the taliban's cowardly act

[niyad]

(this was the most recent thing I could find on malala's condition--does anybody have something more current?)


The Taliban’s cowardly act

ON TUESDAY, Pakistani Taliban thugs tried to assassinate a 14-year-old girl. You read that correctly: Masked gunmen from the ultra-purist Islamist group stormed a van full of schoolchildren in an effort to kill Malala Yousafzai, who has won international acclaim for going to school in defiance of Taliban edicts against educating girls in her home region of Swat.

With chilling pride, a Taliban spokesman announced that the attack was revenge for Malala’s having generated “negative propaganda” about Islam; he called her an “obscenity.” That strikes us as an apt description of the attack itself; if anything is causing a negative view of Islam around the world, it is the Taliban’s attempts to impose a medieval social order on Pakistan and Afghanistan.


At last check, Malala, though critically wounded, was expected to survive. The larger question, of course, is whether the progress she both embodied and sought to extend will prove lasting. The Taliban struck this brave youngster at least in part because it knows that she may represent the wave of the future. She enjoyed significant popularity in Pakistan, as shown by the condemnation that rained down on the Taliban from the highest levels of the government and from the country’s media.

For all its woes, Pakistan has shown measurable progress in educating girls. Pakistani females ages 15 to 24 were half as likely as males to be literate in 1990; in 2009, that ratio had improved to three-quarters, according to the United Nations. Alas, the greatest obstacles to girls’ schooling exist in rural areas where the Taliban and other extreme groups maintain a presence.

. . . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/talibans-shooting-of-malala-yousafzai-shows-its-true-character/2012/10/10/2cfc7bb4-130a-1

[jody]

1. Agree a cowardly act but how does that compare with murdering a child with a missile from a drone

commanded by a person in Nevada?

[bluestate10]

6. The people firing the missile try to avoid killing children.

There is no fucking equivalence between gunning down two school girls with intent and accidentally hurting someone. The fact is, the military and CIA attempt to get targets into space where they are away from children and women, if that was not the case, dozens of the terrorist, barbaric bastards will be killed by drones daily.

[jody]

10. IMO there is an equivalence between the hypothetical I gave and the cited incident. I rank murdering

innocent people as equally immoral regardless of the method.

Have a great evening.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. +1 They are just as much criminals as the assassins who tried to murder the girl.

And, in both cases the killers believe they are doing it for a greater "good".

“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy.” - Mohandas K. Gandhi

[bluestate10]

2. The only thing missing are the people that say you need a fucking trial

before killing bastards that would attempt to kill a young girl and anyone else that don't accept their thirteenth century view of life. Taliban leadership are savages, every one should be hunted down and eliminated from the face of the earth.

[sabrina 1]

5. Every one who commits murder or torture or any other crime should be arrested, charged

tried and convicted. Doing otherwise, 'hunted down and eliminated' is doing exactly the same thing we are condemning them for doing.

[bluestate10]

7. Oh well. The plus is that a bastard will be sent to meet his master, Satan. nt

[sabrina 1]

12. There's no plus to acting they way act. It breaks down civil society which is obvious from

the state of Afghanistan under the Taliban. They too felt they had good reasons for their behavior and were sending bastards to meet their master.

We otoh, have survived as a relatively civil society by abiding by a set of rules which do not allow for people to take it upon themselves to administer 'justice'. Aside from the fact that mobs often get it wrong, even if they believe their causes are just.

[Confusious]

23. What if they don't want to go?

Should people risk thier lives to take people alive who clearly have zero respect for others lives?

Should they send out policemen unarmed to try and arrest them? Should the policemen "shoot to disable?"

[loli phabay]

28. good points, we always see the they should be arrested and brought to trial

yet every day we see criminals who decide to try to take the cops with them, why should anyone have to risk their life more than they have to so we can feel good about ourselves that we at least tried to arrest the guy.

[Confusious]

38. My point was

If they don't want to go peaceably, they have every right to shoot them.

"bring them to trial without hurting them" or "don't bring them to trial because someone might get hurt" are both bullshit.

[Zalatix]

44. So you prefer we act like savages, too? So who is going to act civilized?

I stand by the rule of due process. It's what civilized people do.

[L0oniX]

3. They really are a primitive savage bunch.

[bhikkhu]

11. 30 years of war leads to an 11% literacy rate, and a median age of 17

which doesn't lead to an enlightened culture. Our own would devolve predictably and similarly, so I would be careful to put the blame where the blame lies. Pointless destructive wars.

To begin the peace and the recovery of the nation, there's not much we can do but stop fighting at this point and let them sort themselves out, however ugly that gets in the short term.

[L0oniX]

13. We've had quite a few years of war here too. Is that why idiots like the Westboro gang exist?

As far as what will be sorted out I am sure it will done by the men who lord their authority over women. It IMO is worse than racism and it's barbaric.

[bhikkhu]

36. There hasn't been a war on US soil since 1865

...though you could count the "Indian Wars", which were comparatively tiny and had little effect on people other than native americans.

Afghanistan has been at war with itself and foreign powers for 30 years. Personally I despise the idea of the Taliban and the virtual enslavement of women, but if you go past emotion and look at the cause and effect of the whole mess, then more war looks to be the wrong direction.

Fundamentally, we all have the same nature, and respond similarly to similar conditions. The one condition that they lack, and which we enjoy and thoroughly take for granted is "peace"...so I'd vote for the first step in wishing good things for Afghanistan to be withdrawing our military. Its a hope that things will improve at some point, versus a virtual guarantee that they won't if we just keep on killing (and creating) bad guys.

[L0oniX]

40. "on US soil" is a bit of a reframe IMO but I agree that there is no direct comparison.

I don't think that the US is free from the affects of war just because it isn't on our soil. We have churches with US flags hanging next to the pulpit that think of war as godly and honorable and they praise those that serve. I call that a form of religious societal brain washing. So what would Mohammad do vs what would Jesus do? No ...the crusades do not reflect the true gospel of the bible. There's nowhere in the new testament under the new covenant where any true believer could participate in war or do what the Taliban do. The Taliban IMO are savages who don't even obey all the precepts of the Koran. The Koran does not have any covenant of any real value with any people and is devoid of grace and forgiveness. As far as "peace" goes, we haven't had real continual peace since WW2 so I don't see where that would have enough of an affect on any populous. If anything the "peace nicks" were attacked and considered to be unpatriotic for their protests against the Vietnam war. I think that our nature is formed when we are children by our social economic environment and that is very deep and very hard to change. I don't think that just having no war or peace is going to change things for those living under the Taliban rule. They are under theocratic rule and seemingly want sharia law. Even Egypt is leaning toward sharia law. The problem for them is that you can't have democracy and sharia law together. Maybe the Taliban know this too and they obviously take sides with sharia law. How many so called christians would go up against a US christian law based government when they have a bible that says "obey those in authority over you"? I don't think a peaceful environment is going to have too much to do with that. I certainly wish there was some reasonable way to remove Taliban influence and control. I don't think war and killing is the way by either side. I don't have an answer or solution. There may not even be a solution.

[LibertyLover]

48. I think that the citizens of Honolulu on December 7, 1941

might beg to differ with you on your date.

[niyad]

14. this took place in pakistan, not afghanistan

[Zalatix]

45. And we are part of the problem over there with our drone strikes and empire-building.

[Honeycombe8]

4. They are animals. nt

[hifiguy]

8. No animal has ever killed

in the name of an invisible sky wizard.

[niyad]

16. true, nor do they routinely kill their young and their females

[jody]

18. Don't male lions kill all the young in a pride when they become the dominant male? nt

[Confusious]

24. The secret word is "routinely" nt

[jody]

25. But observers report that male lions do "routinely" behave as I stated. nt

[Confusious]

29. That particular animal yes.

"as a rule" most don't.

Finding an exception to the rule doesn't invalidate the rule. There are always exceptions.

[jody]

30. "Finding an exception to the rule doesn't invalidate the rule." I'll assume you didn't want to post

that statement.

You might browse "The black swan theory or theory of black swan events is a metaphor that describes an event that is a surprise (to the observer), has a major impact, and after the fact is often inappropriately rationalized with the benefit of hindsight." courtesy of Wikipedia.

[Confusious]

32. Are you just trying to be annoying?

Most people know what is ment, except there seems to be a group here that doesn't understand "as a rule," and seem to need to be Argumentative because someone didn't say:



aardvark addax alpaca
anteater antelope aoudad ape
argali armadillo ass baboon
badger basilisk bat bear
beaver bighorn bison boar
budgerigar buffalo bull bunny
burro camel canary capybara
cat chameleon chamois cheetah
chimpanzee chinchilla chipmunk civet
coati colt cony cougar
cow coyote crocodile crow
deer dingo doe dog
donkey dormouse dromedary duckbill
dugong eland elephant elk
ermine ewe fawn ferret
finch fox
gazelle gemsbok giraffe
gnu goat gopher gorilla
ground hog guanaco guinea pig
hamster hare hartebeest hedgehog
hippopotamus hog horse hyena
ibex impala jackal
jaguar jerboa kangaroo kid
kinkajou kitten koala koodoo
lamb lemur leopard
llama lovebird lynx
mandrill mare marmoset marten
mink mole mongoose monkey
moose mountain goat mouse mule
musk deer musk-ox muskrat mustang
mynah bird newt ocelot okapi
opossum orangutan oryx otter
ox panda panther parakeet
parrot peccary pig platypus
polar bear pony porcupine porpoise
prairie dog pronghorn puma puppy
quagga rabbit raccoon ram
rat reindeer reptile rhinoceros
roebuck salamander seal sheep
shrew silver fox skunk sloth
snake springbok squirrel stallion
steer tapir tiger toad
turtle vicuna walrus warthog
waterbuck weasel whale wildcat
wolf wolverine wombat woodchuck
yak zebra zebu, don't kill their young.

Not a complete list, but it will do. And I took out lions.

Uh, yea, no major impacts or suprises around here, so no black swans.

[jody]

33. Just being precise and if that annoys you, ROFL! nt

[Confusious]

34. No, what annoys me is the disengenuousness. Nt

[jody]

35. Gee Confusious you seem confused and meant disingenuous not disegenousness. Anyway that doesn't fit

either.

Have a great evening!

[Confusious]

39. It fits

And I'm a bad speller.

You seemed to know what was meant this time.

Strange.....

[niyad]

26. you mean this?

. . . .

In addition to starvation, cubs also face many other dangers, such as predation by jackals, hyenas, leopards, martial eagles and snakes. Even buffaloes, should they catch the scent of lion cubs, often stampede towards the thicket or den where they are being kept, doing their best to trample the cubs to death while warding off the lioness. Furthermore, when one or more new males oust the previous male(s) associated with a pride, the conqueror(s) often kill any existing young cubs,[105] perhaps because females do not become fertile and receptive until their cubs mature or die. All in all, as many as 80 percent of the cubs will die before the age of two.[106]

. . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion

[jody]

27. Yes but on balance I do agree with your earlier post. I've seen enough killing and I just want it to

STOP!

[hack89]

47. Groups of male chimpanzees routinely kill infants and strange adult males

Michael Wilson of the University of Minnesota and his colleagues amassed data on chimps in 17 communities at 10 sites in west, central and east Africa whose members had long been observed by researchers. For each community the team obtained data on demography, population size, ranging behavior of the group, and so forth. The team also compiled data on bonobos from four communities, to determine whether bonobos really are less aggressive than chimps, as is commonly asserted. Wilson presented the study results on April 12 at the annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists in Portland, OR.

Focusing on 86 cases in which scientists had observed the killings or had inferred them based on compelling evidence, Wilson and his collaborators found that kills occurred in most of the chimpanzee communities and that victims tended to be infant and adult males outside the killer’s social group. Most of the killings were conducted by groups of males.

“The number of males is important because the more males there are, the more competition there is for mates in the community,” Wilson explains. The number of males also equals the community’s fighting strength for defending their territory and the food resources in it. Males in communities with more males can afford to be more aggressive because they have backup. The researchers did not identify a particular number of males that triggered killing. Rather, Wilson offers, the key may be the relative numbers of males in neighboring communities—that is, the balance of power.

“This tells us something about human evolution,” Wilson comments. He notes that although scientists do not know whether humans and chimps inherited their capacity for lethal aggression from a common ancestor or whether it arose in both species through convergent evolution, “lethal aggression is related to power asymmetries where members of one group can kill others with low cost.”

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/04/19/why-chimpanzees-kill/

[4th law of robotics]

50. Well chimps will

when a male or group of males moves in they will typically kill the children to get the females back in to their reproductive phase.

Generally females aren't killed, but they're mated with immediately by the conquerors (rape, if such a concept could exist among animals).

[L0oniX]

17. Animals have more compassion ...please don't degrade them.

[Honeycombe8]

21. So true. I thoughtlessly used an old expression that isn't true. nt

[Honeycombe8]

20. You are right, hifiguy. I stand corrected. They are "humans"! Of the worst kind. nt

[bhikkhu]

9. That's what fox news and the repugs would have us believe

and what the RW guys I know reflexively say whenever anybody does anything heinous in Africa or the Middle East.

Remember, the girl was one of "them". Every people has their lowbrows, and every people has their visionaries.

[rogrot]

19. Few people have the courage and resolve of this young lady.

How many of us would defy those thugs to get an education--at 14 years of age?

[pampango]

22. Pew poll: 76% of Pakistanis support equal rights; 13% view the Taliban favorably.

Last edited Wed Oct 10, 2012, 09:55 PM - Edit history (1)

According to Pew, 65% of men and 87% of women in Pakistan favor equal rights for women. And only 13% of Pakistanis have a favorable opinion of the Taliban.



http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/07/10/most-muslims-want-democracy-personal-freedoms-and-islam-in-political-life/

No one here supports thugs who shoot a 14-year-old girl because she wants to go to school.

"Pakistan has shown measurable progress in educating girls..."

Pakistanis do not necessarily agree with a minority in an "ultra-purist Islamist group".

[Johonny]

37. yet the Taliban still hold a large part of the country

Sadly the power of money from drug trading and guns trumps the will of the majority of the people.

[Turbineguy]

31. They're just jealous that she can read.

It takes less effort to learn how to shoot people than it takes to learn how to read.

[siligut]

42. These men have become so weak and spoiled by easy money

They are no longer actually strong and powerful and they know it. They are watching their position slip away and this is their reaction.

[Turbineguy]

43. Hmmmm....

they sound a bit like teabaggers.

[siligut]

46. Uh oh, now you've said it . . .

There are definitely some similarities.

[4th law of robotics]

51. Easy money?

The taliban have many faults but being too rich isn't really one of them.

[jtuck004]

41. This editorial was read on Lawrence O'Donnell - good

She would have known that they were going to come for her one day. Yet she carried on despite threats to herself and her family, displaying the courage and stoicism that have marked this young life as so very special. That knowledge became reality when the gunmen who stopped her vehicle on the way home from school verified her identity before opening fire, according to another girl who survived the attack.
...

Malala Yousufzai is the winner of the National Peace Award in 2011 and was a nominee for the International Children’s Peace Prize – the first Pakistani girl to achieve such eminence. Interviews that have been published since she came to prominence reveal a young woman who is modest about her achievements. She seeks neither fame nor fortune and carried on her life as normally as she could, except that she was not an ordinary person – she had stood against ruthless murderers who would see every girls’ school blown up. Malala Yousafzai is in critical condition today, and so is Pakistan. We are infected with the cancer of extremism, and unless it is cut out we will slide ever further into the bestiality that this latest atrocity exemplifies.

Here


The people there who want this to change are overwhelmed...

[MadHound]

49. So, what should we do about this? Bomb them back to the stone age?

Oh, wait, that's right, we're already doing that.

Look, I disagree with what the Taliban did to this girl, but frankly I smell propaganda here designed to gin up more support for our illegal, immoral war in the region. Pakistan is a sovereign country whose rights we are violating every single day. Time that we pulled out our troops and leave both the Pakistan and Afghan people to live our their own lives.