The two women were alleged to have been prostitutes who served Western clientèle.

I can’t beleave a westerner would hit that.

There is no level of force that is too much to wipe the sick sons of bitches that perpetrate this kind of brutality on women off the face of this planet.

MadisonConservative on July 14, 2008 at 4:18 PM

Amen. I’d like to see FutureWeapons use these bastards as live targets.

If a Congressman can make pray for Al Queda attention to someone in CIA, why not “out” this guy?

You wanna try this sentence again, bro?

But assuming they were prostitutes, how do you guys think they should have been punished? Stoning? Caning? How about being held in a dungeon of sorts for a while?

scotta on July 14, 2008 at 10:00 PM

Assuming for a second that your question is serious: As a libertarian, I think sex between consenting adults is none of the government’s business. Much less the business of unelected thugs. So, if they indeed were prostitutes, I can see their spiritual advisers counseling them against prostituting themselves. I can see the most effective local NGO (the Taliban) offering them an alternative way of earning a living (yeah, right) but I can’t see myself supporting any kind of punishment, not even six hours of community service.

Since NYT can out CIA people, why not “out” this guy?

If a Congressman can make pray for Al Queda attention to someone in CIA, why not “out” this guy?

I suspect AQ is already going to look pretty hard at newsies who want to “embed”. Like, show them a goat and if they don’t do the right thing, then you know…

I’m kidding, of course — that would obviously be needlessly cruel and inhumane.

But assuming they were prostitutes, how do you guys think they should have been punished? Stoning? Caning? How about being held in a dungeon of sorts for a while?

Memo: to the left,thats why their is still
a WOT!

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
Edmund Burke

Exit question: Why publish them? And why, after the Bilal Hussein fiasco, don’t they have specific guidelines for dealing with obvious propaganda displays?

Love of money.

It seems life is cheap in the muslim world and the AP is even cheaper.

So then these are not propaganda pictures but in fact pictures that expose the Taliban as brutal thugs.

factoid on July 14, 2008 at 6:38 PM

It may not make someone like them better, but fear them more and so they will acquiesce to their will instead of resist if they come along to take over a village. “Let them hate, as long as they fear” works.

propaganda shots?

In my book, a propaganda shot would be one that, when viewed by people not directly involved, might increase sympathy towards the Taliban.

Do you like the Taliban after viewing these pictures more than you did before?

I didn’t think so.

So then these are not propaganda pictures but in fact pictures that expose the Taliban as brutal thugs.

Liberty or Death on July 14, 2008 at 5:36 PM

Of course he published them.

If he didn’t, his special Taliban sources would dry up.

The man has to make a living after all…

I completely agree he would have been killed had he tried to interfere. However I question as to why he chose to publish the pictures once he was safely away from the Taliban?

Liberty or Death on July 14, 2008 at 5:36 PM

Is that true? I can’t completely agree with it. I don’t have enough facts.

Did the reporter even say anything? Did he even ask questions? Did he have the moral courage to at least say: “Please, don’t kill these women …?”

And if he didn’t – do we know for a fact that his words would have made no difference?

I hope he did. I hope he did all he could, and it made no difference. I hope – for his sake – that he didn’t quietly sit there and take pictures.

And for what it’s worth, if he had tried to stop it – and been killed as a result – well, there are worse ways to die.

I think I’d rather be dead than live the rest of my life knowing that happened in front of me while I did nothing.

Why does the word “chatting” irritate me so much.

right2bright on July 14, 2008 at 5:14 PM

You weren’t the only one.

It bothered me – and likely you – because it was so blatantly out of place. And it seemed like to use that word, you’d have to be willfully, maliciously denigrating the last few moments of those womens’ lives.

Chatting not only didn’t fit – it was intentionally cruel.

I don’t know what they were doing. But I guarantee it wasn’t chatting. I’d guess it was a pretty serious conversation. Probably about their loved ones … or hopes of rescue or escape … or maybe a last word of affection for each other. Maybe they were friends comforting each other in the most dire of all possible circumstances.

But they were most definitely not chatting.

I’d guess – ironically – that they were probably praying together.

And I hope whatever God there is welcomed them home with open arms.

I hope that a lot, about a lot of people, these days. Because if that hope is true, then I guess things make sense. If its not, well … then nothing makes sense.

God bless them.

Guess that makes it understandable in some heartless maniac’s worldview.

Scum filming and scum shooting.

Apparently, they could not afford the AP’s rates. Via Rusty Shackleford, apparently these two women were murdered while an AP string watch, and, took video.

(The caption of the picture) Two unidentified Afghan Women chat with each other a few mi…

I can’t blame the guy for not trying to stop the execution in the moment. The Taliban has proven over and over again that they’ve got no problem killing journalists (no problem killing anyone, really).

However, if he knew in advance what was coming, I think he’s an accessory, since he didn’t try to give anyone a head’s up but chose to imbed and get the story instead.

And, if he’s not helping the authorities find the guys who did it after the fact, he’s guilty of obstruction.

JadeNYU on July 14, 2008 at 4:01 PM

I completely agree he would have been killed had he tried to interfere. However I question as to why he chose to publish the pictures once he was safely away from the Taliban?

Instead he should have written a story of the experience depicting the senseless brutality of the Taliban and in his story explain why he chose NOT to publish the pictures as a protest to the brutality he witnessed and further explain he didn’t want to be used by the Taliban as a propaganda tool.

Instead this Taliban tool chose to publish the pictures anyway to further the Taliban’s propaganda machine; therefore he is complicit in murder and a Taliban sympathizer!

Why does the word “chatting” irritate me so much.
*
NOW issued a statement…”The deserved it”

right2bright on July 14, 2008 at 5:14 PM

Because “chatting” makes it sound like it’s such a normal thing, which it probably is, or that these women were somehow ok with their imminent slaughter. But I doubt they were just “chatting”.