Diversity against Women: The Crime File

By Brenda Walker
Published in The Social Contract
Volume 21, Number 4 (Summer 2011)
Issue theme: "Drug smugglers, terrorists, and violent migrants flood across our porous borders"

For women, the influx of diverse immigrants is nothing to celebrate. The home cultures of most current immigrants are not friendly to women’s rights and safety, to say the least. At a time when American women’s equal place in society has been achieved in many respects, misogynous immigrants threaten to unwind significant progress.

In fact, some bring primitive customs of extreme brutality which were entirely unknown to Americans until recently. One example is honor killing, in which a woman is murdered by her family for behavior deemed inappropriate in terms of home country traditions, which usually have a strong component of Islamic ideology. Teenagers going out on dates, like everyone else in high school, may end up dead when dad sees what American freedom means for female young people.

Note to immigrants from Islamic and other misogynist cultures: don’t think your daughters will remain enslaved when they see women living as free individuals around them in America. If retaining chains on females is important, then stay home and keep your Islamic diversity to yourselves.

A regrettable milestone was reached in late January 2011, when two honor killing trials were running in America at the same time. It marked a triumph for Islamic beliefs in America, indicating that sharia’s oppression of women had landed with both feet. Muslims must be proud that their misogynist culture has been implanted so thoroughly in a society that thought it was doing well on gender equality. Such is the effect of multicultural immigration.

Phoenix was the site of the trial of an Iraqi immigrant, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, for the murder of his 20-year-old daughter Noor for becoming too “westernized” — i.e., independent and unwilling to be the slave of Allah and her father. Almaleki was furious that his daughter wanted to live as a free person in America, and he believed his religion and culture approved of extreme punishment. Noor moved in with her boyfriend and his family when the pressure at home got to be too much.

But Faleh Almaleki followed his daughter to a Peoria, Arizona, parking lot and used his Jeep to run her down along with her boyfriend’s mother. Noor died after two weeks in a coma, and the other woman survived her serious injuries. The prosecution’s attempt to negotiate a plea deal fell through, so the killer was left with lame excuses, like claiming “accident.” Witnesses testified that Almaleki drove purposefully to run down the women, so the upshot was the jury found him guilty of second degree murder, aggravated assault and leaving the scene of the “accident.” He eventually received 34 years in prison, a rather light punishment for such an egregious crime.

At the same time, an honor killing in Buffalo was being tried. Muzzammil Hassan admitted murdering his wife Aasiya by beheading her after she sought a divorce. Islamic scholar Daniel Pipes suggested that Hassan may have intended to block his wife’s entrance to Paradise by mutilating her body. The couple had founded an Islamic TV station (Bridges TV) to combat negative stereotypes about Muslims — like violence against women.
In a strange arrogance, Hassan couldn’t get along with his lawyers and insisted upon acting as his own counsel at trial.

Hassan’s son by a previous marriage testified against him. Outside the courtroom, family therapist Nancy Kells said in an television interview that the accused was the only person she ever feared in 20 years of practice.

During the several weeks of trial, local Muslims insisted that the brutal killing was merely domestic violence, with no Islam involved. A woman was brutally murdered, but all the Muslims could think about was deflecting criticism from their religion.

Feminist Phyllis Chesler has investigated cultural murders of women and listed several typical characteristics that define honor killing, including a sense of victimhood in the killer, who feels no remorse. That description fit Hassan, who called himself a battered man who was forced to kill his wife.

Another honor killing indicator Chesler identified is purposeful barbarity, which certainly characterizes a beheading. In addition, domestic violence is usually a crime of passion, occurring in the moment. Hassan carefully purchased two hunting knives and ambushed his wife from the rear after he had lured her to the empty television studio after business hours.

Sadly, honor killing keeps happening in this country because of Muslim immigration. On April 30, 2011, Jessica Mokdad was murdered by her stepfather, who objected to her American ways and became furious when she stopped wearing the hijab. The 20-year-old woman fled for safety to her biological father in Grand Blanc, Michigan, but the stepfather pursued her to her grandmother’s home, where he shot her dead. Jessica wasn’t even the stepfather’s kid, but he felt entitled to kill her to defend Islam and his honor from American values of individual freedom for all.

Of course, most women in this country don’t have to worry about being honor killed by primitive relatives. But immigration has brought more everyday harassment, which women had believed was on the wane due their improved position in society generally until diverse immigration changed the rules. Rude men from places like Mexico feel they have the right to leer and catcall women on the street as they go about their business.

What else could we reasonably expect from the Hispanic third world? In 2008, Mexico City instituted a number of women-only buses after an anti-harassment campaign failed miserably. It was the only way to get some peace for women who were constantly touched and propositioned as they rode the bus. The buses were received with great enthusiasm by the female riders.

In the colonial city of Puebla, a fleet of women-driven taxis went into business for the same market where the female-only customers appreciated lechery-free rides.
Disrespect of women is a Hispanic cultural norm, and with that follows increased violence. But at least their religion doesn’t tell its followers that women not of their tribe should be raped as the reward for promoting that religion, as Islam does.

According to Pew demographic research published in January 2011, the annual number of Muslims admitted to the United States had increased to more than 115,000 by 2009. The number of Muslim immigrants is expected to reach about 130,000 annually by 2030. That’s bad news for anyone who loves freedom.

If the world has learned anything from the European immigration disaster of recent decades, it must be that more Muslims mean more trouble: more violence, civil conflict, and crimes against women. Within the last year, the national leaders of Britain, France and Germany all declared that multiculturalism (aka Muslim immigration) had been a failure. Some observers believe that civil war is inevitable in Europe because of allowing millions of hostile sons of Allah.

The experience of women in Europe and Australia can tell us a lot about the future with more Muslim immigrants in America, and it’s not promising.

In June, the Norwegian author and human rights activist Hege Storhaug was interviewed when she visited Ottawa for a speech. When asked about safety for women now that so many Muslims live in Scandinavia, she replied, “There is no doubt that the freedom, the level of freedom I had as a young woman, young women in Norway will not have, and don’t have actually today and they will not have it in the future, as far as I can see. So the freedom for women in Europe is going backwards.”

Storhaug continued, “Girls in school, they are mocked by Muslim boys and they dye their hair black, yes. Blondes are dying their hair black, that is correct. And some of them also move to other parts of Oslo to be let alone.” She believes that Oslo will have a dangerous Muslim neighborhood within a decade, similar to the Swedish city of Malmo’s Rosengaard district, considered a no-go zone for non-Muslims because of the violence.

A police report from Oslo last spring came clean with something that has been buzzing around the internet for years, namely that the vast majority of rapes are committed by “men of non-western background.” The politically correct Norwegians couldn’t bring themselves to admit Muslims were the culprits, but considering the years of denial about crimes against women, the statement was something of a breakthrough. The blogger Fjordman reported in 2005 of the “Muslim rape epidemic in Sweden and Norway” which the authorities had covered up. The strategy of intimidation, by threatening violence and murder, used by Muslims when they reside as immigrants in the West, has been very effective in pushing their totalitarian agenda, which necessarily demands the end of free speech.

According the Koran, women are lesser beings and should be subservient to men. Mohammed also declared that infidel women were war trophies who could be raped and enslaved by Allah’s holy warriors. One sees that attitude present in the gang rapes in Scandinavia and beyond.

As a result of their extreme misogynous beliefs imbued by their retrograde religion, Muslim males are determined to oppress and control women as their right. Muslims can get very angry when Westerners defend civil equality of the genders. In Australia, a local guy painted a “Say No to Burqas” mural on a public wall in Sydney last winter, which got the Muslims into a raging frenzy. Oddly, when protests occurred against the sentiment of women’s equality, the media characterized the violent Muslims and friends as an “anti-racism rally” because immigrants are always right, according to the liberal experts on virtue. Women’s rights and safety are routinely thrown under the bus when they come into conflict with immigrant sensitivity.

In 2005 France was rocked by three weeks of Muslim rioting across the country in which cars and buildings were burned. In reporting the aftermath, the Associated Press also revealed how the norms of French society have been changed for the worse because of Muslim immigration (“Riots Change Way of Life in Normandy Town”):

EVREUX, France — Three white-haired women stood before the burnt wreckage of their beauty salon, reminiscing about the days when they still felt safe walking the streets of this Normandy town after dark.


“We were happy here,” said one of them, an 80-year-old. “Now we’re afraid.”


Another looked at her watch and reported it was almost 4:30 p.m. — the time that school lets out and when this group of older ladies makes sure they’re at home, behind locked doors.

A once-pleasant French town is now a fearful place for older ladies because of Muslim immigration. Why do America’s national leaders arrogantly believe that welcoming historic enemies will have a better result here? The only difference in Europe is the higher percentage of Islamic population. Regions in he United States where many Muslims have settled are beginning to show the violence we have already seen in Europe: in June 2011, Dearborn Muslims physically attacked Christians who were practicing free speech in areas which the Islamics consider their turf.

As Hege Storhaug stated, “Freedom for women in Europe is going backwards.” It can happen here too if misogynous immigration is allowed to continue full throttle.

All diversity is not equal, and particularly where women’s rights and safety are concerned. A nation can have women’s rights and safety, or it can have Muslim immigration; it cannot have both.

About the author

Brenda Walker is publisher of the websites LimitsToGrowth.org and ImmigrationsHumanCost.org. A resident of the San Fransisco Bay area, she is a frequent contributor to The Social Contract.

Copyright 2007 The Social Contract Press, 445 E Mitchell Street, Petoskey, MI 49770; ISSN 1055-145X
(Article copyrights extend to the first date the article was published in The Social Contract)