Amirul Mumineen Mullah Muhammad Umar Mujahid (Hafidhahullah) is the Promised Mahdi!

[RevolutionThroughReason]

UN statistics are obviously going to serve the agenda of the West which I can predict you use.

The fact of the matter is, the insurgency primarily exists due to the NATO war/occupation.

The NATO/Karzai occupation is the source of instability and the barrier to peace.

Therefore, all Afghan civilian deaths (100%) are due to the NATO war/occupation

that's shoddy logic and a truism; this contradicts your evidence based preaching and also removes responsibility from the Taliban; who by the way can choose not to use murderous tactics to as you falsely portray "resist"

furthermore merely the fact that UN statistics exist does not automatically mean they support the West. furthermore the UN Human rights comittee and UN security council are two more or less autonomous parts of the UN. you have to PROVE that that is the case that they're merely manufacturing statistics to cover their tracks.. You're assuming it as a priori. the fact you "predict" I'd use such data means that you know it exists; but merely make excuses as to why you won't face reality.

The fact is Taliban kill more Afghans. There is no other way around that. Unless you can show scientific research done by the Taliban which shows otherwise; good luck with that since the Taliban don't know how to read.

remember evidence based arguments; where is your evidence that these stats are false?

[Shah-i-Kot]

that's shoddy logic and a truism; this contradicts your evidence based preaching and also removes responsibility from the Taliban; who by the way can choose not to use murderous tactics to as you falsely portray "resist"

furthermore merely the fact that UN statistics exist does not automatically mean they support the West. furthermore the UN Human rights comittee and UN security council are two more or less autonomous parts of the UN. you have to PROVE that that is the case that they're merely manufacturing statistics to cover their tracks.. You're assuming it as a priori. the fact you "predict" I'd use such data means that you know it exists; but merely make excuses as to why you won't face reality.

The fact is Taliban kill more Afghans. There is no other way around that. Unless you can show scientific research done by the Taliban which shows otherwise; good luck with that since the Taliban don't know how to read.

remember evidence based arguments; where is your evidence that these stats are false?

Your issue is you accuse others of cherry picking, but this is exactly what you do. For example, take the interview about the Talib that you claimed said he was from Pakistan. You still carried on stating it even though you were proven wrong. Somewhere you expect people to believe that Yalda knew what she was talking about, and no one else does


It is widely known that the United Nations, based in New York, is a tool of the West. This is not something to have debate about.

The United Nations statistics in fact were proven by other reports to be wrong. It did not add up with the amount of airstrikes that occurred and resulted in civilian casualties. Nor did it add up with the night raids which in 2010 to 2011 resulted in over 1500 civilian deaths (Soros )

Your problem is that despite being proven wrong on mostly every claim you make, especially in regards to Afghanistan, you continue to do so. Take for example the story about the Taliban imposter Noor Aziz and that Tolonews interview of his which you held as truth. Despite the fact that it was widely later discovered he was an imposter, you continued to state otherwise in face of the fact.

Its called being absurd

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Your issue is you accuse others of cherry picking, but this is exactly what you do. For example, take the interview about the Talib that you claimed said he was from Pakistan. You still carried on stating it even though you were proven wrong. Somewhere you expect people to believe that Yalda knew what she was talking about, and no one else does


It is widely known that the United Nations, based in New York, is a tool of the West. This is not something to have debate about.

The United Nations statistics in fact were proven by other reports to be wrong. It did not add up with the amount of airstrikes that occurred and resulted in civilian casualties. Nor did it add up with the night raids which in 2010 to 2011 resulted in over 1500 civilian deaths (Soros )

Your problem is that despite being proven wrong on mostly every claim you make, especially in regards to Afghanistan, you continue to do so. Take for example the story about the Taliban imposter Noor Aziz and that Tolonews interview of his which you held as truth. Despite the fact that it was widely later discovered he was an imposter, you continued to state otherwise in face of the fact.

Its called being absurd

he is from Pakistan; and no there was no "proving" wrong; Barakzai was trying to look for some obscure ....very obscure semantical variation.

barakzaiabdali going 'no no no lalalala you're wrong lalalalal" is not proof.
.
why else do you think shadow governor ran away?

and the Noorul Aziz issue didn't prove he was an imposter; it just proves that no one knew who he was. as if Talibs dont go by pseudonyms. As if the Taliban wouldn't deny when someone exposes them from their ranks.

[Shah-i-Kot]

that's shoddy logic and a truism; this contradicts your evidence based preaching and also removes responsibility from the Taliban; who by the way can choose not to use murderous tactics to as you falsely portray "resist"

furthermore merely the fact that UN statistics exist does not automatically mean they support the West. furthermore the UN Human rights comittee and UN security council are two more or less autonomous parts of the UN. you have to PROVE that that is the case that they're merely manufacturing statistics to cover their tracks.. You're assuming it as a priori. the fact you "predict" I'd use such data means that you know it exists; but merely make excuses as to why you won't face reality.

The fact is Taliban kill more Afghans. There is no other way around that. Unless you can show scientific research done by the Taliban which shows otherwise; good luck with that since the Taliban don't know how to read.

remember evidence based arguments; where is your evidence that these stats are false?

Im not going to have a debate about the ridiculousness of the UN and the fact that it serves a Western agenda. There is no debate to have about that.
In other reports, it was even made clear that the UN civilian casualties attributed to the US didnt add up due to number of airstrikes, and the subsequent civilian casualties they caused. These deaths from the airstrikes were pinned on the Afghan insurgency. If you hold onto that logic, then your as biased and non-objective as the UN.

UN, a Tool in the Hands of Occupiers in Afghanistan

http://english.irib.ir/voj/analyses/in-depth-analysis/item/77015-un-a-tool-in-the-hands-of-occupiers-in-afghanistan/analyses/in-depth-analysis

According to the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, the deaths of Afghan civilians increased by 31 percent during the first half of this year in that American-occupied country.
The spike coincides with Obama’s military surge, which has deployed an additional 30,000 combat troops in the country. According to the report, there were 3,270 civilian casualties during the previous six months, with 1,270 killed and 2,000 wounded, most of them severely.
The UN mission blamed 2,470 of these civilian casualties on what it called anti-government elements, which include the Taliban as well as other forces resisting the American-led occupation, but the fact cannot be denied that most of the Afghan civilians were killed by the NATO forces.
The report presented by Staffan de Mistura, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Afghanistan, is being made public in the midst of an international propaganda campaign mounted by the Obama regime in a bid to stem the growth of antiwar sentiments in both the US and Europe.
Washington, with the full collaboration of the corporate media, is working feverishly to portray the forces fighting against the US-led occupation as criminal violators of human rights and to paint the US military as defenders of the Afghan people.
The outlines of this propaganda report were presented in a confidential CIA document drafted last March that was part of the so-called secret material made public by WikiLeaks. It warned that European unease with the Afghan war could be transformed into active and potent hostility, given an increase in both NATO troops and Afghan civilian casualties resulting from the Obama surge, thereby turning passive opposition into active calls for immediate withdrawal. In a bid to pre-empt this tendency, the UN report urged a strategic communication program. In other words, a propaganda campaign centering on civilian casualties supposedly caused by the Taliban, as well as the so-called defence of women’s rights by the American occupiers.
The bias of the UN officials was unmistakable at a press conference in Kabul, where De Mistura lectured the anti-occupation forces that if they want to be a part of a future Afghanistan, they cannot do so over the bodies of so many Afghan civilians. In the same breath, the UN representativeappealedto the US-led occupation forces to increase substantially their care in avoiding civilian casualties,since they claim that they are in Afghanistan to protect civilians.
The message meant to say that the US military has occupied Afghanistan to protect civilians, while those opposing foreign occupation are bent on killing them. It would be hard to devise a more direct justification of colonialism and imperialist aggression. However, several Afghan reporters at the press conference expressed open frustration with this approach, pointing to the recent crimes by the US military.
They countered the UN representative, stating that "there have been a number of incidents in Helmand, Nangarhar and Baghlan, where US-led occupation forces have caused many civilian casualties and in many cases they have cold-bloodedly shot to death unarmed people on the pretext of protecting themselves. The people of Afghanistan expect the UN representative to end the current crisis in their country and root out the cause of insecurity, that is, the undesirable presence of foreign occupation forces, rather than finding justifications for the terrorist acts of the hated American forces.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

he is from Pakistan; and no there was no "proving" wrong; Barakzai was trying to look for some obscure ....very obscure semantical variation.

barakzaiabdali going 'no no no lalalala you're wrong lalalalal" is not proof.
.
why else do you think shadow governor ran away?

and the Noorul Aziz issue didn't prove he was an imposter; it just proves that no one knew who he was. as if Talibs dont go by pseudonyms. As if the Taliban wouldn't deny when someone exposes them from their ranks.

Not the case... linguistically you were wrong.
What you were alleging about the translation was as wrong as you saying that the English sentence: "See Spot Run" means "See - spotted, run!"

I then provided the evidence that won your central argument with respect to the Wazir boy that Karzai pardoned as a show of good faith, strengthening your central argument.

In all honesty, wallah, I really when listening to that tape do not agree with your assessments of the translation and the general tempo and flow of his conversation.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

so basicall7y once again you're cherry picking what you accept as evidence. figures; evidence isn't your concern you're just looking for stuff to exonerate the Taliban for their crimes.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

hey dumbass
i didnt want to repond because i knwo you are anti intelligence.
you never admit to your ignorance and try to understand.
iam not responsbile for you being ignorant jackass.
the guy didnt say he is pakistani,end of the story.

no conspiracy here.

like the good poet said

it is good to be silent in the face of arrogant ignorant people.
people here refuted your non senses so stick to the facts.

Well actually I want to know as well, from your standpoint,
in your life, have you ever heard that sort of phraseology?
I've read original Rahman Baba, Ahmad Shah Baba, etc modern documents;
speak to refugees from the different regions and I have never heard people using that set of phrases to mean what scimitar says.

I asked my wife as well since she grew up there and she gave me the translation I said.

She said the the only way you could even utilize it that way would be like the following:

Pa asl, Wazir yim.
Or Pa asl yima Tarzi famil

and that is like someone in English in modern times saying:

"Wherefore art thou Romeo?"

no one would say that... instead they would say the more common:
"Why do you exist Romeo ?"

[BarakzaiAbdali]

so basicall7y once again you're cherry picking what you accept as evidence. figures; evidence isn't your concern you're just looking for stuff to exonerate the Taliban for their crimes.

lol, no the crime you accused them of, with respect to having foreign fighters (if you are of the vein that Wazirs count as foreign fighters) is one that I supported man. I just dont agree with your construction of that sentence and that particular boy's conversations meanings. I also do not trust information coming from the same NDS that has proven wrong time and time again... vascillating from saying Omar doesnt exist to Omar is dead.

I trust the CIA's assessments and the US military assessments far more than either of those sorts of sources.

Same goes for the ISI... I have little faith if any that their "leaks" are anything more than attempts to influence policy.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

By the way, this thread is a bad idea... it should go....

[RevolutionThroughReason]

lol, no the crime you accused them of, with respect to having foreign fighters (if you are of the vein that Wazirs count as foreign fighters) is one that I supported man. I just dont agree with your construction of that sentence and that particular boy's conversations meanings. I also do not trust information coming from the same NDS that has proven wrong time and time again... vascillating from saying Omar doesnt exist to Omar is dead.

I trust the CIA's assessments and the US military assessments far more than either of those sorts of sources.

Same goes for the ISI... I have little faith if any that their "leaks" are anything more than attempts to influence policy.

that was for Lynx

[RevolutionThroughReason]

de guy said altha pratha yoo which mean we are laying there in other words we are there.That does not mean im am pakistani or even from pakistan.
than he goes on to say altha der Afghanan dee 30 fisada Afghanan dey aw 70 fisada pakistanyan,so he clearly distances himself from pakistanis.

even his accent ,the way he talks is not from pukhtunkhwa let alone being a pakistani.

that's not what he said though ....watch the first two minutes; you're just parroting Resistance.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

de guy said altha pratha yoo which mean we are laying there in other words we are there.That does not mean im am pakistani or even from pakistan.
than he goes on to say altha der Afghanan dee 30 fisada Afghanan dey aw 70 fisada pakistanyan,so he clearly distances himself from pakistanis.

even his accent ,the way he talks is not from pukhtunkhwa let alone being a pakistani.

I agree with that.

but what about the first part of his sentence?


and that is like someone in English in modern times saying:

"Wherefore art thou Romeo?"

no one would say that... instead they would say the more common:
"Why do you exist Romeo ?"

Like I said, I am 100% confident in my rendering

[Shah-i-Kot]

i think the original post is ridiculous at least.
a mixture fo shia twelfth imam believe.

I also wanted to address that, and I think generally Maiwand here just got caught up. I mean no one wants the war and occupation on their homeland. Its reactionary.

It is in fact a natural psychological reaction that people start to attach extra significance to a person (even if that person did not claim it to be the case).

This happened in Sudan when a Sudanese villager rose up against the British, and whether genuinely or not, claimed to be the Mahdi in order to rally forces around him. In short, the act worked mostly because the people resented the British.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,854292,00.html

There have been dozens of claimants stating to be the Mahdi. With this thread, that is not the case.


Again, the point Im making is I think Maiwand is simply just reacting to this in that manner, and wrongly attaching greater significance to something that is not the case.

However, the argument for Pashtuns being relevant to the Hadith of the Black Flags is a strong one to make because there are Hadiths supporting this.

[Shah-i-Kot]

so basicall7y once again you're cherry picking what you accept as evidence. figures; evidence isn't your concern you're just looking for stuff to exonerate the Taliban for their crimes.

I am merely pointing out that the UN is a tool of the US/NATO hegemony.

Therefore, their reports are biased as I just showed you in another post which you can look at against where the condemn one side (the Afghan insurgency) and blame most deaths on them, and "appeal" to the NATO to prevent civilian deaths in the exact same breath.

The UN is not a neutral factor in this conflict. Their UN mandate allows the NATO mission to continue, and gives it a "legal face." So their reports, especially in regards to Afghanistan are suspect right from the start.


NATO conducted over 35,000 air missions in Afghanistan (airstrikes) in 2011. In fact, they even boasted about this. Do the math?

If you believe that their "airstrikes" did not result in the vast majority of civilian casualties, then you are biased, and doing exactly what the UN does which is exonerate NATO.

straight up!!!

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I am merely pointing out that the UN is a tool of the US/NATO hegemony.

Therefore, their reports are biased as I just showed you in another post which you can look at against where the condemn one side (the Afghan insurgency) and blame most deaths on them, and "appeal" to the NATO to prevent civilian deaths in the exact same breath.

NATO conducted over 35,000 air missions in Afghanistan (airstrikes). In fact, they even boasted about this. Do the math?

If you believe that their "airstrikes" did not result in the vast majority of civilian casualties, then you are biased.

straight up!!!

You're saying the U.N. Human Rights council is a U.S. hegemonic ploy?
\
yeah that';s why they report NATO and U.S. atrocities too . you're contradicting evidence based claims and now going into it "it's true because I said so" territory


what's absurd is if you think indiscriminate suicide bombing doesn't kill more civilians.