Don't these guys know that Islam forbids beheading? After all, that's what so many talking heads (unbeheaded) told us on the news shows during the spate of beheadings in Iraq.
In fact, these men are acting in accord with Qur'an 47:4, which tells believers to "strike the necks" of the unbelievers.
"Militants behead US 'collaborators,'" from AFP, with thanks to JE:
SUSPECTED pro-Taliban militants beheaded two tribesmen in a remote part of Pakistan for allegedly working for US forces across the border in Afghanistan, officials said today.Gunmen captured one of the tribesmen, who had been supplying food to US troops in Afghanistan, and killed him in the town of Khar Qamar in the restive North Waziristan region on yesterday, a security official said.
"They beheaded the man and fled in his vehicle," the official said on condition of anonymity. "He was well known as someone who supplied food to the Americans."
Residents also found the headless body of a man in Madhakhel, another town in the region where Pakistani forces have been battling Taliban fugitives and al-Qaeda linked militants, the official added.
A note found near the body claimed the slain man was a US spy. "All those working as US spies will face the same fate," the official quoted the note as saying.
Why are the beheaders referred to as "militants." Is beheading something taught in the army? The press gives a tacit legitimacy to the most evil things. A "militant" used to be someone who fought in the defeated army of a nation state in conflict with another nation state or the nation's new rulers. The term was connected with military, which was supposed to follow certain humane rules of war.
A correct news heading, if one is forced to use the term "militant" would be: MORE WAR CRIMES COMMITTED BY CALIPHATE MILITANTS.
The Islamists have used reconstruction of the Caliphate as their Jihad chant. We should also. We should refer to all ills done in their name as ills done by the Caliphate. All the ills of Islamic terrorism today are aimed at building the Caliphate. By referring to these terrors as Caliphate atrocities as such, we may be able to galvanize the infidel masses to understand that they are not being attacked by "terror," but rather they are are being attacked by the [Islamic] Caliphate.
I guess it must be a fad to "strike the necks" regardless if there believers are not. I'm amazed they keep managing to find enough innocent people among themselves to "strike the necks", you figure after 1500 years all the innocent people would die off.
What the average muslim knows is that this is the struggle to establish the Islamic Caliphate. They do not describe the actions of these "militants" as terrorism.
The free world and press must recognize the threat of the 21st century and describe it correctly. Otherwise before we know it, we will be living under the Caliphate.
Thank you JW.
The free world's press, by keeping silence, has become complicit in the establishment of the caliphate.
For information about the problems with the Arab press, see this. The Washington Post carried the story.
If the Western press won't tell the truth, don't expect the truth from the Arab press; the latter is busy whitewashing Islam (a given), and the former is doing something quite similar.
Waziristan is the current hideout of al-qaeda, where the Taliban has recently declared an independent state:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/HB08Df01.html
http://www.india-defence.com/reports/1658
As Iran is waving its hands around with enriched uranium while the world watches with baited breath, al-qaeda will do its best to further destabilize Pakistan and get its hands on real life working nukes.
when will Westerners take note of this story, which can currently be found all over the Asian press?
I am surprised that the news media didn’t call the Muslim be headers ..., community activists growing a grassroots movement to raise awareness against local reactionaries. Where is Al Gore to denounce the unforgivable abuses which have forced the Taliban to such desperate acts? If they are caught will Ramsey Clark feel compelled to defend there actions as an act of self defense of a people whose civil rights have been violated by our acts of war?
One need look no further than the book, Red Star over China to realize that horrific terrorism against local citizenry is a weapon of conquest for poorly equipped and supplied fighting force acting against a conventional force operating under the traditional conventions of war. It is a tactic that has been used successfully.
In Apocalypse Now, Colonel Kurtz sums up the strategy, "We'd left the camp after we had inoculated the children for polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. We went back there, and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile, a pile of little arms, and I remember, I...I...I cried, I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out....And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it. I never want to forget. And then I realized like I was shot, like I was shot with a diamond, a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought, 'My God, the genius of that. The genius. The will to do that... then I realized they were stronger than me because they could stand it. .... If I had ten divisions of those men, then our troubles here would be over very quickly. You have to have men who are ... able to utilize their primordial instincts to kill - without feeling, without passion, without judgment - without judgment. Because it's judgment that defeats us."
Kurtz wants primitive men who can kill without judgment "because it's judgment that defeats us." The conventional war effort of Americans (with high-tech bombs and other machines and weapons of war, and a judgmental news media) will ultimately be defeated by opposition forces of primitives that are amoral and determined.
-GrimReaperxxx
The consequence of discarding Ares for Athena. The idea that with enough strategy, planning and finesse, bloody ruthlessness is obviated. The Greeks, Celts, and many many other cultures realized this duality of war. One god for the general, another for the infantryman. Athena granted wisdom, to conduct reconnaissance, look at the maps and the battlefield, arrange forces. Ares rewarded bloodlust. Close with the enemy, look him in the eye, cut him down, and stomp his corpse into the ground.
Its not polite, its not nice, but it has to be done. The West approaches war with a "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" attitude. The enemy does not. They won't swoon just because we don't kick their collective asses as hard as we could.
Theirs is a fully integrated, monolithic war god, both sides of the battle coin, whose ends justify its followers' means.
American and European skittishness at the sight of blood hobbles the effort, banishes Ares to the cheap seats as he sharpens his spear and shakes his head.
Eisenhund:
Your introduction of Ares and Athena is interesting. However, I do not agree with your conclusions.
Ares was a bully and a blowhard, reveling in bloodshed without the slightest interest in right or wrong. He was detested by the other gods for his mindlessness. And he always came off second best whenever confronting Athena.
We're all aware of the values that the "post-Christian" West claims, including the Golden Rule. It is perhaps what causes the Afghanis to cooperate with the Western forces presently in their conutry, to risk death itself. These individuals may take these risks because they see a better way than that offered to them by the warlords and the Taliban.
Ares strikes wildly and indiscriminantly, injuring friend and foe alike. Athena is consistent and considered in her actions, striking swift and sure. War is surely upon us. Let's make sure we're following the right standard.
-Chatillon
Actually, my point was that as the Greek gods were metaphors for phenomena and behaviors, they understood that one could not fight a war with strategy alone. One cannot devise the perfect battle plan, show it to the enemy, and expect him to submit without a fight. The enemy seldom allows you the luxury of figuring the numbers until you are satisfied. You make the best plan you can with what you can. But when its time to clash, you commit. Ares reflected the squinty-eyed, teeth-bared nature of the battlefield. One had to destroy the enemy or surely he would destroy you.
Yes, Ares was a loose cannon. You didn't invite him to your tea party. He would break your china, piss on your rose garden, and have his way with your daughter.
You will never impress the enemy with your shiny toys and pretty uniforms, dancing around the field like a ballerina, not if he thinks you're not willing to split his skull.
I wasn't advocating Mad Minutes and Zippo raids. The Soviets tried that in Afghanistan. The trick is ferreting out not only those individuals killing one's troops, but also those "noncombatants" that are enabling the opposition to operate. Just as their fighters don't wear uniforms, neither do their cooks, clerks, and other assorted support structure personnel. Its a shadow army. Shadows cannot exist without something to cast them.
Worrying about qur'ans and making sure Jihadi Joe at Gitmo gets his Froot Loops for breakfast doesn't impress our enemies. Shedding tears and cursing one's own government because some mohammedan scumbags are 'humiliated' in American custody doesn't weaken their resolve. Self-abasement leads to nothing but contempt. Islam does not award points for playing nice.
History almost always forgives the winners. It buries the losers. Just ask the next Carthaginian you meet. Having someone say "they were better than us" about you is small consolation when its carved on your tombstone.
Anyway, I can respect your disagreement, though I won't go so far as to say that I agree.
Muhammad had the entire male population of the tribe of Banu Qurayza beheaded, some 600-900 of them, depending on which hadith record you read. The women and children were enslaved, and the lush oasis made part of Islamic land. Islam is the only global entity today that still practices beheading as (sanctioned) execution method.
The Bible says that in the End Times, many believers will be beheaded (Rev 20:4, 13:10).
They are all coming together.
WATCHFULEYE: The free world's press, ... has become complicit in the establishment of the caliphate.
Very good observation!
Funny, I would have described the thuggish Renaud de Chatillon as more of the Ares type myself, while that noble Moslem role model, Saladin, strikes me as more of the Athena sort. I vaguely remember that their acquaintance came to an abrupt end.
wallyUK:
"Thuggish?" "Noble?" Adjectives such as these are assigned by the one swinging the axe, not by the one whose neck lies under the axe's edge. Do not depend upon Ridley Scott for your education in this matter.
The enterprising Renaud set off to sack Mecca and steal the bones of Mohammed. His galleys raided up and down the coast of Arabia and got as far as Medina before, alas, the game was up. I personally think it only fair that the game should be taken back to the Moslem home field.
On the debit side, Renaud was a loose cannon. On the credit side, he managed to press Moslem buttons in a big way. A synthesis of Ares and Athena.
“a pile of little arms”
I didn’t make it all the way through, but I watched the Nepalese beheading online, graphic, real life ‘jihad in full bloom' horror, “striking the neck” stomach churning Islamic violence.
I believe that we, as a nation of compassionate people, can and must defeat these monsters if for no other reason than to protect our own from this horror. We don’t have to become them to do it though. We should not have to disgrace our humanity to keep our lives. Defeated and killed? Yes. Ground into the dust and heads mounted on poles? No.
GrimReaperxxx-
Don't worry about the human instinct for survival.
When people in our "do unto others" culture feel the threat close up, the primal predator in every cell will be roused.
We are built on 2 billion years of devouring thy neighbors and a generation or two of whimpification will vanish once that threshold of mortal dread is crossed.
It nears.
And the 2nd Amendment keeps its aim sharpened.
Usually I agree with Robert's facts and arguments. But when he says that Quran 47:4
I think he is being (unintentionally) misleading. I say 'unintentionally' because I am acquainted with Robert's work and I have never been able to find anything in it that wasn't responsible and precise. But 47:4 doesn't simply advise 'cutting off heads of unbelievers.' It speaks of cutting off heads (smiting necks) when Muslims meet unbelievers in battle. That's a bit different, isn't it?:Why would our troops need food from tribesmen? this just sounds like more BS savagery from the peaceful religion of islam.
Beheading of human beings is standard practice in Islam.
Anyone who has spent any amount of time in the Middle East (especially Saudi Arabia) is undoubtedly aware of this.
Furthermore, the Kuran establishes beheading as an integral Islamic practice--as such verse as "smite them upon their necks" and others clearly indicate.
I smell taqqiya! it has a peculiar odor akin to that of blood...
“That's a bit different, isn't it?”
I don’t think so. Their "battle" is to spread Islam. Islam is spread by the sword. Swords strike necks, strikes fear. Seems pretty straightforward to me.
Don’t forget also that fear works. Colonel Kurtz understood the power of fear and its instiller - horror.