HBO Documentry: Fixer...The taking of Ajmal Naqshbandi

[Peshwa]

One can be selective since most documentaries on Kashmir tend be about the oppression and abuse inflicted by IA soldiers and paramilitaries/police on the Kashmiris, all of whom tend to be in uniform or in many cases easily distinguishable by appearance from the locals (soldiers or paramilitaries from India instead of Kashmir) - so you have direct eyewitness and victim accounts of such brutality, not opinion and anecdotes.

In addition, these accounts have been consistent over the decades and are also largely validated by international human rights organizations like Amnesty HRW etc.

This particular issue, of ISI involvement in Afghanistan, is completely different, since the ISI would be at pains to not have any physical or traceable presence in Afghanistan, lest the Americans get wind of it - so eyewitness accounts have little credibility, since there really is nothing to witness linking the ISI to the Taliban currently. And yes, Indian support for Baluch rebels falls into a similar category of 'hard to prove'.


Sticking to the topic of ISI support for the Taliban for now, you admit then that the documentary does not offer any evidence to back up the allegation that the ISI is supporting the Taliban?

'The order came from Pakistan' - that could be anyone in Pakistan, an Afghan Taliban commander secretly seeking refuge there, a Pakistani Taliban commander, someone from Al Qaeda in Pakistan, or someone from another militant group altogether. That statement on its own, without evidence to back it up, is nothing but the documentary maker sensationalizing pure opinion without substantiation in order to demonize the handy bogeyman in the form of the ISI.


Did the narrator accompany the statements by these Afghans with the caveat that none of them could be independently verified?

If not then it seems opinions and anecdotes are being presented as facts to tarnish Pakistan and the ISI, and I would conclude that this documentary is heavily propagandist, or just a plain bad piece of work, lacking objectivity.


How would you feel if evidence emerged that the US had kidnapped Martians on a visit to Earth?

How would you feel if evidence emerged that Indian Army officers upto the COAS were found to be running a child sex ring?

You are asking for opinions based on an allegation that is currently backed by little to no evidence, like the one above.

Lets not indulge in useless speculation.

If there is nothing more to add in terms of evidence in the documentary backing the allegations against the ISI, then I'll close this thread.

1)Wow isnt that convinient for you....I mean so in one place, people who used to be part of the brutal Taliban organization are attesting to the fact that Pakistan and ISI was supporting actions and providing strategic direction on how to maximize on Taliban's brutality....are completely cococting their stories, but the same argument wont apply for videos on Kashmir??.....Hypocrisy at its best!!!

How are we to tell that the video of police beating up Kashmiri's is because of their protests for freedom and not because they went on a rampage of destruction???.....Why should we believe what you say or feel is the whats happening in the video? How can you prove or what evidence do you have that proves that certain important events preceeding the beatings were not edited out??

And eyewitness/victim accounts, I hardly think they hold any ground if you're willing to reject this video.....as it falls under the same category.......How do we know that the victim/eyewitness is not some Pakistani posing as an Indian Kashmiri.....or that the entire incident is taken out of context??

Frankly your argument proving the authenticity of this doc over one from a "Kashmiri freedom struggle" is quite useless.....

2)I am not going to say that this documentry counts as evidence or not....all I want to point out is that the victims and eyewitnesses here point to Pakistan's hand in this particular murder saga.....and implying that Pakistan plays a larger role in providing strategic direction to the Taliban.....but as everything else....unless proven in court it holds no ground

3) Well the documentry explicitly states that the ISI has a hand in supporting and giving direction to the Taliban......If you watch the video, you would know that it couldnt get any clearer.

4) "Did the narrator accompany the statements by these Afghans with the caveat that none of them could be independently verified?

If not then it seems opinions and anecdotes are being presented as facts to tarnish Pakistan and the ISI, and I would conclude that this documentary is heavily propagandist, or just a plain bad piece of work, lacking objectivity."

Can you please explain this further....Why does there need to be an independent verification?? Did the famous video of the Godhra massacre criminal Babu Bajrangi come with a similar caveat? Why dont you ever question the validity of that video that everyone seems to swear bye on this forum?
As I mentioned.......You choose to be selective and biased as far as passing judgement!!!

5)AM your sarcasm and tangential comments about Martians isnt going to change the fact that Pakistan and ISI supported the Taliban.....a regime that has always been ruthless, brutal and savage....There is no counter that you can present that would say that Pakistan did not support Taliban!!
The level at which Pakistan maybe doing this now may have changed....but in my opinion, the ISI as independent as it has been over the years I feel still might have a hand in the support to Taliban....however the army I feel is on a different agenda.....
It has been discussed before that the ISI needs to have more accountability towards the people of Pakistan.....

Have you ever thought about the fact that the ISI and army might be at loggerheads in Pakistan....maybe Gen.Pasha feels he is more powerful than Kiyani and wants to undermine the authority and capability of your army.....since everyone has a conspiracy theory, here is my contribution to the same.......

 

[Peshwa]

Just watching the latest "Taliban" video from Afhganistan, I was thinking it is so easy for Western media to play the propaganda war.

They can dress up anybody behind a face covering cloth and make any statement claiming to be Taliban or Al Qaeda.

Cmon bro this is getting mighty old.....how many theories are you going to come up with???......

Do you also think the americans brought in Steven Speilberg for special effects and Tom Cruise in the role of Baitullah Mehsud???.....

Give your mind a rest for a bit....or that salt and pepper will show up sonner than later!

 

[Developereo]

Cmon bro this is getting mighty old.....how many theories are you going to come up with???......

Do you also think the americans brought in Steven Speilberg for special effects and Tom Cruise in the role of Baitullah Mehsud???.....

Give your mind a rest for a bit....or that salt and pepper will show up sonner than later!

I can understand how you, brought up in the giant Bollywood commercial that is Indian media, would be used to being spoonfed opinions. But most people apply critical skepticism to anything shown on media. Especially if it involves controversial subjects.

Now back to Bollywood for you...

 

[Peshwa]

I can understand how you, brought up in the giant Bollywood commercial that is Indian media, would be used to being spoonfed opinions. But most people apply critical skepticism to anything shown on media. Especially if it involves controversial subjects.

Now back to Bollywood for you...

Haha....This coming from someone who's learnt his history fromText books are nothing more than state sponsored propoganda......Bollywood probably has more honest facts than a page from "Pakistan studies text book"

I have no objections of you living in your fantasy world.....I just hope reality isnt a slap in the face for you.....

 

[kidwaibhai]

Haha....This coming from someone who's learnt his history fromText books are nothing more than state sponsored propoganda......Bollywood probably has more honest facts than a page from "Pakistan studies text book"

I have no objections of you living in your fantasy world.....I just hope reality isnt a slap in the face for you.....

Oh surely someone as sensible as you dont believe that bollywood has more factual portrayals than text books.
Every country has its own point of view on things. they try to inculcate that in their coming generations. Just like in india everyone is taught that the Qaid-e-azam wanted to divide india while all other politicians from congress wanted to keep india united and they all loved muslims and it was Jinnah who hated hindus with a passion.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

1)Wow isnt that convinient for you....I mean so in one place, people who used to be part of the brutal Taliban organization are attesting to the fact that Pakistan and ISI was supporting actions and providing strategic direction on how to maximize on Taliban's brutality....are completely cococting their stories, but the same argument wont apply for videos on Kashmir??.....Hypocrisy at its best!!!

How are we to tell that the video of police beating up Kashmiri's is because of their protests for freedom and not because they went on a rampage of destruction???.....Why should we believe what you say or feel is the whats happening in the video? How can you prove or what evidence do you have that proves that certain important events preceeding the beatings were not edited out??

And eyewitness/victim accounts, I hardly think they hold any ground if you're willing to reject this video.....as it falls under the same category.......How do we know that the victim/eyewitness is not some Pakistani posing as an Indian Kashmiri.....or that the entire incident is taken out of context??

Frankly your argument proving the authenticity of this doc over one from a "Kashmiri freedom struggle" is quite useless.....

Its common sense - the ISI, if it were supporting the Taliban, would only do so covertly so as to not infuriate NATO (and its a biiiiig if that it would take the chance to provide covert support). Assuming covert support is being provided, what exactly are eyewitnesses in Afghanistan going to report?

ISI or PA officials are not going to wander around in PA uniforms or name tags, nor are they going to introduce themselves as being part of PA/ISI/GoP, nor are they going to use any thing that could be traced back to the PA/ISI/GoP. Thats simple stuff I imagine from a covert operations POV, and why its so hard to pin something like that on any nation.

The only credible piece of information, per your summary, is the alleged ex-Taliban member who says something about 'orders came from Pakistan'. What does that mean?

Did a high ranking officer from the PA call this guy personally, introduce himself with rank, serial number and military arm, and then pass on instructions? Ludicrous.

The ex-Taliban could be talking about any number of people from Pakistan - Pakistani Taliban, AQ, other militant organizations etc.

IF the ISI was involved, the only people who would know it would be the top level leadership. So the whole 'eyewitness account story' is just a useless argument from the perspective of trying to show ISI involvement.

Now how does that differ from Kashmir? Simple, as I explained already. The IA and Indian paramilitaries in IOK are not acting covertly for the most part. There are upwards of 500,000 troops openly deployed in IOK. They stand apart both in terms of features and uniforms, and their locations (military bases, checkpoints etc.). Eyewitness accounts detailing rapes, torture, murders and other atrocities committed by Indian security forces are therefore far more credible - especially since they have been consistent for the better part of a decade and validated by organizations such as Amnesty International and HRW.

2)I am not going to say that this documentry counts as evidence or not....all I want to point out is that the victims and eyewitnesses here point to Pakistan's hand in this particular murder saga.....and implying that Pakistan plays a larger role in providing strategic direction to the Taliban.....but as everything else....unless proven in court it holds no ground

As explained above, the argument of eyewitnesses is flawed, given the covert nature of any such support by the ISI, if it were invovled.

That a perception exists amongst Afghans, due in no small part to the continued smear campaign by the current GoA (dominated by people with ties to the ex-Northern Alliance warlords and therefore pro-India) and the Afghan media (a large amount of which is run by expatriate Afghans), that Pakistan and the ISI is involved is clear. Less clear is a valid basis for that belief.

3) Well the documentry explicitly states that the ISI has a hand in supporting and giving direction to the Taliban......If you watch the video, you would know that it couldnt get any clearer.

The documentary may claim it, but I have yet to see any evidence validating that claim - hence my argument that the documentary seems more a continuation of the anti-Pakistan trash churned out by the US media of late.

4) "Did the narrator accompany the statements by these Afghans with the caveat that none of them could be independently verified?

If not then it seems opinions and anecdotes are being presented as facts to tarnish Pakistan and the ISI, and I would conclude that this documentary is heavily propagandist, or just a plain bad piece of work, lacking objectivity."

Can you please explain this further....Why does there need to be an independent verification?? Did the famous video of the Godhra massacre criminal Babu Bajrangi come with a similar caveat? Why dont you ever question the validity of that video that everyone seems to swear bye on this forum?
As I mentioned.......You choose to be selective and biased as far as passing judgement!!!

What does Godhra have to do with this? I don't recall having commented on Godhra. I am discussing this issue and this documentary, and if the author of this documentary is going to push uninformed and unsubstantiated opinion, then he should also, in the interest of objectivity, also point out that those opinions lack substantiation. But then I doubt this documentary was meant to be objective.

5)AM your sarcasm and tangential comments about Martians isnt going to change the fact that Pakistan and ISI supported the Taliban.....a regime that has always been ruthless, brutal and savage....There is no counter that you can present that would say that Pakistan did not support Taliban!!
The level at which Pakistan maybe doing this now may have changed....but in my opinion, the ISI as independent as it has been over the years I feel still might have a hand in the support to Taliban....however the army I feel is on a different agenda.....
It has been discussed before that the ISI needs to have more accountability towards the people of Pakistan.....

Have you ever thought about the fact that the ISI and army might be at loggerheads in Pakistan....maybe Gen.Pasha feels he is more powerful than Kiyani and wants to undermine the authority and capability of your army.....since everyone has a conspiracy theory, here is my contribution to the same.......

The comment about 'Martians' was raised by one of your compatriots first, to which I responded in the same tone, so take up the sarcasm issue with him.

And yes, Pakistan and the ISI supported the Taliban in the past in an attempt to bring about stability in Afghanistan with a pro-Pakistan government. And while we were doing that, India was supporting warlords and criminals who were just as ruthless, brutal and savage as the Taliban - in fact these warlords India supported were so bad, that many ordinary Afghans welcomed the Taliban when they started taking power.

But the main point here is the one underlined, such support was in the past, and as I asked earlier, if all this evidence implicating Pakistan in supporting the Taliban post 2001 exists, then it should be presented here.

Its not sarcasm, its a simple argument - substantiate your allegations or shut up.

 

[Developereo]

Haha....This coming from someone who's learnt his history fromText books are nothing more than state sponsored propoganda......Bollywood probably has more honest facts than a page from "Pakistan studies text book"

I have no objections of you living in your fantasy world.....I just hope reality isnt a slap in the face for you.....

I actually learnt my history from Pakistani, British, American and Australian text books.

Which is why I crack up listening to Indians go on about "Incredible India".

 

[Durran3]

And yes, Pakistan and the ISI supported the Taliban in the past in an attempt to bring about stability in Afghanistan with a pro-Pakistan government. And while we were doing that, India was supporting warlords and criminals who were just as ruthless, brutal and savage as the Taliban - in fact these warlords India supported were so bad, that many ordinary Afghans welcomed the Taliban when they started taking power.

I am a little skeptical about that and i was wondering if you could provide some evidence or scenario or how we knew that Ahmad Shah Masoud's Northern Alliance were more ruthless and barbaric than the Taliban that we supported at that time. I am not refuting your argument i just want to see whether this was true or not, because i know for a fact that many in Afghanistan think of Ahmad Shah Massoud to be a hero and alot more liberal than the Taliban. His alliance was with the Indians thus forcing Pakistan to take sides with the Taliban.

 

[Peshwa]

Oh surely someone as sensible as you dont believe that bollywood has more factual portrayals than text books.
Every country has its own point of view on things. they try to inculcate that in their coming generations. Just like in india everyone is taught that the Qaid-e-azam wanted to divide india while all other politicians from congress wanted to keep india united and they all loved muslims and it was Jinnah who hated hindus with a passion.

Hi Kidwaibhai,

I agree with you Sir......that every country will try to inculcate in its young, the principles and ideas that the country was formed on......I am completely aware that the propoganda exists on both sides of the border....But I feel like a lot of members here try to use the popularity of Bollywood as a way to define how us Indians think.....

My reply was a retaliation to the comment made by someone who claimed that the "history" we had been taught is nothing more than a screenplay if you will.....

I refuse to let anyone insult the history of my nation.....thats it!!!

My apologies to you if I have offended you in any way.....You seem like a nice person and my comment was not directed to you!!!

FYI: I take bollywood as entertainment....Nothing more!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I am a little skeptical about that and i was wondering if you could provide some evidence or scenario or how we knew that Ahmad Shah Masoud's Northern Alliance were more ruthless and barbaric than the Taliban that we supported at that time. I am not refuting your argument i just want to see whether this was true or not, because i know for a fact that many in Afghanistan think of Ahmad Shah Massoud to be a hero and alot more liberal than the Taliban. His alliance was with the Indians thus forcing Pakistan to take sides with the Taliban.

The Northern Alliance warlords were just that - warlords, and they acted like criminals and warlords. Just because one disagrees with Taliban ideology and dislikes them does not mean that the crimes of others have to be whitewashed. The atrocities of the Northern Alliance have been documented in various books on Afghanistan.

You are familiar with the organization RAWA I imagine?

Crimes of the "Northern Alliance" Seen Through the Eyes of a Grieving Mother​

RAWA, December 28, 2001

During the four long years that Jehadi criminals ruled Kabul, tens of thousands of civilians, including this woman's young son were martyred. According to international sources, fifty thousand civilians lost their lives during these years in Kabul alone and tens of thousands were injured and maimed. Our sources know the actual numbers are much higher.

Different groups were fighting with each other in different parts of the city. Kabul was bathed in blood and burned to ashes during the Jehadi criminals rule. Crimes committed by the fundamentalists were not limited to mass murders. They raped young girls and women; tortured ethnic minorities; and pillaged national assets and public property. They crammed and roasted prisoners in steel containers and drove nails into their foreheads. Never in the history of Afghanistan have such atrocities committed against defenseless civilians been witnessed.

Unfortunately, the world tends to forget mass murders in a painful silence and convenient amnesia.

The armed groups of Dustom, Gulboddin, Ahmed Shah Masoud, Rabbani, Sayyaf and Khalili of the Hizbe Wahdat [Unity Party] are the main criminals. Today the majority of these murderers have joined together under the banner of the "Northern Alliance". The West is treating them as allies. The people of Kabul will never forget the years of atrocities. Some forces may conveniently turn a blind eye to their evil actions, but history is not blind.

The leaders of the "Northern Alliance" must be brought to justice in the same way as Milosovich and the like were tried for atrocious crimes of war.

RAWA asked an Afghan mother to tell us her story, in front of a video camera. She told us how she lost her beloved son few months after the fundamentalists seized the power in Kabul in April 28, 1992.

The following is the transcript from videotape of what she related to us in her own dialect, without addition or omission. The interview has been filmed by RAWA in 1999.

Crimes of the "Northern Alliance" Seen Through the Eyes of a Grieving Mother

And even after the Taliban were overthrown, atrocities were committed by Northern Alliance troops, backed by US forces, in Mazar-e-Sharif. The mass graves being discovered now and accounts from that time are now invoking calls for an investigation into the US role in those atrocities.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That evening, during a joint press conference with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, Bush described the Northern Alliance as “our friends.” (“We will encourage our friends to head south across the Shumali Plains, but not into the city of Kabul itself.&#8221

Moments later, Musharraf branded Bush’s “friends” terrorists:

“Why I have been recommending that Kabul should not be occupied by the Northern Alliance basically is because of the past experience that we’ve had when the various ethnic groups were ahold of Kabul after the Soviets left. There was total atrocities, killings and mayhem within the city. And I think if the Northern Alliance enters Afghanistan -- enters Kabul -- we’ll see the same kind of atrocities being perpetuated against the people there....”

A reporter followed up by asking Bush if he agreed with Musharraf’s assessment of the Alliance. Bush replied, “Only, only, I said one question. Now you’re going with three.” No other reporter put the question to Bush.

Now that is a disciplined press corps. In the morning, President Bush takes a strong stand against those who terrorize the innocent and brands governments that support such terrorists “equally guilty of murder and equally accountable.” In the evening he hails as “our friends” an alliance that has terrorized the innocent (and, by the way, dealt heroin) both as a government (1992-96) and as an opposition force.

Bush’s Definition of Terrorism Fits Northern Alliance Like a Glove; TV Interviewers Don’t Notice

From Human Rights Watch:

#

The United Front's Human Rights Record

Throughout the civil war in Afghanistan, the major factions on all sides have repeatedly committed serious human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law, including killings, indiscriminate aerial bombardment and shelling, direct attacks on civilians, summary executions, rape, persecution on the basis of religion or ethnicity, the recruitment and use of children as soldiers, and the use of antipersonnel landmines. Many of these violations can be shown to have been "widespread or systematic," a criterion of crimes against humanity. Although committed in an internal armed conflict, violations involving indiscriminate attacks or direct attacks on civilians are increasingly being recognized internationally as amounting to war crimes.

Abuses committed by factions belonging to the United Front have been well documented. Many of the violations of international humanitarian law committed by the United Front forces described below date from 1996-1998 when they controlled most of the north and were within artillery range of Kabul. Since then, what remains of the United Front forces have been pushed back into defensive positions in home territories in northeastern and central Afghanistan following a series of military setbacks. There have nevertheless been reports of abuses in areas held temporarily by United Front factions, including summary executions, burning of houses, and looting, principally targeting ethnic Pashtuns and others suspected of supporting the Taliban. Children, including those under the age of fifteen, have been recruited as soldiers and used to fight against Taliban forces. The various parties that comprise the United Front also amassed a deplorable record of attacks on civilians between the fall of the Najibullah regime in 1992 and the Taliban's capture of Kabul in 1996.

Violations of international humanitarian law committed by United Front factions include:

# Late 1999 - early 2000: Internally displaced persons who fled from villages in and around Sangcharak district recounted summary executions, burning of houses, and widespread looting during the four months that the area was held by the United Front. Several of the executions were reportedly carried out in front of members of the victims' families. Those targeted in the attacks were largely ethnic Pashtuns and, in some cases, Tajiks.

# September 20-21, 1998: Several volleys of rockets were fired at the northern part of Kabul, with one hitting a crowded night market. Estimates of the number of people killed ranged from seventy-six to 180. The attacks were generally believed to have been carried out by Massoud's forces, who were then stationed about twenty-five miles north of Kabul. A spokesperson for United Front commander Ahmad Shah Massoud denied targeting civilians. In a September 23, 1998, press statement, the International Committee of the Red Cross described the attacks as indiscriminate and the deadliest that the city had seen in three years.

# Late May 1997: Some 3,000 captured Taliban soldiers were summarily executed in and around Mazar-i Sharif by Junbish forces under the command of Gen. Abdul Malik Pahlawan. The killings followed Malik's withdrawal from a brief alliance with the Taliban and the capture of the Taliban forces who were trapped in the city. Some of the Taliban troops were taken to the desert and shot, while others were thrown down wells and then blown up with grenades.

# January 5, 1997: Junbish planes dropped cluster munitions on residential areas of Kabul. Several civilians were killed and others wounded in the indiscriminate air raid, which also involved the use of conventional bombs.

# March 1995: Forces of the faction operating under Commander Massoud, the Jamiat-i Islami, were responsible for rape and looting after they captured Kabul's predominantly Hazara neighborhood of Karte Seh from other factions. According to the U.S. State Department's 1996 report on human rights practices in 1995, "Massood's troops went on a rampage, systematically looting whole streets and raping women."

# On the night of February 11, 1993 Jamiat-i Islami forces and those of another faction, Abdul Rasul Sayyaf's Ittihad-i Islami, conducted a raid in West Kabul, killing and "disappearing" ethnic Hazara civilians, and committing widespread rape. Estimates of those killed range from about seventy to more than one hundred.

# In addition, the parties that constitute the United Front have committed other serious violations of internationally recognized human rights. In the years before the Taliban took control of most of Afghanistan, these parties had divided much of the country among themselves while battling for control of Kabul. In 1994 alone, an estimated 25,000 were killed in Kabul, most of them civilians killed in rocket and artillery attacks. One-third of the city was reduced to rubble, and much of the remainder sustained serious damage. There was virtually no rule of law in any of the areas under the factions' control. In Kabul, Jamiat-i Islami, Ittihad, and Hizb-i Wahdat forces all engaged in rape, summary executions, arbitrary arrest, torture, and "disappearances." In Bamiyan, Hizb-i Wahdat commanders routinely tortured detainees for extortion purposes.

Press Backgrounder: Military Assistance to the Afghan Opposition<br> (Human Rights Watch Backgrounder, October 2001)

 

[Durran3]

@AM

Thanks for the links, i read them but that leads to another question. Basically to be a ruler/leader in Afghanistan you have to be techinically involved in warcrimes or have some sort of fighting experience? Besides who else do you talk to? You obviously try to negotiate or talk to those who are in power and the only people in power in Afghanistan are a bunch of warlords who govern small areas. Its basically trying to find which one is lesser of the evil ones.

This is a great clip i suggest you take a look.

I still don't see the Taliban as being 'better' than the Northern Alliance, although both have been involved in killings, murder, civilian displacement and executions. So whether Pakistan made the right choice or not is open to debate. Northern Alliance i believe were probably not as religously driven as the Taliban and probably could have been tamed since some were from the Shia sect and even the Ismaili's supported them. The Taliban, under the direction of Mullah Muhammad Omar, brought about this order through the institution of a very strict interpretation of Sharia. Public executions and punishments (such as floggings) became regular events at Afghan soccer stadiums. Frivolous activities, like kite-flying, were outlawed. In order to root out "non-Islamic" influence, television, music, and the Internet were banned. Men were required to wear beards, and subjected to beatings if they didn't.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

@AM

Thanks for the links, i read them but that leads to another question. Basically to be a ruler/leader in Afghanistan you have to be techinically involved in warcrimes or have some sort of fighting experience? Besides who else do you talk to? You obviously try to negotiate or talk to those who are in power and the only people in power in Afghanistan are a bunch of warlords who govern small areas. Its basically trying to find which one is lesser of the evil ones.

nUzfWfyuaag[/media] - Afghan Warlords - Aghanistan

This is a great clip i suggest you take a look.

I still don't see the Taliban as being 'better' than the Northern Alliance, although both have been involved in killings, murder, civilian displacement and executions. So whether Pakistan made the right choice or not is open to debate. Northern Alliance i believe were probably not as religously driven as the Taliban and probably could have been tamed since some were from the Shia sect and even the Ismaili's supported them. The Taliban, under the direction of Mullah Muhammad Omar, brought about this order through the institution of a very strict interpretation of Sharia. Public executions and punishments (such as floggings) became regular events at Afghan soccer stadiums. Frivolous activities, like kite-flying, were outlawed. In order to root out "non-Islamic" influence, television, music, and the Internet were banned. Men were required to wear beards, and subjected to beatings if they didn't.

I am not suggesting that the Taliban were better than the Northern Alliance, merely pointing out that they were at least just as bad when it came to committing atrocities, both sectarian and ethnic.

And since no one had a crystal ball, the future trends of religious extremism that we now associate with the Taliban could not have been foreseen. Keep in mind that all these recorded instances of mass rapes, murders tortures and massacres were committed by the Mujahideen leaders, including those from the NA, before the Taliban came on to the scene. In fact these atrocities committed by the NA were part of the reason for the popularity of the Taliban both with Pakistan and the local Afghans (or at least the Pashtun). So at that point in time, it was a pretty easy choice for Pakistan to go for the new, religiously conservative, yet disciplined force that emerged on the scene.

Read Musharraf's comments about the NA at that press conference with Bush again - given what Pakistan knew about the NA and how they had acted in Afghanistan, who in their right mind, with a very immediate and personal stake in the stability of Afghanistan, would have chosen them and supported them as an ally in Afghanistan (post Soviet withdrawal) if there was an alternative available?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

@AM

Thanks for the links, i read them but that leads to another question. Basically to be a ruler/leader in Afghanistan you have to be techinically involved in warcrimes or have some sort of fighting experience? Besides who else do you talk to? You obviously try to negotiate or talk to those who are in power and the only people in power in Afghanistan are a bunch of warlords who govern small areas. Its basically trying to find which one is lesser of the evil ones.

The Afghan invasion should have never happened- as I was discussing with Gambit on another thread, the Taliban had made a concession to allow for a trial in Afghanistan or a mutually acceptable third country. They had never shown this level of flexibility before.

The US however was in WAR WAR WAR mode and saw military force as an easy solution. It was an invasion that never should have happened, for which both Afghanistan and Pakistan have paid a huge price, in blood and treasure.

 

[arsenal_gooner]

The doc depicts some gruesome scenes of beheading.......


i think ill skip this docu ive only seen one beheading (not full 10 secs ) it was horrible ,i cant watch another .it makes me sick thinking about it .