Jump to content
Islamic Forum
anthony19832005

New Taliban Rules

Recommended Posts

Declan Walsh in Kandahar

Monday December 11, 2006

The Guardian

 

A solid set of rules is the bedrock of a successful organisation, as any manager will testify. Afghanistan's Taliban are no different.

 

Most of the 30 new rules for recruits to jihad, or holy war, are predictably concerned with the finer points of killing and destruction. But others will sound familiar to those in more conventional lines of work - such as directives about using office equipment at home.

 

"Taliban may not use jihad equipment or property for personal ends," declares rule number nine - perhaps referring to recreational use of AK-47 guns or RPG-7 rocket launchers.

 

The dos and don'ts of a good Taliban fighter were agreed by the 33-member shura, or ruling council, during the recent Eid religious holiday. The list of regulations swings between the surprisingly punctilious and the coldly sinister.

 

Rule 18 urges mujahideen to quit smoking, while rule 19 declares that "mujahideen are not allowed to take young boys with no facial hair on to the battlefield or into their private quarters".

 

Fighters must be on their best behaviour with civilians - theft, unauthorised house searches and murder are forbidden, but on the other hand traitors and government employees must be treated without mercy and killed.

 

Lest anyone accuse the Taliban of disrespecting legal niceties, there are also some helpful guidelines for fair trials. Suspected spies must be tried before being killed, witnesses must have a "good psychological condition and possess an untarnished religious reputation". And a last word for those those eager to administer a beheading: "The punishment may take place only after the conclusion of the trial."

 

Schools that ignore warnings to close must be burned, "but all religious books must be secured beforehand", while the teachers working there are treated using a variation of the "three strikes, then you're out" system.

 

First they must be warned of the folly of working for the "puppet regime" of the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, rule 24 says, "because this strengthens the system of the infidels". Failing that, they must be beaten. And if the teacher "continues to instruct contrary to the principles of Islam", the handbook declares, "the district commander or a group leader must kill him".

 

The code has been been circulated to field commanders across Afghanistan and northern Pakistan. And just in case there were any doubts, rule 30 declares that "the above 29 rules are obligatory".

 

The ruthless application of these decrees was in evidence on Saturday morning, when militants broke into a house in eastern Kunar province and killed a family of five, including two sisters who were teachers. The women had received "night letters" warning them to stop teaching. The deaths bring to 20 the number of teachers killed by insurgents this year.

 

The strain of the escalating conflict showed dramatically on the face of Mr Karzai during a speech in Kabul yesterday. In a heartfelt address that brought members of his audience to tears, the embattled president described how innocent children were being killed by both Taliban bombs and Nato air strikes.

 

Note: I am not judging the Taliban in any way, i'm posting this so people know the new rules. Some of them are pretty funny :D

 

Salaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

:D/Peace To All

 

Is this real or Just for ha-ha's?

 

I ask because the Taliban are very serious people, and like you said some of this stuff is funny.

 

And I hope "not to take young boys with no facial hair into private quarters," doesn't mean what I think it means.

 

If it is, please remove it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is as real as the screen in front of you, Zman. This has been reported in about every major news agency. The rules are also real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace

 

"not to take young boys with no facial hair into private quarters,"

 

Actually when I first read that I thought it just means the taliban wont recruit child soldiers (only those old enough to have facial hair) but now im not so sure. Anyways, I sincerely doubt Taleban people are engaged in same-sex acts...........really doubt that.

 

There are many sources to this story, just google "taliban new rules". Some of them are

(www.)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.cnn(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2006/WORLD/meast/12/06/schuster.12.6/index.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.cnn(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2006/WORLD/meast/12/06/...12.6/index.html[/url]

(www.)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.cbsnews(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/stories/2006/12/09/ap/world/mainD8LTGS3G0.shtml"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.cbsnews(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/stories/2006/12/09/...D8LTGS3G0.shtml[/url]

(www.)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.examiner(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/a-446605~New_Taliban_Rules_Targefghan_Teachers.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.examiner(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/a-446605~New_Talib...n_Teachers.

tml[/url]

 

The thing is I want the Taleban to win (they wont stop anyways until they win afghanistan back) just so people can see how opressive their rule will be (again).

 

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peace

Actually when I first read that I thought it just means the taliban wont recruit child soldiers (only those old enough to have facial hair) but now im not so sure. Anyways, I sincerely doubt Taleban people are engaged in same-sex acts...........really doubt that.

 

Why do you doubt that? I don't think it could be much clearer. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace

 

I doubt that because I have never read credible reports that acts of sodomy are happening among the ranks of the Taleban.

 

*EDIT* Ok I have actually found some claims which accuse the taleban movement of deviant sexual conduct but im not sure how credible these reports are:

 

He also sees it as a move -- as the Taliban raises its military profile -- to set a certain standard of professionalism and behavior.

 

Along with rules about not smoking cigarettes and not allowing murderers to join the Taliban, there also is this entry: Taliban "are not allowed to take young boys with no facial hair onto the battlefield or into their private quarters."

 

Sexual abuse, says Rizvi, has always been a problem for the movement, especially in some of the madrassas (religious schools) that feed recruits to the movement.

 

Controlling bad behavior, according to Brachman, is just one of the ways "the Taliban are aggressively seeking to update their organization inside and out."

 

&

 

 

Rule 19 says that mujahedeen may not take young boys without facial hair onto the battlefield - or into their private quarters, an attempt to stamp out the sexual abuse of young boys, a problem that is widely known in southern Afghanistan but seldom discussed.

(www.)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.cnn(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2006/WORLD/meast/12/06/schuster.12.6/index.html"]Source[/url] (www.)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.examiner(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/a-446605~New_Taliban_Rules_Targefghan_Teachers.html"]Source[/url]

 

Anyways, These new rules are meant to boost morale of the taleban soldiers and to make the taleban army a more organised professional fighting force.

 

 

*Note: I never understood why some ultra-religious men (of all religions) often prefer to have sex with males instead of having sex with females.....Do they think homosexuality is worse than adultery? Weird

 

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure it means, don't recruit young boys to fight. As in, don't welcome them into your home.

 

It probablly just got translated wierd or something...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anthony,

 

During my research over the last few days I picked up a translation of these new rules.

 

Do you mind if I post them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace

 

 

Tantrum go ahead........if its not too offensive or anything......why would you ask permission lol this is a relatively open and tolerant forum.

 

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anthony,

 

Because they're pretty long and would take up a lot of space.

 

Well here they are:

 

Layeha (book of rules) for the Mujahideen

 

From the highest leader of the Islamic Emirates of Afghanistan.

 

Every Mujahid must abide by the following rules:

 

1) A Taliban commander is permitted to extend an invitation to all Afghans who support infidels so that they may convert to the true Islam.

 

2) We guarantee to any man who turns his back on infidels, personal security and the security of his possessions. But if he becomes involved in a dispute, or someone accuses him of something, he must submit to our judiciary.

 

3) Mujahideen who protect new Taliban recruits must inform their commander.

 

4) A convert to the Taliban, who does not behave loyally and becomes a traitor, forfeits our protection. He will be given no second chance.

 

5) A Mujahid who kills a new Taliban recruit forfeits our protection and will be punished according to Islamic law.

 

6) If a Taliban fighter wants to move to another district, he is permitted to do so, but he must first acquire the permission of his group leader.

 

7) A Mujahid who takes a foreign infidel as prisoner with the consent of a group leader may not exchange him for other prisoners or money.

 

8) A provincial, district or regional commander may not sign a contract to work for a non-governmental organization or accept money from an NGO. The Shura (the highest Taliban council) alone may determine all dealings with NGOs.

 

9) Taliban may not use Jihad equipment or property for personal ends.

 

10) Every Talib is accountable to his superiors in matters of money spending and equipment usage.

 

11) Mujadideen may not sell equipment, unless the provincial commander permits him to do so.

 

12) A group of Mujahideen may not take in Mujahideen from another group to increase their own power. This is only allowed when there are good reasons for it, such as a lack of fighters in one particular group. Then written permission must be given and the weapons of the new members must stay with their old group.

 

13) Weapons and equipment taken from infidels or their allies must be fairly distributed among the Mujahideen.

 

14) If someone who works with infidels wants to cooperate with Mujahideen, he should not be killed. If he is killed, his murderer must stand before an Islamic court.

 

15) A Mujahid or leader who torments an innocent person must be warned by his superiors. If he does not change his behaviour he must be thrown out of the Taliban movement.

 

16) It is strictly forbidden to search houses or confiscate weapons without the permission of a district or provincial commander.

 

17) Mujahideen have no right to confiscate money or personal possessions of civilians.

 

18) Mujahideen should refrain from smoking cigarettes.

 

19) Mujahideen are not allowed to take young boys with no facial hair onto the battlefield or into their private quarters.

 

20) If members of the opposition or the civil government wish to be loyal to the Taliban, we may take their conditions into consideration. A final decision must be made by the military council.

 

21) Anyone with a bad reputation or who has killed civilians during the Jihad may not be accepted into the Taliban movement. If the highest leader has personally forgiven him, he will remain at home in the future.

 

22) If a Mujahid is found guilty of a crime and his commander has barred him from the group, no other group may take him in. If he wishes to resume contact with the Taliban, he must ask forgiveness from his former group.

 

23) If a Mujahid is faced with a problem that is not described in this book, his commander must find a solution in consultation with the group.

 

24) It is forbidden to work as a teacher under the current puppet regime, because this strengthens the system of the infidels. True Muslims should apply to study with a religiously trained teacher and study in a Masjid or similar institution. Textbooks must come from the period of the Jihad or from the Taliban regime.

 

25) Anyone who works as a teacher for the current puppet regime must recieve a warning. If he nevertheless refuses to give up his job, he must be beaten. If the teacher still continues to instruct contrary to the principles of Islam, the district commander or a group leader must kill him.

 

26) Those NGOs that come to the country under the rule of the infidels must be treated as the government is treated. They have come under the guise of helping people but in fact are part of the regime. Thus we tolerate none of their activities, whether it be building of streets, bridges, clinics, schools, madrases (schools for Koran study) or other works. If a school fails to heed a warning to close, it must be burned. But all religious books must be secured beforehand.

 

27) As long as a person has not been convicted of espionage and punished for it, no one may take up the issue on their own. Only the district commander is in charge. Witnesses who testify in a procedure must be in good psychological condition, possess an untarnished religious reputation, and not have committed any major crime. The punishment may take place only after the conclusion of the trial.

 

28) No lower-level commander may interfere with contention among the populace. If an argument cannot be resolved, the district or regional commander must step in to handle the matter. The case should be discussed by religious experts (Ulema) or a council of elders (Jirga). If they find no solution, the case must be referred to well-known religious authorities.

 

29) Every Mujahid must post a watch, day and night.

 

30) The above 29 rules are obligatory. Anyone who offends this code must be judged according to the laws of the Islamic Emirates.

 

 

This Book of Rules is intended for the Mujahideen who dedicate their lives to Islam and the almighty Allah. This is a complete guidebook for the progress of Jihad, and every Mujahid must keep these rules; it is the duty of every Jihadist and true believer.

 

Signed by the highest leader of the Islamic Emirates of Afghanistan

 

(Editor's note: this Book of Rules was distributed initially to the 33 members of the Shura, the highest Taliban council, at their meeting during Ramadan 2006.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never trust these Western sources because first of all they try to put in Arabic or Pashto words into English translations and that gives them a no meaning to someone that understands what the words mean, it just sounds like they are trying to sound like they actually know something when they dont! a true Taliban, its a true Talib not a Taliban!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peace

The thing is I want the Taleban to win (they wont stop anyways until they win afghanistan back) just so people can see how opressive their rule will be (again).

 

Peace

:D/Peace To All

 

The thing is bro, is Afganistan any better now, after it's invasion & occupation by the U.S. & it's NATO allies?

 

The warloards opium trade has fluorished under the current Karzai puppet regime, which is supervised by its US/NATO overloards.

 

I also read that Karzai's government has brought back the religious morals police, ala-Taliban style.

 

So what's the difference really? Afghnaistan are still in bad shape, maybe even in worse shape now.

 

Instead of being "oppressed" by the Taliban, as some Western media & politicians have regurgitated, now they're oppressed by the puppet regime, opium warloards & the occupation troops.

 

They merely changed one ruler for another, that has far more deadly weaponry & sophisticated means of keeping them in bondage & murdering them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The warloards opium trade has fluorished under the current Karzai puppet regime, which is supervised by its US/NATO overloards.

 

I also read that Karzai's government has brought back the religious morals police, ala-Taliban style.

 

So what's the difference really? Afghnaistan are still in bad shape, maybe even in worse shape now.

 

 

 

Re: Poppies

 

Afghans probe 'poppy spray' claim

By Pam O'Toole BBC News

 

The Afghan government has said it is investigating reports that an unidentified aircraft sprayed opium poppies with herbicide.

It comes amid continuing controversy over how to curb Afghanistan's booming drugs trade. s.

Full story here:

 

(www.)"http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4248217.stm"]news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4248217.stm[/url]

 

 

Opium poppy crop to be sprayed

From Times Wire Reports

December 10, 2006

 

The top U.S. anti-drug official said Afghan poppies would be sprayed with herbicide to combat an opium trade that produced a record heroin haul this year.

 

The Afghan government has not publicly said it will spray, but John Walters, the director of the U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy, said President Hamid Karzai and other officials had agreed to ground spraying.

 

No link necessary – that’s the whole story.

 

Afghanistan's opium poppies will be sprayed, says US drugs tsar

 

· Calls for herbicide use follow record harvest

· Fears sensitive move will boost support for Taliban

 

Declan Walsh in Kandahar

Monday December 11, 2006

 

Afghanistan has agreed to poppy-spraying measures in a desperate bid to deflate the soaring drugs trade, America's anti-narcotics tsar announced at the weekend.

The move was urgently needed to prevent Afghanistan becoming a narco-state, said John Waters, the head of the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy. "We cannot fail in this mission."

But the prospect of herbicide use aroused criticism from other western officials, who are sceptical of its benefits and fear it will push farmers into the arms of the Taliban. "Nobody in the international community is loving this," said one.

Article continues

 

Link:

 

(www.)"http://guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1968978,00.html"]guardian.co.uk/international/st...1968978,00.html[/url]

 

You can check out what's going on in Afghanistan here:

 

(www.)"http://pajhwak/"]pajhwak/[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm pretty sure it means, don't recruit young boys to fight. As in, don't welcome them into your home.

 

It probablly just got translated wierd or something...?

 

I don't think so. This is classic vague we-have-a-problem-but-we-don't-really-want-to-say-it-because-it's-embarrassing language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:D/Peace To All

 

Is this real or Just for ha-ha's?

 

I ask because the Taliban are very serious people, and like you said some of this stuff is funny.

 

And I hope "not to take young boys with no facial hair into private quarters," doesn't mean what I think it means.

 

If it is, please remove it...

Not allowing a boy without facial hair in the company of men is Islamic Law. Let alone at the front where the fighting is going on. These rules are no joke. There are very good reasons why they have brought them in, especially in an area where there is constant battles. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not allowing a boy without facial hair in the company of men is Islamic Law.
:D

How is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D/Peace To All

 

CIA Is Undermining British War Effort, Say Military Chiefs

 

Confidential report speaks of 'serious tensions' in the coalition over strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan

 

Courtesy Of: The Independent

By Robert Fox

Published: 10 December 2006

 

British intelligence officers and military commanders have accused the US of undermining British policies in Iraq and Afghanistan, after the sacking of a key British ally in the Afghan province of Helmand.

 

British sources have blamed pressure from the CIA for President Hamid Karzai's decision to dismiss Mohammed Daud as governor of Helmand, the southern province where Britain deployed some 4,000 troops this year. Governor Daud was appointed in mid-year to replace a man the British accused of involvement in opium trafficking, but on Thursday Mr Karzai summoned him to Kabul and sacked him, along with his deputy.

 

"The Americans knew Daud was a main British ally," one official told The Independent on Sunday, "yet they deliberately undermined him and told Karzai to sack him." The official said the Defence Secretary, Des Browne, was "tearing his hair out".

 

Meanwhile, a confidential assessment of the situation in Iraq, seen by the IoS, has reported "serious tensions" in the American-British coalition. American commanders in the country are believed to oppose the British strategy for handing over Maysan and Basra provinces to Iraqi control as part of an exit strategy.

 

The disclosures come only days after differences between the US and Britain were on display during Tony Blair's visit to Washington, and the Iraq Study Group issued a report containing withering criticism of President George Bush's policies. With British commanders warning that they may not be able to succeed in Afghanistan unless forces in Iraq are drawn down, cracks in the transatlantic alliance are likely to widen.

 

The disagreements have come into the open after the summary sacking of Britain's protégé, Governor Daud. Although rival delegations from Helmand were in Kabul last week, one calling for his removal and the other demanding that he stay, a diplomatic source said Mr Karzai had listened to advice from "other powerful Western players".

 

Mr Daud, who had survived several Taliban assassination attempts, was seen as a key player in Britain's anti-drugs campaign in Helmand. He was also the architect of a deal under which British forces moved out of the town of Musa Qala, where they had been involved in fierce combat with Taliban fighters. But the Americans publicly criticised truces in Musa Qala and other Helmand towns, saying they effectively gave in to the Taliban.

 

A British diplomatic source said yesterday: "We backed Mohammed Daud because he was an honest man and a progressive man, so obviously this is very disappointing. However, it is also true that he was under tremendous pressure and his position was getting weakened. Where does this leave our policy? Well, we shall have to wait and see."

 

The British commander of the Nato force in Afghanistan, Lieutenant-General David Richards, has also come in for American criticism as "too political". The American supreme commander of Nato, General Jim Jones, has let it be known, according to sources, that General Richards "would have been sacked if he had been an American officer".

 

General Richards, for his part, has been frustrated that his call for extra Nato troops to form a strategic fighting reserve has been largely unheeded.

 

While the tensions between Britain and the US have burst into the open in Afghanistan, they have been simmering in Iraq. The confidential assessment of the situation there says American commanders want the British to be far more robust in confronting Shia militias in the south.

 

© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited

(www.)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2062489.ece"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_news.independent.co.uk/world/middle...icle2062489.ece[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing is bro, is Afganistan any better now, after it's invasion & occupation by the U.S. & it's NATO allies?

 

Yes it is better.

 

The warloards opium trade has fluorished under the current Karzai puppet regime, which is supervised by its US/NATO overloards.

 

Would you prefer massive famine like the Taliban? They destroyed all the weather predicting machines also.

 

I also read that Karzai's government has brought back the religious morals police, ala-Taliban style.

 

Becuase they had to. No other power will fill the gap except the power hungry. (AKA corrupt "religious leaders."

 

So what's the difference really? Afghnaistan are still in bad shape, maybe even in worse shape now.

 

It now has the definite chance of becoming better. There isn't a government that enforces tribal laws. They're still in practice but now they can slowly fade.

 

 

Instead of being "oppressed" by the Taliban, as some Western media & politicians have regurgitated, now they're oppressed by the puppet regime, opium warloards & the occupation troops.

 

Choose your opression.

 

 

They merely changed one ruler for another, that has far more deadly weaponry & sophisticated means of keeping them in bondage & murdering them...

 

...? They don't even have control over half the country... the Taliban is coming back and wreaking havoc.

 

 

Now I know this is simplified American political view--but it's what I believe overall. I can go indepth to this reason that reason, how some is worse, how some is better.

 

But no matter what I say, it won't matter. Becuase all the news stories you hear are lie s lies lies, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, they've got rules. I honestly prefer to live under Taliban regimes to stupid US invaders' rule.

 

(www.)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_onlinejournal(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/artman/publish/article_1511.shtml"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_onlinejournal(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/artman/publish/article_1511.shtml[/url]

(www.)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.washingtonpost(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101654.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.washingtonpost(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wp-dyn/conte...6120101654.html[/url]

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I honestly prefer to live under Taliban regimes to stupid US invaders' rule.

 

Your life your call. But as an afghan id rather be opressed by my own compatriots than by some foreigners.

 

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sky, you know nothing about Taliban. Tribal rules? lol

 

 

To quote people that know much more than I do...

 

...the Taliban treatment of women and their attitude towards civilisation have nothing to do with the Koran or the practice of the Prophet. The Koran commands women to "be modest" and "to draw their veils over their bosoms" (Surah XXIV, verse 31) not to envelop themselves in the sort of chador worn by Afghan women which leaves only a square of net open for the eyes.

 

The Prophet was an innovator who gave women legal status, property and inheritance rights. He was a man whose closest confidantes were women, whose first convert was his wife, Khadija, an independent businesswoman. The "canonical punishments" of beheading and flogging as practised in Saudi Arabia are also tribal, relics of the pre-Islamic past when nomadic tribesmen maintained order by lopping off the hands of thieves and the heads of murderers.

 

The Suadi part applies also I think.

 

source: (www.)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.islamfortoday(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/tribal.htm"]Tribal Rules[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×