Harper Conservatives Drafting Strict Product Safety Laws

Story here.

The proposed legislation would for the first time empower the federal government to order mandatory product recall when companies fail to act on legitimate safety concerns; force importers to take responsibility for the safety of goods they bring into Canada; and lead to increased inspections of imported goods and stricter product licensing when problems arise. Clement said the measures also could raise the current maximum fine for health product violations to as much as $1 million from the current $5,000.

Now, that'll not only have teeth, but will also bite hard those who run afoul.

I hope the actual enforcement will be strong and relentless.

Canada's government really ought to go after corrupt, greedy importers of risky stuff, particularly risky stuff from China. Like a pitbull!

If we're not going to ban crap made in China, at least we can take action to ensure that that Commie crap is at least safe!

Better yet, spend a bit more and buy stuff made in your own country or at least in the Free World, whenever possible!

Hillary Clinton Tied Via Fundraising To Terrorist Group

Story here. Wonder if the American MSM will pick up on this story? Or if they'll yet again go out of their way to cover up any negative, inconvenient truths or suspected truths about the Clintons? Wonder how many Americans who depend on TV, radio and newspaper as opposed to the internet are aware of Hillary's felony case involving former top fundraiser Peter Paul, including the video & audio proof that she's guilty? Despite all the negative stuff surrounding Hillary as well as Bill Clinton, the MSM continues to protect this shadowy duo, at the potential cost of its integrity, credibility and relevance to news and information consumers.

The terrorist group in question is the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka. I recall former Canadian Prime Minster Paul Martin, a Liberal, had himself been caught schmoozing, wining & dining with these sinister folks.

One of the men arrested worked three jobs at Newark Airport as a security agent and baggage handler with complete security clearance. The Tamil Tigers are well known for their use and “perfection” of terrorists’ “suicide belts” and vests, and the use of females as suicide bombers as illustrated in our report published earlier this month.

Further investigation conducted by this investigator of Tamil Tiger activity in the U.S. confirmed published reports that at least one well-known supporter of that terrorist organization, 56 year-old New Jersey resident Ramanathan RANJAN is actively soliciting funds for New York Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

RANJAN, of New Brunswick, NJ was identified as an approved recipient for funds solicited by Pat PATHMAKUMAR through her e-mail campaign containing “Tamils for Clinton” in the subject line. A fund raising event this week in New Jersey at The State Theater in New Brunswick, advertised on Clinton’s web site, offered potential donors tickets ranging from $100 - $2,300, depending upon seat selection. Although the referral list has been removed from the site, the Northeast Intelligence Network was able to secure a list of referrals that included the names of both RANJAN and PATHMAKUMAR.

I wonder how come terrorists love Democrats (and Liberals and New Democrats in Canada) so much and want to be involved with them? This is disturbing... it means that such leftist, appeasenik political parties will owe these dangerous folks a debt of some sort for their helping get them elected. This certainly includes the Liberals in Canada, who do indeed have some (suspected/actual) Islamic extremists within their party. Current leader Stephane Dion, I've observed, has been bending over backwards to act in the interests of radical Islamists rather than in the interests of Canada's national security, having voted to scrap an anti-terror law which his own party itself had brought forth following 9/11. Of course, Dion and his Liberals are well-known to oppose the presence of Canadian troops in Afghanistan, despite the fact that they themselves sent them there in the first place. Payback's hard to cover up, ain't it?

And one wonders why "Taliban Jack" Layton of the NDP wants us to "sit down and talk with" the Taliban. Either he's just an unhinged moonbat idiot or there's something shadowy going on behind the scenes... Oh, and of course, Mr. Layton and his moonbat caucus, as well as the separatist, soft-Quebecois-supremacist Bloc Quebecois, want the troops brought home immediately, making one wonder whose interests they're really serving...

But back to Hillary Clinton. Should she win the Democratic nomination, her ties to terrorism as well as all other possible wrongdoing must be exposed and discussed publicly. The American people have every right to know about the ugly warts and terrible brainfarts of those who demand their votes.

'Tolerant' NDP Dumps She-Male Candidate

Jack Layton, above and below: Can't have transsexuals running for the New Democrats?

Whose rights will the Hard Left take away next? First they went after the Jews, then the Christians, then the Falun Gong, now they're starting to turn against the sexual minorities?

Is the Far Left starting to show its true colors? Is the whole "tolerance" propaganda campaign nothing but a Big Lie?

Surprise, surprise! The "tolerant" NDP is intolerant of chix with dix!

So why doesn't "she" haul the hard-left New Democratic Party before the Canadian Human Rights Commission?

After all, all it takes is for someone to "complain" about someone else, and the CHRC will find them guilty without due process of law, just in the name of political correctness. Evidence is irrelevant. Just accuse the NDP (or anyone) of being intolerant of guys who pretend they're girls... and the accusee will be fined thousands of dollars and so on...

Here's another MSM report, more comprehensive.

"They just said I do not fit in the NDP anymore," the prominent family and labour lawyer said in a phone interview Saturday.

"They also told me... that many people who wish to be a candidate for the NDP do not wish to have their name associated with the name of Micheline Montreuil, because I am transgendered."

Apparenlty NDP head honcho Jack Layton is fine with the removal of the tranny. He displays no concern that "she" may have had "her" feelings hurt by this discrimination.

Meanwhile, if Montreuil heads to court, it wouldn't be the first time.

Last month, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled the Canadian Forces discriminated against Montreuil in 2003, when it passed her up for a job as a grievance officer.

The tribunal ruled Montreuil's sexuality was the real reason she didn't get the position and awarded her $40,000.

She won a similar case in 2004 when the same tribunal ruled against the National Bank for failing to hire Montreuil as a customer service representative.

It's the NDP's turn to fall victim, ironically, to the fascist Leftist state apparatus it so loves!

Don't you just love the irony of it all? One of the NDP's most favored folks is turning against them!

I hope the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal will be consistent and automatically find in favor of the sexual extremist, just as it always does! Evidence be damned! They must yet again unilaterally deem, as if playing god, that the complainant is right and that the NDP got rid of "her" because she has a willy.

Bet the NDP didn't see this coming... (I sure didn't!)

I guess the NDP is bigoted after all!

What do the NDP, the Liberals and the Hard Left in general really stand for?

We don't know. They won't dare say until they take power again and scrap the Constitution and the Charter and change Canada into God knows what kind of society!

Well, I may exaggerate a bit, but, hey, the Hard Left is infamous for its gross exaggerations, we know very, very well.

Those asshats never cease to astonish me with their hypocrisy and about-faces.

Leftists, Liberals, Progressives, Socialists, Secular Humanists, Nazis, Communists, Islamofascists... they're all the same folks...

Man's Rights Taken Away For Criticizing Homopedophile's Personal Ad

Here's an MSM report. Not much specific information; little in the way of facts to help the reader understand the context, the hows and whys. It isn't helpful in helping readers decide whether any party has done right or wrong. Talk about telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Yep, that's the MSM. Sure.

Here's pretty much all the "factual" information for readers to base their decision upon. I believe most folks will just believe what the MSM tells them to believe, if this is all the information they're given:

He distributed flyers in Regina and Saskatoon in 2001 and 2002 railing
against information about homosexuality that was being taught in the Saskatoon
public school system and at the University of Saskatchewan.

No indication of exactly what the man actually said so we can judge for ourselves whether the way he has been treated is just. Just vague, generalized, open-to-the-imagination reporting. Nice job, eh? Comprehensive. Informative. Fair. Balanced. NOT.

Note the word "railing". Boy, talk about avoiding using judgemental, pejorative words and just reporting what happened. But then again, we know the MSM has an agenda to manipulate the public perception with such judgemental words. Couldn't they have simply used the word "criticizing"? And there's a lot of factual information omitted there, too. So don't we want to know the rest of the story?

Seems to me that the effect of this little MSM report is to demonize the man in the mind of the guillible, impressionable reader. What else will folks think, when they (most folks, actually, as they're too busy and/or unmotivated to dig deeper for the rest of the story from other sources) depend essentially wholly on the MSM to tell them what's going on? The MSM knows that they're not likely to be challenged in any way significant enough to cause them to worry, so they regularly report in such manipulative ways. I think Joseph Goebbels would be very impressed with the subtle-but-massively-effective propagandizing of today's Free World media.

Now, here's the World Net Daily report. It's far, far more comprehensive and may tend to make you feel outraged at what happened to a Canadian man for exercising his human/Charter right to freedom of expression, which was taken away by what's pretty much an agency of the Far Left, paid for by Canadian taxpayers. Imagine that... violating political correctness imperatives and ending up with your rights taken away and fined many thousands of dollars by an illegitimate kangaroo court which seemingly only goes after folks who are politically incorrect!

A lifetime ban on public criticism of homosexuality was upheld against a
Catholic activist in Canada by his province's superior court.

Like I've said in the past, the Left is always taking away the human/Charter rights of Christians (And, yes, it happens in Canada, too; not just in America and Europe). Imagine that: the state apparatus orders you to never, never again express your opinion on a particular topic. Imagine that!

In Canada. I didn't make this up.

Bill Whatcott was fined 17,500 Canadian dollars by the Saskatchewan Human
Rights Commission in a complaint by four homosexuals who charged he "injured"
their "feelings" and "self respect" in pamphlets denouncing the "gay lifestyle"
as immoral and dangerous, Lifesite News reported.

Ever hear of anyone being treated like that for hurting the feelings of Catholics by calling them "intolerant" and "mean spirited" and so on? I never have. Interesting. Some peoples' feelings are important; others' are not? Is this what is meant by "human rights"? Treating different groups of individuals differently according to politically correct dogma?

So... exactly what did the man actually say? What was so horrendous that it justified the revokation of his human/Charter right to freedom of expression? (I always thought that rights couldn't ever, ever be taken away, as I see rapists, murderers and terrorists having their rights reinforced, not reduced and certainly not taken away!)

Whatcott says his pamphlets used "verbatim" a text from a
classified personal advertisement in a local homosexual publication that said,
"Man seeking boys … age not so relevant."

Imagine that... having your rights taken away by some "commission" for criticizing a homopedophile's classified ad suggesting that potentially underage boys meet him for certain activities! Isn't soliciting sex with minors a serious crime? What's wrong with "railing" against pedophiles advertising their desire to meet young boys for illegal activities? And what was done to bring the homopedophile to justice for this crime? Anyone know anything about that?

LifeSiteNews noted Ottawa Citizen columnist David Warren
criticized the tribunals as "kangaroo courts" and "star chambers" with
"quasi-legal powers that should be offensive to the citizens of any free country
... in which the defendant's right to due process is withdrawn."

There's a petition being circulated to urge the Prime Minister to abolish such fascist organizations or at least revoke their illegal/unconstitutional powers. I'd recommend at least ending their taxpayer funding completely.

After all, what do we have REAL courts for? When people break the law, they're entitled to due process, a fair trial, representation, not summary judgement and sentencing, like in Communist China, Islamofascist Saudi Arabia, Mugabe's brutal Zimbabwe, Castro's fascist Cuba, etc...

Is Canada a "just society", as promised by the exalted Pierre Elliot Trudeau when he announced his "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms"?

I say no. Canada isn't a "just society" as long as such things happen, as long as rights are taken away for being politically incorrect, for angering some folks...

I thought freedom of expression was sacred; that one's freedom to say what one wanted was constitutionally protected from revokation, no matter whom it offended or angered.

After all, the day will come when people will have their rights taken away for offending the government... in fact, I think that happened already, and I've seen it happen to people who offended the previous Liberal regime... like reporters ending up getting suspended or fired for negatively reporting on the Liberals/Prime Minister Chretien, or even suspended for merely saying something unflattering about the government, like calling it the "forces of darkness" in an email to a witness (the case of Terry Milewski).

While some folks may not particularly agree with some of the things he says, or find his language needlessly provocatively strong, fair minded folks will not agree with revoking his right to say what he wants. Because everyone else has the same right to counter his speech with their own! Now the "everyone else" has the right to speak against him, but he's been silenced! This is NOT just!

More power to him for pushing ahead with his appeals. He should have the support of all, including even homosexuals and pedophiles, who understand that they, too, could have their right to free speech someday taken away by a state apparatus with new, different politically-correct imperatives. But I predict that they'll continue with the delusion that their kind of political correctness is eternal, that their Far-Left ideology will only spread and strengthen. But that's their right. Being deluded isn't a crime, after all. If they want to see people they hate lose their rights, that's their problem. Taking away anyone's rights tends to backfire on those who do the taking-away. Look at what happened to the Nazis of Hitler. Look at what happened to Saddam Hussein. Look at what happened to the Taliban. Look at what will eventually happen to the Far Left (it happened to the Soviet Union).

If we don't support this man in his fight to get his rights back, we may end up hurting ourselves in the long run; we may lose our own rights. Even my strongest ideological opponents (and you know who you are), after all, swear to me that they'll fight for my right to say what I want, even if they detest what I say. So I hope they'll put their money where their mouths are, and not prove themselves liars. I hope they'll blog in favor of this man's rights, and not support those who claim "offence" and not be apologists for any phony "human rights" kangaroo-court organizations.

"Human rights". This is amazing, isn't it? The Far Left can be anything they want and get away with it simply by self-labelling their organizations with the warm-and-fuzzy words "human rights". Just as the Chinese Communists call their regime "The Peoples' Republic" and how the North Korean tyrant calls his regime "Democratic". And there's also the "American Civil Liberties Union", whose agenda largely includes persecuting Christians and litigating to take away their rights based on the Big Lie of "separation of church and state".

Finally, it bears mentioning that the Charter is self-abrogatory, just like Islam. Trudeau's Charter is defective in that it offers a loophole of indeterminate nature and size to the state apparatus for the purpose of revoking or limiting rights. All it takes is for a court or kangaroo court to sophistize an excuse for doing so! It's so open to interpretation as to be dangerously unjust and potentially fascist. But then again, we know what Trudeau's true ideological beliefs were... they were closer to the beliefs of the likes of Fidel Castro, Karl Marx, Mao Tse-Tung et al...

When Trudeau announced the words "Just Society", what did he really, really mean? Is it like calling Red China the "Peoples' Republic"? Like calling the former East Germany the "German Democratic Republic"? Like calling Kim Jung Il's North Korea the "Democratic Republic of Korea"? Like calling the Liberals (who are only "liberal" some of the time) the "Liberals"? Like calling the New Democrats (who are only "democratic" some of the time) "Democrats"?

Did CBC Help Liberals With Inquiry Questions?

Stephen Taylor reports.

h/t: NationalNewswatch.com

Canadian Press: CBC reviewing claim reporter fed questions to Liberal MP

"a very serious allegation, and if proven true (it) begs the question: why
is a public broadcaster getting involved in partisan politics?"

CBC apparently censors own story about itself in controversy

Funny how the CBC, despite oodles of taxpayer dollars being incessantly shovelled thereunto, is incapable of doing its own stories and merely, blogger-style, posts Canadian Press stuff! And it appears to be possibly automatic, without editorial vetting prior to posting. Talk about value for our hard-earned... and easily confiscated by the government... money! Talk about professionalism and doing their job without taking lazy shortcuts! Huh... they sound a lot like the Liberals themselves!

The question is therefore being begged: How about a full, independent public inquiry into this possible collaboration between the supposedly non-partisan/non-biased/non-ideological/non-corrupt taxpayer-funded "public broadcaster" and the Liberal Party of Canada?

I recall that CBC reporter Terry Milewski was suspended for communicating with an APEC 1997 protester-witness, following a complaint from the then-Liberal Prime Minister's Office of "bias" against the Liberals. Ironic, that, in light of the optics of the CBC being like crossed fingers with the Liberals today!

We the Canadian People want, and have every right to know. Really, do we believe the claims of Liberals and other Leftist Opposition parties that "Canadians want an inquiry into the tall tales of an international fugitive known to be a liar/perjurer (Karlheinz Schreiber)"?

Given a choice, and given the massively greater amount of money involved in the CBC (billions, billions and billions out of your pocket and mine over the years as compared to an alleged $300,000 fee payment to a former Prime Minister for post-resignation services rendered... just because it was in cash, which isn't in any way illegal at all?), I believe Canadians prefer to know what on earth the CBC and Liberal Party are apparently doing, communication so suspiciously as regards an inquiry.

Crazed Passenger Shouts Jihad Slogan, Racist Slur

Crazed Man Yells "Allahu Akhbar" and "F...n White People" on Air Canada International Flight

h/t: NationalNewswatch.com

No, it isn't the "Islamic Rage Boy", the suspiciously omnipresent, obviously professional Islamic protester.

This guy appears to be genuinely disturbed. Thank goodness two big fellows had the courage to restrain him for the duration of the flight so he couldn't possibly harm anyone.

Parvez Murder Was 'Islamic Justice' and a Hate Crime, Not a 'Domestic Dispute'

Doug Hagmann, Director, Northeast Intelligence Network, weighs in on the murder of 16-year-old Aqsa Parvez:

It is doubtful that her tragic death will receive the
media attention it deserves. She was not Anna Nicole Smith or some other darling
of the media, and did not die at the hands of a stranger or in a mass shooting.
She was simply a bright, energetic and strong willed young girl with dreams and
desires that were clearly and absolutely incompatible with those of her family’s
religion. For having such desires and for betraying Islam, her father allegedly
dispensed Islamic justice under Sharia law.

(...)

Surely, the death of Aqsa Parvez will be lost among the
headlines of the forthcoming days, but her death must not be in vain. In open
and free societies like Canada and the United States, much can and must be done
to protect the most precious among us – our children. It appears that the checks
and balances that are in place in our schools and through our laws failed Aqsa.
Her friends knew that she was terrified of the punishment that awaited her at
home should she be caught unclad in Islamic attire outside of her
home.

In other words, while Canada may have protected Aqsa if she was, say, a white atheist lesbian whose father hated her sexual choice and was threatening to hurt her if she didn't do as she was told, Canada has failed Aqsa in the name of political correctness, allowing her to die just because we're not supposed to judge Islam and Muslims, etc.

It doesn't appear that the Left wishes to act to prevent similar murders of Muslims by Muslims in the future. It's as if the Left thinks it's ok for Muslims to commit murder in the name of Islam, doesn't it? It certainly does, if the Left dismisses this as "just another case of domestic dispute... shut up and leave the Muslims alone, you hateful, ignorant bigots, or we'll tell the CHRC on you!"... not caring that their attitude dooms other Muslim girls to death, failing to stand up for their right to choose... geez, I thought the Left thought that atheism/secularism was a sacred human right and must alwasy be defended like such things as sexual perversion and infanticide, but I see they practice the double standard here, yet again...

Sensible reasoning should conclude that it was likely that
her teachers, guidance counselor, or any number of other school officials knew
or should have known of her abnormal fears. Perhaps they were, but considered it
a family or religious matter off limits to their oversight responsibilities,
despite the fear Aqsa exhibited. After all, we are not to meddle in a family’s
right to practice their own religion – in this case Islam; doing so will
undoubtedly bring civil rights complaints and lawsuits by way of organizations
like the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and
CAIR-Canada.

There must be a full public inquiry into this, not into the Mulroney-Schreiber affair. A girl was murdered, and we want to find out why. Why her father murdered her, and whether her school knew she was in potential danger because of her choices, and why they didn't do anything to protect her from her obviously dangerous father. One somehow doubts they'd have hesitated if Aqsa was a white atheist lesbian if they heard that her homophobic redneck father was angry and threatening towards her for her choices.

So... why don't the Liberals, NDP, Greens and Bloc Quebecois, as well as the MSM, demand that Prime Minister Harper call a full, public inquiry into Aqsa's murder and cancel the one into the tall tales of an admitted liar and fugitive from justice?

Where are our priorities as a nation? Do we care about some crooked old liar accusing people of corruption to get out of being extradited to answer criminal charges against himself... or do we care about a young girl who was murdered for exercising her human rights/Charter rights, by her own father, in the name of Islam?

Who does Canada really care about? What are Canadian values, really?

Let's have a full, independent public inquiry to go along with the murder trial (and which murder must be treated as a hate crime, as it was commited because the victim was different, because she was female and because of her religious orientation, which differed from the murderer's) of Mr. Parvez.

Shootings At Christian Institutions Likely Hate-Motivated

Story here. Emphasis mine.

UPDATE 1; 10 December 2007; 5:30 p.m. A 24 year-old man from the suburban Denver, Colorado area is reportedly responsible for both shooting sprees that occurred at two Christian institutions yesterday. The man has been identified as Matthew MURRAY (...)

According to a law enforcement source, the man professed to "hate all Christians," and reportedly left a note or letter that he intended to murder as many Christians as possible. According to this law enforcement source, MURRAY "was also in possession of explosive or incendiary devices" during the attacks.

Of course, the Left will continue to insist that "nobody hates Christians and nobody wishes to harm them". Naturally, in the mind (if there is one) of the Left, the only folks who could possibly ever be targets of hate and violence are women, sexual extremists and Muslims. Never JudeoChristians; of course not... and any reports that there was hate-inspired violence against Christians must therefore be hoaxes. To have it reported that there's hate crimes being perpetuated against JudeoChristians is an inconvenient truth for the Left, for they apparently have an agenda to persecute and marginalize JudeoChristians. After all, we've heard the hatred they've spewed with respect to JudeoChristians, frequently attacking, for example, politicians on the basis of JudeoChristian religious orientation, maliciously defaming them as "wanting to impose...", "wanting to take away peoples' rights" and so on.

Hate crimes against JudeoChristians must be treated, by society and the state apparatus, with the same amount of seriousness and urgency as hate crimes against everyone else!

I'd suggest that the man in question probably was influenced to have such hatred towards Christians due to incessant Left-wing Christianophobic propaganda being pushed at us all via many methods. When society seems to be telling a person that a particular group is bad and deserves hatred and violence, then a person may well take it literally, failing to think for himself... and go forth and commit acts of violence against members of that persecuted, defamed group.

The Left must stop saying negative things about Christians. So must the mainstream media.

I'd suggest that sensitivity training for Christianophobes be mandatory whenever they're caught saying or doing things reasonably considered Christianophobic. I'd also suggest that schools be required to teach tolerance of JudeoChristians.

Arnold's Radical Sexual Extremist Agenda For California

Something strange and bizarre is going on in California.

There is a very selfish extremist ideological group with an agenda to impose its beliefs upon society, particularly in schools. Against the rights of Americans.

We know that leftists/liberals often fearmonger about an alleged plot by Christians to "impose their values on people" and so on, but realistic people know that that's nonsense, that no evidence has been offered to support that propagandic claim.

However, there is evidence that the GLBT movement is aggressively moving forward with a campaign to force its radical sexual-extremist ideology onto society with a view to transforming society as it selfishly sees fit.

It has nothing to do with "tolerance", by the way. This extremist group isn't interested in mere equality and non-discrimination. It goes radically beyond that...

It's state-borne propaganda.

And it's happening with Arnold's blessing. He's practicing the politics of ultra-special interests.

Perhaps Californians should consider recalling the Governator for having gone haywire and proceeding to make a mess of everything...

Man Strangles Daughter To Death. Why?

Story here.

Asqa Parvez, the 16-year-old allegedly strangled by her father, has died of her injuries.

A man telephoned Peel Regional Police at 7:55 a.m. yesterday claiming he had killed his daughter.

(...)

Aqsa's father, Muhammad Parvez, 57, has been charged with murder. He made a brief court appearance this morning and was remanded in custody pending another court appearance Wednesday.

Wonder why he'd strangle his daughter? What drove him to it?

Did he think he was somehow supposed to do that? Did he necessarily just do it for no reason at all? Was he somehow influenced by someone or something, or was he acting completely independently and with pure, unadulterated malice borne of simple, indistinct evil?

This is violence against women. It is intolerable in this country. It must be investigated and exposed vis-a-vis any identifiable, probable cause(s).

If it's just treated as a mere case of domestic violence causing death and the man gets a relative slap on the wrist, then it may happen again, for society's failure to investigate why the man may have done what he did, report findings and take action to make it clear to all in our society that regardless of why the man did what he did, such behavior will NOT be tolerated, no exceptions, beyond self-defence, of course.

It would potentially be a tragedy innumerable times over if political correctness or other forms of intimidation were to prevent an investigation and spark a cover-up.

A girl is dead, murdered by her own father. Why? Don't we want to find out why? Shouldn't we find out and discuss the "why" as a society and take action to ensure the "why" is neutralized and may never again cause anyone any harm. It's the right thing to do, no matter what the politically correct extremists may claim.

Might it have been a hate crime? A crime commited specifically because of the gender of the victim?

And, make no mistake, as long as there is hate crimes legislation in Canada, NO ONE shall be exempt from prosecution thereunder.


UPDATE: Via Drudge Report, I've discovered that the man strangled his daughter for not wearing the hijab.

Friends and classmates of a 16-year-old girl who police say was murdered by her devout Muslim father in a Toronto suburb told local media Tuesday she was killed for
not wearing a hijab.

(...)

The girl's friends, meanwhile, told local media she was having trouble at home because she did not conform to the family's religious beliefs and refused to wear a traditional Islamic head scarf, or hijab.

"She wanted to go different ways than her family wanted to go, and she wanted to make her own path, but he (her father) wouldn't let her," one of her classmates told public broadcaster CBC.

"She loved clothes," another of her friends, Dominiquia Holmes-Thompson, told the daily Toronto Star. "She just wanted to show her beauty ... She just wanted to dress like us, just like a normal person."

According to her friends, Aqsa had worn the hijab at school last year, but rebelled in recent months.