Meredith Horn & Anneliese Johnston

Hist. 202- Hardy

11 December 2014
The Taliban Versus the United States
Throughout history we see many different instances where individuals and groups are
treated unfairly and where basic rights are revoked. The group or official in charge of the
movement may justify why the action took place, but overall they are simply justifications for an
inhumane act that has taken place. This is manifest through the articles My Student the
Terrorist and The Taliban-Decrees. Both of these articles depict instances where an individual
or group has been deprived of their rights as a human. They are also different in the fact that the
Taliban acted because of religious beliefs and the United States government because of fear of a
terrorist attack. Both the Taliban and the United States revoked basic human rights by force
without a valid reason, on the other hand, one act was done due to religious beliefs and the other
because of fear of terrorism.
The article My Student the Terrorist focuses on a young man named, Syed Fahad
Hashmi, who was a U.S. citizen with no criminal record. He studied both in the United States
then left the country for a few years to seek higher education at a University in England. During
his studies in the United States, one of his professors noted that he very opinionated in his
political activity. His final paper contended that in contradiction to the Bill of Rights, the civil
liberties of Muslim-American groups were being violated in the aftermath of September 11 (p.
2). He believed that Muslim-American groups deserved to not be discriminated against. While he
was away, the terrorist attack on the twin towers took place. Hashmi was accused of being an
accomplice in the attacks because he was suspected of housing a supplier of Al Qaeda. He was

imprisoned in England for a time then sent back to the United States where he was immediately
placed in prison. He was then placed in high security where he could not see nor talk to anyone
for quite some time. There was no solid evidence on his involvement in the terrorist attack yet
his rights were stripped from him. Hashmids father was dealt a hard blow with his son being
denied the rights that are supposedly guaranteed to every citizen in the U.S. When Hashmid
appeared in court the following account took place, in front of a courtroom filled with family
and friends, Judge Loretta Preska denied him bail. Although he was a citizen with no criminal
record, she said that he did not respect the U.S. laws or have significant ties to family and
community to prevent him from fleeing (p. 5). This statement holds oxymoronic value because
there was no proof of him disrespecting the law if he held no criminal record. Again this is
another example of how his rights were unfairly taken away in a moments notice. Just as
woman in the case of the Taliban decree were stripped of rights without any foreknowledge.
The article The Taliban-Decrees explains the strict rules that were implemented for
religious reasons on how women should act and dress in public. The Taliban was written by men
and was strict in how women should not show and skin nor talk with other men. In addition to
this if they disobeyed those orders the men related to those women would be punished. Included
in the decrees was the requirement of dressing according to sharia regulation whenever leaving
the residence. There were also strict rules for conduct in hospitals. 1. Female patients should go
to female physicians. In case a male physician is needed, the female patient should be
accompanied by her close relative (p. 297). This way the Taliban controls the men by subjecting
them to the punishment and thereby the men control the women so they dont suffer the
consequences. No reason was given for why such restrictions were placed on the women or why
the men would suffer consequences if the rules were disobeyed. They simply stated it was for

religious purposes and to make all women equal in appearance. The women in the Islamic
religion who fell under the Taliban decrees were subjected to what members of Western culture
find inhumane and extreme acts of inequality. However, the United States government revoked
rights that are supposed to be given to every citizen no matter what their religion or political
beliefs are. Their rights were stripped from them for no exact reason except for that the leaders of
their church felt it should happen.
In both of these documents individuals are being dominated by either a government or
religious organization with the power to carry out their demands. The Taliban and the U.S.
government have the capacity to carry out their declarations and judgments. The Religious
Police (Munkrat) have the responsibility and duty to struggle against these social problems and
will continue their effort until evil is finished (p. 297). The Taliban leaders believed these to be
problems that plagued society and therefore took measures against it just as the United States did
against Hashmi. Building upon this similarity, with their law enforcement very few individuals
would dare to oppose these institutions because of the fear of repercussions. In addition, some
third parties would agree that what both institutions are doing is very similar because they are
infringing or affecting people who cannot retaliate. Irony can be found in the similarity of these
two groups because the U.S. government was the sole provider and supporter of the Taliban in
the 1980s to fight in Afghanistan. As a result, the Taliban gained more power and their ideals
and beliefs came into conflict with the American ideals. In essence, the Taliban became a threat
to the U.S. government only after they had gained weapons and support from the latter group. To
combat this, the U.S. invaded their country with the justification that the Taliban held the
perpetrators of the attack on September 11. These two cases show similar actions, but the
motives of each of the groups differ.

The basis for the Talibans actions was mainly religious. The Islamic leaders believed
that womens provocative apparel and makeup drew inappropriate attention. As stated in the
Taliban article, Islam as a rescuing religion has determined specific dignity for women (p. 297)
which included covering themselves whenever they were leaving their residence or were in the
presence of a male they were unrelated to. The main goal of these decrees was to prevent the
attention of useless people who will not look at them with a good eye (p. 297). Before the
decrees were given, women were thought to be the reason or instigator of the aroused and unholy
feelings of the males. As a result of this, the Taliban initiated strict rules that the women would
have to follow. They managed to carry out these proclamations because the party that would fall
victim or be punished were the male relatives. This was very effective because the men would
inflict punishment on the women to follow the rules because of the potential punishment they
would receive. It was also in the womans interest to follow these rules based on the religion if
they wished to be found virtuous. With this evidence, the Taliban was acting out of religious
purposes.
In contrast with the motives of the Taliban, the U.S. acted out of irrational fear in the case
of Syed Fahad Hashmi. United States government officials immediately jumped to the
conclusion that anyone who was even remotely related to the Islamic religion had the potential to
be a terrorist. This view hurt many, especially those who have no association with the extremists
of Radical Islam and held peaceful and loving values. In Hashmis case he was an American
citizen who was denied the rights that were promised by the founding fathers in the constitution
and the bill of rights. The actions taken against Hashmi were unjust initially because his crime
was housing someone who might have been supplying the Taliban. Consequently, he was
subjected to the utmost cruelty of having rights and freedoms confiscated from him that even

mass murderers were allowed. He had not received a fair trial which is the promised right to all
United States citizens. In addition to this, the United States government disregarded the ideal of
innocent until proven guilty. In the end he was confined and kept from his family because of
the assumption of his involvement in the terrorist attack.
In conclusion, both the Taliban and Hashmis case, basic human rights were taken away.
In both cases there was no solid logical evidence as to the reason for the punishment
caused. While the Taliban seemed to be acting in the name of their religion, the United States
acted in the name of preventative measures against terrorism. The results of both cases seem to
be unjust and therefore immoral in the minds of Western occupants. It is seen as immoral
because justice is a moral virtue and is being denied to the Afghan women and Syed Fahad
Hashmi. Women under the rule of the Taliban were suppressed through the limited apparel they
were allowed to wear and the interactions they were allowed to have with the opposite gender.
Syed Fahad Hashmi was practically disregarded as a citizen of the United States because of the
suspicion of affiliation through an acquaintance to Al Qaeda. Western ideals seem to be against
both cases of infringement of rights, but Hashmis case makes the United States out to be a
hypocritical nation. Rights should not be confiscated in a country where they are held so dear
and are supposed to be granted to all citizens no matter their race or religion.