Amirul Mumineen Mullah Omar Mujahid (hafidhahullah) tells his lifestory in his own vo

[JAMALUDEEN]

well first of all , when you say authentic , how do you define authentic? what do you deem authentic? and why do you deem such things as authentic

because I can present sources but it's so easy to say "baaaah that's not authentic" and avoid moral accountability that way, agreed? So we have to come to an agreement on what is acceptable and what isn't.

so before we can go to that, let's establish authenticity first.

au·then·tic
   [aw-then-tik] Show IPA
adjective
1.
not false or copied; genuine; real: an authentic antique.
2.
having the origin supported by unquestionable evidence; authenticated; verified: an authentic document of the Middle Ages; an authentic work of the old master.
3.
entitled to acceptance or belief because of agreement with known facts or experience; reliable; trustworthy: an authentic report on poverty in Africa.
4.
Law . executed with all due formalities: an authentic deed.
5.
Music .
a.
(of a church mode) having a range extending from the final to the octave above. Compare plagal.
b.
(of a cadence) consisting of a dominant harmony followed by a tonic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/authentic

Here..

[ScimitarXEdge]

au·then·tic
   [aw-then-tik] Show IPA
adjective
1.
not false or copied; genuine; real: an authentic antique.
2.
having the origin supported by unquestionable evidence; authenticated; verified: an authentic document of the Middle Ages; an authentic work of the old master.
3.
entitled to acceptance or belief because of agreement with known facts or experience; reliable; trustworthy: an authentic report on poverty in Africa.
4.
Law . executed with all due formalities: an authentic deed.
5.
Music .
a.
(of a church mode) having a range extending from the final to the octave above. Compare plagal.
b.
(of a cadence) consisting of a dominant harmony followed by a tonic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/authentic

Here..

so you're going by the dictionary ....so how do you determine what isn't false and what is real? would you consider documentation of human rights organizations false or real?

[کیش]

Based from my family perepsctives who lived through the Taliban's regime, the Taliban did not rape women or ever participated in Bacha Bazi.

[ScimitarXEdge]

and your family had records of each and every case of rape and bacha bazi in afghanistan ?

[JAMALUDEEN]

so you're going by the dictionary ....so how do you determine what isn't false and what is real?

It is pretty simple, just read through the definition.

1.
not false or copied; genuine; real: an authentic antique.
2.
having the origin supported by unquestionable evidence; authenticated; verified: an authentic document of the Middle Ages; an authentic work of the old master.
3.
entitled to acceptance or belief because of agreement with known facts or experience; reliable; trustworthy: an authentic report on poverty in Africa.

So pretty much, you get your source, then you go through this checklist.

Unquestional evidence provided
Authenticated by authentic sources
Verified by consulting with authentic sources
The source has to be Reliable.
Trustworthy by looking at the history of the source,etc..etc..

Do consider the fact that during the taleban rule, there wasn't much media freedom. So i don't know how your sources could have obtained that kind of information, risking their lives..

[کیش]

and your family had records of each and every case of rape in afghanistan ?

I think having members live in Kabul throughout the 80's, 90's and 2000's, there observation are better proof then where you get your information. You yet it from bias sources, my family aren't Talibs and some were pleased they got toppled.

[ScimitarXEdge]

It is pretty simple, just read through the definition.

1.
not false or copied; genuine; real: an authentic antique.
2.
having the origin supported by unquestionable evidence; authenticated; verified: an authentic document of the Middle Ages; an authentic work of the old master.
3.
entitled to acceptance or belief because of agreement with known facts or experience; reliable; trustworthy: an authentic report on poverty in Africa.

So pretty much, you get your source, then you go through this checklist.

Unquestional evidence provided
Authenticated by authentic sources
Verified by consulting with authentic sources
The source has to be Reliable.
Trustworthy by looking at the history of the source,etc..etc..

Do consider the fact that during the taleban rule, there wasn't much media freedom.

so tell me if say you received information from a Human Rights group how would you go about determining if it's real or not real?

[ScimitarXEdge]

But you admit they DO fall for the trap and they kill civilians anyways; so they willfully kill civilians

But Syrians fight Assad specifically BECAUSE he started murdering protesters, The Taliban murder civilians just to get to NATO.

the situations are polar opposite.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I think having members live in Kabul throughout the 80's, 90's and 2000's, there observation are better proof then where you get your information. You yet it from bias sources, my family aren't Talibs and some were pleased they got toppled.

That's proof enough? We dont even know if "said relatives" even exist, you're presenting what is called hearsay.

What makes your statement not biased?

[Ghundal]

But you admit they DO fall for the trap and they kill civilians anyways; so they willfully kill civilians

But Syrians fight Assad specifically BECAUSE he started murdering protesters, The Taliban murder civilians just to get to NATO.

the situations are polar opposite.

I'm not because I am not saying or denying that NATO kills civilians.

I am saying the Taliban does too and willfully as YOU admitted, this is YOUR admission. So don't blame me for this. What you're doing is making a caricature; that's why if you noticed my posts towards you are more streamlined because I know you have no real ammo here.

Kurdish oppressing save haves of Turkey? This isnt 1998, Kurds have minority rights now; Can't say the same for the Taliban and Hazaras now can we? lol

Now you resort to lying . I did not admit shiiioot

I asked you why the foreign forces go near civilian areas ?

You answered it saying that they are trapping the Afghan insurgency to kill civilians, and that the Afghan insurgency should not fall for the trap

To which I responded

That the Wahabi Saudi backed Syrian insurgents should stop fighting Assad since he retaliatory strikes resort in mass civilian deaths, and that they should not fall for his trap. Let me go further , in the face of such a well armed enemy, they should just submit to save the lives of Syrians that Assad is provoked to kill as punishment.

They provoked Assad with violent protests.

Like you I am assigning all the blame on the insurgent.

To which you then made falsified/dishonest and outright distortions about the Afghan insurgency, stating that they don't care about the deaths of Afghan civilians because they are evil and want power .

I knowingly restated the same garbage that not even US intelligence spewed out, and rephrased in regards to the Syrian insurgency which is backed by Saudi Wahabis, and also enjoy safe havens in Kurdish oppressing Turkey.

[JAMALUDEEN]

so tell me if say you received information from a Human Rights group how would you go about determining if it's real or not real?

This is not an interview.. bro

anywho just

Go through the check list...

I question everything.. its a habit..and its a good habit as i dont fall for the chal baazi of people or oganisations.. If i'm not satisfied by its authenticity going through that check list, then there is something wrong with it..

You are entitled to your own opinion bro.. but don't go around playing with semantics or trying to convince us with statements or questions such as above, if you cannot distinguish the authenticity of your sources..

[ScimitarXEdge]

Unquestional evidence provided
Authenticated by authentic sources
Verified by consulting with authentic sources
The source has to be Reliable.
Trustworthy by looking at the history of the source,etc..etc..

Do consider the fact that during the taleban rule, there wasn't much media freedom. So i don't know how your sources could have obtained that kind of information, risking their lives..

You're speaking in circles; authenticated by authentic sources; what do you deem unquestionable and irrefutable evidence.

People risk their lives all the time ....Ok how's this , if you saw photo like this would you see this as proof ....or would you deem this a hoax?

[JAMALUDEEN]

That's proof enough? We dont even know if "said relatives" even exist, you're presenting what is called hearsay.

What makes your statement not biased?

This is so true. Soldat Amir does this a lot.

He has so many friends, relatives.. who all happen to have his views

[JAMALUDEEN]

You're speaking in circles; authenticated by authentic sources; what do you deem unquestionable and irrefutable evidence.

People risk their lives all the time ....Ok how's this , if you saw photo like this would you see this as proof ....or would you deem this a hoax?

This is not rape.

[ScimitarXEdge]

This is not an interview.. bro

anywho just

Go through the check list...

I question everything.. its a habit..and its a good habit as i dont fall for the chal baazi of people or oganisations.. If i'm not satisfied by its authenticity going through that check list, then there is something wrong with it..

You are entitled to your own opinion bro.. but don't go around playing with semantics or trying to convince us with statements or questions such as above, if you cannot distinguish the authenticity of your sources..

We have to go through what exactly YOU think of as authentic and come to an agreement so you cant go "baaaah that's not authentic" and void feeling morally accountable for Taliban injustices.


Your checklist is a bit circular; you said "authenticated by authentic sources"

How do you go about authenticating evidence and what do you deem is legitimate vs. illegitimate evidence?