“Taliban execute woman in public” Real or rhetorical propaganda?

Tuesday, 10 August 2010 05:36

The news report released under the headline “Taliban execute women in public” featured the breaking news of Monday, August 09, 2010, published and given a tremendous coverage by a number of major media outlets.
To be frank, such media outlets have nothing to do with the use of rhetorical techniques or inspirational propaganda in the news,
what they really have to do is to pin anything on Taliban that can defame them and tarnish the Mujahideen movement, no matter they have to overstep the bounds of media ethics and go far, far beyond.
Indeed, there are some technical flaws and lack of balance in what they have reported in the news about the stated women that we want to pinpoint before we confirm the truth of the news report.
“Taliban execute woman in public” this is to say (Qisas). And Qisas (execution) is an Islamic term meaning retaliatory punishment of a murderer, whereas the term does not refer to adultery. Take for example Ahmad, who killed Mahmood deliberately or unjustly, in such case, the Islamic jurisprudence carry out Qisas (execution).
Without the media weighing the scientific accuracy and determining the truth of the news report, it has used the term execution, some reports even said she was lashed 100 times and shot in her heart, the others said she was lashed 200 times and shot three times in the head, which are all nothing but mere propaganda and are against the professionalism and media ethics.
In the light of Islamic law, the stoning and lashings are carried out under certain cases, when a man and a woman are convicted of aduletory. When an unmarried male commits adultery with an unmarried female, they should be lashed. In case of a married male committing adultary with a married female, they should be stoned.
According to some media reports, saying that a 40-year-old pregnant widow was lashed and shot dead in public is an unusual and preposterous event of its kind, a novelty in the history Islamic law which has never been heard of.
If, according to some news reports, she was a widow, then she was married who should have been stoned not lashed and shot, in accordance with Islamic Sharia. Let say, she was unmarried, according to Islamic law, she should have only been lashed 100 times rather than 200 times and shooting with a gun.
To put it bluntly, such courts as previously ordered to cut off Aish’s nose and ears in Uruzgan province and this time decided that a 40-yea-old woman should be flogged and shot instead of stoning in Badghis province are rarity and can only be created and operated by the US and the its media which is in the US’ payroll to defame Mujahideen.
However, the media outlets are reminded to observe their code of neutrality and should not be bent on tarnishing their good name.

SOURCE: alemarah