BoarSpear

Afghan beheaded for being "U.S. spy" in Pakistan

2 hours, 32 minutes ago

TANK, Pakistan (Reuters) - Militants in Pakistan beheaded an Afghan cleric they accused of spying for U.S. forces fighting insurgents in
Afghanistan, officials said on Wednesday.


The murdered cleric, Akhtar Usmani, 30, had spoken out against militancy in a Pakistani region on the Afghan border where some analysts say the government has virtually handed power to pro-Taliban militants.

Usmani was found dumped beside a road in the South Waziristan region, a hotbed of Islamist support to the west of the town of Tank, on Tuesday evening.

"The body was in a big bag while his head was placed nearby in the open," said the region's deputy administrator, Amin Akbar Khan.

A note found with the body accused Usmani of spying for the Americans, said another official who declined to be identified.

Pro-Taliban militants said Usmani was a prayer leader in a mosque in North Waziristan and who had criticized militancy.

"He recorded several cassettes in which he criticized us and the Taliban," a militant said by telephone. He declined to comment when asked who had killed Usmani.

Militants in North and South Waziristan have killed dozens of people they accused of being Pakistani government supporters or U.S. spies.

Many Taliban and al Qaeda militants fled to Pakistan's semi-autonomous tribal lands from Afghanistan after U.S.-led forces toppled the Taliban in 2001.

Pakistani forces tried to clear out foreign militants and subdue their Pakistani allies after 2001 and hundreds of people were killed. But the government later signed peace deals aimed at ending the fighting and stopping raids into Afghanistan.

Critics say the deals have given the militants free rein and led to the "Talibanisation" of a region that has become a haven for al Qaeda and the Taliban.

The government of President Pervez Musharraf, a major ally in the U.S.-led war on terrorism, defends the deals and dismisses concern about Talibanisation.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070228/..._violence_dc_1
.....................................

Just in case anyone wonders why more Afghans or Iraqi's don't speak out against the Radicals.

medic06

That's funny. I remember being told on this forum that they don't speak out because they actually condoned terrorism

BoarSpear

It just goes to show their level of understanding of the subject is rather....limited.

The_Judo_Jibboo

if that's in reference to Mike Brewer's recent posts i don't think that's a very fair or accurate assessment of what he was trying to point out.

__________________
"When the enemy comes, welcome him. When he goes, send him on his way."


So the real message here is that in a SD situation you should always take off your trousers...
-jubaji

gregimotis

Nor do I. Maybe y'all could resist the urges to snipe each other... a little bit?

__________________
.
.
I am Tired. Tired. Tired.

BoarSpear

If ANYONE does these things for ANY reason they're evil...
Of course if that goes against your leader who makes the wars current plans you might weaken your leaders goals if you don't support them, and that makes you bad for your country, not for the rest of the world but bad for your own country and leadership...
Remember this exchange?

It seems that you feel the men who weakened Hitlers rule by opposing military decisions that were sure to end in the demise of their country were bad men...

Sniping? Sorry if these quotes confused me.

The_Judo_Jibboo

Boar, in all those quotes you posted Mike was pointing out some action(s) or attitude(s) that he felt was lacking on the part of peace loving Muslims. But by my reading, none of those quotes accused those peace loving Muslims of condoning terrorism. If i might offer my interpretation (please correct me if i'm wrong Mike) it seems like he's voicing that old sentiment that the greatest evil is the indifference of good men. it's not that they are condoning terrorism, it's that they don't condone terrorism and are not acting to stop it.
again, that's my interpretation of Mike's words, nothing more.

__________________
"When the enemy comes, welcome him. When he goes, send him on his way."


So the real message here is that in a SD situation you should always take off your trousers...
-jubaji

Tom Yum

The reason why the silent majority does nothing is because the 1% radical are willing to kill - anyone - to maintain their beliefs.

They intimidate the majority by setting examples: beheading those who speak out against them or severely torturing them.

It would take the unified efforts of the silent majority to destroy the 1% radical element, but they won't because they know they mean business, are easily motivated by fear and/or not willing to make the sacrifices.

On top of that, the radical elements would just grow new heads and new members.

I do see Mike's point, though.

The problem though, is that the silent majority has no power, no government backing...like the silent majority in Iraq have the U.S. forces to train their police force and fight off foreign insurgents.

From what I gather from press releases and maybe a few accounts, the silent majority have the U.S. forces as backing in Iraq as evidence in the Marines who do joint operations with them and the Green Berets who trained them.

__________________

Love it, leave it or fix it.

BoarSpear

What I get from all this is the message is "you should speak out against those responsible for the problem or else you can be assumed to be in support of the behavior."

The message also appears to be "By remaining silent you support these actions and therefor you give momentum and support to the bad things by remaining silent."

Is that what you're saying you got from those posts? Maybe I Misunderstood Mike if thats what you think he meant.

BoarSpear

So your point is good men fear to do the right thing? In my book those that lack the courage to do the right thing and separate themselves by words and actions from the bad guys, aid the bad guys...If you aren't willing to stand up and risk the fight that comes whenever you try to free yourself from oppression, you will always be oppressed. How many times has a Nation been screwed by those that were supposed to protect them? If you wont take responsibility for your own freedom, perhaps you don't deserve others to fight and die to earn it for you in the first place.

Tom Yum

Its true, Boar.

Good men do fear doing the right thing. It happens everyday.

Tim Mousel posted a video of a set up, where some guy was dragging a child around, who was yelling and crying "rape." Most of the people who were filmed, just walked by or walked by and paid attention for a bit, then decided it was none of their business.

There were finally two young men who passed by and knew something was wrong...so they looked at each other, whispered a few things, then proceeded to assault the guy...the guy stopped and let them know it was just an experiment done for television.

A good man who is also a warrior will also fear doing the right thing, but is able to overcome that fear and take action.

__________________

Love it, leave it or fix it.

BoarSpear

So you're saying the masses don't have the courage and integrity to stand up against evil when its unpopular or unsafe to do so, But some people do have those qualities and they're called warriors?

Tom Yum

Yes.

That's the best definition I can come up with at this point.

An example of this would be the men (and even some women!) in Iraq who volunteer for the Special Police Force with the intention of stopping foreign insurgents and making their cities peacful again.

__________________

Love it, leave it or fix it.

BoarSpear

So the people who realize there is a problem and take whatever risk are necessary to make a stand and fight evil no matter the personal cost are a good thing and are called warriors? And the more people/warriors willing to do this the stronger the country/cause will be?

gregimotis

Fantastic series of posts.

__________________
.
.
I am Tired. Tired. Tired.