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

[ScimitarXEdge]

Why not?

Because you're giving justification for immorality.

[ScimitarXEdge]

suddenly disappear again?

[Ghundal]

I answered your question, answer mine, you can't "counter" ask a question to answer a question. I'll get to this point though AFTER you answer these questions. It seems you try to avoid questions like these constantly


why do the Taliban play into it?

No buddy, you did not answer my question.

Lol at AFTER I answer your question. How old are you again?

Why is the Syrian insurgency still fighting when they know that Assad will retaliate by conducting air raids, resulting in mass civilian casualties ?

Why are they playing into Assads trap?

This is my answer. Do you know how to extrapolate ?

[Ghundal]

It's called a rhetorical question.

[ScimitarXEdge]

a rhetorical question dont requires answers and I did answer your question

I said because they want more civilians to die at Taliban hands

now why can't you give a straight response about the Taliban and why they ply into that strategy?

[Ghundal]

a rhetorical question dont requires answers and I did answer your question

I said because they want more civilians to die at Taliban hands

now why can't you give a straight response about the Taliban and why they ply into that strategy?

The answer to your question is this rhetorical question.

Why is the Syrian insurgency still fightIng, knowing that Assad will retaliate by attacking their areas, resulting in mass civilian deaths?

Why are they playing into Assad's trap? Strategy? His plans?

Why? This is my answer if you can figure it out

[ScimitarXEdge]

a rhetorical question is not an answer; it's an question that doesn't have an answer. it's more of a statement in question form.

so your question cannot "answer" a question; just by logical default.


so a direct response would be required here.

[ScimitarXEdge]

The answer to your question is this rhetorical question.

Why is the Syrian insurgency still fightIng, knowing that Assad will retaliate by attacking their areas, resulting in mass civilian deaths?

Why are they playing into Assad's trap? Strategy? His plans?

Why? This is my answer if you can figure it out

Ok I know how to outsmart you ....since this is a rhetorical question; the question itself is an answer? Which means that the Truth Value of the statement can be nullified

well the response to this statement is the "Syrians are not playing into Assad's hands", but I will explain that after you give an answer to why the Taliban play into NATO?

[ScimitarXEdge]

look everyone Kundhal is avoiding again......

[ScimitarXEdge]

"jawab-e-khamosh yek jawab ast" as Rumi once said

Case Closed

[Ghundal]

a rhetorical question dont requires answers and I did answer your question

I said because they want more civilians to die at Taliban hands

now why can't you give a straight response about the Taliban and why they ply into that strategy?

Ok I know how to outsmart you ....since this is a rhetorical question; the question itself is an answer? Which means that the Truth Value of the statement can be nullified

well the response to this statement is the "Syrians are not playing into Assad's hands", but I will explain that after you give an answer to why the Taliban play into NATO?

Skip the after tactic wrora

Respectfully, your just being ridiculous.

So the Syrian insurgency is not playing into Assads hands by fighting where Assad retaliates by attacking their areas of Homs and Hama, resulting in mass civilian deaths, but the Afghan insurgency is playing into the hands of NATO by falling into their trap of causing civilian deaths as of they don't normally cause civilian deaths.

The question remains : why is the Syrian insurgency still fighting Assad , knowing that Assads retaliatory strikes continue to cause mass civilian deaths?

If you have thought up an explanation to this question , then that may be my answer.

At the same time , you have yet to answer my questions regarding Saudi Wahabis backing and support for the Syrian insurgency , and Kurdish oppressing Turkish safe havens for the Syrian insurgency. These same Saudi Wahabis are exporting Wahabism to Afghanistan, right?

I'm not going to continue to repeat myself in a nonsensical circle with you.

[ScimitarXEdge]

No question remains; because your statement was rhetorical remember, you put yourself in that hole


The Taliban don't care for Afghans that's why they wilfully play into the NATO scheme, they care for power.

The Syrians aren't urging Assad to kill them, the Assad murders happened in response to Syrian protests ; the Insurgency happened in response to that, so the Insurgency isn't instigating Assad, but the other way around to protect the civilians; the Syrians are responding in response to BEING attacked

In the Taliban's case; NATO patrol civilian areas specifically to lead the Taliban in an attack The Taliban attack anyways willingly, The Taliban are attacking JUST because they see NATO in a civilian area, if the NATO troops were hostile TO the civilians in that situation; the Taliban would be free of blame for fighting back.

That shows the distinction ...... .....I love saying this ....Case Closed

[Ghundal]

The laugh is on you.

The point is your response to the question reeks of contradiction.

I can say the AQ/Saudi Wahabis backed/qatari backed Syrian insurgency continues to fight because they do not care about the Syrians civilians killed by Assad retaliatory strikes.

A rhetorical question is still a question and you can't answer it without revealing your contradictory stances.

So I am supposed to believe that the Afghan insurgency purposely kills civilians and does not care? Show me their Statements where they say they dont care about civilians.

So the AQ /Saudi Wahabis slave Syrian insurgency (terrorists) also does not care about civilian deaths.


On every level I have exposed your contradictions. Saying case closed is fine with me as anyone can see your contradiction right here in supporting the Saudi Wahabis backed Syrian insurgency that is also supported by the Kurdish oppressing Turkish safe havens as well as by AQ

[ScimitarXEdge]

yeah but you'd lose since Syrian insurgents protect their people not go ahead and kill their people anyways just to get to NATO

ahem and that's why the Syrians are superior to the Taliban.

al7amduilah

[Ghundal]

No question remains; because your statement was rhetorical remember, you put yourself in that hole


The Taliban don't care for Afghans that's why they wilfully play into the NATO scheme, they care for power.

The Syrians aren't urging Assad to kill them, the Assad murders happened in response to Syrian protests ; the Insurgency happened in response to that, so the Insurgency isn't instigating Assad, but the other way around to protect the civilians; the Syrians are responding in response to BEING attacked

In the Taliban's case; NATO patrol civilian areas specifically to lead the Taliban in an attack The Taliban attack anyways willingly, The Taliban are attacking JUST because they see NATO in a civilian area, if the NATO troops were hostile TO the civilians in that situation; the Taliban would be free of blame for fighting back.

That shows the distinction ...... .....I love saying this ....Case Closed

The laugh is on you.

The point is your response to the question reeks of contradiction.

I can say the AQ/Saudi Wahabis backed/qatari backed Syrian insurgency continues to fight because they do not care about the Syrians civilians killed by Assad retaliatory strikes.

A rhetorical question is still a question and you can't answer it without revealing your contradictory stances.

So I am supposed to believe that the Afghan insurgency purposely kills civilians and does not care? Show me their Statements where they say they dont care about civilians.

So the AQ /Saudi Wahabis slave Syrian insurgency (terrorists) also does not care about civilian deaths.

The Syrian insurgents should stop protesting and provoking Assad.


On every level I have exposed your contradictions. Saying case closed is fine with me as anyone can see your contradiction right here in supporting the Saudi Wahabis backed Syrian insurgency that is also supported by the Kurdish oppressing Turkish safe havens as well as by AQ

The Syrian insurgency can choose not to fight, stop protesting Assads rule, and save Syrian lives.

Your digging yourself a hole buddy

And the case certainly is not closed. You have no case at all