited and punishments were doled out. Would you believe one of the biggest issues the non-Muslim tribal Arabs had with Prophet Muhammad was his banning of infanticide and honor killings? It’s funny how this message gets lost when someone is blinded by hate of Islam. With that said your blame is misplaced for those “unwilling or afraid to speak out.” There are three major culprits. The obvious one is the oppressive Saudi regime that our country (America) supports. The second is the desire for our media to give these crazy people, such as this preacher, a voice to broadcast his hate and intolerance to millions. The third is you. Yes, you. Let me explain.
People like you are the type that still continue to claim today that Muslims didn’t speak out enough post-9/11. A search of the internet will show that every major Muslim organization on both ends of the liberal and conservative spectrum spoke out and condemned the attacks. Yet, somehow no matter how loud those organizations spoke nor how many press conferences were held, these organization’s messages fell on deaf ears. This leads one to ask: if a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around does it make a sound? Or in this case, if a Muslim organization condemns an act of violence and nobody wants to hear it does it still matter?
At this point, many of us in the American Muslim community are exhausted. Regardless of what we say there are too many out there who want to believe all 1.2 billion of us are the spawn of satan. Our religion is blamed from everything to 9/11, honor killings, genocide, and everything else that is evil in this world. On one hand we have a psychotic few like Osama bending scripture to fit their world view but on the other we have “enlightened” non-Muslim Westerners bending scripture to fit their hatred for all things Islam. Its interesting how psychotic terrorists and Islamophobs make for strange bedfellows.
As far as the comment above. No human can condone the actions of the father. Unfortunately, its always more complicated than the story we read. Facebook may just have been the straw that broke the camels back and set off this terrible man (animal?) to do the unthinkable. How sick and disgusting of him. I certainly hope that if this story is true then this man gets the maximum punishment allowed by law.
Tragedy is always a terrible time to bring this up but we must recognize that our cultural norms are sometimes shunned by other nations of the world. This certainly does not condone what this father did but to judge a nation because they aren’t into Facebook stinks of ethnocentrism. If we are to maintain our lead in the 21st century in an increasingly connected world then we need to understand and accept that not everyone may agree with what we do here. I want to make it very clear: this doesn’t mean that we accept terrible crimes like murder or honor killings. What it means is that we accept that social constructs are different for other nations and other people.
“Facebook is a door to lust and young women and men are spending more on their mobile phones and the Internet than they are spending on food.†This sounds similar to the same radical ideals illustrated by the thought leaders…
How the hell is this radical? It's true. We spend 400 dollars for an iphone when people are still living in under 2 dollars a day. smh. Since when is truth radical?
“Facebook is a door to lust and young women and men are spending more on their mobile phones and the Internet than they are spending on food.†This sounds similar to the same radical ideals illustrated by the thought leaders…
How the hell is this radical? It’s true. We spend 400 dollars for an iphone when people are still living in under 2 dollars a day. smh. Since when is truth radical?
You know I find it strange that this story has been published in The Telegraph but I live here in Saudi Arabia and have not heard this story from any of the newspapers here or the news? Am I missing something??
I would really dislike if the Saudi Government blocks facebook as it's an excellent social network IF used properly. But the sad reality is that I cannot blame or criticize the Saudi Government if they do block facebook. Just log on to the Saudi Network on facebook and see all the pronographic groups, the pornographic user profiles, the porn spam and the women and men using facebook as a perverted tool to meet others.
All of that is AGAINST facebook rules itself, so I think facebook should be first to take action before the Saudi Government does.
This way the 10's of thousands of users in Saudi Arabia can continue to use it.
You know I find it strange that this story has been published in The Telegraph but I live here in Saudi Arabia and have not heard this story from any of the newspapers here or the news? Am I missing something??
I would really dislike if the Saudi Government blocks facebook as it’s an excellent social network IF used properly. But the sad reality is that I cannot blame or criticize the Saudi Government if they do block facebook. Just log on to the Saudi Network on facebook and see all the pronographic groups, the pornographic user profiles, the porn spam and the women and men using facebook as a perverted tool to meet others.
All of that is AGAINST facebook rules itself, so I think facebook should be first to take action before the Saudi Government does.
This way the 10’s of thousands of users in Saudi Arabia can continue to use it.
This is in response to the April 5th Tom:
I ran across this blog looking for any updates on this story, (I have not as yet found any), and felt I should write something in respose to your comments.
First off, Islamic law, based on the Quran and Sunnah (hadith), actually condone Honor killings. The notion that these kinds of murders are somehow “un-Islamic” is pure nonsense:
1. You need to study a little about Sharia law and how it effects the courts in predominatnly Muslim countries. Under Sharia, the family, (based on the decision of the nearest male relative) of the victim choses the punishment for the murderer. The family of the victim can chose “an eye for an eye” (ie death for the culpret) or “blood money”. Additionally, under Sharia, a Muslim cannot be killed for killing a non-Muslim - but must pay blood-money. A Muslim only faces the death penalty if he kills another Muslim. At any rate, under this arrangement, fathers or brothers who kill their daughters or sisters are never punished.
2. Mohammad himself condoned honor killings in the hadith, upon which Saria law is based. Normally, a man would have to pay blood money for killing a non-Muslim, but Mohammad waived the penalty in the case of a man who killed his slave-wife:
—-QUOTE—-
Sunan Abu Dawud: Book 38, Number 4348:
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.
—-END QUOTE—-
So, your notion that honor killings are somehow 'un-Islamic' don't match with the facts.
This is in response to the April 5th Tom:
I ran across this blog looking for any updates on this story, (I have not as yet found any), and felt I should write something in respose to your comments.
First off, Islamic law, based on the Quran and Sunnah (hadith), actually condone Honor killings. The notion that these kinds of murders are somehow “un-Islamic” is pure nonsense:
1. You need to study a little about Sharia law and how it effects the courts in predominatnly Muslim countries. Under Sharia, the family, (based on the decision of the nearest male relative) of the victim choses the punishment for the murderer. The family of the victim can chose “an eye for an eye” (ie death for the culpret) or “blood money”. Additionally, under Sharia, a Muslim cannot be killed for killing a non-Muslim - but must pay blood-money. A Muslim only faces the death penalty if he kills another Muslim. At any rate, under this arrangement, fathers or brothers who kill their daughters or sisters are never punished.
2. Mohammad himself condoned honor killings in the hadith, upon which Saria law is based. Normally, a man would have to pay blood money for killing a non-Muslim, but Mohammad waived the penalty in the case of a man who killed his slave-wife:
—-QUOTE—-
Sunan Abu Dawud: Book 38, Number 4348:
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:
A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.
—-END QUOTE—-
So, your notion that honor killings are somehow ‘un-Islamic’ don’t match with the facts.