Taliban Flogs and Executes Pregnant Woman for Adultery

Yesterday, the Taliban publicly flogged and executed a pregnant woman for adultery. She received 200 lashes and was then shot in the head 3 times.

Bibi Sanubar, 35, was kept in captivity for three days before she was shot dead in a public trial on Sunday by a local Taliban commander in the Qadis district of the rural western province Badghis....The Taliban accused her of having an "illicit affair" that left her pregnant. She was first punished with 200 lashes in public before being shot, deputy provincial police chief Ghulam Mohammad Sayeedi said.

The man with whom Sanubar had the affair was not punished. The Taliban is denying its militia carried out the execution. But a local Taliban-controlled district confirms:

Head of Badghis provincial council Mohammad Nasir Nazaari confirmed the execution and said the Qadis district was entirely under Taliban control.

< Bennet -Romanoff Race: A Nailbiter? | Gross Domestic "Win Shares" And Productivity Losses >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Just horrible (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 10:37:50 AM EST
    That said, as a supporter of the PResident's policy in Afghanistan, I do not think this horrible event is a rationale for the policy.

    Horrible things happen all over the world but that does not justify the US intervening militarily everywhere.

    I support the Afghanistan policy because I believe it is in the national interests of the United States, not on human rights grounds.

    How is Afhgan War this in our national interest? (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by BobTinKY on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:56:09 AM EST
    I am obviously missing something.

    I wasn't thinking about the U.S. involvement (none / 0) (#2)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 10:40:51 AM EST
    just the barbarism of Sharia law. Agree it has nothing to do with U.S. involvement and I certainly wasn't suggesting U.S. intervention is needed to stop it.

    I did not mean to suggest you did (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 10:44:41 AM EST
    It's just that I had that Time magazine cover with the photo of the woman mutilated by the Taliban on it in my mind when I read this.

    Time did argue that it was a justification for U intervention.


    I had not seen (none / 0) (#14)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:10:28 AM EST
    oops (none / 0) (#15)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:11:46 AM EST
    True (none / 0) (#7)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:00:25 AM EST
    Although we are no less barbaric, imo. Prison rape, torture, gang beatings, and our shameful history...

    And if you want to argue that Sharia Law makes it institutionalized, well my guess is that most Americans were OK with the Muslim torture program...


    Bull. We've got alot of problems. ALOT. (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by tigercourse on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:07:47 AM EST
    But no less barbaric then Sharia law and the freaking Taliban. Come on.

    Yes (none / 0) (#17)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:17:58 AM EST
    No less barbaric..  Not sure if that was a slip considering the following phrase  Come on

    But when you have armed foreign soldiers in your town, running around like they own the place, who cannot distinguish you from the bad guys, and your friends are being tortured for no f'ing reason in the local jail by sicko perverts....  

    and the residents of the country are sitting on their couches eating popcorn and cheering on the troops...

    What we did in Iraq is representative of America.


    representative of who, (none / 0) (#19)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:23:54 AM EST
    for all intents and purposes, OWNS America, and how they can lull everyone else to sleep..

    You remind me of the America-hating Weatherman (5.00 / 5) (#20)
    by rennies on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:33:51 AM EST

    When was the last time a woman who committed adultery was publicly lashed and shot in the head? (And, of course, I am aware of our history, e.g lynching). But comparing present-day state of affairs to Sharia is lunatic.


    Publicly... (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:40:06 AM EST
    I can't recall an instance...but you bet your arse women are beaten and killed over adultery, or the mere accusation of it, on the regular here in the land of the quasi-free by regular citizens.

    Inhumanity is a worldwide epidemic of a problem...though some societies sully their criminal codes more than others...we might not sentence to flogging, but we sentence to prison beatings and prison rape for bullsh*t crimes, with a wink and a nod that we don't condone what goes on.  And we've got the death penalty just the same as the Taliban.  We're a lot closer to the barbarians we supposedly despise than we'd care to admit.


    Fact is though (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:46:14 AM EST
    In my generation it is not condoned.  It has been illegal, but we have a history of overlooking family violence until lately.  In my generation though it is punished.  If you seriously think you have an apples to apples comparison betwee  American justice and Sharia Law....whew kdog.

    Not apples to apples... (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:49:12 AM EST
    no doubt their code is nastier than ours...just saying it's closer than you'd think...and closer than I'd like.

    It is not closer (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:01:16 PM EST
    Not even close.  If I lived anything at all like women in Afghanistan live, things with testicles would magically disappear around me until they offed me.  I could not live how these women must live, you have no idea of what you speak on this issue.

    Except (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:15:11 PM EST
    we didn't go in there in the first place to help the women of Afghanistan.

    It was a first response to 9/11 and, ostensibly, for the purposes of neutralizing Al Queda's base of support there. No 9/11, no all-American, purely humanitarian intervention. It's that simple.


    Who said we did? (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 01:17:33 AM EST
    I didn't.  Spin spin spin though, and the truth is that we often protect women in the areas that we claim as ours.  When we leave that will end.  That is a fact.  And remember Code Pink from last year?  This isn't just a "BAD TIME RAG MAG" moment.

    The anti-war group Code Pink, which rose to prominence with high-profile protests against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars over the past seven years, is softening its stance against the war in Afghanistan over concerns that a troop withdrawal could harm women's rights in the country.

    "We would leave with the same parameters of an exit strategy but we might perhaps be more flexible about a timeline," Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin told the Christian Science Monitor. "That's where we have opened ourselves ... to some other possibilities. We have been feeling a sense of fear of the people of the return of the Taliban. So many people are saying that, 'If the US troops left the country, would collapse. We'd go into civil war.' A palpable sense of fear that is making us start to reconsider that."

    The apparent shift in policy comes in the wake of a week-long trip to Afghanistan by Code Pink members, where activists were surprised to find a lot of support among women's rights activists for maintaining the US and NATO presence in the country.

    It's just me, but if some liberals don't care what happens to the women of Afghanistan vs. their "anti-war" stance, they should have the intestinal fortitude to not pussyfoot around and  say so.  Please, just say pi$$ on them...I don't give a rip....and move along.  Hide behind rhetoric much?


    Fodder AKA Propaganda (none / 0) (#117)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 01:31:33 AM EST
    A less publicised leak by the same website [wikileaks] in March 2010 exposed a confidential CIA document urging the use of abused Afghan women to shore up support for the war.

    "Afghan women could serve as ideal messengers in humanising the ISAF [International Security Assistance Force] role in combating the Taliban because of women's ability to speak personally and credibly about their experiences under the Taliban, their aspirations for the future, and their fears for a Taliban victory," read the memo. . . .


    Worth a read...

    But at the same time, it's also incredibly revisionist for Time Magazine to exploit Aisha's tragedy (although she is now living with a host family here in the US and about to undergo reconstructive surgery [to replace her nose]) and claim that the same fate awaits others if we leave Afghanistan.

    Let's be absolutely clear: what happened to Aisha occurred while we were IN Afghanistan. Our presence did absolutely nothing to prevent it. So to claim that more women will meet Aisha's fate if we leave ignores the fact that we could do nothing to save Aisha and any other women who suffered similar abuses already.

    The CIA didn't ask the women to lie (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 01:41:23 AM EST
    They suggested they speak credibly about what had been done to them.  Once again, have the intestinal fortitude to say pi$$ on them...you don't give a rip.  You do realize that this is Obama's CIA too right?  Are you hating on Obama :)?

    And gee squeak, if nothing bad was still happening in Afghanistan to its people by the Taliban there is a name for that and it is called TIME TO GO HOME :)


    Huh? (none / 0) (#119)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 01:47:47 AM EST
    I am 100% for withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq, my position since the whole mess started.

    And f'you to. To suggest that I don't give a rip is absurd. I am against killing of any kind. And doing it under the guise of religion or liberation is equally repulsive.

    And I have no love for the Obama administration, although I prefer it 1000 times over the last 8 years. But I am not a hater like you.


    I Don't Know What the Numbers Would Be, but... (none / 0) (#34)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:08:44 PM EST
    If you asked men if they would rather go to prison or get their nose removed, there would be plenty asking for the nose removed.  Not because they can't do the time, but because they can't do they systemic raping.

    I'm with Kdog on this, the violence that occurs in prisons is never discussed meaningfully, and like Gitmo I suspect most people feel like they deserve it, even the non-violent prisoners.

    And for the record I can remember when I lived in Wisconsin and a woman was gang raped in a bar full of people and later nearly decapitated for 'having a smart mouth'.

    The book was recently released:
    Torture at the Back Forty: The Gang Rape & Slaying of Margaret Anderson by Mike Dauplaise

    I suspect women are raped all the time for much less the adultery, but because it's not as visible as having ones nose removed, it's not considered as damaging, which I would argue it's far more.


    kdog is using his argument (5.00 / 4) (#37)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:12:47 PM EST
    as some sort of justification to do nothing or say nothing....to simply sigh and accept it and move along.  Because prisoners are raped in U.S. prisons, does that magically make it okay to flog and shoot in the head a woman?

    I'll call it evil all day long... (none / 0) (#46)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:02:26 PM EST
    you know that...as for doing something about it...I don't know what we can do to fix societies half way around the world when we can't even fix ours...occupation sure as hell ain't the way to go.

    As a woman (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:50:49 PM EST
    Never say die.  I suppose it is many fights.  I see it as a feminist fight.  I will support women all over the world to be treated like human beings.  I will speak of the crimes.  I will acknowledge the realities.  I will work to educate, fund, and apply political pressures that can change things.  If I didn't have children I could take riskier risks too, but I chose a different path.

    I see it as part of the big fight... (none / 0) (#82)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:54:59 PM EST
    for basic human rights and decency for all human beings...and there are human rights abuses all along the road from here to Afghanistan.  I don't know but starting in Afghanistan and working our way back to the States seems like the opposite of how we should do it...think globally, act locally.

    Militarytracy (none / 0) (#90)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 05:13:43 PM EST
    I appreciate the feminist fight. But I have a couple points.

    The first being if this was a man, we wouldn't probably even know about it.  Even worse, this happens all day long in Africa by the ruling classes, but no outrage, why do you suppose that is ?  Nothing to do with us fighting the Taliban at all.

    But that brings me another point, violence against women is despicable, but so is violence against a man.  And to be honest, if we actually started with the root cause of violence, men, and spent our money eliminating it, rather then propagating it, women everywhere would be a whole lot safer.

    We preach freedom, democracy, and humanity and all that jazz that sounds great, but our country is exactly like your average family values republican politician.  It's fairly hard to take them seriously when they are caught with their pants down.  Which is what I suspect the rest of world thinks of us when we roll in with tanks, jets, and bombs waving the peace flag.

    The difference of course is that war machinery  costs a whole lot of treasure, treasure we could use to clean our own act up.  The world might take us a bit more serious when we don't have a the sanctimonious gun pointed at them while talking peace.

    I would imagine someone in the Taliban would be far more likely to beat their wife after fighting the US military and losing family and friends in that fight, than if he were doing whatever his job might had been before we decided to declare war on him.

    Do you think Iraq is a safer place than it was 10 years ago for women ?  Did the violence help women ?


    No (none / 0) (#49)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:11:59 PM EST
    I think the point is we need to stop calling the kettle black.

    I think it's truly despicable that we are spending billions to change the very issues that happening right here.  Yet not doing a GD thing about it, nor spending a dime in our own backyard.  It's indefensible.

    We lead the world in violence, murder rates, rapes, you name it, we are numero uno.  We had/have how many facilities in the world used for one thing, torture.  Yet we lecture every back-oss country about their cruelty and inhumanity.  'How dare they cane a boy for stealing', we say while we terrorize suspected terrorists to the point of breaking their minds.  We put people in Prisons with very violent people for a handful of white powder, and we call ourselves free and civilized.

    The Taliban mistreats woman harshly, but I bet the odds of a violent death are far higher in this country for women.  We are just more 'civil' about our violence and make sure it happens behind closed doors.  Where word of it can be controlled and manipulated into something less vile sounding.

    I can promise you I can find something as horrifying, if not worse every week in a US paper.  When in fact (besides the violence we are raising) this is a rarity in Afghanistan.  Does it really matter who perpetuates the violence, be it some drunk husband or a Taliban judge ?  We should pay attention and try and prevent the violence equally, if not more at home.  

    But we don't, we send armies over there and here we toss them in prisons where, in all likelihood, they become more violent, and the we release them right back into society because we don't want to spend the $$$ it takes to release them less violent.


    A different argument (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by christinep on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:26:27 PM EST
    Some of the "we are bad too" arguments certainly make good points. Yes, there are a number of policies over the years that call for a mea culpa and more. But, also inherent in the "but, looky look here too" argument is a kind of not wanting to deal with what is going on there argument. I have a longtime friend who has often stated what you have, Scott; and, one day, I asked if there was a reason that she could not take her laser focus of her philosophy for a brief time to look at a similarly serious matter(s) elsewhere. My friend had trouble calling up the same sense of passion against injustice elsewhere (no matter how gut-wrenchingly wrong) because her interest has always been on the wrongs of her own society.

    The point: We look at the same picture. Some decry what they see; some refer to/are reminded of another picture. These perceptural screens aren't mutally exclusive, of course. But, it can appear so if those who would not see the immediate picture cannot step back from their concerns about our own house to start and if others (like myself) push back the problems here to focus on the problems there. Maybe it has something to do with wanting an acknowledgement from each position first?


    I see a difference between... (none / 0) (#83)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 03:00:03 PM EST
    atrocity and atrocity we help pay for and done in our names...you gotta have a moral leg to stand on, otherwise the bad guy half way around the world can point to your brand of atrocity and destroy your credibility.

    Would we take a human rights complaint from Iran seriously?  or the Taliban?  Of course not...we would laugh at the hypocrisy.  


    Oh good grief Scott (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:40:14 PM EST
    One. More. Time.

    The flogging and killing there was done under the law. It was legal.

    Now. Try to see the difference between a society that does that and a society that has laws against it and has been slowly improving for over 200 years.



    and only recently (none / 0) (#74)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:09:55 PM EST
    devolving back in the direction of knuckle-walking with the recent advent of the nitwits running around with "commie muslim" signs.

    Gesh and heh.


    And that Matters... (none / 0) (#84)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 04:27:07 PM EST
    To the families, how ??

    Great, my pregnant daughter was beaten and killed legally/illegally ?  What a conundrum for my sorrow.

    I suspect the lifespan of a Taliban judge is shorter than some maniac on death row, and that's if they are caught.  Great, justice is served.

    My point being that an innocent life take is a murder, no matter where you live.  And before you start, I would bet my last dollar that the State, as in United States, has executed more than one innocent person.  And old sparky is hardly any more humane than flogging followed by a couple of bullets.

    Add in the innocent people or people in for pure non-sense who are killed inside prison and you have a whole lot of injustice.

    But, "OMG those dirty Muslims and their archaic system of justice...".


    Scott, try to focus on one claim at a time (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 05:12:50 PM EST
    There is a huge difference between accidental death and a death mandated by the state. The latter is an "execution."

    And while I understand the victims families and friends will be angry, the issue is what society as a whole sees.


    I am not saying that how prisoners (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:53:09 PM EST
    are treated in the U.S. is humane.  It is not.  It is a different issue though.  Fight for what matters to you.  I fight for things that directly impact my life most often or things that I indentify with readily.  I'm not against your fight.  But your fight does not nullify mine.

    Good job, well said! (5.00 / 3) (#78)
    by Dr Molly on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:25:07 PM EST
    I'm not against your fight.  But your fight does not nullify mine.

    This is such a common rhetorical device.


    We need to start at home (none / 0) (#77)
    by Untold Story on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:16:50 PM EST
    with respect to humane conditions.

    During Katrina I was in Prague and with others watched New Orleans.  It was no different than a city of any third world country.  Many thought  how much is covered up here in the States while we are off, under a pretense of some kind, to put another country in order.

    We need to start at home.  We have homeless, we have prisons that offer inhumane conditions, people constantly in fear of their lives, of physical harm or rape.  We have children without enough to eat.  We have mentally ill who are imprisoned and put to death.

    It is sad.  We need to start at home first.


    Yeah they sure are (none / 0) (#85)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 04:53:41 PM EST
    Orchard Park police are investigating a particularly gruesome killing, the beheading of a woman, after her husband -- an influential member of the local Muslim community -- reported her death to police Thursday.

    Police identified the victim as Aasiya Z. Hassan, 37. Detectives have charged her husband, Muzzammil Hassan, 44, with second-degree murder.  


    Honor killings of females, for a variety of "sins," by Muslim male family members are on the rise in the US.


    Ditto (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:42:44 AM EST
    Crazy? (none / 0) (#28)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:53:23 AM EST
    Before you make this a poster child for feeling good about slaughtering everyone who you believe practices "sharia law", you might want to do some looking around in your own backyards.

    There are towns in the US where a black, gay, jew, muslim, or any strange looking person cannot go unless he or she wants to disappear, with a nod and a wink by the law.


    Where? (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:01:49 PM EST
    Danziger Bridge (none / 0) (#51)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:23:04 PM EST
    For starters...  

    Is being addressed (none / 0) (#62)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:54:26 PM EST
    Where's the wink and the nod there?

    Only By Luck (none / 0) (#69)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:05:39 PM EST
    The wink and nod happened long ago, false evidence was planted to justify the crime. Only reason it is a criminal case now is because Michael Lohman, six years later, just admitted to the cover up. Had he kept his mouth shut, the deaths would, more than likely, have been considered self defense.

    Lohman, who helped orchestrate an elaborate cover-up of the crime, supervised the investigation and was at the scene on Sept. 4, 2005, according to an 11-page bill of information unsealed today.
    According to the document, Lohman was aware that a subordinate planted a gun at the scene. He also wrote a 17-page police report full of lies about the incident and encouraged officers at the scene to remove shell casings.

    As I said the list of those who do not make the news because it never gets out of the community is waaaaaaay longer.

    Danziger is just the tip of the iceberg, so to speak.


    Proof that is only by luck please (none / 0) (#72)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:08:21 PM EST
    Are we lucky that someone at justice goes to work and actually works?  Is that the luck you speak of?

    Good Point (none / 0) (#76)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:11:21 PM EST
    A tree that falls in the forest with no one to hear it makes no sound.



    loooong list (none / 0) (#58)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:44:54 PM EST

    The State reports that the Newberry incident is similar to a notorious 1998 Texas case in which white supremacists tied a black man to a truck by a logging chain and dragged him three miles to his death, Lloyd said. More recently, in South Carolina, three white Marlboro County men were sentenced to federal prison last December for hate crimes for burning a black man's car and threatening him with a chainsaw when he tried to use a restroom at a rural store frequented by whites, Lloyd said.

    Abner Louima, Michael Stewart, Sergio Adrián Hernández, Jose Enedion Acosta-Amaniego, Manuel Esquer Gomez, Guillermo Martinez Rodriguez, Tashawnea Hill, Theresa Adell Ardoin...  looong list, and those are the ones who made the news, and faced the law...  the other list is much longer..

    and a September 11 special:

    SEPTEMBER 11--A black West Virginia woman was sexually assaulted, stabbed, and tortured while being held captive by her white abductors, one of whom told her, 'That's what we do to niggers around here.'

    Where's the wink and the nod? (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:55:13 PM EST
    Are You F'ing Kidding Me? (none / 0) (#71)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:07:23 PM EST
    Maybe you should google some of those cases... and once again, tip of the iceberg....  most of the time these things do not make it to court, or the news.

    Evidence is required (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:09:51 PM EST
    when deciding to try cases.  I have no idea what sort of country and justice you are fighting for now :)  It is starting to sound like a dictatorship of a squeaky kind :)

    are sanctioned or even permitted by our laws.

    In contrast, the topic of this thread - the beating and execution of a woman for adultery - is apparently what is demanded by Sharia law.

    iow, you have no list.


    Sanctioned? (none / 0) (#75)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:10:11 PM EST
    Well the case in this thread was not sanctioned either. The government denies it even happened. And the Muslim representatives have said that the killing was illegal.

    Mobs kill in the name of law, justice and religion here too.


    I Can't Remember the City... (none / 0) (#39)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:17:48 PM EST
    Where 3 boys killed a Mexican boy and were found innocent even though they had proof of the murder, that was fairly recent, maybe a year ago.

    It happens all the time, maybe not death, but major beatings... happen all the time to minorities every day for far less than adultery.

    I would argue that if the extreme Christian wing could have their way, would would look very similar, to the Afghans.  The only difference in some communities is that they have the common sense to hide their crimes.


    If you are correct (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:44:37 PM EST
    And I would like to see your facts...

    The point is that what they did was against the law and they were arrested and tried.


    and yes, I'm yelling....


    You have to stand trial to be found (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:58:55 PM EST
    innocent.  How does it compare to the flogging and murder of a pregnant woman where no one will stand trial ever.  There is no system to even take a look at what took place, there is no will to fight the Taliban either....that'll just get you killed too.  There is a system and a will to tend to such things in the U.S.  And someone was found innocent?  Gee, are we going to advocate trying to give the Innocence Project even more work than they currently have on their plate?

    I suspect you are thinking of this PA case (none / 0) (#97)
    by Peter G on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 06:12:38 PM EST
    in Schuylkill County.  With the help of an allegedly intentional bungling of the investigation by local police, the 18 and 19 yr old defendants (local high school athletes) were acquitted in the beating death of a local Mexican immigrant.  Now, not only have they been re-charged with federal hate crimes, but the local police have been arrested and charged with a cover up.  Not too far from there, in Wilkes Barre, there was this recent case, in which local thugs beat and killed Ecuadorian brothers whom they mistook for a gay couple (oh, that explains it!), because the brothers were walking at night arm-in-arm (why don't "those people" understand American cultural norms?!).  Result:  37 year prison sentences.

    Yes (none / 0) (#100)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 06:21:00 PM EST
    There is no shortage of hate, intolerance and violence in the good ole USofA...

    Savages are everywhere.


    I see the serial smearer has arrived. (none / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:42:47 PM EST
    I echo MT.



    America Hating? (none / 0) (#113)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:25:36 PM EST
    Hardly... My problem is with some of the people, and yes some of the people who run things are included.

    Good point (none / 0) (#9)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:04:34 AM EST
    and eradicating the sources of the often extremely selective outrage will never work until EVERY country is committed to cleaning out their own houses.

    Yes (none / 0) (#10)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:06:51 AM EST
    Maybe universal adoption of a "humanizing" and "moral" religion like Christianity is the answer... lol

    they'd probably just (none / 0) (#16)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:12:33 AM EST
    start crucifying pregnant accused adulteresses..

    Crucify pregnant adulteresses? (none / 0) (#18)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:21:29 AM EST
    Probably not until after birth--life is sacred.

    They also hanged a seven year old (none / 0) (#26)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:47:33 AM EST
    last month who was the grandson of the tribal elder who took a stand against them.

    The difference is that (none / 0) (#44)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:00:19 PM EST
    that the things you note are not done under law.

    That is a huge difference.

    But thanks for trying for equivalency again.


    I have become (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by lentinel on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 07:19:13 PM EST
    very cynical.

    When fervor for a war in which America is engaged begins to wain, stories invariably appear to depict the enemy as satanic.

    You betcha (none / 0) (#109)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 10:06:37 PM EST

    The swine that dropped the hammer on that woman were without doubt working for Cheney or perhaps Bush himself.  Although in this case those stories long proceeded tthe war.

    This was a horrid crime to humanity. (5.00 / 3) (#105)
    by mexboy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 07:28:27 PM EST
    And this is what happens when religious crazies who have the "absolute truth" and feel obliged to impose it on everyone else, because their god tells them so.

    I'm not going to diminish this woman's tragic murder by comparing it to others. What I hope we learn from this is, to be vigilant of those who claim to speak for god and who wish to enforce god's commandments on everyone, even if you don't belong to their particular sect.

    California comes to mind.

    Thanks for this: (none / 0) (#121)
    by Dr Molly on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 08:40:47 AM EST
    I'm not going to diminish this woman's tragic murder by comparing it to others.

    A great comment overall.


    Comparisons Diminish? (none / 0) (#128)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:25:20 PM EST
    Well I would agree, particularly when you distort and lie about other posts here at TL.

    Yet, when there are posts here about that very other thing (e.g., sexual abuse and rape crimes against women here in the U.S.) - much of the reaction is again to deflect and to say: stop persecuting the perpetrators, you are just vengeful, don't put them in jail, contempt for the 'dom rel crowd' as it seems to be known, etc. End result again:  toleration of sexual abuse and rape crimes against women and children.

    Hypocrisy much?


    My point in (none / 0) (#129)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:39:19 PM EST
    "comparing it to others" is that doing anything significant about these recurring problems in places like Afghanistan will require an INTERNATIONAL effort, which we'll never have if other countries are allowed to opt out by being given special permission to gloss over their own problems. Screw whatever their "trading partner" status is.

    Also, when the coverage of human rights outrages is consistently restricted to people's living under Sharia Law, there's a big part of me that calls neocon bullsh*t.

    That's not a "deflection" in my book, it's just widening the context in which the problem is seen.


    "Doing anything significant" (none / 0) (#132)
    by Dr Molly on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:45:45 PM EST
    about "these recurring problems" will require a no-excuses, consistent, standing up against rape and abuses against women and children 100% of the time.

    I made no argument that this bogus war is helping that problem at all. Another deflection.


    Standing Up? (none / 0) (#134)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:55:21 PM EST
    Sounds like you are setting up a BushCo zero tolerance so that you can root out the sexist pigs. Anyone not standing up to your dog whistle is a traitor and gets a arm tatoo?

    That is how fascism worked. You are either with us or agin us...

    It appears that in your formula anyone who would say, for instance, we should be pulling out of Afghanistan, supports rape, killing and torture of women and children.

    Well, maybe if you are a computer that works by zeros and ones, but that is not the way human beings operate.


    Yeah o.k (none / 0) (#135)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:57:10 PM EST
    now you're telling me what I care about and what I don't..f*ck off (in a nice, non-deflecting way)

    I'm not really (none / 0) (#131)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:42:30 PM EST
    seeing how comparing it to others "diminishes it" either.

    Unless it has something to do with people caring more about what happens to people in SOME countries than in others.


    Yes (none / 0) (#133)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:49:22 PM EST
    It is interesting how easily sophisticated propaganda works. The couch and the teevee are portals to manipulate both the Keyboard Kommandos and the bleeding heart liberals.

    It is as if a target can be placed anywhere on the world to draw support for US strategic interests by just a story and a few pictures.



    Of course you don't see it. (none / 0) (#136)
    by Dr Molly on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:58:08 PM EST
    Uh huh.

    did you read the words (none / 0) (#138)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 01:02:45 PM EST
    "international effort" and possibly think about how that just MIGHT dovetail with your "100% all the time" comment?

    See It? (none / 0) (#139)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 01:03:58 PM EST
    What I see is someone who knows so much that there is nothing possible to discuss, unless it is repeating the memorized lines.

    See MT's comment above. (none / 0) (#137)
    by Dr Molly on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:58:36 PM EST
    Highly explanatory, IMO.

    It's easy, don't break your heads. (none / 0) (#141)
    by mexboy on Wed Aug 11, 2010 at 07:37:40 PM EST
    You compare and say murder X is more tragic than murder Y for Z reasons. That would diminish it.

    If you still don't get it, let me give you another example.

    Some on the African American community saying the civil rights violations of the GLBT community are not  civil rights violations because they are not as horrific as what they suffered...They were savagely treated, no question about it. But when you start measuring (comparing) one against the other you will  diminish the suffering of group X and therefore be more willing not to protect them.


    Difficult to understand. (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by Dr Molly on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 08:50:16 AM EST
    Here's a post describing a horrifying case of law-mandated torture and murder of a pregnant woman. Much of the reaction here is to deflect:  yes, that's bad, but what happens in terms of sexual abuse of women and children in the U.S. is just as bad so we should just focus on our behavior rather than that of other countries. End result (whether intentional or not): toleration/dismissiveness of sexual abuse and rape crimes against women and children worldwide.

    Yet, when there are posts here about that very other thing (e.g., sexual abuse and rape crimes against women here in the U.S.) - much of the reaction is again to deflect and to say: stop persecuting the perpetrators, you are just vengeful, don't put them in jail, contempt for the 'dom rel crowd' as it seems to be known, etc. End result again:  toleration of sexual abuse and rape crimes against women and children.

    So, um, when exactly do we get to the part where everyone actually stands up without excuses against sexual abuse and rape of women and children here and everywhere?

    Deflection? (none / 0) (#127)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:19:52 PM EST
    To quote one of your pals:

    Imagine that -- women who can walk and chew gum at the same time.
    Your arguments are pathetic.

    Nice formula, but it is quite bogus and nasty. Sounds like you are battling ghosts from the past.

    And spare me your empty gestures about "standing up without excuses" because you are doing zero about the situation of women in Afghanistan. In fact the presence of US troops is clearly adding to the distress of women and children in the region.

    For every heart rendering picture or story of a woman killed, tortured, there are 100 killed by US bullets.

    When you have an actual plan that does not involve killing and maiming human beings to vent your hatred, then you can speak with clean hands. Otherwise your are a sanctimonious hypocrite.


    Very sad (4.50 / 2) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 10:42:12 AM EST
    It gets easy sometimes to take for granted what past Feminists have given to my generation, there are reminders though.

    It's beyond horrible (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 10:59:06 AM EST
    Im suggesting - strongly - that a very well organized international effort to rectify these kinds of glaring human rights abuses hasn't taken place because, once again, the priority of lucrative business arrangements and the "trading partner" trump cards wielded by countries like China, Saudi Arabia and India (for starters), makes it too easy for SOME countries to opt out and equivocate on what HAS to be an organized international movement to make common decency, sanity and non-violence the no 1 thing all nations strive for; not new oil piplines, more Humvees and Super Stores up and running in Myanmar, or wherever.



    In this instance (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:38:08 AM EST
    I think it is much larger than that.  It is about power and control and existing structures.  Afghanistan has been deeply impoverished for so long, there isn't much there for big business, barely enough there for its own people to survive.  Whatever meager power there is to be had, the Taliban wants it and this is how they maintain it.

    What should (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:56:28 AM EST
    we do about the untouchable women in India who upper caste Hindus are allowed to beat and gang rape with impunity?

    Your thoughts.  


    I always come up with education (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:09:32 PM EST
    personally.  Funny, so does the author of 'Three Cups of Tea'.  He wants education of women and girls in Afghanistan.  The Taliban will kill you while you attempt this :)

    This is not an opportunity for me to spin things into some sort of American political rhetoric.  A pregnant women was flogged and then shot in the head three times in Afghanistan for adultery by an institutional element of Afghan society.  That's the facts.  And, this did not happen in the United States.  That's the facts.


    Nobodys saying, (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:21:13 PM EST
    it isn't better here, just that every country has to clean out it's own house.

    As long as vaguely defined "interests" trump enlightenment and humanity, certain powerful interests here will always opt for propping up brutal regimes before they consider the long-term well-being of the people of a particular nation.


    Considering that the most (none / 0) (#54)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:41:05 PM EST
    advanced military that the world has ever seen and being enriched by almost every single other organized military force on the planet is having one hell of a time cleaning up the Taliban, your idealistic notions are snort worthy IMO.

    At best, perhaps you could hope to escape Afghanistan....if you are extremely extremely lucky.

    I prefer debates full of facts, even the inconvenient truths. And one other fact exists too.  While we are closing our borders to Latinos, what you barter for in Afghanistan to help the Americans is a Visa and a pathway to U.S. citizenship.  I suppose that is a form of escape for a very lucky few.  The lottery of getting a life though.  It is like the Thunderdome in my opinion whether we are there or not.  Some will leave with us though.


    Seriously (none / 0) (#94)
    by star on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 06:00:24 PM EST
    Are you equating a lone incident or 2 that happened ILLEGALLY in india to this incident by taliban - following the sharia law??
    there are wrong doers and wrongful acts done in every country. but by no means does the LAW of the land support these kind of abuses or the press try to hide these kind of incidents or the masses support such atrocities in India.
    I do not understand the compulsion you have to drag India into this mess, even though India is in no way comparable to Afghanistan or pak or even china in terms of human rights situation.

    Seriously (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:32:19 PM EST
    get off your as* and educate yourself. It's not an "incident or two"; but I'll refer you to the work of Dr K Jamanadas, who has thoroughly documented the atrocious and inexcusable double standard of the Indian government as it relates to the providing of the protection of "the law" for the Dalit community in India, ie, untouchables and unseeables, for decades.

    I just love it when outraged ignoramuses chime in about subjects they know nothing about. It's so Bush-era America..so Tea Party America.


    that was for "star" (none / 0) (#115)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:33:08 PM EST
    Law? (none / 0) (#96)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 06:12:20 PM EST
    But a Taliban spokesman denied Monday that the militia was responsible for Sanubar's death.
    "We have not done anything like that in Badghis or any other province," said Qari Yosuf Ahmadi, calling the report "propaganda" by foreigners and the Western-backed Afghan government.

    The Taliban is not a unified national movement and small groups operate shadow government structures autonomously in pockets of the insurgent south....

    The deputy head of the religious council for western Afghanistan, Mohammad Kabaabiani, said the execution ran counter to Islamic principles.

    Taliban (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by star on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 06:20:26 PM EST
    has executed and flogged women routinely when they were in power in Afg and they are doing it in the name of Sharia law.

    Sharia Law (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by star on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 06:24:48 PM EST
    is the only law Taliban recognizes and they will continue to terrorize and control women in the name of this law if and when they can get away with it.

    Yes (none / 0) (#102)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 07:15:05 PM EST
    And they terrorize men too... but it is true the conditions for women under the Taliban are deplorable from a US standpoint.

    What do you propose to do?

    Do you think that there is anything to do to improve the conditions of the underclass of women in the US?

    Is that more important or equally important?


    Ignorance and denial (5.00 / 2) (#108)
    by shoephone on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 10:03:28 PM EST
    News flash: Many of us ARE ALREADY working to improve the lives of women and girs in this country. I work with victims of domestic violence, and I am fully aware of others on this blog who do as well. Lo and behold, we can still take note of and condemn the atrocities that occur in other countries. Imagine that -- women who can walk and chew gum at the same time.

    Your arguments are pathetic.


    Excellent response (5.00 / 2) (#110)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 10:18:39 PM EST
    as the ridiculously dichotomous thinking here can just be so useless.

    And thank you for your work for others in need, wherever they may be in need.


    Well (none / 0) (#111)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:04:19 PM EST
    Get to work. The (white) feminist movement seems to have left their black sisters behind...

    Women of all races bring home less income and own fewer assets, on average, than men of the same race, but for single black women the disparities are so overwhelmingly great that even in their prime working years their median wealth amounts to only $5.

    In a groundbreaking report released Monday by a leading economic research group, social scientists turned a spotlight on the grave financial challenges facing an often overlooked group of women, many of whom could not take an unpaid sick day or repair a major appliance without going into debt.

    "It's rather shocking," said Meizhu Lui, director of the Closing the Gap Initiative based in Oakland, Calif., who contributed to the report "Lifting as We Climb: Women of Color, Wealth and America's Future."

    Among the most startling revelations in the wealth data is that while single white women in the prime of their working years (ages 36 to 49) have a median wealth of $42,600 (still only 61 percent of their single white male counterparts), the median wealth for single black women is only $5.




    What the h*ll are you talking about? (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Cream City on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 08:50:11 AM EST
    For once, would you please focus on the point at hand?  Do you understand at all the repeated point made here to talk about the topic others are talking about, rather than whatever you want to talk about from thread to thread to thread. . . .

    Point At Hand? (none / 0) (#130)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 12:41:27 PM EST
    The topic appears to be the suffering and injustice of women at the hands of oppressors.

    And thank you for your work for others in need, wherever they may be in need.

    Except when they are in your backyard and black? Then it is off topic?  lol.... you really show your cards here.

    Interesting that you would get sooooo uppity when the focus is brought back to the suffering of women in the US.  Is it also off topic to point out that the CIA has determined that using the suffering of Pashtun women under the Taliban is a great way to get liberals, like you, to support the Afghan war. Another win for Pavlov.


    Arguments? (none / 0) (#112)
    by squeaky on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:05:37 PM EST
    Sorry I have made no arguments, but I did ask a couple of questions.

    But why not deflect the conversation into your blog rage, more fun, no?


    Yes, all that, and much more... (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by Dr Molly on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:41:40 PM EST
    It's also about the worldwide subjugation of women (and children) occurring at various levels all over the globe (including the U.S.), since time immemorial, and often codified in religious doctrine to various degrees...

    So much truth in so few words (none / 0) (#70)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:06:00 PM EST
    The subjugation of women and children occurring at various levels all over the globe and often codified in religious doctrine.

    And that's why... (none / 0) (#31)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:59:25 AM EST
    their barbarism makes the cover of TIME, and the barbarism of those selling something we wanna buy hardly gets reported.

    We ain't gonna get anywhere till every society is held to similar and very high human rights standards...until then we'll keep pointing at the taliban and the taliban will kepp pointing at the great satan predator drones in the sky, neither to change their ways.


    Those drones are (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:04:01 PM EST
    killing people who are killing pregnant women for adultery.

    Your analogy doesn't work.


    I'm glad you're so sure... (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:15:32 PM EST
    I believe there are graves where children are buried that tell a different story.

    But they woulda just grown up to kill pregnant women...the boys, anyway.


    kdog, if you have a solution (none / 0) (#61)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:54:12 PM EST
    Let's have it.

    And I admit that what we are doing now is not perfect.

    It's just that I don't think leaving will solve the problem and that leaving will empower the terrorists to recruit and eventually seize control of the Islamic faith.


    And I thought the terrorists had (none / 0) (#67)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:00:50 PM EST
    already seized control of the Islamic faith....and that Islam was an inferior, inherently violent religion....

    I got no solution.... (none / 0) (#80)
    by kdog on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:44:40 PM EST
    and neither do you...neither does Stephen Hawking.

    But I do think any course of action has to first do no more harm.  I'm down with offering every woman living under cracked-out Islam's thumb throughout the world political asylum in the USA...work for you?  


    No it doesn't (none / 0) (#87)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 05:03:44 PM EST
    first because there are way too many so it isn't possible.

    Secondly, it is a problem that must be solved by Muslims.

    But the problem is the moderates are hiding because the radicals are killing them.


    That Time cover is horrifying (none / 0) (#81)
    by Cream City on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:49:44 PM EST
    isn't it?  Of course, some of us also see echoes of the famous National Geographic cover of the girl from Afghanistan, decades ago, with similar eyes.

    I have read the updates about that girl grown up now; I know that her life has not been great -- but at least she still has her nose as well as her eyes.


    execution (none / 0) (#5)
    by Molly Pitcher on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 10:56:31 AM EST
    I think I personally would welcome the bullets after the flogging and whatever other barbarities were (and would have continued to be) inflicted.

    It's only bad... (none / 0) (#8)
    by DancingOpossum on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:03:49 AM EST
    ...when the Taliban kill their own. When we kill children and pregnant women, however, it's A-OK.

    A night raid carried out by US and Afghan gunmen led to the deaths of two pregnant women, a teenage girl and two local officials in an atrocity which Nato then tried to cover up, survivors have told The Times.


    Three women crouching in a hallway behind him were hit by the same volley of fire. Bibi Shirin, 22, had four children under the age of 5. Bibi Saleha, 37, had 11 children. Both of them, according to their relatives, were pregnant. They were killed instantly.

    The men's mother, Bibi Sabsparie, said that Shirin was four months pregnant and Saleha was five months. The other victim, Gulalai, 18, was engaged. She was wounded and later died. "We had already bought everything for the wedding," her soon-to-be father-in-law, Sayed Mohammed Mal, the Vice-Chancellor of Gardez University, said.

    On the night of the attack about 25 male friends and relatives had gathered at Commander Dawood's compound in Khataba, a small village, to celebrate the naming of a newborn boy.


    Just collateral damage, folks. I'm sure those people were happy to die for the sake of our national security!

    collateral damage (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:09:58 AM EST
    weasel words invented by the Pentagon-hired-firms-of-the-world.

    Means, basically, we knew there was a high likelihood it would happen, but we didn't MEAN for it to happen.


    pr firms.. (none / 0) (#13)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:10:24 AM EST
    A horrible tragedy, but (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by efm on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:11:07 PM EST
    I think there is a little difference between a night raid where people were accidentally killed and a intentional public lashing and execution.

    Not to Their Families (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:38:06 PM EST
    If anything, they might understand why the woman was killed, not that I agree, but in their society it's understood.  

    How do you rationalize killing children, an accident ??  Great my kids are dead and some clown in a uniform from a country on the other side of the planet comes on TV, which I probably don't own, and says it was an error for the greater good.  Now I feel so much better.

    I would rather live in a society where punishment is ultra-extreme than one in which bombs randomly fall from the sky killing innocent people, by people I don't know without explanation.  Strike that, coming from remote controlled robots driven by people 10,000 miles away, who are filthy rich to me, without explanation.


    Both of these incidents were horrible. (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by efm on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:02:24 PM EST
    In both cases the families have lost their loved ones.  And I don't think that it is OK for these people to have been killed. But I do believe that there is a moral difference between an intentional act and an accident.  

    Not an accident (none / 0) (#125)
    by DancingOpossum on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 09:28:01 AM EST
    Except it was not an accident. It was a night raid carried out by NATO troops, who then tried to cover it up and disguise it as a "Taliban killing." Jerome Starkey, who was as an un-embedded reporter there, uncovered the true story.

    Nor is this an isolated instance. With wars come atrocities, and our troops have committed war crimes and atrocities in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the list goes on. And there is no justification for it. None.


    How was it not? (none / 0) (#142)
    by efm on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 01:06:27 AM EST
    A NATO raid doesn't mean that they murdered those women on purpose. Them covering it up also doesn't mean that they purposely killed them either.  I also didn't read in that article that they lined up the women and shot them.

    I think that everyone in Afghanistan is - (none / 0) (#43)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 12:59:44 PM EST
    after so many decades of it - well used to war, and bombs, and unintended victims.

    Whether the unintended deaths result from a bomb that fell out of a US drone or from a Russian/local warlord/Taliban/AQ/whatever mortar that was lobbed from a nearby hilltop, unintended deaths occur and have been occurring for a long time.

    In no way does this make it "OK" for us to be the source of any of these unintended deaths.


    Problem is the Taliban (none / 0) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:05:20 PM EST
    won't just quit...

    So how would you solve the problem?


    We (5.00 / 3) (#104)
    by lentinel on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 07:23:33 PM EST
    threw out the British.
    The Vietnamese threw out the French.
    And us.
    The French overthrew its' monarchy.

    Mandela defeated apartheid.

    People have a way of ridding themselves of tyranny.


    You need moderate Muslims (none / 0) (#55)
    by MKS on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:42:32 PM EST
    to take power and win the p.r. battle and get rid of the Taliban...

    There are a number of things that would help that effort.  Making a Korematsu type mistake won't help.


    You got a million or so moderate Muslims (none / 0) (#64)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 01:57:34 PM EST

    I wish so and I hope so but I don't think so.

    Too many "moderates" have seen too many "moderates" killed by extremists.

    You are not going to turn this around until you kill enough terrorists to let the moderates feel safe.


    So (none / 0) (#86)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 04:55:41 PM EST
    taking into account what we know now, do folks here still think supporting and equipping the Taliban and Al Queda in Afghanistan in the eighties was really in the best, long term interests of the region and the rest of the world?

    Since no one had a time machine back then (none / 0) (#88)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 05:07:41 PM EST
    how was anyone to know?

    You're just mad because we used them to bled the Soviets.


    the word you're (none / 0) (#92)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 05:46:41 PM EST
    looking for, I believe, is "bleed".

    Yeah, that's it; cuz Lefties is all dang communists in disguise..

    The point is, it was NEVER about humanitarianism to begin with. I wish it was.


    The mistake, using your perfect 20/20 hindsight (none / 0) (#91)
    by BTAL on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 05:38:21 PM EST
    was not following through with alliance building.

    but not alliances (none / 0) (#93)
    by jondee on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 05:52:32 PM EST
    with backwards-looking, ultra-nationalist, benighted-by-fundamentalism folks..

    Which would leave the American Right completely on the strategic sidelines vis a vis the needed ability to see beyond one's own prejudices and dangerous delusions in building for the future.


    Yeah, like Nixon going to China (none / 0) (#95)
    by BTAL on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 06:01:02 PM EST
    and Clinton cruise missile'ing Iraq.

    And, now we are supporting (none / 0) (#98)
    by Untold Story on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 06:18:50 PM EST

    What right... (none / 0) (#126)
    by DancingOpossum on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 09:29:28 AM EST
    ...do we have to "make them quit"? What right do we have to be over there, or anywhere, telling a country we've invaded and destroyed how to behave?

    Yeah, they "won't quit" as long as we keep slaughtering their pregnant women and children. How uppity of them.


    We know Time got it wrong. (none / 0) (#21)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 11:38:04 AM EST
    On the authority of none other than the president himself, the justification  for our military misadventure in Afghanistan, as recently as August 1 is "...a fairly modest goal which is: don't allow terrorists to operate from this region, don't allow them to create big training camps to plan attacks against the US Homeland with impunity."  Pretty much the same language as in President Bush's October 2001 speech "Operation Enduring Freedom".  I think the freedom so entitled refers to us, not them, however.

    the afghan "war" (none / 0) (#68)
    by pitachips on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:01:28 PM EST
    has already devolved into just one massive PR program - might as well add the "humanitarian" aspect to the long list of justifications for continuing the policy.

    Yes, and maybe the (none / 0) (#79)
    by KeysDan on Mon Aug 09, 2010 at 02:42:06 PM EST
    "Bomb Iran Now" advocates can use this human rights case: Ebrahim Hamidi, an Iranian teenager, is faced with death by hanging for a "gay assault". A confession was extracted by torturing until he signed a confession for this Iranian crime that his accuser now says he did not, in fact, commit. But the judge will not hear it.

    It seems like a a couple of bites can be taken from this human rights apple: the horror of antigay laws or the injustice of sentencing innocent people (heterosexuals) on trumped up false charges.  Somehow I do not feel the first would be a winner, but the second might work.  After all, it sounds better than the rationale that someday Iran may get a nuclear weapon even though our intelligence estimates question its imminence.