After the Ark moved to Ekron, perpetrators smitten by ‘‘emerods.’’
ellauri156.html on line 526: Abner was indignant at the rebuke, and immediately opened negotiations with David, who welcomed him on the condition that his wife Michal should be restored to him. This was done, and the proceedings were ratified by a feast where Rizpah and Michal were the lights of the party. Almost immediately after, however, Joab, who had been sent away, perhaps intentionally returned and slew Abner at the gate of Hebron. The ostensible motive for the assassination was a desire to avenge Asahel, and this would be a sufficient justification for the deed according to the extremely low moral standard of the time (although Abner should have been safe from such a revenge killing in Hebron, which was a City of Refuge). The conduct of David after the event was such as to show that he had no complicity in the act, though he could not venture to punish its perpetrators.
ellauri156.html on line 535: Shortly after Abner's death, Ish-bosheth was assassinated as he wept, and David became king of the reunited kingdoms. The conduct of David after the event was such as to show that he had no complicity in the act, though he could not venture to punish its perpetrators.
ellauri189.html on line 114: It becomes clear that the apparent benevolence of the wojewoda was only a ruse to lure away the defenders from Maria’s home. During their absence his brigands, disguised as revellers (taking part in a kulig, a sort of carnival cortege of the szlachta moving about the countryside), had raided the house, carried Maria away and drowned her in a pond. Her dead body was found by the tenants and servants who had left it on the bed before they went in pursuit of the perpetrators of the crime. And so “Wacław loses in one moment everything on the world,/ Happiness, virtue, respect for his fellow-men and brothers” (“I tak Wacław od razu wszystko w świecie traci:/ Szczęście, cnotę, szacunek dla ludzi, swych braci”). It is suggested that in the “dark and dreary wood of human feelings” (“W tym
ellauri189.html on line 219: perpetrators and victims) shows the illusoriness of this conviction.
ellauri192.html on line 297: While Tokarczuk’s win has been widely lauded — The Guardian declared her “the dreadlocked feminist winner the Nobel needed” (aargh! will some future prize go to Estonia's own bluewig girl Sofi Oxanen?) — Handke’s provoked immediate and widespread displeasure. PEN America, an organization that advocates for writers’ liberty, wrote that it was “dumbfounded by the selection of a writer who has used his public voice to undercut historical truth and offer public succor to perpetrators of genocide.” The Slovenian public intellectual Slavoj Žižek told the Guardian that “In 2014, Handke called for the Nobel to be abolished, saying it was a ‘false canonisation’ of literature. The fact that he got it now proves that he was right.”
ellauri275.html on line 709: A zariba (from Arabic: زَرِيْـبَـة, romanized: zarībah, lit. 'cattle-pen') is a fence which is made of thorns. Historically, it was used to defend settlements or property against perpetrators in Sudan and neighbouring places in Africa. An example would be a pen to protect cattle and other livestock from predators such as lions, albeit often unsuccessfully.
ellauri346.html on line 39: a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. War is not terrorism because it is legal and the perpetrators wear uniforms.
ellauri346.html on line 49: Why isn't there no agreed definition of terrorism? The international community has found it difficult to agree upon a definition because it has all too often depended upon who the perpetrators are. A simple definition of terrorism involves all of the above EXCEPT: Counterterrorism.
xxx/ellauri122.html on line 1002: in fact Nazis that were the perpetrators of the most heinous
xxx/ellauri193.html on line 222: An honor killing (American English), honour killing (Commonwealth English), or shame killing is the murder of an individual, either an outsider or a member of a family, by someone seeking to protect what they see as the dignity and honor of themselves or their family. Honor killings are often connected to religion, caste and other forms of hierarchical social stratification, or to sexuality, and those murdered will often be more liberal than the murderer rather than genuinely "dishonorable". Most often, it involves the murder of a woman or girl by male family members, due to the perpetrators' belief that the victim has brought dishonor or shame upon the family name, reputation or prestige. Honor killings are believed to have originated from tribal customs. They are prevalent in various parts of the world, as well as in immigrant communities in countries which do not otherwise have societal norms that encourage honor killings. Honor killings are often associated with rural and tribal areas, but they occur in urban areas too.
xxx/ellauri193.html on line 224: Although condemned by international conventions and human rights organizations, honor killings are often justified and encouraged by various communities. In cases where the victim is an outsider, not murdering this individual would, in some regions, cause family members to be accused of cowardice, a moral defect, and subsequently be morally stigmatized in their community. In cases when the victim is a family member, the murdering evolves from the perpetrators' perception that the victim has brought shame or dishonor upon the entire family, which could lead to social ostracization, by violating the moral norms of a community. Typical reasons include being in a relationship or having associations with social groups outside the family that may lead to social exclusion of a family (stigma-by-association). Examples are having premarital, extramarital or postmarital sex (in case of divorce or widowship), refusing to enter into an arranged marriage, seeking a divorce or separation, engaging in interfaith relations or relations with persons from a different caste, being the victim of a sexual crime, dressing in clothing, jewelry and accessories which are associated with sexual deviance, engaging in a relationship in spite of moral marriage impediments or bans, and homosexuality.
12