Thursday, December 29, 2005

2005 Father Of The Year: Nazir Ahmed

Some parents are strict "disciplinarians." Then there's Nazir Ahmed.

Last week Ahmed, a Pakistani laborer, murdered his 25-year-old stepdaughter and three daughters, ages four, seven and eight, respectively. He slit each girl's throat with a machete as their horrified mother watched.

What could have driven a father to such a barbaric act?

The stepdaughter had been unfaithful to her abusive husband, and Ahmed feared her younger sisters would eventually follow in her footsteps. Hence they all had to be, in his remorseless words, "eliminated."

If you're still trying to process this information at home, here's the Reader's Digest version:

  • Infidelity = A no-no!
  • Murdering your adult step-child for a marital indiscretional = Okey dokey!
  • Murdering your three young daughters for something they might one day do = Ditto!
Apparently some look upon infidelity and infidels with the same regard.

Killings like this, known as "honor" killings, are common in Pakistan (America's best buddy in the War on Terra). Typically, some immoral act by a member of one's family - most often female - is morally rectified by their death at the hands of one or more family members.

Though such crimes are technically illegal (under Pakistani law, but not Islamic law), perpetrators of violence against women are not agressively prosecuted by authorities.

Hence, I'm sure I wasn't the only American who winced just a bit to hear that Pakistan, one of the world's worst countries in terms of women's rights, was to be our ally in the invasion of Iraq. But, as has been stated on this blog and elsewhere, we never hesitate to overlook such details when it's to our advantage.

Women voting in Iraq? Woo-hoo! Women's rights in Pakistan? Um, we're kinda busy right now.

There's no "honor" in slicing up little girls. Nor any humanity in beliefs that would allow such to happen. Nor any excuse for being chummy with the killers' enablers.


presidentbobo said...

Well, this seems pretty cut and dry to me. The father did the right thing.
He was just following George Bush's example. George attacked and invaded Iraq for something the country might do. The father did the same thing. He had to take preemptive action to preserve the family honor much as George attacked Iraq to restore his family honor.
But, where do you draw the line? That same logic leads me to believe that it would be a good idea to go ahead and annihilate the entire planet just to prevent anyone from doing anyhting anywhere.

Pete Bogs said...

true, there's always the preemption angle... Ahmed was trying to stop infidelity at his own house by attacking it outright... of course, infidelity is much worse than murder, which apparently doesn't offend God quite as much...