Gunned down with an AK47 as baying villagers cheer in delight, this is the shocking moment a burqa-clad woman was executed in Afghanistan for her part in a Taliban love triangle.

The 22-year-old woman, said to have been married to a member of a hardline Taliban militant group, was shot dead after being accused of adultery with a Taliban commander.

Horrific pictures show a crowd of bearded men gather to watch a rifle-wielding gunman shoot her in the head and back during the execution in Qimchok village, in Afghanistan’s Parwan province.

Amateur footage of the brutal killing shows the woman, known only as Najiba, slump to the floor, as dozens of men on a nearby hillside cheer, ‘God is great!’
The unidentified shooter, who is seen wearing an orange pakol (the traditional Afghan hat), swiftly executes her – but continues to shoot her dead body whilst walking towards it.

Officials in Afghanistan said the killing came about due to a dispute between two Taliban members, who had argued over the woman.

Parwan province governor Abdul Basir Salangi told CNN that as both Taliban men ‘had some kind of relationship with the woman’, they instead opted to accuse her of adultery to ‘save face’.

The harrowing images came from an undated video, although it is thought the Afghanistan execution took place some time in late June.

The video was handed over by a Qol villager to the Parwan provincial government, situated north of Kabul, their spokeswoman Roshna Khalid told AFP today.

It is understood that both Taliban commanders have subsequently been executed.

The video has been condemned by the Afghan government as un-Islamic and inhuman.

Public executions of alleged adulterers were common when the Taliban regime was in power.

They were in control of the country from 1996 until 2001, when they were ousted by a US-led invasion for harbouring Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden after the 9/11 attacks.

[Editor’s Note: The New York Post is reporting that both Taliban commanders have been killed.]

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Anan7

    “un-Islamic”?  Are you serious?

    The only reason it was “un-Islamic” is because she wasn’t an attractive blond girl.

  • “Who knows” what really happened here.  “Truth is the first casualty of war.”  Kabul could be lying.  The Taliban could be lying.  This breathless commentator could be lying.  The editor of this film could be lying with his “edits”. Or all four of the above.  No one knows.

    What’s lost in all this is that adultery has been treated as a serious crime in Western nations too, for centuries, until relatively rather recently.  And the woman has been held to be primarily responsible, for obvious reasons.  If these Taliban are “depraved” for treating adultery as a serious offense, so was Western society for about 3000 years.  

    So, to be intellectually honest, you pretty much have to decide: was the old world too racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. …  Or was it not?

  • ILOVEMYRACE

    The’re just like us. 
    We’re all the same.
    Stop the Hate.
    Each race brings new ideas to the table — new ways of doing things.
    America will be greatly enriched after our government imports tens of thousands of these people into our communities.

  • bubo

    We’re close to winning in Afghanistan.   A couple of hundred more years, max.   

  • Turnagain

    Diversity is our strength.  Hollywood liberals, especially the women should approve of that display of an alternate cultural norm.  

  • Southern__Hoosier

    AH! Love Islamic style. Islam is peace and there is nothing more peaceful than a dead person

  • Obama and Holder will award them medals.

  • These people are animals. There is no other way to see it! Any government who would allow these miscreants into their country should be tried for treason!

  • KenelmDigby

    And, of course, it is the militant feminists who are the most persistant enemy of White men – joining forces with literally every ‘oppressed minority of color’ in their never sated quest to subjugate and dominate White men.

  • Xanthippe2

    When AR poss stories like this I  always wonder what readers want?  Do they want the U.S. to intervene in the Middle East to “teach” the people there more Western ways? By propaganda? By force of arms? With taxpayer money? Do they want Muslim women to be given political asylm in the U.S.?   Or  do they just want 3rd worlders to stay in their own countries and solve their own problems as best they can and on their own time-line?

    • It gives us a glimpse of what will happen to our children if current policies remain. 

      Sara Malm, Daily Mail (London), July 9, 2035
      Gunned down with an AK47 as baying Londoners cheer in delight, this is the shocking moment a burqa-clad white woman was executed in London for her part in a Muslim Brotherhood love triangle.

      • Xanthippe2

        No doubt, but you totally dodged the question as to how this could best be prevented.

        • That’s their problem. I just want them out of white countries and stuff like this proves that they are incompatible with Western Society.

          The only thing that can help the 3rd world is genetic engineering and we can’t do that yet.

  • refocus

    This execution certainly justifies the US military involvement.

    • The__Bobster

      How so? We will lose thousands of men and trillions of dollars and nothing will change.

  • Kurt Plummer

    Nettle,

    Murder implies, not that the woman was helpless but that she was innocent.  And we simply don’t know enough to surmise this from the available evidence.

    I would suggest that ‘old world’ refers to the Middle East as much as Europe because, like it or lump it, at some point we -did- share a common ancestor with these people.

    And where culture is the reflection of genes, it is likely that you -can- say that this is a ‘racist’ event because Afghanistan has huge psychological dissonances with all manner of sexual perfidies, including wide spread homosexuality among their younger men. 

    Something which -Islam- specifically forbids, on pain of death.

    So this can be attributed to regional and thus genetic as much as religious social insularist views.

    My own understanding of the way Islam in general works is that a woman’s safety lies in marriage and the sequestering of herself from public risk.  Her husband, a brother or another female may accompany her in public and thus give her the honor of chastity by implied a-sexual condition of her companions (and their strict adherence to a no-funny-business interpretation of the Koran as witnesses to her own actions).

    Yet this young woman stood alone, without any of her own gender or family to protect her.

    If there is a crime here, that is where it lies.

    Because the first step in undoing a bias crime (gender-driven in this case) is having someone who is respected stand up and insist: “Oh no you don’t.  This -isn’t- ‘just the defendant’s view’ I am a person in good standing who has no interest here and _I say_ she wasn’t a willing participant.”  Or even there at all.

    And the fact that none did say this, is indicative.

    Further to this, it is -highly- instructive that you have this Akufi woman, who is described as a government worker and ‘campaigner for girls rights’, pretending to be shocked by the _status quo_ of a patriarchal society with zero tolerance for female independence.  And who is equally (apparently) surprised to view the video as though for the first time, of something that happened only a few kilometers from where she works, in Kabul.  If she is that out of the loop or ‘protectively isolated’ herself, what does she expect from others in the way of changed attitudes as standup defense of women?

    /=/

    Finally, at the end of the video, look at that market street or whatever as the voiceover says that violence against women is on the rise over the past year.  Why?  Where are the burkha-less strutting whores who are living in open defiance of something they despise? 

    Where!?!?!  All I see is acre after acre of walking tents.

    This is _Western_ moralizing propaganda sticking it’s supercilious nose into other cultures affairs and daring to call them primitive rather than ‘diverse’.

    The Afghan people aren’t really interested in change.  Not even the women.

    And acknowledging -that- will never happen because it will effectively mean that the association of these ‘crimes’ with the attitudes and activities of the former government is itself a lie.  That this is simply the way the Afghans are.  And we are supporting them with money and status.

    Culture from Genes -becomes- History, as strict social stratification of laws and customs.  The latter in turn being a social vehicle for continuum in a hostile environment.  Afghanistan lies at the crossroads of invasions from every direction, for millennia.  The most successful of those cultures which have tramped over the Afghan wastes being the ones whose fierceness brought it’s own intolerance for any but ‘the right way’ of a male dominated, bandit, religion.  But it’s still the genes as the gender and it’s still a response to the overwhelming absurdities of the greater world’s miasma of poisonous beliefs.

    It is not up to us to judge them so much as hold them at arms length, as they do us.

    Keep a wider view, look for contradictory details the undermine the social engineering message and ultimately only take offense at what is important to you and yours.  These aren’t whites.  They are not our concern.


    • It is not up to us to judge them so much as hold them at arms length, as they do us.”  << Yes.  very well said.

  • Xanthippe2

    That is my opinion, but I am really curious about what other AmReners think,  My guess is that they do NOT support the “invite the world” part of this strategy, but that they DO support the “invade the world” part.  But I am just guessing.

    •  I support none of the above, because one inevitably begets the other.

      The only reason we should “be” in Afghanistan is to punish the Taliban for giving direct aid and comfort to AQ’s 9/11 plans.  But by “be” I mean drone strikes and air strikes, not ground occupation.

      • “The only reason we should “be” in Afghanistan is to punish the Taliban for giving direct aid and comfort to AQ’s 9/11 plans.  ”
        And even that is questionable.  Rather than giving direct aid and comfort, it was more like they were negligently naïve  in tolerating Al Qaeda.  And I’ve never seen any evidence that the Taliban knew that they were to blow up three or four buildings in America.   See, this recent interview with a top Taliban commander:
        Taliban’s Icy Relationship With al Qaeda “Our people consider al Qaeda to be a plague that was sent down to us by the heavens. Some even concluded that al Qaeda are actually the spies of America. Originally, the Taliban were naive and ignorant of politics and welcomed al Qaeda into their homes. But al-Qaeda abused our hospitality.”
        Relief at Bin Laden’s Death “To tell the truth, I was relieved at the death of Osama. Through his policies, he destroyed Afghanistan. If he really believed in jihad he should have gone to Saudi Arabia and done jihad there, rather than wrecking our country.”

        The Taliban were taken out because of the Hillary Clinton/feminist agenda. If we would’ve made a deal with the Taliban on 9/12/01 they would’ve had Bin Laden’s head on a platter in a New York minute for us.  But that wasn’t going to happen, because the feminists had a hard on for the Taliban.  As do many people on this board.  The Rahm Emanuel theory, “Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste”, reigned supreme.

  • it is ironic that so many of the present day Muslim haters are Protestants.  The Catholic Church was the one force that kept Muslims at bay.  the only institution, arguably that understood the inherent problem of a Muslim invasion.  (The same invasion that Western countries now welcome.)  The Reformation was very critical of the Crusades and the Catholic Church’s intolerant position towards Muslims.  Once the political effects of the Reformation set in, the local Protestant princes refused to give coin to raising any Christian army to fight in the East.

  • Syntec

     Would it be correct to say that Louisiana and S Carolina both have sizeable Hindu and Sikh communities on account of those two having been elected to the governorship? 

    In England, the city of Leicester has long since  been infiltrated and taken over by Hindus and Sikhs and they don’t hide their contempt of White natives either even to the point of using every tactic in the book to prevent the selling of properties to the indigenous British themselves.  On a smaller scale, other parts too are also persistently being taken over by these invaders.

    To sum it up, therefore,  it’s not only Muslim Asians and blacks we have to contend with taking over our lands.  We’ve become outnumbered  in our lands by the invasion of EVERY non-White race and its culture on the planet, the likes of which, in the reverse,  one is not seeing in non-White homelands.

  • Hirene

    Islam seems to be the religion of the insecure male.  Christian men look like fools to them:  only one wife, chivalry, woman can say “no.”