Friday, October 30, 2009

"Devout" Muslim Wife Attacks Westernized Husband with Knife

And now for something completely different in the "honor killing" department, a "devout" Muslim wife from Staten Island attempted to kill her Westernized husband. Fortunately he is a light sleeper. From The Staten Island Advance via FOX News.

Wife Tries to Kill Husband Over Muslim Principles, Cops Say
Thursday October 29
FOX News

A New York woman allegedly tried to slit her husband's throat because she said he wasn't the devout Muslim she thought she married five months ago...

Rabia Sarwar told authorities in a four-page written confession that she tried her "best to cut his throat", but that her husband, Sheikh Naseem, woke up and took the knife from her.

[For some reason the cut-and-paste isn't working right, so go read the rest at FOX. Don't miss the extended story at the SIA site and especially the comments section. More people may be waking up than we think.]


Pastorius said...

He wasn't devout enough. So, I guess that means he wasn't beating her when she was a bad girl, and he wasn't forcing her to wear a burqa.

Bad, bad girl.

And, what a pussy of a Muslim husband he is.

Epaminondas said...

Had she been born in the west it would be cuffs and leather outfits and nobody gets hurt

Pastorius said...

I removed your comment, because your blog looks like a spam blog.

If you want to actually have a conversation with us, we welcome it, and I will allow you to plug your strange blog.

Total said...

Perhaps she tried to provoke him into beating her, as the Prophet encourages violence against disobedient wives.

Anonymous said...

By the way, Rabia Sarwar is a Pakistani name--as far as I know. And I agree with Pastorius--what a wuss that husband!!

Although, what could he have done in return, stoop down to the level of DEVOUT Muslims and hit his woman? I don't know.

jenny said...

I am in a college class "culture and values" and there is a questtion i cant answer.The question is, Comment on the inaccuracy of labeling a devout Muslim as an Infidel. can anyone help me i have read thisbook a million time and still cant get an answer.

Anonymous said...


Could you elaborate a little more? Who labels devout Muslims (or rather Muslims) infidels? If it is the Christians or Jews or someone from another faith and they mean Muslims are people that believe something other than what they believe then yeah, its very accurate. Your paper seems to just assume that it has to be inaccurate. You have to look at the context before assuming "it must be inaccurate to call a Muslim that".

Its like someone saying it is inaccurate to call "African Americans" black which of course it isn't just like calling white folks white isn't inaccurate. But if the context (in both these cases) is supposed to be racist, then its inaccurate.

When someone of another faith calls a Muslim infidel, there is nothing wrong with it because that just means Muslims follow a different religious system and a different god than theirs. And that is completely accurate.

Pastorius said...

It seems to me there is a simple way of explaining this.

Islamic teaching divides the world into two camps;

Dar al-Islam (the world of Islam)


Dar al-Harb (the world of war against Islam)

The worldview of Islam is, therefore, absolutely manichean. You're either for Islam, or you are against Islam.

So, if a devout Muslim disagrees with a primary tenet of Islam, for instance the one calling for Muslims to wage violent Jihad against the Infidels (non-Muslims), then

he is also considered to be at war with Islam, a member of Dar al-Harb.

Anonymous said...


That's completely accurate, once you get right down to the basics. Mohammed had that in mind when there existed only two camps. Muslims and Non-Muslims. He killed those who opposed him and let those who appeased him live for a time being.

In modern times it gets a little complicated for the ummah though, mainly because they also want to appear as though they are very saintly and also because they are showered with questions (not a lot) where they have to explain away the barbarity of Islam (which is inherent, without it, Islam crumbles on its own weight).

Its this mentality, that you explained that makes sure that there are no MODERATE muslims. There aren't. Not a one. and by that I don't mean all Muslims are blood thirsty maniacs but the love and fear of their more powerful, violent brethren is what will always keep them at odds with modernity. The only way out for them? Destroy Islam. Cut it at its roots.