I think this was discussed once before, but I don't remember the answer...
...why is it that these militants choose be-heading (decapitation) as the means to kill their hostages? Why that particular way instead of shooting or any other form of murder?
Farmgirl
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
It is basically the ultimate disrespect.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Don't know the answer to that, Farmgirl. If I had to guess, maybe to underscore their resentment at the nature of the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib?
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
But Elizabeth, why is it the ultimate disrespect?
Posted by Black Fox (Member # 1986) on :
Well it is about the treatment of prisoners in American detention facilities, something I honestly.. well I won't get into as I'm sure someone would find my words highly disrespectful. Anyhow they dressed him up in an orange jump suit just like Nick Berg and beheaded him. For one I guess ( not 100% sure to be honest) there is a tradition of beheading in Islam. Also its a person head, its kind of like the ultimate disrespect. Plus its a messy death and it leaves the body unmarked, its easy to say yep that was so and so, and yeah.. their obviously dead.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Argh. There WAS a discussion about this, I believe it was on the other thrad about the previous beheading.
I will try to find it, and another link.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
pooka, I have a lot of difficulty believing they would act any differently if the scandal didn't occur.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
It's pretty telling that their ultimate sign of disrespect is beheading, whereas ours is parading prisoners around naked and making them stick things up their cornholes.
Posted by Black Fox (Member # 1986) on :
Actually from what I've heard the cool thing to do is make them wear sweaters and jackets etc. during the summer heat, then make them get naked and blast them with water during the night time when the temps drop).
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I guess we'll never know for sure, Phanto.
I don't know if sexual degradation is really the worst thing. Was it what we thought was worst for them or what they thought was worst? Worse things are always conceivable.
Oddly, though, I've already become hardened to the horror of beheading. When I told my husband about the first one, he just sat down and cried. But now beheading is just another possibility, another risk travelers face.
P.S. Black Fox, that is of course terrible. But it falls into the same realm of potentially lethal physical discomforts as starvation.
[ June 18, 2004, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: pooka ]
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
I guess we'll never know for sure, Phanto.
True. But look at places like Israel, Saudia Arabia, and Argentina. Terrorists, especially those of the certain persuasion that most terrorists seem to be, will kill until they get what they want.
Their leaders will use anything as justification.
Posted by Black Fox (Member # 1986) on :
Well, that is the nature of what they are doing, they don't need any justification besides the fact that well thats what they want.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
Well, one thing to remember is that beheading is still used for executions in Saudi Arabia - not sure about other countries. I did a quick check and one website claimed that "Saudi Arabia publicly beheaded 52 men and 1 woman for murder, rape, sodomy and drug offences in 2003."
Don't have time now to check the accuracy of the numbers, but the phenomenon on public beheadings is still part of Saudi Arabia's culture anyway.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
But have there been beheadings of hostages from Israel?
Thanks, sndrake... likewise American prisoners in American prisons have been sexually molested. But I think it is somehow different in both cases.
[ June 18, 2004, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: pooka ]
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Not 100% true. They use justification to feed the media--keep them on their side. They also use justification to keep their side rallied.
"Today the damned infidel pigs have dared to do X...Allah demands we retaliate against the pigs."
That sort of thing. However, the justification plays a minor role, as they can easily make things up when they don't have any. Furthermore, justification is also minor in that even without it they would kill.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think that's a disrespectful use of "Allah" assuming this isn't an untranslated quote from a terrorist.
Posted by Black Fox (Member # 1986) on :
Its interesting how Islamic clerics and believers know exactly what Allah wants since Muhammed was the last prophet, but whatever.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote:Thanks, sndrake... likewise American prisoners in American prisons have been sexually molested. But I think it is somehow different in both cases.
OK - but there's a difference there, too. Prisoners aren't molested as a matter of policy, even though it is widespread.
In at least one country in mideast, public beheading is the accepted and fairly frequent mode of execution for the most heinous criminals. That probably changes the context somewhat for viewers in the Arabic world, who are familiar with this as a sanctioned form of execution - while we view it as an atrocity and outrage. And just in case there's any confusion, my perspective is also that it falls into the category of atrocity. But I think it's useful to try to figure out what the cultural differences are in how these events and actions get interpreted.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Oh, I'm sorry, pooka.
quote: "...Brothers, today more than ever before, we need the grace of Jihad of the soul... particularly in this difficult hour in which the Islamic nation [is] experiencing, an hour in which it faces the challenge of [forces] of disbelief of infidels, Jews, crusaders, Americans and Britons. They challenge Allah, His Book, His Prophet, they challenge you the believers. They believe that their castles will protect them from Allah. They think that with their bombs, planes, missiles and advanced [weapons] they will scare us. By Allah, no!!! You [the West] are the real terrorists. We will scare you with the help of Allah. We stand strong; Allah will not allow the infidels to overcome the believers. Who are you, Oh foreigners. Who are you, Oh descendents of pigs and apes, to scare Muhammad, who is supported by Allah, as well as by Gabriel and the [other] Angels...??? Who are you, anyway, Bush [you] little dwarf to threaten Muhammad and his descendents!!?? We challenge you with our words, before challenging you with our weapons. Who are you to threaten us, our feelings and our holy places??!!"
quote: "The Jews are the Jews... They are all liars… They are terrorists. Therefore it is necessary to slaughter them and murder them, according to the words of Allah… it is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land. Make war on them any place that you find yourself. Any place that you encounter them, kill them. Kill the Jews and those among the Americans that are like them… The Jews only understand might. Have no mercy on the Jews, murder them everywhere…"
If only I could find translated transcripts of some of those sermons...
[ June 18, 2004, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: Phanto ]
Posted by Black Fox (Member # 1986) on :
I will ask this, why does it matter how he died as long as the death was decently quick. would it have been better if they just oded him on drugs, lethal injection, shot him, hung him, etc.???
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote:Its interesting how Islamic clerics and believers know exactly what Allah wants since Muhammed was the last prophet, but whatever.
Thanks goodness we don't have any Christians who do that with Jesus here in the U.S.
*please check your sarcasm meters before and after reading*
Posted by Black Fox (Member # 1986) on :
lol, who says I like them either
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
pooka, I just didn't feel like reproducing all the wonderful lines such as Therefore it is necessary to slaughter them and murder them, according to the words of Allah and as such I decided to condense the feeling into a short phrase.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
It doesn't matter how he died -- I simply asked the question to see if there was religious significance to the action in Islam that I wasn't aware of...
FG
Posted by Black Fox (Member # 1986) on :
At the very least terrorists are allowed to be publicly violent.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Thanks, Phanto, seriously. This is obviously an emotional thread.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote: lol, who says I like them either
Cool. My remark wasn't meant as a slap at you. Glad you didn't take it that way. Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
Hopefully these people will lose all support by doing stupid things like this. This is the best way I can think of to win the whole world's condemnation.
If anything of the sort were ever to happen to me, I would hope none of my family or friends, or anyone at all, actually, would play into their hands by watching whatever video or looking at any stills they publicized. Let's all refuse to be shocked and horrified, and simply redouble our efforts to bring peace and stability to Iraq because of things like this.
That's what I plan to do.
Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
I'd hope that my eyes would swirl around in their sockets, and that the foul mouth of my injurious reflectitude (and my forefathers before them) would rain vindicitive resentment on my cloaked-n-hooded captors in irrepentant form - with a block-red background embroidered with squirrely scruneiform script.
fallow
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
A skilled executioner will bring about a very swift death with beheading.
Now, electrocution is another story. Are there any states in USA still doing that . . . ?
Of course, England really capitalized on torturous deaths for traitors back in the old days with their systematic hanging, drawing and quartering - prior to the final mercy of beheading.
*shudders*
Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
*shrugs*
*makes waffles with x-tra dischord*
*fills divets with packets of grape jelly*
*flings Flar flung*
fallow
[ June 19, 2004, 05:40 AM: Message edited by: fallow ]
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Why beheading?
Because the media notices it.
If it was just a shooting, or strangling, well, that's hardly news compared to the innocent Iraqi's blown up everyday by others.
They need the media attention.
With it they believe they can spread their fear.
With it they do spread thier name, increasing recruitment. "Ah, the infidel's must die. Should we join Al Queda or Hamas." "Well brother, Al Queda did that cool beheading yesterday. They must be the coolest group to join."
With it they believe they can get better funding. "Tell me Osama, why should I give your group any money? What have you done recently? Hamas blew up a bus last week." "Ah, but sheik, we beheaded the American, surely you've seen that on CNN."
They spout religion, but this is not a religious war. It is a media war. It will be won not by guns or bombs but by broadcasts and word of mouth. And so far, as the best that I can see, we keep shooting blanks.
Posted by michaele8 (Member # 6608) on :
Beheading isn't so unusual -- the technique these murderers use might be though. The way they killed Nick Berg was done in the same ritualistic manner Muslims kill sheep during sacrifice. So I don't know what you can read into this -- although beheading has had a ritualistic and religious significance since Mohammed.
Point is, the Saudi Arabians were able to kill these animals. That's the only good thing about this situation. I don't want to hear any human rights organizations complain about how Saudi Arabia, Egypt or Libya deals with these elements either. In fact, since Russia, the USA and India are the main targets of the Islamic terrorist networks then our countries should work together to stop this menace. And if that means tracking these cells down and killing them (whatever countries they are hiding) then so be it.
Posted by fil (Member # 5079) on :
Hmmmm...al Qaeda cell in Saudi Arabia captured and killed an American. Terrorism rears its ugly head in Saudi Arabia...so...let's invade Turkey. Turks! Turks! Or mabye invade Ireland. They had it coming.
I agree, we should be at the very least fighting terrorism, but gosh, with this whole Iraq thing going on, who has the time?
fil
Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
quote: A skilled executioner will bring about a very swift death with beheading.
Yeah, but if the Nick BErg case was any sort of example, they aren't trying to be swift and painless. I think I read that SAWING from the back of the neck was the method used.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:I don't want to hear any human rights organizations complain about how Saudi Arabia, Egypt or Libya deals with these elements either.
Well, they will. And I will complain because this is how they deal with, not only terrorists, but LOTS of people. You would not want to be a non-royal citizen of Saudi Arabia.
Posted by Alai's Echo (Member # 3219) on :
quote:I think I read that SAWING from the back of the neck was the method used.
Don't believe everything you read. It was from the front.
Posted by Misha McBride (Member # 6578) on :
Nick Berg's beheading was not quick nor easy.
I watched the video. I wish I hadn't.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Well, they will. And I will complain because this is how they deal with, not only terrorists, but LOTS of people. You would not want to be a non-royal citizen of Saudi Arabia.
Quite right, Rakeesh.
The wrongs committed by one person or group NEVER justify the wrongs committed by others, including their victims.
I don't care who it is. Us, "them," Arabs, Jews, Palestinians, Northern Irish, US Military, or our very own CIA, FBI, etc.
My mom taught me that two wrongs don't make a right. It was true when I was 3 and it's still true today.
Posted by michaele8 (Member # 6608) on :
You can't deal with people that see YOU as subhuman except through strength. If Bush had been a wimp after 9/11 we would have suffered much more attacks than have been the case.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Well, we have "dealt with" these people for a long time without the kinds of problems we're facing now. What do you think has changed?
I think your comment is essentially dehumanizing the enemy. It's just propaganda, not anything that truly makes sense or upon which a sensible policy can be developed.
It's just another justification for "do bad things to them because they did bad things to us."
Once you decide that only monstrous behavior will get your message across, we've all lost.
Not only do I think you're wrong, but I think your sentiment is exactly what we should NOT succumb to. It makes us inhumane and lets us off the hook. And, worse, it perpetuates the downward spiral of retribution.
No, if we're going to claim moral superiority, the first thing we have to do is actually be morally superior.
And that means NOT retaliating and not excusing our own excesses, no matter whether they are sanctioned by our leaders or not.
Look at it this way:
The majority of Muslims and NO Muslim head of state has authorized the kidnapping and beheading of US citizens.
Our government authorized the abuse of prisoners through the CIA, its contractors and the military. On our behalf, of course.
So, while the stain of innocent blood is on the hands of renegades from the Middle East, every single American wears the stain of the humiliation of prisoners.
Or, at least that's one way of looking at it if one is not just being blindly patriotic.
There are other ways to look at it, I admit. But to be honest, I feel perfectly justified in pointing out that America has become rather hypocritical of late.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Oh, and by the way, before everyone dogpiles, I don't see the above as an excuse for kidnapping and murder.
Nor am I forgetting that Saddam Hussein was a head of state who did call for the targeting of Americans.
Since he basically made no distinction between soldiers (who would be considered enemy combatants under the basic rules of warfare) and civilians (who ranged from reporters to military contractors and thus don't technically qualify as combatants), he could be viewed as having authorized any number of atrocities against Americans, given the opportunity.
But, he's no longer a head of state.
Whereas Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft and Rumsfeld (and others), have now been shown to have pursued a policy of prisoner abuse by their own memoranda. They actually ARE the heads of a state. Our state. And while they didn't outright authorize the abuse, they sure as heck gave it a nod and a wink.
Current "shock and dismay" notwithstanding.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Hopefully these people will lose all support by doing stupid things like this. This is the best way I can think of to win the whole world's condemnation.
ak: I think you're being way, way too optimistic. If anything, this will make certain governments happy. They won't say anything in public, yes, but in their private meetings with terrorist leaders...
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"Why beheading? Because the media notices it. If it was just a shooting, or strangling, well, that's hardly news..."
There was an far greater media frenzy over the shooting of LeonKlinghoffer. Followup productions included made-for-tv movies, a theatrical-release movie, and an opera.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)