More disinformation and obfuscation in connection with this story. The bottom line is that Pakistani forces are unwilling and/or unable to access these areas and verify what is going on.
"Taleban commander denies shootout, says alive," from Reuters, August 9:
PESHAWAR, Pakistan - A Pakistani Taleban commander who the government said was involved in a deadly shootout with a rival commander denied on Sunday that there had been any fighting and said both he and the rival were alive.
The comments by Wali-ur-Rehman add to a volley of unverifiable claims and counter-claims by the government and the Taleban that have surrounded the reported death of Pakistani Taleban leader Baitullah Mehsud in a US missile attack on Wednesday.
Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik had said on Saturday that Taleban commander Wali-ur-Rehman had been involved in a shootout with rival Hakimullah Mehsud, and that there were reports one of them died.
Wali-ur-Rehman, speaking by telephone from an undisclosed location to a Reuters reporter who had spoken with him several times before, denied that any council meeting, or shura, had taken place to decide on a successor to Baitullah Mehsud.
‘There are no differences. There was no fighting. We both are alive, and there was no special shura meeting,’ he said.
Hakimullah Mehsud had earlier denied that Baitullah Mehsud had been killed by the US drone strike in the first place.
Taleban commanders have said the government is fabricating reports of dissent within its ranks in order to promote division and undermine the movement.
Hakimullah Mehsud would call journalists soon to prove he too was alive, Rehman said.
‘He definitely will call you and tell you everything,’ he said.
Western governments with troops in Afghanistan are watching to see if any new Pakistani Taleban leader would shift focus from fighting the Pakistani government and put the movement’s weight behind the Afghan insurgency led by Mullah Mohammad Omar.
Hakimullah, who controls fighters in the Orakzai, Kurram and Khyber tribal regions, is regarded as one of the leading contenders to replace Baitullah Mehsud, who had a $5 million US bounty on his head.
Re-posting from my (dumbledoresarmy) records, comments made to this article during the IntenseDebate era.
Part the first:
MUHAMMADBEAR said - I still think a shoot out is the best way of electing a new leader and that this is to be encouraged.
-DUMBLEDORESARMY said - It has always been the main method of succession, inside dar al Islam, the Region of War.
James Parkes in his book 'Whose Land?', which includes a handy whistlestop tour of the history of eretz Israel during the Muslim imperium, says of the Mamluk Muslim dynasty: "by intrigue and assassination they ascended the throne and by intrigue and assassination they perished".
If one goes to Churchill's "The Story of the Malakand Field Force" and peruses the chapter entitled 'The Theatre of War' one finds an account of the rise and fall of local warlords in Swat, which boils down to the same thing: claw your way to the top of the local heap by violence, stay on top by a ruthless deployment of same, and then get attacked and destroyed by everyone around you, the moment you start losing your edge.
-GRAVENIMAGE replied - .'.says of the Mamluk Muslim dynasty: "by intrigue and assassination they ascended the throne and by intrigue and assassination they perished".'
.................
This is entirely true, Dumbledore's Army. When Muslims talk about abolishing democracy, this is *exactly* what they are condemning others to, whether they realize it or not. If you have no lawful succession, there will *always* be internecine warfare, coups, assassinations, and palace intrigues--why anyone would want to return to these horrors after the democratic example of legal, smooth transfers of power is utterly insane.
That they consider this insanity to be "God's will" is even crazier.
GRAVENIMAGE said - (quoting) "There are no differences. There was no fighting. We both are alive, and there was no special shura meeting,’ he said."
"Hakimullah Mehsud had earlier denied that Baitullah Mehsud had been killed by the US drone strike in the first place.
Hakimullah Mehsud would call journalists soon to prove he too was alive, Rehman said."
..........................
So--will Baitullah Mehsud be calling soon, too?
HESPERADO said - Pakistan itself, from its inception in 1947, is a grotesque concretion of evil and dangerous Islam. Differentiating between the Taliban and Pakistan is like differentiating between cancer of the lungs and cancer of the prostate. Meanwhile, the disease is the Islam they both share -- and it is metastasizing around the world.
-EPISTEMOLOGY said - The Taliban is the offspring of the Paki secret service ISI and the madrassas. And they still cherish their little boy who's grown up to to a monster by now, but never tell parents that their child is horrible, that's not PC.____
But there was a time when Pakistan was more liberal, that was before 1979, when Zia-ul Haq came to power, isochronous with Khomeini's power seizure, what a coincidence.
You're right, today Pakistan and the Taliban are entwined like lovers. No way to separate them. ____
As for the cancer and its metastases you can feel them around the world, that type of cancer is called re-Islamisation.
-HESPERADO said - Pakistan was never more liberal. It only had at times a surface skin less gangrenous and pustulent.
JAYHAWKE said - Of course the Taliban will denie the shootout, they will come out and say that they are stronger than ever.
LEEVY said - It seems all things evil and islamic comes from the Pak. cant we just say no to money sent there? is there anyone with a brain at the State Dept?
ICESTAR said - Does it matter if that ugly man is dead or not? Islam is worse than the Borg, kill one and another takes its place.There must be a better way of fighting Islam and its dogma. Short of nukes I am at a loss.
-DAVEGREYBEARD replied - "The answer is simple as sunshine, yet difficult as bringing light to darkness.
The beast will NEVER die,
until honest men find the courage to speak the truth."
END OF FIRST PART OF ORIGINAL COMMENTS.
Second part of my record of the original comments. I apologise to anyone who commented at that time, but whose writing - for whatever reason - may not appear here. I do not always keep a copy of everything; this is my own, sometimes idiosyncratic record; but re-posted here since I doubt that otherwise anything we said, while at IntenseDebate, will be carried over - dumbledoresarmy.
ISLAMMACHTFREI said - Islam is about one thing - power here on Earth. It is one of the best catalysts ever devised for claiming, extending and consolidating power. All the rest is posing and posturing. The idea that Islam is the reflection of the will of a beneficent god is more laughable than that Stalin was a man of good will who only wanted to help the downtrodden.
GMCCAL said - (quoting) "Despite the apparent internal turmoil among the Taliban, security analyst Hasan Askari warned the threat was not over..."
Understatement. So long as islam exists...
PULSAR said – (quoting) “There were then unconfirmed reports of a deadly shooting at a meeting of top Taliban commanders who convened to discuss the choice of a successor to Mehsud"
Islam the religion of warlord feudalism....Don't ya just love the Muslim election process.
KEPHA said - This is a further warning to all who believe that the radical Islamicists can be appeased, and that surrender might bring a "moderate, tolerant" Islam. They are brittle and harsh people, so when there's a crisis, it will be solved by violence.
EBONYSTONE said - (quoting Eastview's remark above, on those who believed '...that Stalin was a man of good will' ...." )
Yet there were plenty in the West who believed that, just as there are plenty who believe that Islam is the ROP. P.T.Barnum was right.
-DOGWITHOUTSLIPPERS said - Well, Ebony we'll set the record straight....Uncle Joe was a mass murderer! Onthe other hand, couple here, couple there, adds up to millions - Muslims are mass murderers too.
-MRSJ said - Religion of Peace? Don't get me started. Yesterday, around 2000 Muslims attacked random white people in Birmingham (England) centre, following a peaceful protest directed against Militant Islam (and no, it wasn't organised by the BNP, this group is anti-BNP and had people of all colours in the protest).
Photo showing the protestors: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_IsIVb_6uIco/Sn6491WnHnI...
MSM report:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205263/P...
Report from the organisers:
http://casualsunited.webs.com/
DUHSWAMI said - Allah's not going to like this when he finds out...Mahoundians are not supposed to kill each other...Whoever did the shooting has a serious misunderstanding of Islam...I think this shooting qualifies as murder under sharia law...Of course the Taliban commit so many murders they think it's normal...so no sharia charges are likely to be leveled...and even if they are, I don't think the Taliban is capable of arresting itself...
CORNELIUS said - What else is new. After Muhammad's death, his immediate successors, on down through rulers of the the Ummayad and Abbasid dynasties - almost always died violently. Such is the typical model for succession and the transfer of power inside Islam...and one more chapter in the volumes of evidence that the "religion of peace" is anything but.
WCCRUSADER said - It's always good to know that we have some very moderate muslims for our President and his Secretary of State to negotiate with...Ms Clinton better bring more than words to any meeting with these fellas.
WILLIAMTELL said - Let me guess what these two mohammedans were fighting over?
One of them claimed to be a more pious mohammedan than the other, and killed the less pious one.
You see, the most pious mohammedan is most fanatical, most violent, most cunning, and most ruthless.
Consequently, the odds are that he will be more successful in removing any competitor for the top war-lord spot.
Now, this murderer will remain in charge until either we kill him or one of his co-religionist mohammedan murders him, believing that he is not being pious enough.
WESTERNINFIDEL said - Hang on a minute...If I were a Talib, jockeying for the top job and the coalition forces were offering a bounty of $5m, I'd see an opportunity here and it don't involve turning up for the interview.
-PULSAR said - "and if you play your cards right, the next bozo , if he very Islamic and ruthless, could garner another 5 million on his head ....heck ,, you could be a double winner, lying in wait for number three..."