Archive for Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Taliban kill young couple for eloping

April 15, 2009

Advertisement

— A Taliban firing squad killed a young couple in southwestern Afghanistan for trying to elope, shooting them with AK-47s in front of a crowd in a lawless, militant-controlled region, officials said Tuesday.

The woman, 19-year-old Gul Pecha, and the man, 21-year-old Abdul Aziz, were accused by the militants of immoral acts, and a council of conservative clerics decided that the two should be killed, officials said.

The two had hoped to travel to Iran, which borders their home province of Nimroz, but their parents sent villagers to bring them home, said Sadiq Chakhansori, the chief of the provincial council. Once back home, the pair was either turned over to the Taliban by their parents or the militants took them by force, the officials said, providing slightly varying accounts.

Riflemen in the remote district of Khash Rod shot them Monday, said Chakhansori.

“Unfortunately, Khash Rod is an area that is almost out of the control of the government,” said Gov. Ghulam Dastagir Azad. “We don’t have coalition or Afghan army forces there like we do in other districts.”

The U.S. has 38,000 forces in Afghanistan, and President Barack Obama recently announced that the U.S. would send 21,000 more troops to the country this summer.

But in remote and dangerous regions of Afghanistan, Taliban fighters operate what are sometimes referred to as shadow governments, where militant leaders serve as government officials and run their own police units and pseudo court systems.

The conservative Taliban movement ruled Afghanistan from 1996-2001 and put in place harsh social rules that forbade unmarried men and women to talk or meet in public. Women were not allowed out of their homes without a male relative, and girls couldn’t go to school.

Taliban fighters have widened their influence the last three years and now control many remote districts in Afghanistan where there are not enough U.S., NATO or Afghan forces to establish a permanent presence.

The Nimroz governor decried the fact that a three-person council of clerics operating outside the state’s judicial system would level the death penalty.

“Through legal channels it would take months to prove such a case,” Azad said. “How can these people make a decision in four days and kill them? No one has the right to kill anybody without the decision of a court.”

Pecha, the woman, was an ethnic Pashtun from the region and a member of the Sunni sect of Islam, Azad said. Aziz was from the Shiite sect, Azad said, though he didn’t know his ethnicity.

Comments

jaywalker 6 years ago

Lovely. Their parents turned them in to a firing squad.
I have no problem with a religion requiring a strict adherence to its fundamental by-laws. It's when failure to do so leads to this sort of action, a crime against the state, in essence, punishable by death, that the 'civilized world' needs to rise up and take action. Here's to hoping our mission in Afghanistan and Pakistan is victorious. Take 'em out.

JoRight 6 years ago

After hearing some of the stories from Afghanistan (patrol, watch towers over villages etc) there are way more heinous acts going on.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

Yea, it'd been much better if they had gone ahead and had a full-out wedding-- it would have made a good target for a 2000-lbs. bomb.

Chris Ogle 6 years ago

At least we are making progress..... Uh, I think

badger 6 years ago

The Taliban represent Islam about as well as Timothy McVeigh represented Christianity.

Cloaking your barbaric, hateful acts in a religion doesn't make them any less your barbaric, hateful acts. The Taliban are brutes and bullies, vicious tyrants using Islam as a means to control a populace through fear and oppression. They are what the Westboro Baptists would be if they could get political power: dangerous, unbalanced, and convinced of their own morality.

I may not appreciate the US taking on the role of World Policeman, but I have a hard time opposing it if it means standing up to a Taliban or a Janjaweed.

Connacht 6 years ago

"I have no problem with a religion requiring a strict adherence to its fundamental by-laws."

Looks to me like that's exactly what happened. And you don't have a problem with it?

This sort of thing is hardly Islam's sole responsibility. If people actually followed what the Bible said, we would have plenty of religious killings in the United States. Thankfully the secular elite keeps religious wackos in check in the U.S. At least for the most part.

spammer89 6 years ago

Sometimes you just ask yourself WTF.

Jersey_Girl 6 years ago

Marion - maybe that will lead to American pedophiles moving to Saudi so that they can wed their victims, er, I mean true loves.

jaywalker 6 years ago

As mind-numbingly dumb a post as ever, bozo, well done.

"Looks to me like that's exactly what happened. And you don't have a problem with it?"

No, connacht, I don't have a problem with a religion requiring veils on women or the men growing a beard a certain length, to a strict prayer regimen or arranged marriages. Like I said, it's when the violation of one of these religious rules becomes a justification for murder that I have a big problem with it. Someone wants to live like a monk or be subservient due to their religion, whatever blows your hair back. But if a young couple can be gunned down for considering eloping or a woman gets stoned to death because SHE got raped.........then they've crossed the boundary. Many religions have hard and fast 'rules', they should never be allowed to progress to such extremes. Strict adherence does not mean 'punishable by death'.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years ago

" Like I said, it's when the violation of one of these religious rules becomes a justification for murder that I have a big problem with it."

You're such a moral beacon. (more extreme sarcasm.)

Shane Garrett 6 years ago

Romeo and Juliet: Someone should write about this.This is just to sad. The killing of love.

Danimal 6 years ago

Lets chalk this one up to tolerance run amok. Seriously, these people are barbarians.

cthulhu_4_president 6 years ago

Marion, have you ever read the bible? If you ever did, you would find many brutal accounts in there, also. Killing children, homosexuality, rape, war....the list goes on! How could people possibly follow such a religion? Barbarians all I say! It's sad that you claim to be so learned about history when you are so comically ethnocentric and xenophobic.

That aside, this story represents a victory for abstinence-only sex education and preserving the holy sanctity of marriage, right?

Kyle Reed 6 years ago

We just need to send some moderate Taliban to talk some sense into them. Oh wait then they will be killed too. Hmm...

georgeofwesternkansas 6 years ago

Is this place a new bar in Lawrence??

Its the only place in Kansas they would kill a man and woman for getting married.

jaywalker 6 years ago

"Do you have a problem with a religion which permits and advocates child rape?"

'Course, Marion. To what are you referring? I'm unaware that Islamists advocate such if that's what you mean. If you're talkin' 'bout the Taliban extremists, I'm not surprised, but they're who I've been referencing.

"You're such a moral beacon. (more extreme sarcasm.)"

Wha..?? Gotta problem with that benign statement, bozo, or still playing the fool? (HINT: That's rhetorical)

TacoBob 6 years ago

It is beyond the pale that some posters here can't condemn such a vile and wicked act by the Taliban.

Just can't do it, can you?

Amazing.

beatrice 6 years ago

What a sad and tragic story. Imagine, a young couple in love, killed before they could realize their "dream" of escape to Iran. Just horrific.

Marion, to repeat what Badger already wrote: The Taliban is to the Muslim Religion what Westboro Baptist (or the KKK, for that matter) is to Chrisianity. I find it difficult to condemn an entire religion based on the acts of a few.

I agree, for once, with jaywalker: "Here's to hoping our mission in Afghanistan and Pakistan is victorious."

I'd even take it a step further -- Here's to committing ourselves to making sure our mission in Afghanistan and Pakistan is victorious. This is where our real enemy is, and has been, for some time. I hope all of you will support President Obama's efforts toward this goal.

yellowhouse 6 years ago

How can we ever hope to help, save, or even be able to make a difference in a country, that will hurt and kill their own women and children?

Sending our troops to the Middle East is a lost cause!

jaywalker 6 years ago

Marion,

Have heard the tales concerning Mohammed, But I do not believe ALL muslims practice this nor advocate such. I could be wrong, but I doubt it on this. I have muslim friends, fairly certain such practices are not part of their doctrine.

beatrice 6 years ago

Marion, do all Muslims practice the things you are addressing? If not, what is the point?

Practicality 6 years ago

I am certainly not condoning

"People who rape, permit or advoacte for the rape of children are vermin."

But, to be fair, there are plenty of examples of leaders who practiced all the religions in history who took child brides. Especially, when most brides were the result of political and social alliances and not about anything else. And, as disgusting as it was, the weddings had to be consummated to be considered binding.

Practicality 6 years ago

Marion writes:

"So you give a free pass for those who practice and support the raping of children?"

I don't give anyone a pass. Just pointing out that if you judge and condemn Mohammad for that practice, you will likely have to condemn all leaders during that same time frame and even later.

Practicality 6 years ago

kansasdaughter,

The founding of Islam was just as much politcally motivated as it was religiously motivated.

Marion,

I am not defending child rape, or any other rape for that matter. Unfortunately, all forms of rape have been extremely prevelant in the history of the world. So much so, that it used to be the added "incentive" for besieging armies to attack a well fortified town. Including all European armies, even at much later dates than Mohammad was alive.

Practicality 6 years ago

kansasdaughter,

I did not mean to sound condescending in my reply to you or Marion. It just seemed like this reply to my previous post,

Marion writes:

"So you give a free pass for those who practice and support the raping of children?"

was more of an attack upon me personally than anything based on what I said or grounded in Historical accuracy. I did resent the statement.

jaywalker 6 years ago

"Do or do not your Muslim freinds support the decisions of the Islamic court which has recently ruled the “marriage' between a 47-year-old man and a child as “legal”?

“Pretty sure” ain't going to get you very far as the documentaion belies your “pretty sure”."

Fine. I'm SURE my friends don't condone such a marriage. But your 'documentation'........ is that supposed to blanket every single one of the billions that practice islamic faith? You should know better than that, and if your point is to convince me to do the same you're wasting your time. There are aspects of virtually every religion I know that are ugly or unsavory parts of its history. If you choose to believe that all muslims are child molestors and rapists, or a the very least condone such practice or turn a blind eye, that's your cross. I ain't bearin' it.

Practicality 6 years ago

Marion,

Under your logic, we should condemn all Protestants, Calvinists, Methodists, Baptists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Adventists, and Anglincanism for their acceptance of beheading wives to get a divorce.

You say that the discussion doesn't concern other religions, only Muslim. But it appears that you are holding Islam to a different standard when judged in the context of history and time. Child Brides are an unfortunate reality in History, just like slavery. It is also a practice that occurred in every nation, in all religions across the globe. Including the United States for a longer period than it has not. This practice is still found in many regions today. It is true that in many countries that practice Islam, you will find Muslim Clerics who will condone such a practice. You will also find many that won't.

Marion writes. . . .

"Simply put, if you do not actively oppose such practices, you at least tacitly support those practices by saying and doing nothing."

I will actively oppose the practice of child rape, or the taking of a child bride, or any rape for that matter. I will not actively oppose Islam. The two are not the same. That is where the difference comes from between you and other posters.

cthulhu_4_president 6 years ago

misdirection to the point of artistry, Marion. You are truly a moron. By the way, the word "ethnocentric" has nothing to do with other ethnicities, but rather how focused you are on your own. You need to do your homework before flailing away at your keyboard. I also never assumed you were a Christian, I just assumed that you had heard of this book called the Bible and condemmned everyone of that savage religion as you condemn all Muslims. And it is not up to you to decide what this thread topic is, if this becomes a thread about comparative religion, then that it what it is. whether you like it or not. It's called free speech, idiot.

Game, set, and match.

jaywalker 6 years ago

Practicality nailed it. 'Nuff said.

Shane Garrett 6 years ago

Saudi family had the money and Whab, the fire brand religious zelot, led the way to unify the current boarders of Saudi Arabia. Together they conqured the holy places of Mecca and Maccina. It was a join or die war. Let me remember 11 of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. No wonder the current Pres. bowed so deeply to the mighty Royal King.

cthulhu_4_president 6 years ago

Again, a beautiful misdirection.

"I am well aware of the meaning of the word “ethonocentric” and my response is completely consistent with the definition of that word although I might have phrased the reply differently for better effect."

Actually, no. What you actually did was change the definition to suit your needs. A glorious pasttime of the intellectually lazy.

"No one is disputing these facts but instead are attacking me for pointing them out"

Again, no. You are being attacked because you are ignoring evidence that contradicts your opinion, dismissing it as "not on topic". Again, a sad pasttime for those uninterested in truth. The main point being that today, in this world, atrocities have been and are carried out in the name of all major religions, but, for some reason, the allmighty Marion is ok with the ones that are prevelant in his own country. Argument by analogy to another religion is not equivicating or rationalizing. It is meant to illustrate that you have an obvious double-standard when judging the worth of religions. If this frustrates you it must be because you realize that your flawed logic is showing. Embarrasing, no?

Since you hate it when people engage in personal attacks rather than face the music, I assume you are ready to answer the two simple question that I first asked, but which you cleverly misdirected away from:

1) have you read the Bible? 2) Do you condemn all people who follow that chosen book as savages, (you know, those people who bow at the Vatican once a week) based on the savage content in the book and by the horrible acts that are carried out even today in it's name?

No rationalizing or obfuscation, please. I know how much you hate that. An answer will suffice.

I'm not holding my breath.

come on, if your moralizing is the

cthulhu_4_president 6 years ago

Again, a beautiful misdirection.

"I am well aware of the meaning of the word “ethonocentric” and my response is completely consistent with the definition of that word although I might have phrased the reply differently for better effect."

Actually, no. What you actually did was change the definition to suit your needs. A glorious pasttime of the intellectually lazy.

"No one is disputing these facts but instead are attacking me for pointing them out"

Again, no. You are being attacked because you are ignoring evidence that contradicts your opinion, dismissing it as "not on topic". Again, a sad pasttime for those uninterested in truth. The main point being that today, in this world, atrocities have been and are carried out in the name of all major religions, but, for some reason, the allmighty Marion is ok with the ones that are prevelant in his own country. Argument by analogy to another religion is not equivicating or rationalizing. It is meant to illustrate that you have an obvious double-standard when judging the worth of religions. If this frustrates you it must be because you realize that your flawed logic is showing. Embarrasing, no?

Since you hate it when people engage in personal attacks rather than face the music, I assume you are ready to answer the two simple question that I first asked, but which you cleverly misdirected away from:

1) have you read the Bible? 2) Do you condemn all people who follow that chosen book as savages, (you know, those people who bow at the Vatican once a week) based on the savage content in the book and by the horrible acts that are carried out even today in it's name?

No rationalizing or obfuscation, please. I know how much you hate that. An answer will suffice.

I'm not holding my breath.

cthulhu_4_president 6 years ago

don't know why it posted twice. My apolagies.

Flap Doodle 6 years ago

The more pretentious Nick tries to be, the funnier he actually is.

denak 6 years ago

First, I would like to say that this is truly a tragic case. IF the parents turned their children in of their own free will, then I hope they feel shame and guilt for the rest of their life. If they turned them over under duress, then I hope that they will be able to find some measure of peace.

The problem here isn't Islam. The problem is that there is a society that is under a rogue government that rules via fear and ignorance. Throughout history, there have been numerous governments like this that have imposed strict absolute rule on its subject. The Afghani people continue to suffer under the Taliban because, in part, Pakistan will not move against it and allows the Taliban to use Pakistan as a recruiting/training center. The U.S. can not and will not force Pakistan to get serious about the Taliban because the U.S. does not want to anger Pakistan and the U.S. needs Pakistan as a buffer in order to move troops and weapons. So, the Taliban has no fear of reprisals from Pakistan and very little fear against the U.S., especially considering we have concentrated out energy on Iraq the last 8 years instead of where we should have, which is in Afghanistan.

Lastly, to throw my two cents into this ridiculous arguement about Islam and "child rape." First, throughout history, in many countries, including the "civilized Christian West," chid brides were not uncommon. In some aristocratic socities, girls and boys from blue blood families were betrothed to individuals at birth. Many times a child was taken from the family, young, and lived in the house of her "husband" during her betrothal which could last for years. A "betrothed huband has the same rights to his "wife" that he did in marriage. In fact, only the "husband" could break off a bethrothal. However, to do so would make the girl "unmarriageable" for the rest of her life. Also, many times the girl was brought into the house so that she would grow up with an emotional bond to her husband's family instead of her biological family. She was also used as a servant.

This whole notion that "Islam" condones "child rape" is ridiculous because the notion of "child rape" did not exist. The notion of marital rape did not exist even in this country until the late 1970's( 1977 I think is when it was first defined) So, trying to link Islam with "child rape" shows a gross misunderstanding of how "marriage" was conducted for centuries in many, m any countries. Countries that were Muslim and countries that were Christian. And lets not forget, that a girl in this country can get married at age 16 in some states. She can marry a 47 year old if she wants and it is all legal and fine. No one cries "rape." However, if she weren't married to the 47 year old, he would be guilty of rape. Even in our own country, our laws don't always make sense. If it is wrong for a 47 year old man to have sex with a 16 year old, then it should be more right, just because it is under the guise of 'marriage."

Dena

beatrice 6 years ago

kansasdaughter: "The point, BEA, and Jaywalker, is that people who are Muslim are following the teachings of a MAN that takes first grade girls as brides, what is so hard to comprehend about that??? Further what is so hard to abhor about that???"

Christians who believe the Bible worship a God who once killed all humans, save one family who were instructed to build a big boat. So do you accept those who follow the teachings of a GOD who would whipe out mankind on a whim, including all first grade girls and boys, whether they were married or not??? While we are at it, how old was Eve? Anybody? Or Mary? How old was she when God had his way with her? And you think those who believe this should be accepted in OUR society???

Why select which religion to dump on for its lack of humanity in its founding?

Practicality 6 years ago

Marion,

No one is trying to say that child rape is o.k. Denak explained it very well. Marriage between young girls and older men permeate history world wide. Do I think that it is disgusting, yes. I think a lot of practices that took place 1200 years ago are disgusting and I am glad that they are no longer practiced like they once were. All those instances, child bride in Saudi Arabia, killing of the eloped couple in Afganistan, etc. are terrible. I do not dispute that, and I am glad people are trying to put an end to it. You view Islam as the problem, I see it more as oppressive governments that are the problem.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7999777.stm

"Saudi Arabia says it plans to start regulating the marriage of young girls, amid controversy over a union between a 60-year-old man and a girl of eight."

"Saudi Arabia implements an austere form of Sunni Islam that bans free association between the sexes and gives fathers the right to wed their children to whomever they deem fit."

"The Unaiza case was brought by the eight-year-old girl's mother who wanted the marriage to be annulled.

The judge said he had tried to persuade the husband to accept a divorce, but the man refused.

The girl is still with her family and there is no suggestion that she will live with her husband until much older.

The judge said that once she reached puberty, she could ask for a divorce.

Local press reports say the case seems to be an example of how some Saudi families sell their daughters for money.

Correspondents say the girl's father appeared to have sought the dowry from the groom to pay off debts.

Saudi commentators also point out that the marriage took place in the central province of Qaseem - the heartland of Saudi Islamic fundamentalism.

Earlier this year, the country's highest religious authority, the Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Shaikh, said it was not against Islamic law to marry off girls who are 15 and younger."

As you can plainly see, not every Muslim thinks this is a good thing, even the Judge.

Practicality 6 years ago

I also thought you would like to see this. In all the countries in the world, Saudi Arabia didn't even crack the top twenty in percentage of child brides. Please note that poverty seems to be the prevailing factor in these countries, not religion. If you notice, India is on the list (Hindu majority) and Nicaragua is on the list which has over 90% of its population that follows a Christian Denomination, the majority of those being Roman Catholic.

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/341/facts.html

Child Marriage Around the World

Percentage of girls marrying before the age of 18

1 Niger 76.6 2 Chad 71.5 3 Bangladesh 68.7 4 Mali 65.4 5 Guinea 64.5 6 Central African Republic 57.0 7 Nepal 56.1 8 Mozambique 55.9 9 Uganda 54.1 10 Burkina Faso 51.9 11 India 50.0 12 Ethiopia 49.1 13 Liberia 48.4 13 Yemen 48.4 15 Cameroon 47.2 16 Eritrea 47.0 17 Malawi 46.9 18 Nicaragua 43.3 18 Nigeria 43.3 20 Zambia 42.1

denak 6 years ago

".....The question is why would someone profess and practice a faith system that has child brides as one of it's tenets?....."

Islam does not have child brides as one of it's tenants. The are 5 basic tenants (or Five Pillars) in Islam. They are as follows: 1) Bearing witness that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah 2) Observance of Prayer 3)Paying Zakat 4)Fasting during Ramadhan 5)Pilgrimage to the house of Allah

Nope don't see anything that says "take a child bride."

As for the question of Mary in some posts, Mary is thought to have been roughly 14-15 years old when she gave birth to Jesus. So, she would have been 13-14 when she was betrothed to Joseph. Joseph was thought to be in his mid-30's. In that time period, men traditionally did not marry until after they apprenticed a trade. This normally took years. Also, men were thought to make better husbands if married in their 30's because they weren't as impulsive as when they were younger. Women in this society were judged by their purity and what they could bring to their husband (the main prize being her virginity) Therefore, the younger the bride, the less likely it would be that she was "tainted." In fact, a woman/girl who was not a virgin would have no chance of marriage. That is why Joseph freaked out when Mary came up pregnant. They were still technically betrothed. There was no marriage yet and no consummation. So when Mary turned up pregnant, Joseph thought he was getting taken for a ride because what use was Mary if she wasn't a virgin. And as you know if you have read the Bible, Joseph was not going to do the right thing and was ready to break off the betrothal until he was visited by an angel and relented.

So, a conservative estimate of Joseph's age would have been roughly 15-20 years older than Mary. However, there is no mention of Joseph after Jesus turns 12 and preaches in the temple. So, some people speculate that Joseph died prior to that so he could have been even older than his 30's when he married Mary.

Dena

denak 6 years ago

And oh yeah, Mary is thought to have been Palestinian.

denak 6 years ago

Marion,

The definition of a red herring is "any diversion intended to distract from the main issue."

Putting the phenomonon of "child brides" as I did, in a historical context, is not a "red herring" or even a comparison.

You insistance that Islam has "child brides" as a fundemental tenant of its creed is the red herring. Your insistance that Islam, at its core, is wrong because Mohammed had a child bride, is simply a diversion from the main point.

No one, on this board, is arguing that it is correct, in the 21st century, to have a child bride.

However, trying to show that a religion is immoral/wrong/perverted because of the actions of its founder..who lived in the 7th century (Fourteen centuries ago).. is simply short sighted.

I am sure that we can look at the behavior of our Founding Fathers as find some of their behavior morally repugnant. That does not make the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution "wrong." The developement of history...and religion...can not be viewed by the moral standards of the present. It has to be viewed within the context of its time. Child brides have always been a common thing. However, child brides are not an "Islamic" thing.

Child brides show up in cultures (all cultures) that devalue the worth of women. In countries where women are thought to be less, there will be laws in place, whether secular (as in China and its one child policies) or religious that seek to keep females from equal standing. This isn't an Islamic thing.

The reason this couple was killed is not because of Islam but because there is a government in place that must seperate and keep one half of the population shackled and ignorant in order to spread fear.

That is the main point. Your insistance that this has anything to do with Islam as practiced by the majority of Muslims today or your insistance that Islam is bad because of Mohammed and his chidl bride, is a red herring.

Now, if you want to have a conversation about the political turmoil in Afghanistan and how it relates to this couple's death, I would be happy to discuss this with you because it is relevant to the fate of this couple. However, if wish to continue to insist that "child brides" are a basic tenant of Islam(when it is clearly not) then you are just going to end up looking foolish.

Dena

WHY 6 years ago

Islam is a violent religion with no sense of humor. So Mohamed was having gay sex in a bar.... Oh no now I must be killed.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.