Destroying the face of Womanhood. :( (disturbing imagery warning)

I'm not sure she would see it that way.

wa:do

ps. as being used as "pro war" propaganda. I think she would say she is anti-misogyny propaganda.

Mr Spinkles said:

I'm not sure. Yes and no. I don't agree with the caption that went with the photo. But the story itself is important for raising awareness about women's issues. And TIME magazine has traditionally been anti-war, they were against the Iraq war from the start, as I recall.

Click to expand...

That's why i'm surprised it's the *TIME* magazine, not any other magazine.

Mr Spinkles said:

The actual act was carried out by her relatives:

The 18-year-old was reportedly given away by her family in childhood as a "blood debt" and was subsequently married to a Taliban fighter. His family abused her and she ran away but was recaptured and mutilated by her husband.
​

BBC News - Mutilated Afghan girl Aisha in US for new nose

It's not clear to me who "sentenced" her, some reports are saying her husband WAS a Taliban commander, other reports say he was a Taliban fighter.

She told the magazine that she was given away as a child to settle a so-called "blood debt" – her uncle killed one of her husband's relatives – and subsequently married to a Taliban commander. She fled following years of abuse but was captured and hauled before a Taliban commander who ordered the punishment. "Aisha's brother-in-law held her down while her husband pulled out a knife," the article said. "First he sliced off her ears. Then he started on her nose."
​

War in Afghanistan: Warning or blackmail? - World Politics, World - The Independent

Whoever "sentenced" her it seems pretty clear to me that no political organization had to be involved. Just tribal warfare and a family with a radical Islamic ideology.

Click to expand...

seems pretty clear to me Spinkles that the Taliban is a political organisation and the Taliban sentenced this girl, the mutilation was it seems carried out by her husband who it seems was Taliban. are you saying that this was not carried out under Taliban authority? or are you saying the Taliban are not political? or are you just ignoring the continuous use of the word "Taliban" in all the articles

TashaN said:

That's why i'm surprised it's the *TIME* magazine, not any other magazine.

Click to expand...

Hi TashaN

Then maybe you could take them at their word for it.

kai said:

Hi TashaN

Then maybe you could take them at their word for it.

Click to expand...

Any person and any organization can screw up sometimes.

TashaN said:

Any person and any organization can screw up sometimes.

Click to expand...

or maybe not

kai said:

seems pretty clear to me Spinkles that the Taliban is a political organisation and the Taliban sentenced this girl, the mutilation was it seems carried out by her husband who it seems was Taliban. are you saying that this was not carried out under Taliban authority? or are you saying the Taliban are not political? or are you just ignoring the continuous use of the word "Taliban" in all the articles

Click to expand...

No what I'm saying is yes, sure, this guy was Taliban. But no political organization had to exist in order for this to happen. They didn't need roadside bombs or an ammunition bunker or a bunch of zealous recruits with AK-47's. The only ingredient that was required for this woman to be buthered was for a *family* in Afghanistan to subscribe to the Taliban-style radical Islamic ideology and for another *family* (which wasn't Taliban) to subscribe to the tribal mentality that young girls could be traded as a "blood debt".

As long as there is a culture like this in Afghanistan, these things will be commonplace whether or not any political or military organization exists like the Taliban.

You can destroy the political/military organization of the Taliban with NATO forces. But you can't change the culture/religious beliefs people hold and practice and inflict upon their own family members. The way to fight barbaric cultural / religious practices, I think, is a long, slow route of humanitarian efforts.

Consider the barbaric butchering and oppression of blacks which occurred in the American South. The North beat the South in the American Civil War, yet the oppression of blacks continued even after the political organization and military power of the South (and later the Ku Klux Klan) was destroyed. U.S. federal troops did help fight the oppression of blacks in the U.S. South on a few occasions, but ultimately it was law enforcement and humanitarian/grassroots political work that changed the hearts and minds of Southern Whites which ended racial oppression.

Mr Spinkles said:

No what I'm saying is yes, sure, this guy was Taliban. But no political organization had to exist in order for this to happen. They didn't need roadside bombs or an ammunition bunker or a bunch of zealous recruits with AK-47's. The only ingredient that was required for this woman to be buthered was for a *family* in Afghanistan to subscribe to the Taliban-style radical Islamic ideology and for another *family* (which wasn't Taliban) to subscribe to the tribal mentality that young girls could be traded as a "blood debt".

Click to expand...

So? That's not what happened.

I never understood the argument that x is unnecessary when x is clearly involved.

As long as there is a culture like this in Afghanistan, these things will be commonplace whether or not any political or military organization exists like the Taliban.

Click to expand...

Isn't that supposed to be why we're there? To win hearts and minds over from this?

You can destroy the political/military organization of the Taliban with NATO forces. But you can't change the culture/religious beliefs people hold and practice and inflict upon their own family members. The way to fight barbaric cultural / religious practices, I think, is a long, slow route of humanitarian efforts.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

Consider the barbaric butchering and oppression of blacks which occurred in the American South. The North beat the South in the American Civil War, yet the oppression of blacks continued even after the political organization and military power of the South (and later the Ku Klux Klan) was destroyed. U.S. federal troops did help fight the oppression of blacks in the U.S. South on a few occasions, but ultimately it was law enforcement and humanitarian/grassroots political work that changed the hearts and minds of Southern Whites which ended racial oppression.

Click to expand...

Not the best comparison, I think. The Yankees were just as racist as the Southerners, and simply didn't care for the most part.

Mr Spinkles said:

No what I'm saying is yes, sure, this guy was Taliban. But no political organization had to exist in order for this to happen. They didn't need roadside bombs or an ammunition bunker or a bunch of zealous recruits with AK-47's. The only ingredient that was required for this woman to be buthered was for a *family* in Afghanistan to subscribe to the Taliban-style radical Islamic ideology and for another *family* (which wasn't Taliban) to subscribe to the tribal mentality that young girls could be traded as a "blood debt". Thats a good theory and i would say its most likely but the fact is Tribalism and radical islamic ideology is nourishment for the taliban and that does exist and endorses this kind of punishment. Its paired down Sharia to nothing but hud punishments.

As long as there is a culture like this in Afghanistan, these things will be commonplace whether or not any political or military organization exists like the Taliban. The Taliban are a product of this culture yes . abut cultures can grow and evolve if watered and fed

You can destroy the political/military organization of the Taliban with NATO forces. But you can't change the culture/religious beliefs people hold and practice and inflict upon their own family members. The way to fight barbaric cultural / religious practices, I think, is a long, slow route of humanitarian efforts. Thats right but you cant do that without security or no humanitarian effort will be forthcoming

Consider the barbaric butchering and oppression of blacks which occurred in the American South. The North beat the South in the American Civil War, yet the oppression of blacks continued even after the political organization and military power of the South (and later the Ku Klux Klan) was destroyed. U.S. federal troops did help fight the oppression of blacks in the U.S. South on a few occasions, but ultimately it was law enforcement and humanitarian/grassroots political work that changed the hearts and minds of Southern Whites which ended racial oppression.

Click to expand...

I agree and thats what i hope will happen in Afghanistan

Storm said:

So? That's not what happened.

I never understood the argument that x is unnecessary when x is clearly involved.

Click to expand...

That's not what happened? From the news reports I quoted in post #78 it seems that no "political organization" was involved, just family. (Family with a radical ideology, of course.)

Storm said:

Isn't that supposed to be why we're there? To win hearts and minds over from this?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure why NATO is there .... what do you think?

Storm said:

Not the best comparison, I think. The Yankees were just as racist as the Southerners, and simply didn't care for the most part.

Click to expand...

I agree, perhaps it's not the best comparison ....

Mr Spinkles said:

That's not what happened? From the news reports I quoted in post #78 it seems that no "political organization" was involved, just family. (Family with a radical ideology, of course.)

Click to expand...

Obeying the orders of a political organization. Or are you disregarding all the reports that the punishment was ordered by a "Taliban commander?"

I'm not sure why NATO is there .... what do you think?

Click to expand...

I'd like to think for the reason I listed, and I do believe it's the goal of the common soldier. The leaders, well... I'm a bit more cynical.

Our tolerance of oppressive faiths (in particlar the abrahmic religions), and our willingness to tolerate beliefs that would be considered insane if they were associated with any other topic, is what provides the foundation for this type of behaviour.

As long as we allow faith to be exempt from criticism and rational thought, and as long as we feel it is rude to challenge religious beliefs, both mild moderates who claim to do good, as well as violent extremists who do evil, will have free reign to do anything they want in the name of religion, and use religion as a stay our of jail card.

Hopefully humanity will one day overcome our need for religion and become more human.

Mr Spinkles said:

That's not what happened? From the news reports I quoted in post #78 it seems that no "political organization" was involved, just family. (Family with a radical ideology, of course.)

Click to expand...

But that is what happened, and a political organisation was involved, and that organisation was the Taliban and the radical ideology was Taliban radical ideology, Thats very clear from the news reports you quoted in post #78.

whats going on here Spinks? doesnt it count if the Taliban that carries the mutilating is related to the victim?



you posted this quote from the news article:

The 18-year-old was reportedly given away by her family in childhood as a "blood debt" and was subsequently married to a Taliban fighter.
His family abused her and she ran away but was recaptured and mutilated by her husband.

Click to expand...

but totally ignored this :

Aisha told Time her nose and ears had been cut off - with the approval of a Taliban commander - by her abusive husband as punishment for running away.

Click to expand...

am i taking it too far to suggest that the scum who was her husband carried out this attack because he was able to, due to the Taliban being the authority in the area and that he himself was Taliban?

Taliban publicly flogged, executed pregnant Afghan widow accused of adultery

Read more: Taliban publicly flogged, executed pregnant Afghan widow accused of adultery

Click to expand...

Since we are talking about the Taliban and their cruel practices of punishment toward women.

I must say, though, that in all fairness, the Taliban says they had nothing to do with this case.(Note the sarcasm)

Storm said:

Obeying the orders of a political organization. Or are you disregarding all the reports that the punishment was ordered by a "Taliban commander?"

Click to expand...

The so-called "Taliban commander", or "Taliban fighter" was the woman's husband. The press makes it seem like a tribunal of Osama bin Ladens convened by teleconference using their iPhones from all over Afghanistan, to put the woman on trial, and some masked guy was hired to carry out their sentence while the poor husband watched in horror. Then when you read the press reports in detail, there's a somewhat different story .... yes, the guy was Taliban 14 years ago when the girl was given to him as "blood debt". A large chunk of the population of Afghanistan, presumably, was Taliban 14 years ago. They had a civil war and the Taliban almost won, remember?

Of course, the Taliban is a brutal group and it wouldn't surprise me at all that they would sanction such barbaric punishments against women. However, in this case, like I said, the fact is no political organization was involved. Just families with a radical Islamic ideology and families who don't respect women's rights.

You may as well say that "The Republican party sentenced" a woman to be abused if her Republican husband abused her.

How could predator drones or U.S. special forces possibly stop this kind of thing from happening? They can provide security, possibly, but ultimately this was a crime, surely it is illegal in Afghanistan to enslave and butcher a woman like this? If so, police and crime-fighting is the way to stop this behavior. If not, then it's impossible to stop this behavior until the people of Afghanistan decide they care about women's rights enough to pass laws against this kind of thing.

kai said:

But that is what happened, and a political organisation was involved, and that organisation was the Taliban and the radical ideology was Taliban radical ideology, Thats very clear from the news reports you quoted in post #78.

whats going on here Spinks? doesnt it count if the Taliban that carries the mutilating is related to the victim?

Click to expand...

Let's say a U.S. Army general abuses his wife. Therefore, the U.S. Army sentenced a woman to a beating?

The analogy isn't perfect, of course, because the Taliban would sentence women to terrible punishments if they were in power. They did so before. All I'm saying is that in this case, there was no political organization involved. It's not like random Taliban fighters tracked her down, her in-laws tracked her down. Random Taliban officials didn't kidnap her from her family, her family gave her away as "blood debt".

Mr Spinkles said:

Let's say a U.S. Army general abuses his wife. Therefore, the U.S. Army sentenced a woman to a beating?

The analogy isn't perfect, of course, because the Taliban would sentence women to terrible punishments if they were in power. They did so before. All I'm saying is that in this case, there was no political organization involved. It's not like random Taliban fighters tracked her down, her in-laws tracked her down. Random Taliban officials didn't kidnap her from her family, her family gave her away as "blood debt".

Click to expand...

It's an honor-shame thing, and it (not a Western sense of justice) is what drives these folks to do what they do.

Adultery is not cheating with someone, it's putting yourself in a position to be even remotely available to someone you are not married to. So a woman can be killed for appearing in public without a male family member with her. If she is seen in public without an escort, she is sexually available - this can be a man looking at her, holding hands, or even being raped. If her family finds out about it, they can kill or her for dishonoring the family by putting herself in the situation. It's backwards to the Western mind, but that's how it works.

angellous_evangellous said:

Adultery is not cheating with someone, it's putting yourself in a position to be even remotely available to someone you are not married to. So a woman can be killed for appearing in public without a male family member with her. If she is seen in public without an escort, she is sexually available

Click to expand...

that really damages dignity of women. sounds more like a jungle rule than humane behavour. makes me sick. animalistic men!

.

Mr Spinkles said:

Let's say a U.S. Army general abuses his wife. Therefore, the U.S. Army sentenced a woman to a beating? no only if a US Army commander sentenced her to the abuse and the general carried it out because US army rules on the ground says he can.

The analogy isn't perfect, of course, because the Taliban would sentence women to terrible punishments if they were in power. They did so before. All I'm saying is that in this case, there was no political organization involved. It's not like random Taliban fighters tracked her down, her in-laws tracked her down. Random Taliban officials didn't kidnap her from her family, her family gave her away as "blood debt".

Click to expand...

why do they have to be "random" Taliban? A Taliban commander sentenced her and her husband a Taliban carried out the punishment, all done in a Taliban environment . or as you seem to be saying the Taliban had nothing to do with it, but i cant really find a source that, says that can you spinks?

She was mutilated after last year attempting to flee her home, where she had been subjected to a life of misery at the hands of her husband's family.

When she was caught, a local Taliban commander acting as judge ordered the medieval-style punishment.

Click to expand...

Its from women against Sharia but i am sure they are biased

http://womenagainstshariah.blogspot.com/2010/08/mutilated-by-taliban-girl-of-18-who-had.html


Actually Spinkles we may be having a little missunderstanding , its not that i meant this particular punishment had political undertones but that this particular punishment is endorsed and proliferated by the Taliban who are a political organisation, that uses it to enforce their views and goals and was capable of being carried out in such an environment by the girls Taliban husband because a Taliban commander said so .as against any random act of violence carried out in my country as suggested by Paul

I've been observing this thread and I do appreciate all Muslims who have come forward in condemnation of brutality against women. However, why is it, that out of all of the many Mulsims on this forum, only three have actually expressed their dismay over this deliberate mutilation of womanhood!? Just wondering?

Xeper em Ma'at.
/Adramelek\