Canberra, Australia: Muslim Man Assaults Daughter For Dressing Unislamically In Public
A little news report which came to my attention on the very same day on which I read the Sydney Morning Herald’s enthusiastic screed about ‘modestwear”, the unseemly rush by certain Infidel fashion houses to make hijab… fashionable. Adrienne Francis of our Aussie ABC reporting.
“Canberra Father Allegedly Assaults Daughter for “Dressing Inappropriately” in Public’.
Not a ‘Canberra father’. ‘A Canberra-resident Muslim father.’ His Islam, not his Canberra address, is the most salient feature of this story, because it is so dismally typical of the way in which Muslim males treat their female chattels the world over. Of course, one would prefer that this ugly little demonstration of Muslim male dominance were not taking place in Canberra, Australia. – CM
‘A Tuggeranong father (i.e. “a Muslim man resident in Tuggeranong” – CM) has been ordered to keep 100 metres away from his 16 year old daughter after allegedly assaulting her for not being “appropriately attired” in public.
The word is not “appropriately”. The word is “Islamically”. If just her hair were uncovered she would be deemed unislamically dressed. – CM
‘The ACT Magistrates Court heard the alleged victim had been using equipment at a Tuggeranong gym when her father arrived about 8.30 pm on Friday.
On a Friday. Had he been at the mosque that day? Was he on his way to the mosque? And what sorts of things would he be likely to hear at the mosque, about the proper way to keep one’s female chattels suitably obedient, suitably Islamically submissive? – CM
‘Police allege the 54 year old Bonython father saw his daughter talking to a young man, before gesturing for her to approach him.
Hm. Was the young man another member of the Muslim ummah (and even that, in many parts of the dar al Islam, could be more than sufficient to trigger an ‘honour’ murder) or, even worse, visibly Infidel? – CM
‘When she did not come, the man approached his daughter, and attempted to “cover her up” by grabbing the jumper she was holding and forcing her to put it on, the court heard.
‘She allegedly resisted [and] ran to another area of the gym, according to the Statement of Facts tendered to court.
‘Police allege the man followed his daughter and raised his hand at her, before she turned away from him as he hit her across the shoulders, neck and head with an open hand.
‘Several gym patrons witnessed the alleged assault and intervened.
‘Alleged’. ‘Allegedly’. And yet the attack was obviously violent enough to prompt other people present – who were, presumably, Aussie infidels – to intervene and to summon the police. – CM
‘The man was arrested shortly before 10 pm and charged with common assault.
‘The man’s defence lawyer, Hugh Jorgensen, told the court the father tried to put a jumper on his daughter because she was “inappropriately attired”, and cited the man’s Muslim faith.
“He tried to cover her up”, he said.
And he hit her. Hit her obviously enough, often enough, hard enough, for other people who were there to feel they must intervene to stop him. – CM
‘Magistrate Bernadette Boss described the allegations as examples of inappropriate, controlling behaviour and domestic violence. “A controlling form of behaviour and an apparent disregard for the law in terms of how you discipline a child or young person”, Ms Boss said of the allegations.
“It is certainly controlling behaviour”.
Indeed. You don’t know the half of it, Madam Magistrate. In the dar al Islam every woman, as Churchill observed in “The River Wars” (1899), is supposed to be some man’s “absolute possession”, either as child, as wife or as concubine. This is not ‘simple’ domestic violence such as you might encounter among non-Muslim Aussies. This is about ‘honour’ and ‘shame’, about Dominance and Submission, within the frame of an ideology that permits and indeed encourages the domestic male despot to do as he wills – up to and including execution – with his subordinates. There is a very illuminating article – “Wife-Beating, Sharia, and Western Law”, by one ‘Spengler’, published in Asia News, that discusses this paradigm.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LE25Ak01.html
And we might like to reflect also on something that, way back in 2006, was recorded in a mosque in London. An Islamic preacher named Abu Hamza al-Masri called upon his fellow Muslims to murder female tourists in his native Egypt, saying: “If a woman, even a Muslim woman, is naked (not necessarily ‘naked’ as Infidels understand it; ‘naked’ in Islamspeak often means “un-Islamically dressed”), and you have no way of covering her up, it is legitimate to kill her…”. And the “Undercover Mosque” investigation recorded one Mohammed Al-Jibali, an imam in Britain, declaring that “A girl should start hijab from the age of seven. By the age of ten it becomes an obligation on us to force her to wear Hijab, and if she doesn’t wear Hijab, we hit her.” – CM
‘The father was granted bail on the condition that he keep 100 metres away from his daughter and not intimidate, threaten or harass her.
Does anyone who knows anything about abusers in general – let alone about Islamic abusers! – believe that he will obey the court orders? – CM
‘He will be back before the Magistrates Court later this month.”
One hopes that the Canberra police will not find themselves investigating the girl’s mysterious disappearance – or her death – within the month. – CM