Quote:

If the Taleban were prepared to sit on the other side of the table and talk about a political settlement

This is quite rich, the Talibaan are the ones who weren't prepared to sit down at the table and find a political settlement?

Afghan victory hopes played down

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44764000/jpg/_44764686_carletonsmith_mod226i.jpg
Brig Carleton-Smith said the war in Afghanistan cannot be won

The UK's commander in Helmand has said Britain should not expect a "decisive military victory" in Afghanistan.

Brig Mark Carleton-Smith told the Sunday Times the aim of the mission was to ensure the Afghan army was able to manage the country on its own.

He said this could involve discussing security with the Taleban.

When international troops eventually leave Afghanistan, there may still be a "low but steady" level of rural insurgency, he conceded.

'Taken the sting out'

He said it was unrealistic to expect multinational forces would be able to wipe out armed bands of insurgents in the country.

Brig Carleton-Smith is the Commander of 16 Air Assault Brigade which has just completed its second tour of Afghanistan.

     
If the Taleban were prepared to... talk about a political settlement, then that's precisely the sort of progress that concludes insurgencies
Brig Mark Carleton-Smith

He paid tribute to his forces and told the newspaper they had "taken the sting out of the Taleban for 2008".

But he stated: "We're not going to win this war.

"It's about reducing it to a manageable level of insurgency that's not a strategic threat and can be managed by the Afghan army."

Brig Carleton-Smith said the goal was to change how debates were resolved in the country so that violence was not the first option considered.

He said: "If the Taleban were prepared to sit on the other side of the table and talk about a political settlement, then that's precisely the sort of progress that concludes insurgencies like this.

"That shouldn't make people uncomfortable."

Since the start of operations in Afghanistan in 2001, 120 UK military personnel have been killed.

Source: BBC

Of course you can't expect a decisive victory. In a traditional military sense we won that long ago. Now we can't even agree on what victory is.

In whatever sense you want to consider it, victory would mean the vanquishing or surrender of your opponent, neither of which has occurred.

But since these wars are mostly based around propaganda, it's most likely the premature procalamations of victory were announced, in the media, to give the public the feeling of victory, and keep them firmly supporting the wars. And hasn't that been a disaster.

If you mean we aren't going to engage in genocide in order to kill the last few who refuse to surrender, then yes in that sense we won't win, but it's an absurd standard to apply. Victory is usually claimed once you destroy any organised military. The difference here is not that we have failed to do that, but that we are staying behind to try to help the local people establish a new country. Defeating an army, and putting in place a system that might prevent another hostile army from emerging from it's ashes has never been considered the same thing.

freediver wrote on Oct 5^th, 2008 at 4:29pm:

If you mean we aren't going to engage in genocide in order to kill the last few who refuse to surrender, then yes in that sense we won't win, but it's an absurd standard to apply.

NATO have killed more civilians now than the taliban...


Quote:

Defeating an army, and putting in place a system that might prevent another hostile army from emerging from it's ashes has never been considered the same thing.

The Taliban are not scuttling about over western drawn borders they are running large parts of the country and most of the rest is run by equal criminals under Karzai. Troops cannot enter Kandahar anymore, its gone.

I bet you're pretty happy about this news, hey Abu?

NATO have killed more civilians now than the taliban...

What's the score?

Exotic Cheese wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 5:44pm:

NATO have killed more civilians now than the taliban... ...

Can you be more precise, how many unarmed civilians were killed by NATO and how many by Taliban?

freediver wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 5:47pm:

NATO have killed more civilians now than the taliban... What's the score?

tallowood wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 5:50pm:

Exotic Cheese wrote on Oct 6th, 2008 at 5:44pm: NATO have killed more civilians now than the taliban... ... Can you be more precise, how many unarmed civilians were killed by NATO and how many by Taliban?

Dunno but it was U.N figures that came out at the end of July

Don,

Quote:

I bet you're pretty happy about this news, hey Abu?

Are you unhappy about it? Would you prefer them to stay and more civilians to get needlessly killed?

and most of the rest is run by equal criminals under Karzai

On what grounds do you consider them 'equal criminals'?

Dunno but it was U.N figures that came out at the end of July

What were the figures?

freediver wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 5:57pm:

and most of the rest is run by equal criminals under Karzai On what grounds do you consider them 'equal criminals'?

On the grounds that the entire U.S protected Afghany government is full of crooks, war lords and drug barons.


Quote:

Dunno but it was U.N figures that came out at the end of July What were the figures?

NATO (read U.S) in 2008 kill more civilians than taliban. Don't know the numbers, a few hundred more probably, and only have time for some one liners before leaving the internet so search away.

NATO (read U.S) in 2008 kill more civilians than taliban. Don't know the numbers, a few hundred more probably, and only have time for some one liners before leaving the internet so search away.

Is that within Afghanistan alone?

How does it compare with the number of combatants killed. The Taliban don't seem very effective in a military sense. If they can't organise an attack on US forces, then they are hardly going to rack up many civilian deaths.

On the grounds that the entire U.S protected Afghany government is full of crooks, war lords and drug barons.

So why did the people vote for them?

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 5:56pm:

Don, Quote: I bet you're pretty happy about this news, hey Abu? Are you unhappy about it? Would you prefer them to stay and more civilians to get needlessly killed?

So are you happy about the news?  ;D

I'll be happy when the occupation ends, and poor Afghanis stop suffering for nothing.

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 6:52pm:

I'll be happy when the occupation ends, the taliban regains power and poor Afghanis stop suffering for nothing.

Edited for accuracy.

I've never been a fan of the Talibaan, so that's nothing but your own insertion.

Which group do you think is worse, the Taliban or Karzai's government?

Definitely the American-imposed corrupt government of the former-Unocal official.

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 8:37pm:

Definitely the American-imposed corrupt government of the former-Unocal official.

So you support the taliban?

So if the US pulled out, you would prefer the Taliban to retake control than for power to remain with the new government?

What's the matter, Abu?

http://media.threadless.com/product/200x210/1059-minizoom.jpg

Don,

As I said:

Quote:

I've never been a fan of the Talibaan, so that's nothing but your own insertion.

Perhaps you should be questioning Brig Carleton-Smith, he's the one who is hoping that the Talibaan will sit down at the table to hammer out a political solution.. What else could this mean other than a power-sharing arrangement of some sort?

Unfortunately this news does not help anyone.




"AUSTRALIAN special forces soldiers may have inadvertently shot dead Afghan district governor Rozi Khan, defence head Angus Houston has admitted.

The Australian Defence Force (ADF) was working with the governor's tribe to ensure his death had no negative consequences for operations in the region.

Afghanistan war 'unwinnable'

Air Chief Marshal Houston says a very confused situation is still under investigation.

“But, you know, it certainly looks that way,” he said when asked whether Australian troops had shot the governor.

“But we don't know at this stage. We really need to complete our investigation.”

In the incident on September 18, Australian special forces soldiers came under fire during a patrol in the Oruzgan district capital Tarin Kowt.

Defence promptly confirmed that Chora district governor and tribal leader, Rozi Khan, was among those killed but said it was not possible at that time to confirm if he was killed by ADF fire.

News reports indicated Governor Khan and his bodyguards had been mistaken for Taliban insurgents.

Australian troops fired back in self-defence and it appeared they acted in accordance with their rules of engagement and their actions were appropriate for the situation, Defence said.

Immediately afterwards, Defence launched an inquiry as did the International Security Assistance Force and Afghan authorities.

Air Chief Marshal Houston said he had been briefed on the incident and was familiar with the details.

“I am very happy with how we are managing the incident,” he said.

“We deeply regret his death. We are working very closely with his tribe to ensure that this has no far-reaching negative effects on our operations in the province of Oruzgan.”


http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24460515-2703,00.html

Are cracks appearing in the great alliance of freedom against barbarism and uncivilised terror?

So now both a UK and US leader in this war have declared their intention to sit down at the table with the 'terrorists' and negotiate. I thought the West doesn't negotiate with terrorists?

-----


US renounces Afghan 'defeatism'

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates has rejected as "defeatist" a comment by a top British commander in Afghanistan that the war there cannot be won.

Mr Gates said despite challenges, there was no reason to think success could not be achieved in the long run.

But he endorsed the recommendation by Brig Mark Carleton-Smith that a resolution to the conflict would require negotiations with the Taleban.

Earlier, Nato-led forces said they also supported opening talks with militants.

Brig Richard Blanchette, the spokesman for the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), said there could be no military solution.

The UN Special Representative in Afghanistan, Kai Eide, made similar comments.

"We all know that we cannot win it militarily. It has to be won through political means. That means political engagement," he said.

'Reinforcement'

Speaking on board a flight to Budapest to meet Nato defence ministers, Mr Gates rejected the assertion made by Brig Carleton-Smith that a "decisive military victory" should not be expected.

"While we face significant challenges in Afghanistan, there certainly is no reason to be defeatist or to underestimate the opportunities to be successful in the long run," he said.

     
If the Taleban were prepared to... talk about a political settlement, then that's precisely the sort of progress that concludes insurgencies
Brig Mark Carleton-Smith

'Managing' the insurgency

But Mr Gates agreed that part of the solution to the conflict would involve talks with members of the Taleban who are willing to work with the Afghan government.

"What we have seen in Iraq applies in Afghanistan," he added, referring to a successful programme to persuade Sunni Arab tribesmen who had previously fought against the government to turn against al-Qaeda in Iraq.

"Part of the solution is strengthening the Afghan security forces. Part of the solution is reconciliation with people who are willing to work with the Afghan government."

Mr Gates said he would again press Nato members to send more troops to Afghanistan during the meeting in Hungary.

"I want to make sure that everybody understands that the increase in US forces is not seen as replacements for Nato contributions, but as reinforcement," he said.

'Political settlement'

On Sunday, Brig Carleton-Smith, the British commander in Helmand province, said the aim of the Nato-led mission was to ensure the Afghan army would be able to manage the country on its own.

Brig Carleton-Smith said the war in Afghanistan cannot be won

He said this could involve discussing security with the Taleban.

When international troops eventually leave Afghanistan, there may still be a "low but steady" level of rural insurgency, he conceded.

He said it was unrealistic to expect that multinational forces would be able to wipe out armed bands of insurgents in the country.

"If the Taleban were prepared to sit on the other side of the table and talk about a political settlement, then that's precisely the sort of progress that concludes insurgencies like this," he told the Sunday Times newspaper. "That shouldn't make people uncomfortable."

The BBC's Martin Patience in Kabul says Brig Carleton-Smith's comments echo a view commonly-held, if rarely aired, by British military and diplomatic officials in Afghanistan.

Many believe certain legitimate elements of the Taleban represent the positions of the Afghan people and so should be a part of the country's future, says our correspondent.

Quote:

I thought the West doesn't negotiate with terrorists?

I thought you said they weren't terrorists.

jordan484 wrote on Oct 9^th, 2008 at 4:56pm:

Quote: I thought the West doesn't negotiate with terrorists? I thought you said they weren't terrorists.

You have won the spot the tongue-in-cheek comment game! Top of the class!

Exotic, it was a little too subtle for Jordan. Nevermind.

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 7^th, 2008 at 9:36pm:

Are cracks appearing in the great alliance of freedom against barbarism and uncivilised terror? So now both a UK and US leader in this war have declared their intention to sit down at the table with the 'terrorists' and negotiate. I thought the West doesn't negotiate with terrorists?

Excited Abu?  ;D

ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Oct 9^th, 2008 at 9:27pm:

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 7th, 2008 at 9:36pm: Are cracks appearing in the great alliance of freedom against barbarism and uncivilised terror? So now both a UK and US leader in this war have declared their intention to sit down at the table with the 'terrorists' and negotiate. I thought the West doesn't negotiate with terrorists? Excited Abu?  ;D

The Muslims, being supremeely inward looking and semi-ignorant of all that is beeyond islam, have failed for the last 800 years in every major undertaking precisely because they do not undertsand what they are facing.
If this particular representive of world domination is excited, it is due to the same reasons.

Islam's only idea of renewa, ever, l is to go back and be like it was 1400 years ago. That is not even stupid. That's manic.

Quote:

have failed for the last 800 years in every major undertaking

Quite ironic that during that 800 years, we managed to conquer the crown jewel of European Christendom, the city of Constantinople. capital of the entire Orthodox branch of Christianity... but nevermind keep deluding yourself that it was a failure... :)

Oops, sorry, 550 years then.

HUUUGE difference.

Quote:

NATO announced Friday its troops would from now on target Afghanistan's opium trade directly in an effort to cut off hundreds of millions of dollars of drug money financing the Taliban insurgency.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5itoN5PfNVGFCaH-6STAPLxUtpYtA

Good.

Doesn't sound quite correct. The Talibaan banned opium farming, and only under the American-installed Karzai government has opium farming flourished again.

Quote:

Doesn't sound quite correct. The Talibaan banned opium farming, and only under the American-installed Karzai government has opium farming flourished again.

Quite right Abu.  Opium farming is now out of control - and exports have increased by some unbelievable amount - 1,000% or similar.  The Taliban are no doubt financing their weapons through this trade now - but prior to the fruitless search for the invisible Osama - the rest of the world wasn't exposed to unlimited top grade heroine and cocaine.  

No-one has ever won a war in Afghanistan.  Maybe with this global meltdown - the US will retreat and make a deal with the "terrorists".  They really have no alternative - they've run out of money.  

Quote:

The Taliban are no doubt financing their weapons through this trade now

What would lead you to say "no doubt" mantra? Do you mean by that, there's no actual evidence they are, but no doubt they most likely in all probability could be remotely suspected of doing that?

During their early days in power, the Talibaan did not prevent opium growing, but after being shown that Islamically it's not permissible (if it's known it will be used for recreational drugs, and not medicine), they began a serious campaign to stamp it out, and succeeded, I can't see them going back on that so easily.

Quote:

No-one has ever won a war in Afghanistan.

Ya'qub bin Laith as-Saffar had no problem winning a war there. The Western powers have never been able to properly conquer it though.


Quote:

Maybe with this global meltdown - the US will retreat and make a deal with the "terrorists".

See my thread, also in the "Thinking Globally" section, about Talibaan talks, the US has already begun the process, through their loyal servants the Saudis.

Quote:

What would lead you to say "no doubt" mantra? Do you mean by that, there's no actual evidence they are, but no doubt they most likely in all probability could be remotely suspected of doing that?

Our leaders and the media tell us they are doing this.  There may be no evidence, but it sounds feasible enough.  Unless they're getting their funding from another source - and in all honesty - why wouldn't many angry Taliban have infiltrated the opium trade - how else do they derive an income to support their work? Probably working in conjunction with the US.  Who knows?


Quote:

Ya'qub bin Laith as-Saffar had no problem winning a war there. The Western powers have never been able to properly conquer it though.

Correction then - only Ya'qub bin Laith as-Saffar has ever easily won a war in Afghanistan?  

Alex The Macedonian Greek beat them up and so did the Mongolian fella.
Actually everybody beats them up but when winners go back home Afghanis beat up each other.
Anyway it is good that NATO going to have a go against opium traders. If Taliban is really against drugs then they should cheer them up and if they are not than the whole world will know what Taliban is after.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the CIA caught red handed dealing cocaine to raise money for arms shipments to Iran. (Contra deals).

Really, the US has a long history of using drug money to fund covert operations and mini-wars..this is just the sort of thing they thrive on.

Don't fall for the propaganda people....everything that is happening in Afghanistan is occuring under the watchful eyes of the US/coalition.

If the heroin trade is roaring in Afghanistan (and it is) then  you can be assured that much of that money is probably being used by the US to bribe Afghan farmers for support.

Lets not forget that the Taliban put many farmers off side by stopping the opium trade to begin with...I have no doubt that the US would of has used this to garner support amongst the population.

Lestat wrote on Oct 11^th, 2008 at 9:03pm:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the CIA caught red handed dealing cocaine to raise money for arms shipments to Iran. (Contra deals). Really, the US has a long history of using drug money to fund covert operations and mini-wars..this is just the sort of thing they thrive on. Don't fall for the propaganda people....everything that is happening in Afghanistan is occuring under the watchful eyes of the US/coalition. If the heroin trade is roaring in Afghanistan (and it is) then  you can be assured that much of that money is probably being used by the US to bribe Afghan farmers for support. Lets not forget that the Taliban put many farmers off side by stopping the opium trade to begin with...I have no doubt that the US would of has used this to garner support amongst the population.

During soviet occupation and when they become sole rulers in 1996 they used opium trade to finance themselves. Yes they slowed the trade in 2000 but did not stop it. Now they need  finance again. In that respect Taliban is not different from CIA.

tallowood wrote on Oct 11^th, 2008 at 9:15pm:

Lestat wrote on Oct 11th, 2008 at 9:03pm: Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the CIA caught red handed dealing cocaine to raise money for arms shipments to Iran. (Contra deals). Really, the US has a long history of using drug money to fund covert operations and mini-wars..this is just the sort of thing they thrive on. Don't fall for the propaganda people....everything that is happening in Afghanistan is occuring under the watchful eyes of the US/coalition. If the heroin trade is roaring in Afghanistan (and it is) then  you can be assured that much of that money is probably being used by the US to bribe Afghan farmers for support. Lets not forget that the Taliban put many farmers off side by stopping the opium trade to begin with...I have no doubt that the US would of has used this to garner support amongst the population. During soviet occupation and when they become sole rulers in 1996 they used opium trade to finance themselves. Yes they slowed the trade in 2000 but did not stop it. Now they need  finance again. In that respect Taliban is not different from CIA.

DO you have any evidence of this...besides western media and propaganda.

Remember it wasn't that long ago when we were given snazzy satelite pictures and diagrams of Saddams WMD. The media fed us with 'evidence' 24/7 that Iraq was stock piling missiles. And we all know how that turned out.

And how can we forget the 45 minute claims...

And lets not forget the now discredited claim in 91 that Iraqi soldiers were stealing incubators from Kuwait...with the now infamous daughter of the Kuwaiti embassy making claims which were found to be lies..under the watchful eye of the US propaganda machine.

For years..all we have been fed by the media is how horrible, oppressive and tyranical the Taliban rule was..especially to woman. Yet when a highly intelligent and fiercely feminist femal journalist was captured by the Taliban, Yvonne Ridley, when released she made the famous quote that 'I would of much rathered be hostage to the Taliban then to the US'...and in addition, she actually converted to Islam a year later. Reading her books really made me wonder...are we being told the truth. Once again, the facts indicate that we are not.

Why are Afghan civilians rejecting the occupation and beginning to support the Taliban. It is a fact, that a military insurgency of this nature cannot be successful without civilian support. Fact is...if the Taliban were as bad as the media has portrayed, then they would have zero support from the population. And if they had zero support, then they would have been obliterated long ago. This is a fact.

The Vietcong was only succesful because of the support of the civilians...without this support they would have been defeated. The taliban are no different...without civilian support they would have been defeated long ago.

Same with Hezbollah...much of their power is derived from the support they receive from the Shi'ite population in South Beirut. Likewise Hamas in Gaza...it is the ground swell popularity which gives organisations strength. Without it they are nothing. The taliban are no different...the fact that they have not only resisted for 5 years probably the greatest military machine known to man...but now coalition miliatary and political leaders are talking about 'losing' this war...tells me that quite clearly the Taliban have far more support from the general populace then we are led to believe. Which leads to the next question...why do they have this support, if they are as bad as we are to believe. There is only logical conclusion...what we are being told is not the truth.

The US has admitted that it is throwing money at the 'war of hearts and minds'....what do you actually think that means. Its propaganda..with another name.

Why are we so willing to fall for the same lies again and again. Its time we stop believing what we read...and start trusting our eyes, and what we see.

Personally...I like to read between the lies. See what is happening, not what is being reported. The fact is that under Taliban rule, opium production was halted (or close too), under Karzai and the US occupation, it is now a booming industry. These are the facts....all these reports that the Taliban are using opium now to fund the war effort, without any evidence, is nothing but propaganda from a media which has been found in the past...to be wrong.

Quote:

Remember it wasn't that long ago when we were given snazzy satelite pictures and diagrams of Saddams WMD. The media fed us with 'evidence' 24/7 that Iraq was stock piling missiles. And we all know how that turned out.

Come on Lestat, are you sure this wasn't true? I saw the satellite pictures myself on the 6:00 news, of a truck parked on the side of the road. Looked clearly like it was a mobile nuclear weapons facility to me!  ;D

Quote:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the CIA caught red handed dealing cocaine to raise money for arms shipments to Iran. (Contra deals). Really, the US has a long history of using drug money to fund covert operations and mini-wars..this is just the sort of thing they thrive on. Don't fall for the propaganda people....everything that is happening in Afghanistan is occuring under the watchful eyes of the US/coalition. If the heroin trade is roaring in Afghanistan (and it is) then  you can be assured that much of that money is probably being used by the US to bribe Afghan farmers for support. Lets not forget that the Taliban put many farmers off side by stopping the opium trade to begin with...I have no doubt that the US would of has used this to garner support amongst the population.

I read about the CIA a few years ago being involved in the drug trade and arms supply - they were incredibly corrupt.  The above scenario sounds about right Lestat.


Quote:

I saw the satellite pictures myself on the 6:00 news, of a truck parked on the side of the road. Looked clearly like it was a mobile nuclear weapons facility to me!

Those satellite photos were so fake - I don't know how so many could have fallen for them.  When Powell announced to the world they were sheds holding WMD's - he was lying and he knew it.  Then we had Bush & Howard repeat the same thing with such insincerity.  The world will be a better place with those two gone.  

The Iraq War was planned years before 9/11 - they just needed an excuse - a pathetic one at that.

Lestat wrote on Oct 11^th, 2008 at 9:33pm:

tallowood wrote on Oct 11th, 2008 at 9:15pm: Lestat wrote on Oct 11th, 2008 at 9:03pm: Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the CIA caught red handed dealing cocaine to raise money for arms shipments to Iran. (Contra deals). Really, the US has a long history of using drug money to fund covert operations and mini-wars..this is just the sort of thing they thrive on. Don't fall for the propaganda people....everything that is happening in Afghanistan is occuring under the watchful eyes of the US/coalition. If the heroin trade is roaring in Afghanistan (and it is) then  you can be assured that much of that money is probably being used by the US to bribe Afghan farmers for support. Lets not forget that the Taliban put many farmers off side by stopping the opium trade to begin with...I have no doubt that the US would of has used this to garner support amongst the population. During soviet occupation and when they become sole rulers in 1996 they used opium trade to finance themselves. Yes they slowed the trade in 2000 but did not stop it. Now they need  finance again. In that respect Taliban is not different from CIA. DO you have any evidence of this...besides western media and propaganda. ....

The whole thread started based on info from western media and your statement about CIA and story with WMD had come from the same.

But it does not matter. As was said before

Quote:

Anyway it is good that NATO going to have a go against opium traders. If Taliban is really against drugs then they should cheer them up and if they are not than the whole world will know what Taliban is after.

Or generally speaking those who don't support NATO in it's drive against heroin trade are in favour of the trade.

Drugs and War go hand in hand, the Vietnam war saw the proliferation of Heroin onto society,and the Latin American revolutionaries were using Cocaine to fund themselves.
As far as definitive proof of CIA involvement, well we have seen statements from ex members which certainly seems to verify it, but I don't know how definitive that is.

I know that when I was in the UK, I knew a truck driver who used to pick up shipments of cocaine from the US air force base in Germany, and bring them back to the UK for distribution.
Whether it was a "private" deal arranged by individuals soldiers wanting to make a buck, or if it was a part of an intelligence agency operation, sanctioned from the top, I couldn't say, but I have always believed it was.

The IRA used to be big drug smugglers also, weapons cost money, drugs get them that money.

I seriously doubt that many terrorist groups "moral code", would preclude them from indulging in drug trafficking.

Quote:

I seriously doubt that many terrorist groups "moral code", would preclude them from indulging in drug trafficking.

As was already noted, the world's largest terrorist group has indeed been involved in drug trafficking.

If however, as I suspect, you are referring to Muslim freedom fighters, then I highly doubt it. The Muslims are generally self-funded when it comes to these kinds of things, in oder to keep the independance of their movements from foreign entities, and in the case of drugs, they do not sell them as it violates shari'ah.

tallowood wrote on Oct 12^th, 2008 at 8:59am:

The whole thread started based on info from western media and your statement about CIA and story with WMD had come from the same. But it does not matter. As was said before Quote: Anyway it is good that NATO going to have a go against opium traders. If Taliban is really against drugs then they should cheer them up and if they are not than the whole world will know what Taliban is after. Or generally speaking those who don't support NATO in it's drive against heroin trade are in favour of the trade.

Difference being that there is actually solid evidence proving that the CIA has dealed drugs to finance military operations (Contra) and that the US and media lied about WMD.

Remember the footage in the 80's of the US miliatry commander (can't remember his name) confessing to the Contra arms deal during the Regaen years. This is evidence...

And 4 years on, no WMD have been found in Iraq, this once again is evidence that the US was spreading propaganda and using the element of fear to garner support for the invasion of Iraq amongst the people of the world.

In regards to the Taliban using heroin money to fund its war effort, their is absolutely no evidence of this besides some media reports, and claims made by a nation which has been found in the past time and time again to have spread lies.

If you have any other evidence, I am all ears.

mozzaok wrote on Oct 12^th, 2008 at 10:07am:

I seriously doubt that many terrorist groups "moral code", would preclude them from indulging in drug trafficking.

Look, I'm not saying that the Taliban are definately NOT trafficking drugs, because quite frankly, we can't really know either way. However, as I have said ealier, currently, all the evidence and past actions would suggest that they do not use drug money to fund their operations.

When they were in power, they almost completely stopped opium export, when the Northern Alliance/US and Karzai govt. regained power, the opium export industry began again. This is all we really know, which is an indication that it is in fact the US, not the Taliban which is using the opium trade to advance their military operations.

We should just build a wall around the ME and associated nations, have nothing to do with them  and leave 'em to it.

Oh and Lestat...  just google Taliban and drugs  ::)

Grendel wrote on Oct 12^th, 2008 at 1:32pm:

We should just build a wall around the ME and associated nations, have nothing to do with them  and leave 'em to it. Oh and Lestat...  just google Taliban and drugs  ::)

oh how cute...the ignorant masses believe that evidence constitutes 'google'.

Thanks for your contribution Grendel...but I think its best you let the adults discuss this one.

Oh dear so nothing on the Net is factual or true...

ROTFLMAO...   :D

Grendel wrote on Oct 12^th, 2008 at 2:49pm:

Oh dear so nothing on the Net is factual or true... ROTFLMAO...   :D

It doesn't surprise me that you cannot distinguish between fact and propaganda.

So you go ahead and use the media and google sites to form your opinions....I like to use my own mind..but hey...each to their own I guess.

I understand that some people are incapable of forming their own idea's and opinions...I suspect that you fall into this category.

I have already discussed this earlier with adults, so I don't expect one with 'limited' brain capacity to understand...but perhaps you can give it a go.

You should try to actually look at the facts, and not the words of some journalist or 'expert' to form your opinions.

DWMT moron.

Grendel don't insult other member.

The Talibaan banned opium farming, and only under the American-installed Karzai government has opium farming flourished again.

There has always been opium farming there. Now that the taliban need more money they are pushing up output.

During their early days in power, the Talibaan did not prevent opium growing, but after being shown that Islamically it's not permissible (if it's known it will be used for recreational drugs, and not medicine), they began a serious campaign to stamp it out, and succeeded, I can't see them going back on that so easily.

LOL, they had to be told it was Islamically wrong to flood the market with cheap opium? Maybe someone should have told them it is wrong to support terrorists.

How successful were they?

Why are Afghan civilians rejecting the occupation and beginning to support the Taliban. It is a fact, that a military insurgency of this nature cannot be successful without civilian support. Fact is...if the Taliban were as bad as the media has portrayed, then they would have zero support from the population. And if they had zero support, then they would have been obliterated long ago. This is a fact.

So the fact that local terrorists like Alquaida prop up the taliban means they are actually nice people?

The fact is that under Taliban rule, opium production was halted (or close too), under Karzai and the US occupation, it is now a booming industry. These are the facts....

I thought the US didn't have control over the entire place? WOuldn't it be lack of effective government due to the war that is the real cause?

all these reports that the Taliban are using opium now to fund the war effort, without any evidence, is nothing but propaganda from a media which has been found in the past...to be wrong.

Do you nexpect them to be filing tax returns or something?

When they were in power, they almost completely stopped opium export, when the Northern Alliance/US and Karzai govt. regained power, the opium export industry began again. This is all we really know, which is an indication that it is in fact the US, not the Taliban which is using the opium trade to advance their military operations.

No, it's an indication that there is a war on. That's all. We know how the US is funding it's side. But let's see, the taliban has no obvious source of income, there is opium growing everywhere, the taliban is somehow funding a war. Hmmmm can't quite join the dots here....

Lestat wrote on Oct 12^th, 2008 at 3:36pm:

I like to use my own mind..but hey...each to their own I guess.

Yes, make do. It may not be much but it's yours. I admire that.


(You were asking for it, posting such boasts. :P :P)

lol fd...  yes unfortunately Lestat and others only show half the story.


BTW Lestat The Taliban aren't in power now, so how do you think they are funding their armed resistance and attempt to get back in power?

Honestly...  ::)

As for calling a moron a moron fd...  sorry but I call a spade a spade... who else would crap on about the media and facts and then use the same type of sources to inform itself.  I'm sick of pseudo-intellectuals insulting others and failing to put forth real facts or address real argument with substantive rebuttal.  So do unto others I say, if they cant be bothered to read the sources provided and apologise or admit others are right then so be it.

Unless of course Lestat is actually in Afghanistan and is and Afghani and can tell us exactly what is going on there and not just on the ground propaganda. he should put up or shut up.

Oh and unlike myself who actually knows thins 1st hand about ON and uses real knowledge and facts to back my opinions etc, etc, etc...

Puhlese  you people are a joke.

Lestat wrote on Oct 12^th, 2008 at 3:36pm:

Grendel wrote on Oct 12th, 2008 at 2:49pm: Oh dear so nothing on the Net is factual or true... ROTFLMAO...   :D It doesn't surprise me that you cannot distinguish between fact and propaganda. So you go ahead and use the media and google sites to form your opinions....I like to use my own mind..but hey...each to their own I guess. I understand that some people are incapable of forming their own idea's and opinions...I suspect that you fall into this category. I have already discussed this earlier with adults, so I don't expect one with 'limited' brain capacity to understand...but perhaps you can give it a go. You should try to actually look at the facts, and not the words of some journalist or 'expert' to form your opinions.

All this talk about distinguishing between 'propaganda' and 'facts' Lestat.

How are you 100% sure that the information you got to form your opinions on Afghanistan and other Middle Eastern mumbo jumbo wasn't propaganda as well? After all, unless you went to the Middle-East yourself and experienced all these 'facts' your talking about first-hand, you're really just forming your opinions with secondary sources aren't you?

What's the difference between 'reliable' information and 'unreliable' information anyway? Can you give me a couple of examples of a 'good source' and a 'bad source?' How are you forming your opinions better than the rest of us? What's your secret?

Quote:

All this talk about distinguishing between 'propaganda' and 'facts' Lestat.

Here's the difference. CIA agents have admitted they sold drugs to fund wars.

Talibaan have denied they do this.

Under Talibaan rule, opium farming was virtually wiped out.

Under Karzai (Read: US) rule, opium farming has spread.

Now from all the propaganda, ahem I mean news, I've read, the US won the war right? And they control the country right? And they've just cornered OBL and Mullah Omar off in a small border region next to Pakistan... right? So how can they blame the Talibaan for the proliferation of opium farming.

Google is as legit a source for info than any other. Everyones opinion is valid...

Agreed Oceanz, it's merely a tool for aggregating information, and that information can be as valid or invalid as any other medium of information.

But when someone's only defense in an argument is "Just google Talibaan and drugs", it's quite obvious they have no argument to make.

rotflmao

Well gee does that mean the articles it produces that agree with you are also wrong...

you people make me laugh  ;D ;D ;D

There are very valid sources of information o the Net.

You just don't like the ones that show you up to being a world class goober.

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 10:43am:

Agreed Oceanz, it's merely a tool for aggregating information, and that information can be as valid or invalid as any other medium of information. But when someone's only defense in an argument is "Just google Talibaan and drugs", it's quite obvious they have no argument to make.

dont be redicluos Abu_ to go down that road means 90% of forums would cease to be...the main source of info is a source/paraphrase from Google when discussing topic s like this.

Everyone gets their info from some form of media or another, wether those sources are correct or not is not for any of you too know..you too up to and inlcuding everyone who has commented so far has used information provided by media..

So I suppose you are all " in the know" huh ?..all been to Afghaganistan, know a man who knows a man who has links to blah blah    ::)?  see  how arrogant/silly you sound?

Your all just having a lend if you think anyone believes you have the superior knowledge/intellect here.

grendel is being no more offensive that some of this lot FD.


Abu_ Im suprised at your arrogance.

I'm not.

OceanZ,

I don't think you read 50% of my post:


Quote:

Agreed Oceanz, it's merely a tool for aggregating information, and that information can be as valid or invalid as any other medium of information.

You can call me arrogant and 'redicluos' all you like.

As for calling a moron a moron fd...  sorry but I call a spade a spade...

Not if you want to remain a member here.

Funny...  but I don't see that as a threat,

Suggest you tighten the reigns on what others say then eh.

Any meaningful material that you google usually isn't there - thanks to subtle, or maybe not so subtle censorship.  You have to go by the information which makes the most sense to you.

In my view the CIA are working with the Taliban - if not blatantly - they are turning a blind eye.  The opium trade benefits both of them.

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 12:37pm:

OceanZ, I don't think you read 50% of my post: Quote: Agreed Oceanz, it's merely a tool for aggregating information, and that information can be as valid or invalid as any other medium of information. You can call me arrogant and 'redicluos' all you like.

ok..deal. Yes i did read all your post..but ending it with an insult cancelled the rest out..sorry.

And if a typo is all you have , then you dont have much.


you do have this however..


Abu-

Quote:

Yeh traditionally Aussies couldn't have cared less about this patriotism crap that they're now mimmicking from the Yanks.

the timley reply-


Quote:

This from the Aussie bloke who dresses and grows a beard to mimic an alien culture.

when put like that.?  

sounds like your not even an authentic muslim..yet you hold yourself up as authority.

mantra wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 1:22pm:

Any meaningful material that you google usually isn't there - thanks to subtle, or maybe not so subtle censorship.  You have to go by the information which makes the most sense to you. In my view the CIA are working with the Taliban - if not blatantly - they are turning a blind eye.  The opium trade benefits both of them.

I think the point being made mantra, and i know you get it ( and Im sorry if I sound patronising)..is ..how is your veiw/opinion formed ?..we are all subject to censorship in all its forms..which means all of the opinions offered here are simply based on that censorship..noone here has 1st hand info on this problem..so their veiw no more valid than mine..no matter how uninformed i sound..so why is it a poster is shot down in flames and told to "get lost" because they dont like what he has to say..he has a right to say it regardless.

We can only make sense of already censored material..which means we are posting based on half lies anyway.

Im done .

Quote:

Any meaningful material that you google usually isn't there - thanks to subtle, or maybe not so subtle censorship.  You have to go by the information which makes the most sense to you. In my view the CIA are working with the Taliban - if not blatantly - they are turning a blind eye.  The opium trade benefits both of them. I think the point being made mantra, and i know you get it ( and Im sorry if I sound patronising)..is ..how is your veiw/opinion formed ?..we are all subject to censorship in all its forms..which means all of the opinions offered here are simply based on that censorship..noone here has 1st hand info on this problem..so their veiw no more valid than mine..no matter how uninformed i sound..so why is it a poster is shot down in flames and told to "get lost" because they dont like what he has to say..he has a right to say it regardless. We can only make sense of already censored material..which means we are posting based on half lies anyway. Im done .

Of course no-one can offer first hand information on anything unless they're there.

I think I'm missing something though.  You were defensive with Abu and I couldn't see why - he wasn't rude to you.  No-one has told you to get lost.

A lot of my opinions are confirmed from older articles that tie in with today's bits and pieces on the media.  It's still only guesswork - although quite a few people (including moi) knew a few years ago that what is happening today was going to happen.  

Your arguments are valid - who's being rude to you?  :-?

OceanZ,


Quote:

ok..deal. Yes i did read all your post..but ending it with an insult cancelled the rest out..sorry.

I'm sorry, you've really lost me there, can you show me where the insult is in the remainder of my post, reproduced below to spare you scrolling back up:

"But when someone's only defense in an argument is "Just google Talibaan and drugs", it's quite obvious they have no argument to make."


Quote:

And if a typo is all you have , then you dont have much.

I just reproduced your words (actually they were the closest things to insults between us that I've seen so far) as you typed them.


Quote:

you do have this however.. [quote]Yeh traditionally Aussies couldn't have cared less about this patriotism crap that they're now mimmicking from the Yanks.

the timley reply-

Quote:

This from the Aussie bloke who dresses and grows a beard to mimic an alien culture.

when put like that.?  
sounds like your not even an authentic muslim..yet you hold yourself up as authority. [/quote]

I'm not following this either... can you put it in simpler terms for me? What exactly did you derive out of these comments you've posted? That I'm not an authentic Muslim?

It is fairly obvious that as "We're not going to win this war" was told to us by shamelessly lying media propaganda that the truth is We have won the war.

I also had read about Taliban fighting against drug trade from the same media, BTW.  8-)

.

Lestat wrote on Oct 12^th, 2008 at 1:42pm:

Grendel wrote on Oct 12th, 2008 at 1:32pm: We should just build a wall around the ME and associated nations, have nothing to do with them  and leave 'em to it. Oh and Lestat...  just google Taliban and drugs  ::) oh how cute...the ignorant masses believe that evidence constitutes 'google'. Thanks for your contribution Grendel...but I think its best you let the adults discuss this one.

I wasnt being told to get lost mantra..this person was .The comment above from Lestat  was that  necessary?

They dont own the topic..anyone can join in, they obviously think they own it however..

He was not being inflammatory just trying to add to the topic.

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 3:59pm:

OceanZ, Quote: ok..deal. Yes i did read all your post..but ending it with an insult cancelled the rest out..sorry. I'm sorry, you've really lost me there, can you show me where the insult is in the remainder of my post, reproduced below to spare you scrolling back up: "But when someone's only defense in an argument is "Just google Talibaan and drugs", it's quite obvious they have no argument to make." The above and shame on you i have to point it out Abu_ [quote]And if a typo is all you have , then you dont have much.

I just reproduced your words (actually they were the closest things to insults between us that I've seen so far) as you typed them. ::)


Below..your words from another thread

Quote:

you do have this however.. [quote]Yeh traditionally Aussies couldn't have cared less about this patriotism crap that they're now mimmicking from the Yanks.

Below is from Soren pointing out your charade as a pretend muslim- if its not a charade why does he add "mimic"...? Goes to the point that you are no more of an authority or have any more right to comment in here on this topic than anyone else

Quote:

This from the Aussie bloke who dresses and grows a beard to mimic an alien culture.

when put like that.?  
sounds like your not even an authentic muslim..yet you hold yourself up as authority. [/quote]

I'm not following this either... can you put it in simpler terms for me? What exactly did you derive out of these comments you've posted? That I'm not an authentic Muslim?[/quote]


I do apolagise tho' Abu_ for singling you out of the 3..that wasnt fair.

I think your a nice person overall.

OceanZ,


Quote:

The above and shame on you i have to point it out Abu_

The above was about Grendel, not you.


Quote:

Below is from Soren pointing out your charade as a pretend muslim- if its not a charade why does he add "mimic"...?

Soren is angry with me because I was born into the mighty lineage of Brittania, but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam. From what I can gather, soren is not Anglo, but an Anglophile, and therefore he covets that which I willfully rejected, so please excuse his bitterness. Kind of like how the Borg despised Data, because he strove to be more human, when he was already the ultimate thing they strove to be, fully machine. (If you're not a Star Trek fan, just disregard that last bit).


Quote:

I think your a nice person overall.

Thanks, that makes up for it. No hard feelings then?

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 6:07pm:

OceanZ, Quote: The above and shame on you i have to point it out Abu_ The above was about Grendel, not you.Yes but its not just about grendel is it..this has happened to many of us..its about freedom of speech.. [quote]Below is from Soren pointing out your charade as a pretend muslim- if its not a charade why does he add "mimic"...?

Soren is angry with me because I was born into the mighty lineage of Brittania, but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam.I kind of got that too , but thats your choice From what I can gather, soren is not Anglo, but an Anglophile, and therefore he covets that which I willfully rejected, so please excuse his bitterness. Kind of like how the Borg despised Data, because he strove to be more human, when he was already the ultimate thing they strove to be, fully machine. (If you're not a Star Trek fan, just disregard that last bit). no im not a trekkie..but thats my loss perhaps..?


Quote:

I think your a nice person overall.

Thanks, that makes up for it. No hard feelings then?None at ll.[/quote]

Quote:

but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam.

We all make bad choices in our lives.

Soren is angry with me because I was born into the mighty lineage of Brittania, but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam.I kind of got that too , but thats your choice

I'm with Oceans and Jordan. Freedom means freedom to make even that choice.

freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 6:25pm:

Soren is angry with me because I was born into the mighty lineage of Brittania, but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam.I kind of got that too , but thats your choice I'm with Oceans and Jordan. Freedom means freedom to make even that choice.

FD..have you banned grendel...?

freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 6:25pm:

Soren is angry with me because I was born into the mighty lineage of Brittania, but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam.I kind of got that too , but thats your choice

Thats ok...because I kind of think that your culture (or lack of) is backwards....each to their own hey. ;)

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 6:23pm:

Quote: but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam. We all make bad choices in our lives.

And so the obsession continues.....

Yes. I absolutely agree. Each to their own.

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 7:06pm:

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 6:23pm: Quote: but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam. We all make bad choices in our lives. And so the obsession continues.....

It would seem.

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 4:21pm:

It is fairly obvious that as "We're not going to win this war" was told to us by shamelessly lying media propaganda that the truth is We have won the war. I also had read about Taliban fighting against drug trade from the same media, BTW.  8-)

One is a speach and quotes given by a member of government of one of the coalition nations involved in making military decisions..

Whereas, the other is made up of media reports and heresay almost always from second and third hand sources....from experts who quite often have never even been to Afghanistan, and a biased media being fed information from sources (western govt) who have already been found to spread misinformation time and time again.

Do you think you can spot the difference.

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 7:07pm:

Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 7:06pm: jordan484 wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 6:23pm: Quote: but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam. We all make bad choices in our lives. And so the obsession continues..... It would seem.

Yeah...your crush on Abu Rashid is becoming concerning. Do you dream about him at night?

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 6:23pm:

Quote: but I chose, by my own will, to adopt the 'backwards dark age' culture of Islam. We all make bad choices in our lives.

Whereas some are a bad choice. ;)

Quote:

Yeah...your crush on Abu Rashid is becoming concerning. Do you dream about him at night?

No. He doesn't enter my head, the only time I think about him is when I read yet another one of his biased posts.

oceanz wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 11:52am:

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 10:43am: Agreed Oceanz, it's merely a tool for aggregating information, and that information can be as valid or invalid as any other medium of information. But when someone's only defense in an argument is "Just google Talibaan and drugs", it's quite obvious they have no argument to make. dont be redicluos Abu_ to go down that road means 90% of forums would cease to be...the main source of info is a source/paraphrase from Google when discussing topic s like this. Everyone gets their info from some form of media or another, wether those sources are correct or not is not for any of you too know..you too up to and inlcuding everyone who has commented so far has used information provided by media.. So I suppose you are all " in the know" huh ?..all been to Afghaganistan, know a man who knows a man who has links to blah blah    ::)?  see  how arrogant/silly you sound? Your all just having a lend if you think anyone believes you have the superior knowledge/intellect here. grendel is being no more offensive that some of this lot FD. Abu_ Im suprised at your arrogance.

Ocean...

I suggest you go back and read my post and actually read what I said instead of what you think I said.

At the end of the day...everything we read in the papers is propaganda...and this is not restricted to western media...this applies to all media. Every single article we read, every media report has some slant....after all, everthing is written by someone, and no one is completely unbiased...

If you actually payed attention to what I wrote...you would notice that I said I like to try and read between the lines. I look first and foremost and what I KNOW what is happening, and make an informed opinion that way. I'm sorry, but just because some dude in America states that 'The taliban are funding their operation with drug money' doesn't mean that its true.

Maybe the Taliban are, maybe they are not...we don't really know, however, from what we DO KNOW is that I have never read anything from a Taliban member, a confession, or even a transcript from an Afghan farmer confirming this. The only place I have ever read these claims is from western media 'sources', Karzai govt spokesman...and coalition govt officials and military commander.

US spokesman have been ON THE RECORD recently stating that they would be ramping up the 'information' (propaganda) war. This is not something thats read, or an opinion of some reporter...but actual US officials on record. Something that we have all seen and heard. Are you really naive that you don't think that this propaganda will filter through to our media.

I have asked a number of times for any evidence that the Taliban are using drug money to fund their operations. I have had two responses.

1) Just google 'Taliban' and 'drugs'. Really...the fact that you even defend this is really disapointing....

2)FD and his pearls of wisdom..."There has always been opium farming there. Now that the taliban need more money they are pushing up output."

No one has even come close to providing real evidence...because quite simply..they can't.

Yet everyone is so willing to accept this...why, because they have been conditioned to do so. We are so conditioned to believe that the Taliban epitomise all that is evil in this world...that it has got to the point, that anyone can say anything about them, and everyone believes it...no questions.

As I said..I too was the same...and had a very low opinion of the Taliban...and was ashamed, and actually angry at what I thought they were doing in the name of my religon.

Then I read a book by a British journalist by the name of Yvonne Ridley. She was captured by the taliban, and held hostage for two weeks. What was in this book just did not correlate with the picture the media was given.

She came out to melbourne a few years later, and I went to hear her speak. Here was a fiercely independant, bright, intelligent woman who after being held captive by the supposed most abhorrent, sexist animals (according to the media)...actually converted to Islam...and had nothing but praise for the Taliban.

Once again...this is not some article by some reporter who is fed information by some military spokesman...these are words that I heard in real life, a British woman that was so impressed by the Talibans treatment of her that she actually became muslim.

It was then I started telling myself....something doesn't seem right. After this I started really paying attention to the news reports, the stories...and I realised...that 99% of what we read today...lacks substance. Often they dont include any quotes....almost always only one side of the equation contributes in any way.

And I will stipulate now clearly..so you don't accuse me of bias.

THIS DOES NOT ONLY APPLY TO WESTERN MEDIA!

All media is guilty of this...western, arab, asian..you name it. Governments all over the world use the media to spread propaganda, and they rely on our patriotism and pre-concieved idea's and beliefs to ensure that we swallow whatever we read...without truly reading what is being said...and questioning whether it is backed up by any true substance.

Really...I implore you to actually look past my religon, and read what I am saying.

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 7:14pm:

Quote: Yeah...your crush on Abu Rashid is becoming concerning. Do you dream about him at night? No. He doesn't enter my head, the only time I think about him is when I read yet another one of his biased posts.

Yes..because of course you are the epitomy of 'balanced' and 'unbiased'.  ::)

Thank you. Let me ask you, lestat, how long are you staying this time before you have a little hissy fit and storm off like a teenage girl?

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 7:51pm:

Thank you. Let me ask you, lestat, how long are you staying this time before you have a little hissy fit and storm off like a teenage girl?

I came back for you Jordan...I heard you were down and I wanted to give your life some meaning. :)

I don't go for men, but thanks for the offer anyway. Hope you find someone.

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 7:10pm:

tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 4:21pm: It is fairly obvious that as "We're not going to win this war" was told to us by shamelessly lying media propaganda that the truth is We have won the war. I also had read about Taliban fighting against drug trade from the same media, BTW.  8-) One is a speach and quotes given by a member of government of one of the coalition nations involved in making military decisions.. Whereas, the other is made up of media reports and heresay almost always from second and third hand sources....from experts who quite often have never even been to Afghanistan, and a biased media being fed information from sources (western govt) who have already been found to spread misinformation time and time again. Do you think you can spot the difference.

Of course. The quotes are lies perpetuated by propaganda media. That's why The true msg of the thread is Taliban terrorists are beaten and in desperation restored to drug peddling.

You don't seriously think that propaganda media can not lie about quotes do you?

mantra wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 3:45pm:

I think I'm missing something though.  You were defensive with Abu and I couldn't see why - he wasn't rude to you.  No-one has told you to get lost.

Lets cut to the chase Mantra. Its because Abu is muslim. And Oceans reaction to my post to Grendal is for the very same reason.

Soren, Jordan, Sprint have made hundreds of posts attacking Abu for everthing under the sun, yet I have never heard Ocean attack any of their posts, or defend Abu's 'freedom of speach'.


mantra wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 3:45pm:

A lot of my opinions are confirmed from older articles that tie in with today's bits and pieces on the media.  It's still only guesswork - although quite a few people (including moi) knew a few years ago that what is happening today was going to happen.

Precisely.

Mind you I also stated in my post that 'we don't really know...but alas, being muslim, ofcourse my post would warrant a different response then yours.

I guess its just a sign of the times huh.

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 7:54pm:

I don't go for men, but thanks for the offer anyway. Hope you find someone.

So whats with your obsession with Abu then? Your almost stalking him.

No obsession. But you think what you like.

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 7:54pm:

Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 7:10pm: tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 4:21pm: It is fairly obvious that as "We're not going to win this war" was told to us by shamelessly lying media propaganda that the truth is We have won the war. I also had read about Taliban fighting against drug trade from the same media, BTW.  8-) One is a speach and quotes given by a member of government of one of the coalition nations involved in making military decisions.. Whereas, the other is made up of media reports and heresay almost always from second and third hand sources....from experts who quite often have never even been to Afghanistan, and a biased media being fed information from sources (western govt) who have already been found to spread misinformation time and time again. Do you think you can spot the difference. Of course. The quotes are lies perpetuated by propaganda media. That's why The true msg of the thread is Taliban terrorists are beaten and in desperation restored to drug peddling. You don't seriously think that propaganda media can not lie about quotes do you?

Yes of course they can...which is why these too should be taken with a grain of salt....though I don't believe they actually take it that far. Quite often it can be a different word here, or their, and the whole meaning of a sentence can change. Even the tone of an article can change the perception that a quote can portray.

Of course hearing the quotes on TV is even better...but even they can be taken out of context.

But lets clarify one thing....the example I raised about the CIA/Contra arms deal was exposed during a US Congressional hearing...where confessions were made on TV for all to see....people were charged with treason.

After the weapon sales were revealed in November 1986, even  Ronald Reagan appeared on national television and stated that the weapons transfers had indeed occurred, but that the United States did not trade arms for hostages.

I'm sure you can agree that their is a big difference between this, and the heresay and claims that the Taliban are using drug money...which really has no substance.

Now if a Taliban leader appears on TV, whilst free and in a position of power (as Regan was at the time) and confesses to using drug money then I will yield...no problems.

Let me tell your something Tallowood...now you can believe me if you like or not...I don't really care...but I have actually heard arab personalities being mistranslated on TV. A couple of times...what was being said in Arabic DID NOT correspond to the english voice over.

Look...what I am saying is that the reality is that propaganda today is everywhere...yet for some reason no one actually will believe that they may have fallen for it.

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:01pm:

No obsession. But you think what you like.

Doesn't matter what I think. Its there for all to see.

Abu makes a post...and just like clockwork...shortly following is Jordan with a sly remark.

You probably don't even know your doing it....stalkers rarely do.

Quote:

Abu makes a post...and just like clockwork...shortly following is Jordan with a sly remark.

Hmmm....reminds me of someone else....but I can't quite think who ???

Quote:

You don't seriously think that propaganda media can not lie about quotes do you?

Generally they don't fabricate quotes by US government personnel who would sue the pants off them. But I guess they possibly could fabricate statements by people who are besieged in a far off land, living in caves and constantly being bombed... they wouldn't be too much of a legal threat I wouldn't think.

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:04pm:

.... Look...what I am saying is that the reality is that propaganda today is everywhere...yet for some reason no one actually will believe that they may have fallen for it.

I agree. That is why I said before and say it again that CIA and Taliban are much the same when it comes to fund rising.

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:07pm:

Quote: Abu makes a post...and just like clockwork...shortly following is Jordan with a sly remark. Hmmm....reminds me of someone else....but I can't quite think who ???

hehe...is that the best you can do.

Like I said...its there for all to see. An unhealthy obsession.

You...are OBSESSED. :D

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:08pm:

Quote: You don't seriously think that propaganda media can not lie about quotes do you? Generally they don't fabricate quotes by US government personnel who would sue the pants off them. But I guess they possibly could fabricate statements by people who are besieged in a far off land, living in caves and constantly being bombed... they wouldn't be too much of a legal threat I wouldn't think.

Media is shameless and they fabricate quotes even by a USA President. Somebody here even said that Taliban is CIA.

Thanks for your words of wisdom.

However, I don't care what you think, say, post, assume or insinuate.

Have a nice day.

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:12pm:

I agree. That is why I said before and say it again that CIA and Taliban are much the same when it comes to fund rising.

The CIA links with Contra/arms deal was exposed, and we all saw on TV during the congressional hearings military personal admitting to the drugs/arms deals. The president of the United States even admitted to it. That CIA have used drug money to fund military operations cannot be denied. Other CIA documents have been released which support this. The evidence is their.

Out of curiousity...do you have similar evidence indicating that the Taliban have done likewise. If you do...please share it. :)

jordan484 wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:17pm:

Thanks for your words of wisdom. However, I don't care what you think, say, post, assume or insinuate. Have a nice day.

Sweet dreams possum :D

There will be plenty of posts by Abu waiting for you tomorrow morning...for you to obsess over....

Excellent.

And I'll post plenty just for you.

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:17pm:

tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:12pm: I agree. That is why I said before and say it again that CIA and Taliban are much the same when it comes to fund rising. The CIA links with Contra/arms deal was exposed, and we all saw on TV during the congressional hearings military personal admitting to the drugs/arms deals. The president of the United States even admitted to it. That CIA have used drug money to fund military operations cannot be denied. Other CIA documents have been released which support this. The evidence is their. Out of curiousity...do you have similar evidence indicating that the Taliban have done likewise. If you do...please share it. :)

Like if TV is not media. Of course I have similar evidence.

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:22pm:

Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:17pm: tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:12pm: I agree. That is why I said before and say it again that CIA and Taliban are much the same when it comes to fund rising. The CIA links with Contra/arms deal was exposed, and we all saw on TV during the congressional hearings military personal admitting to the drugs/arms deals. The president of the United States even admitted to it. That CIA have used drug money to fund military operations cannot be denied. Other CIA documents have been released which support this. The evidence is their. Out of curiousity...do you have similar evidence indicating that the Taliban have done likewise. If you do...please share it. :) Like if TV is not media. Of course I have similar evidence.

You have evidence linking the Taliban to opium exports, similar to that of President Ragan confessing the contra arms deal and CIA involvement? Really.

After the contra arms contraversy, fourteen administration officials were charged with crimes, and eleven convicted, including then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. You really have something comparative linking the Taliban funding to opium production?

I'd love to see it. Does Mullah Omar confess live on TV? Could you please provide this evidence, or point me in the right direction so I can make an informed opinion.

Thanks in advance.

Guess we won't be seeing tallowood back in this debate too soon  ;D

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:22pm:

Like if TV is not media. Of course I have similar evidence.

Of course TV is media...I never implied it wasn't. But being visual...it gives you more information...and a more accurate portrayal of what is going on. But even then.....even TV is far from being an accurate medium...and yes, I completely agree with you...most of the propaganda we receive today comes from TV.

Because a picture can have so many different meanings, if you change the words that are being spoken. This probably makes TV are for more powerful medium for propaganda then print media, because when we are seeing the pictures in front of our very eyes, at that point we are very susceptible to what is being said.

I said earlier that we like to believe everything we read, without really questioning. That goes double for TV and everything we see....

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:27pm:

Guess we won't be seeing tallowood back in this debate too soon  ;D

Where is your evidence abu? Not in Koran I hope because it is just another media. So I wait and wait and wait.  ;D

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:33pm:

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:27pm: Guess we won't be seeing tallowood back in this debate too soon  ;D Where is your evidence abu? Not in Koran I hope because it is just another media. So I wait and wait and wait.  ;D

Once again....resorting to insults....disapointing really.

Whenever a muslim on this site expresses his opinion, the same posters will always resort to insulting our beliefs if they have response.

Really is getting rather boring.

Lestat wrote


Quote:

Ocean... I suggest you go back and read my post and actually read what I said instead of what you think I said. At the end of the day...everything we read in the papers is propaganda...and this is not restricted to western media...this applies to all media. Every single article we read, every media report has some slant....after all, everthing is written by someone, and no one is completely unbiased... If you actually payed attention to what I wrote...you would notice that I said I like to try and read between the lines. I look first and foremost and what I KNOW what is happening, and make an informed opinion that way. I'm sorry, but just because some dude in America states that 'The taliban are funding their operation with drug money' doesn't mean that its true. Maybe the Taliban are, maybe they are not...we don't really know, however, from what we DO KNOW is that I have never read anything from a Taliban member, a confession, or even a transcript from an Afghan farmer confirming this. The only place I have ever read these claims is from western media 'sources', Karzai govt spokesman...and coalition govt officials and military commander. US spokesman have been ON THE RECORD recently stating that they would be ramping up the 'information' (propaganda) war. This is not something thats read, or an opinion of some reporter...but actual US officials on record. Something that we have all seen and heard. Are you really naive that you don't think that this propaganda will filter through to our media. I have asked a number of times for any evidence that the Taliban are using drug money to fund their operations. I have had two responses. 1) Just google 'Taliban' and 'drugs'. Really...the fact that you even defend this is really disapointing.... 2)FD and his pearls of wisdom..."There has always been opium farming there. Now that the taliban need more money they are pushing up output." No one has even come close to providing real evidence...because quite simply..they can't. Yet everyone is so willing to accept this...why, because they have been conditioned to do so. We are so conditioned to believe that the Taliban epitomise all that is evil in this world...that it has got to the point, that anyone can say anything about them, and everyone believes it...no questions. As I said..I too was the same...and had a very low opinion of the Taliban...and was ashamed, and actually angry at what I thought they were doing in the name of my religon. Then I read a book by a British journalist by the name of Yvonne Ridley. She was captured by the taliban, and held hostage for two weeks. What was in this book just did not correlate with the picture the media was given. She came out to melbourne a few years later, and I went to hear her speak. Here was a fiercely independant, bright, intelligent woman who after being held captive by the supposed most abhorrent, sexist animals (according to the media)...actually converted to Islam...and had nothing but praise for the Taliban. Once again...this is not some article by some reporter who is fed information by some military spokesman...these are words that I heard in real life, a British woman that was so impressed by the Talibans treatment of her that she actually became muslim. It was then I started telling myself....something doesn't seem right. After this I started really paying attention to the news reports, the stories...and I realised...that 99% of what we read today...lacks substance. Often they dont include any quotes....almost always only one side of the equation contributes in any way. And I will stipulate now clearly..so you don't accuse me of bias. THIS DOES NOT ONLY APPLY TO WESTERN MEDIA! All media is guilty of this...western, arab, asian..you name it. Governments all over the world use the media to spread propaganda, and they rely on our patriotism and pre-concieved idea's and beliefs to ensure that we swallow whatever we read...without truly reading what is being said...and questioning whether it is backed up by any true substance. Really...I implore you to actually look past my religon, and read what  I have to say

I think I've read enough of your stuff for one day...

Guess we won't be seeing abu back in this debate too soon  ;D ;D ;D

oceanz wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:38pm:

I think I've read enough of your stuff for one day...

My apologies...perhaps if I registed another alias...and made the same post without you knowing it was made by a muslim....perhaps then you'll be interesetd in my POV.

Quote:

Like if TV is not media. Of course I have similar evidence.

If you have it champ, let's see it...

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:39pm:

Guess we won't be seeing abu back in this debate too soon  ;D ;D ;D

I'm still waiting for that evidence.....

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:35pm:

tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:33pm: abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:27pm: Guess we won't be seeing tallowood back in this debate too soon  ;D Where is your evidence abu? Not in Koran I hope because it is just another media. So I wait and wait and wait.  ;D Once again....resorting to insults....disapointing really. Whenever a muslim on this site expresses his opinion, the same posters will always resort to insulting our beliefs if they have response. Really is getting rather boring.

What insults?   :o :o :o

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:42pm:

Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:35pm: tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:33pm: abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:27pm: Guess we won't be seeing tallowood back in this debate too soon  ;D Where is your evidence abu? Not in Koran I hope because it is just another media. So I wait and wait and wait.  ;D Once again....resorting to insults....disapointing really. Whenever a muslim on this site expresses his opinion, the same posters will always resort to insulting our beliefs if they have response. Really is getting rather boring. What insults?   :o :o :o

none...forget that I ever mentioned it.

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:42pm:

tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:39pm: Guess we won't be seeing abu back in this debate too soon  ;D ;D ;D I'm still waiting for that evidence.....

I am waiting for yours. Where is it?

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:41pm:

oceanz wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:38pm: I think I've read enough of your stuff for one day... My apologies...perhaps if I registed another alias...and made the same post without you knowing it was made by a muslim....perhaps then you'll be interesetd in my POV.

your religion has nothing to do with what I think about you...

If your a Muslim..bully for you...but I could care less...

"speech" lestat..not "speach"..

Tallowood....if you'd like to insult Islam and muslims to your hearts content....I suggest you go to the Extremism Exposed thread.

There's a Islamophobic lovefest going on their...and if any muslim should post their...never fear...Easel will be right there to delete the post.

Quote:

I am waiting for yours. Where is it?

He provided it, that's why you said similar I assume? Similar to the evidence he provided, no?


Quote:

Of course I have similar evidence

oceanz wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:46pm:

your religion has nothing to do with what I think about you... If your a Muslim..bully for you...but I could care less... "speech" lestat..not "speach"..

Oh dear...another child resorting to grammar.

Um...I think you mean 'couldn't Ocean...not could, couldn't'.

;D

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:53pm:

oceanz wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 8:46pm: your religion has nothing to do with what I think about you... If your a Muslim..bully for you...but I could care less... "speech" lestat..not "speach".. Oh dear...another child resorting to grammar. Um...I think you mean 'couldn't Ocean...not could, couldn't'. ;D

sorry I know what I mean..

[quote author=tallowood link=1223174305/120#122
I am waiting for yours. Where is it?[/quote]

Here you go....

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=R67CH-qhXJs


And if that isn't enough....

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=l-yrVzvsiMk

oceanz wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:55pm:

sorry I know what I mean..

So do I Oceans...so do I.

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:47pm:

Tallowood....if you'd like to insult Islam and muslims to your hearts content....I suggest you go to the Extremism Exposed thread. There's a Islamophobic lovefest going on their...and if any muslim should post their...never fear...Easel will be right there to delete the post.

What are you talking about? I don't like to insult anybody but if anybody insults me or mine they have only themselves to blame.

Here I seek The Truth and it Seems to me that we are either to believe media or not. Can't be both.

So if we believe media we believe that a UK military said thinks that he can not win and that Taliban use drug trade to arm themselves.

If we don't believe media then both above statements are untrue as well as the rest of what media tells us including media story on Taliban war against drugs.

Which one it is?

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 8:57pm:

There's a Islamophobic lovefest going on their...and if any muslim should post their...never fear...Easel will be right there to delete the post. What are you talking about? I don't like to insult anybody but if anybody insults me or mine they have only themselves to blame. Here I seek The Truth and it Seems to me that we are either to believe media or not. Can't be both. So if we believe media we believe that a UK military said thinks that he can not win and that Taliban use drug trade to arm themselves. If we don't believe media then both above statements are untrue as well as the rest of what media tells us including media story on Taliban war against drugs. Which one it is?

Forget the 'insult' reference...just having a go at Easel's pathetic forum that no one really visits anyway...my mistake. Back on topic.

I never said never believe the media..what I did say is that we should always question what we hear, see and read. There is a big difference.

Do you really need me to explain to you the difference between an article which has no substance, tells only one side of the story, and makes claims without any evidence whatsoever....

To the United States of America admitting to sellings arms to Iran via contra's, and a US military officer admiting to the Contra drugs arms deal on camera.

The UK military chief actually said these worlds. He stated...on camera that he does not believe that the war can be won militarily. Its there for all to see...

No I have no doub that their are probably some govt's out their..., perhaps anti-western...that have probably squeezed every inch of propaganda material out of this..no doubt. Chavez and Castro are probably having a field day and I bet many quotes have probably been taken out of context.

Yet clearly, here, for us in the west, this is not the case. So in this instance, its fairly safe to say that in regards to what the UK military chief said...we have had a fairly accurate representation of what was said. It isn't as black and white as you like to portray it. There are plenty of shades of grey. As long as you question what you read/see, and take a moment to actually consider whether what you are reading or seeing has some substance behind it...then alls well. Thats all...

Have you ever seen a Taliban leader state that drug money is funding their operations. Apparently you said earlier that you evidence..

Well please..show me. Like I said...I am more then willing to admit that my opinions were wrong, because there was evidence out there that I hadn't come across.

I am always wanting and willing to learn..show me this evidence that you have already stated a couple of times that you have seen.

Les, what does Yvonne Ridley say about 9/11?

THIS DOES NOT ONLY APPLY TO WESTERN MEDIA!

All media is guilty of this...western, arab, asian..you name it. Governments all over the world use the media to spread propaganda, and they rely on our patriotism and pre-concieved idea's and beliefs to ensure that we swallow whatever we read...without truly reading what is being said...and questioning whether it is backed up by any true substance.

Except that our media is free to disagree with the government. We even host foreign celebrities in our universities who have converted to the other side. Try doing that under the Taliban regime.

Now if a Taliban leader appears on TV, whilst free and in a position of power (as Regan was at the time) and confesses to using drug money then I will yield...no problems.

They already have confessed. Even pro-Taliban Muslims in this thread conceded that they were using drugs to fund their operations. Forget which one sorry. 'Apparently' they didn't know drugs were bad, but then someone mentioned one night over KFC and they stopped it the next day.

After the contra arms contraversy, fourteen administration officials were charged with crimes, and eleven convicted, including then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. You really have something comparative linking the Taliban funding to opium production?

Sure, they murdered a bunch of people in the night and buried them in unmarked graves. It's all there in the documentation vaults in Taliban headquarters.

Of course TV is media...I never implied it wasn't. But being visual...it gives you more information...and a more accurate portrayal of what is going on. But even then.....even TV is far from being an accurate medium...and yes, I completely agree with you...most of the propaganda we receive today comes from TV.

Because a picture can have so many different meanings, if you change the words that are being spoken. This probably makes TV are for more powerful medium for propaganda then print media, because when we are seeing the pictures in front of our very eyes, at that point we are very susceptible to what is being said.

I said earlier that we like to believe everything we read, without really questioning. That goes double for TV and everything we see....

I always prefer print. It's far harder to get away with avoiding the question.

Quote:

Here I seek The Truth and it Seems to me that we are either to believe media or not. Can't be both

It might be quite convenient for you to paint it as black and white as that, but the simple fact is that we were referring to how easily people believe stuff in the media, even when it's quite clearly just hearsay.

Eg.

US government representative publically admitting in front of television camera he did wrong = believable.

Hearsay that the Talibaan most likely could possibly be smuggling drugs to pay for their war = not-believable.

Making sense now?

Anyway you said you have similar evidence to what Lestat brought for you.. can we see some of it? Or are you going to scamper off with your tail between your legs as you shoulda done about 20 odd posts ago when you made the ridiculous "I have similar evidence" claim?

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:03pm:

... Have you ever seen a Taliban leader state that drug money is funding their operations. Apparently you said earlier that you. Well please..show me. Like I said...I am more then willing to admit that my opinions were wrong, because there was evidence out there that I hadn't come across. I am always wanting and willing to learn..show me this evidence that you have already stated a couple of times that you have seen.

Yes I did but I did not to see your movie yet. Beside a movie is a media and you yourself said that media is not to be trusted as tool of propaganda. Didn't you say something like this or not?

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:09pm:

Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 9:03pm: ... Have you ever seen a Taliban leader state that drug money is funding their operations. Apparently you said earlier that you. Well please..show me. Like I said...I am more then willing to admit that my opinions were wrong, because there was evidence out there that I hadn't come across. I am always wanting and willing to learn..show me this evidence that you have already stated a couple of times that you have seen. Yes I did but I did not to see your movie yet. Beside a movie is a media and you yourself said that media is not to be trusted as tool of propaganda. Didn't you say something like this or not?

No I didn't...go back and read my post. If you still don't understand what I am saying get back to me and I'll explain it further.

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:08pm:

Quote: Here I seek The Truth and it Seems to me that we are either to believe media or not. Can't be both It might be quite convenient for you to paint it as black and white as that, but the simple fact is that we were referring to how easily people believe stuff in the media, even when it's quite clearly just hearsay. Eg. US government representative publically admitting in front of television camera he did wrong = believable. Hearsay that the Talibaan most likely could possibly be smuggling drugs to pay for their war = not-believable. Making sense now? Anyway you said you have similar evidence to what Lestat brought for you.. can we see some of it? Or are you going to scamper off with your tail between your legs as you shoulda done about 20 odd posts ago when you made the ridiculous "I have similar evidence" claim?

It wasn't me who started on that trek. and I have provided evidence similar to what Lestat did.

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:11pm:

tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 9:09pm: Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 9:03pm: ... Have you ever seen a Taliban leader state that drug money is funding their operations. Apparently you said earlier that you. Well please..show me. Like I said...I am more then willing to admit that my opinions were wrong, because there was evidence out there that I hadn't come across. I am always wanting and willing to learn..show me this evidence that you have already stated a couple of times that you have seen. Yes I did but I did not to see your movie yet. Beside a movie is a media and you yourself said that media is not to be trusted as tool of propaganda. Didn't you say something like this or not? No I didn't...go back and read my post. If you still don't understand what I am saying get back to me and I'll explain it further.

I think you should go back and read my posts first and if you still don't understand what I am saying read more.

So till you understand the statement "Taliban are drug pedlars is as good as "We're not going to win this war" says UK Commande"

Quote:

Les, what does Yvonne Ridley say about 9/11?

What's that got to do with the price of kebabs in Lakemba?


Quote:

Except that our media is free to disagree with the government. We even host foreign celebrities in our universities who have converted to the other side. Try doing that under the Taliban regime.

Not according to one of the front line operatives in the 'War on terror':


"On balance, the Islamic media's taste for what the West terms sensationalizing and conspiracy mongering is less than meets the eye. Based on my research, it is apparent that the Islamic media's correspondents and editors work harder, dig deeper, and think more than most of their Western counterparts. This is not to say that the Islamic media do not suffer from sensationalized conspiracy theories, but they probably are no more prone to those faults than their Western colleagues." (Michael Scheuer, Through Our Enemies' Eyes, p. 280)


Quote:

They already have confessed. Even pro-Taliban Muslims in this thread conceded that they were using drugs to fund their operations.

I think you're referring to me, and I've stated quite clearly I am not pro-Talibaan, probably even in this very same thread. Besides, we're talking about NOW not about pre-2001. It's well known they turned a blind eye to it back then, but they were advised, and they heeded the advice. Why they'd go back on it now, I really don't know... but at least if we actually had some tangible evidence they have gone back on it... we might actually have ourselves a debate, but as it stands this is all nothing but conjecture.

Quote:

So till you understand the statement "Taliban are drug pedlars is as good as "We're not going to win this war" says UK Commande"

One is a clear statement by a commander who's expressing his opinion about the futility of an event, the other is an accusation that the other side is doing something, without any substantiating evidence.

If they're the same to you, then that's fine. Thank you very much for playing.

freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:04pm:

Les, what does Yvonne Ridley say about 9/11?

Before...or after she was captured by the Taliban.

Anyway FD...what relevance does this have. Facts are she was captured by the Taliban, held hostage for 3 weeks, and when released her views did not correlate at all with the image we are fed by the media.

Oh sorry...I get it, you are now going to try and discredit her.

THIS DOES NOT ONLY APPLY TO WESTERN MEDIA!

All media is guilty of this...western, arab, asian..you name it. Governments all over the world use the media to spread propaganda, and they rely on our patriotism and pre-concieved idea's and beliefs to ensure that we swallow whatever we read...without truly reading what is being said...and questioning whether it is backed up by any true substance.



freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:04pm:

Except that our media is free to disagree with the government. We even host foreign celebrities in our universities who have converted to the other side. Try doing that under the Taliban regime.

lol...you are really extremely naive if you believe this. THe media in the west is a business...and they are in it for one reason...to make money.

Media outlets know very well that if they say the wrong thing here...print the wrong thing there, accesibility to the people they want to get stories from will be refused. Or they will be denied the 'exlusives'. Then of course their is the adverting dollars from multi/national organisations...do you truly believe that the press is 'free'.

During the Iraq war...journalists were 'embedded' into the US military. Is this the 'free press' your talking about.


freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:04pm:

They already have confessed. Even pro-Taliban Muslims in this thread conceded that they were using drugs to fund their operations. Forget which one sorry. 'Apparently' they didn't know drugs were bad, but then someone mentioned one night over KFC and they stopped it the next day.

Have they...sorry but your word means nothing, and quite frankly I don't believe you. I've read a fair bit about the Taliban and Afghanistan...books as well as media reports, and have never read anything but second and third hand references and 'experts' making claims without any backing or substance.

Now...I've asked you and others a number of times now to provide anything if they have it. Maybe you have stumbled accross something that I have not. Please...go ahead, convince me.....


freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:04pm:

Sure, they murdered a bunch of people in the night and buried them in unmarked graves. It's all there in the documentation vaults in Taliban headquarters.

Once again...you say these things without providing any evidence whatsoever. I posted a video backing up claims that CIA dealed drugs, with confessions from a military commander and the president of the USA. You have given nothing but your word...and given some of the other posts I've read from...forgive me if I don't take what you say to seriously.

I'm not saying that these things never happened. Maybe they did...I don't really know...and neither do you.

Of course TV is media...I never implied it wasn't. But being visual...it gives you more information...and a more accurate portrayal of what is going on. But even then.....even TV is far from being an accurate medium...and yes, I completely agree with you...most of the propaganda we receive today comes from TV.

Because a picture can have so many different meanings, if you change the words that are being spoken. This probably makes TV are for more powerful medium for propaganda then print media, because when we are seeing the pictures in front of our very eyes, at that point we are very susceptible to what is being said.

I said earlier that we like to believe everything we read, without really questioning. That goes double for TV and everything we see....


freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:04pm:

I always prefer print. It's far harder to get away with avoiding the question.

Print goes into more detail no doubt...but really depends on the media. I don't even bother with the Herald Sun anymore....the AGE is ok but still, doesn't matter what it is, I always question everything I read.

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:22pm:

Quote: So till you understand the statement "Taliban are drug pedlars is as good as "We're not going to win this war" says UK Commande" One is a clear statement by a commander who's expressing his opinion about the futility of an event, the other is an accusation that the other side is doing something, without any substantiating evidence. If they're the same to you, then that's fine. Thank you very much for playing.

Exactly...I can't believe that we even have to explain the difference between the two.

Like really...am I missing something. I would of thought that the difference is OBVIOUS!

If the Taliban were so nice, why is it that only one country still recognised them as the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan? Were they all hoodwinked by US propaganda? Was it a global conspiracy?

freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:30pm:

If the Taliban were so nice, why is it that only one country still recognised them as the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan? Were they all hoodwinked by US propaganda? Was it a global conspiracy?

Mate...stop moving the goal posts...read what I am saying.

I never said that 'they were so nice'....what I am saying is that we REALLY DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE STORY.

I used the Yvonne Ridley example to highlight this fact. If the Taliban were as bad as the media and you would lead us to believe....then how can you explain how Yvonne Ridley..who was a fiercely feminist british journalist...could not only survive the experience, or not even get raped or abused...no, she actually praised their conduct and the taliban...these monsters, actually inspired her to eventually convert to Islam just 2 years later.

And as I said earlier...it is a fact that any insurgency can only be successful/survie with the support of the civilian population. Taliban, Al-Quaida...I don't care who it is, without civilian backing they will never be succesful.

And yet..from all reports, Afghan civilians are rejecting the occupation and Karzai govt. Like seriously...this is completely unexplainable....how can the Afghan people reject the Karzai govt/US occupation after the 'apparent' hell they had to endure under the Taliban. Even American miliatry leaders are claiming that they are losing the battle of the 'hearts and minds' in Afghanistan.

WTF...battle of hearts and minds with the Taliban? I would of thought that it would be a no-contest. The Taliban..those who bash woman, murder men and boys, and treat everyone like dogs...in a battle of 'hearts and minds' with the good old US of A, and the enlightened and civilised west?

From an article in the UK....

Without the groundswell support of the Afghan population, it is a war that can never be won. The Taliban and their allies know this. Their propaganda machine, honed by a decade of fighting the Soviets in the 1980s and the west over the past seven years, has already won the battle for the minds, if not the hearts, of their fellow citizens.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/editorial/display.var.2459913.0.Fighting_a_losing_battle.php

If true (yes it may not be) this is staggering. How can the very same people that (if we are to believe the western media) apparently  suffered so much for so long, forget so quickly and now many are even saying the the coalition/Karzai government has 'lost'. Don't know about you...but really, either the Karzai govt/US occupation is really really shocking...or that Taliban has got some damn amazing propaganda, wiping the memories of those people who suffered for so long under their reign.

Once again...this is just not logical...it is unbelievable, truly amazing really. That the USA/Karzai government actually have to fight some sort of 'battle' with the Taliban to win the support of the people.

The only logical conclusion really is that maybe we haven't been told the truth, and maybe they are not as bad as the media have portrayed.

Do you have another 'logical' explanation. (take note...I did ask for something logical).

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:28pm:

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 9:22pm: Quote: So till you understand the statement "Taliban are drug pedlars is as good as "We're not going to win this war" says UK Commande" One is a clear statement by a commander who's expressing his opinion about the futility of an event, the other is an accusation that the other side is doing something, without any substantiating evidence. If they're the same to you, then that's fine. Thank you very much for playing. Exactly...I can't believe that we even have to explain the difference between the two. Like really...am I missing something. I would of thought that the difference is OBVIOUS!

Here is a clue. All that we definitely know is that both "Taliban are drug pedlars" and "We're not going to win this war" says UK Commande" statements came from media so if this statements to be trusted you have to make decision if you trust media or not.
Now, keeping above in mind try to understand it again after all it is a simple classical logic. ::)

I think you're referring to me, and I've stated quite clearly I am not pro-Talibaan

Didn't you say you would rather have them than a government chosen by the local people? They'd have to be pretty good to justify discarding democracy.

Why they'd go back on it now, I really don't know...

Maybe they need the money again. They are fighting another war after all.

but at least if we actually had some tangible

Other than the massive increase in opium production you mean?

Anyway FD...what relevance does this have. Facts are she was captured by the Taliban, held hostage for 3 weeks, and when released her views did not correlate at all with the image we are fed by the media.

You can say all the nice things you want about the taliban, but it is widely accepted, even among Muslims, that they were harbouring terrorists.

lol...you are really extremely naive if you believe this. THe media in the west is a business...and they are in it for one reason...to make money.

That doesn't contradict anything I said. Not all media is in it for the money, only the rich ones.

Have they...sorry but your word means nothing, and quite frankly I don't believe you. I've read a fair bit about the Taliban and Afghanistan...books as well as media reports, and have never read anything but second and third hand references and 'experts' making claims without any backing or substance.

Take it up with Abu then.

Once again...you say these things without providing any evidence whatsoever. I posted a video backing up claims that CIA dealed drugs, with confessions from a military commander and the president of the USA. You have given nothing but your word...and given some of the other posts I've read from...forgive me if I don't take what you say to seriously.

It was a joke. I was making fun of your insistence that there would be evidence of a similar standard if the taliban were involved in drug smuggling. The American people care if their agencies smuggle drugs. The Afghani people grow the drugs.

I used the Yvonne Ridley example to highlight this fact. If the Taliban were as bad as the media and you would lead us to believe....then how can you explain how Yvonne Ridley..who was a fiercely feminist british journalist...could not only survive the experience, or not even get raped or abused...no, she actually praised their conduct and the taliban...these monsters, actually inspired her to eventually convert to Islam just 2 years later.

It's called stockholme syndrome.

freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:48pm:

Other than the massive increase in opium production you mean?

Which began once the country was under US occupation/Karzai govt control....you fail to add.


freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:48pm:

You can say all the nice things you want about the taliban, but it is widely accepted, even among Muslims, that they were harbouring terrorists.

I didn't say anything nice about them...Yvonne Ridley did, and given that she was their hostage for 3 weeks, I'm guessing she'd have a more relevant opinion then either you or I.

Then again....you believe what you do because its 'widely accepted'..even amongst muslims. Amazing huh...now what we muslims believe has some relevancy. hehehe.


freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:48pm:

That doesn't contradict anything I said. Not all media is in it for the money, only the rich ones.

Money is used to control everything...including the media.


freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:48pm:

Take it up with Abu then.

You made the claim..and you still cannot provide any evidence.


freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:48pm:

It was a joke. I was making fun of your insistence that there would be evidence of a similar standard if the taliban were involved in drug smuggling. The American people care if their agencies smuggle drugs. The Afghani people grow the drugs.

I didn't say that...I asked if there was any evidence...besides third hand references and nato/US claims.....

Great way to generalise by the way.....besides, there's plenty of Americans making, dealing, and doing drugs.

freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 9:55pm:

I used the Yvonne Ridley example to highlight this fact. If the Taliban were as bad as the media and you would lead us to believe....then how can you explain how Yvonne Ridley..who was a fiercely feminist british journalist...could not only survive the experience, or not even get raped or abused...no, she actually praised their conduct and the taliban...these monsters, actually inspired her to eventually convert to Islam just 2 years later. It's called stockholme syndrome.

lol...yeah, that must be it. And all those millions of Afghani's who have forgotten the years of brutality under the Taliban which occurred only recently...they've all got stockholme syndrome as well.

Its telling that you are willing to accept all these other really far fetched and ludricous theories.....and you are uncapable or unable to even consider that which is most logical.

Oh...Yvonne Ridley has had a complete psychological examination shortly after her release, with many tests, and quite a few counselling sessions...and was found to be mentally sound.

Which began once the country was under US occupation/Karzai govt control....you fail to add.

I believe I mentioned the fact that they were at war. I doubt anyone is confused as to who they are at war with.

You made the claim..and you still cannot provide any evidence.

I claimed that someone here said it. I was right. Abu admitted it. There is my evidence. It's right here in this thread. If you disagree with what he said, ask him about it.

And all those millions of Afghani's who have forgotten the years of brutality under the Taliban which occurred only recently...they've all got stockholme syndrome as well.

You mean the ones growing Poppies?

Millions Afghanis hate Taliban from Pakistan except drug dealers of course

http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00025/helmand_opium_25881t.jpg


Quote:

Smugglers told The Independent how Russian arms dealers meet Taliban drug lords at a bazaar near the old Afghan-Soviet border, deep in Tajikistan's desert. The bazaar exists solely to trade Afghan drugs for Russian guns – and sometimes a bit of sex on the side.

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 10:08pm:

Millions Afghanis hate Taliban from Pakistan except drug dealers of course http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00025/helmand_opium_25881t.jpg Quote: Smugglers told The Independent how Russian arms dealers meet Taliban drug lords at a bazaar near the old Afghan-Soviet border, deep in Tajikistan's desert. The bazaar exists solely to trade Afghan drugs for Russian guns – and sometimes a bit of sex on the side.

hehe...you've spent all this time searching and this is the best you found.

Where's the Taliban. All I see is a guy with a gun and a farmer. Many Afghani's have guns, including the NA.

Besides the caption below trying to convince me that this is a taliban soldier...there is nothing their that is indictive, that this is the taliban. Nothing whatsoever.

"Smugglers told the independant"...well, gee, I'm convinced...must be true. After all...the 'smugglers' told the 'independant'..absolutely no names mentioned...no substance, nothing whatsoever. Yet you and others are so willing to believe this..without question.

Thanks Tallowood, for providing us with exactly what I am talking about. I bet that the photo also had a long article...that really, just like the photo and quote, full of nothing but hot air, with very little to no substance.

Now maybe he is Taliban...but maybe he isn't....I don't really know, and neither do you, and that photo really doesn't indicate either way.

Try again...

freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 10:06pm:

And all those millions of Afghani's who have forgotten the years of brutality under the Taliban which occurred only recently...they've all got stockholme syndrome as well. You mean the ones growing Poppies?

Are millions of Afghani's growing poppies now...

Really FD...your doing yourself no favours....

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 10:13pm:

hehe...you've spent all this time searching and this is the best you found. ...

No, I was counting pages in Koran while having end of day crap.

Now, can you tell me in 10 seconds how many pages are in English translation of Koran?

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 10:18pm:

Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 10:13pm: hehe...you've spent all this time searching and this is the best you found. ... No, I was counting pages in Koran while having end of day crap. Now, can you tell me in 10 seconds how many pages are in English translation of Koran?

Once again you resort to insults and abuse when you cannot respond to a post in a meaningful and mature manner.

FD...this is the insults and abuse I am talking about. Seems that people cannot discuss and debate in a civilised manner...and if I responded to this (which I really want too...but I won't), it would be I being accussed of being abusive.

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 10:22pm:

tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 10:18pm: Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 10:13pm: hehe...you've spent all this time searching and this is the best you found. ... No, I was counting pages in Koran while having end of day crap. Now, can you tell me in 10 seconds how many pages are in English translation of Koran? Once again you resort to insults and abuse when you cannot respond to a post in a meaningful and mature manner. FD...this is the insults and abuse I am talking about. Seems that people cannot discuss and debate in a civilised manner...and if I responded to this (which I really want too...but I won't), it would be I being accussed of being abusive.

What insults  you talking about again?
You made a false statement about  where I "spent all this time" and I told you where and what I did. You really are your own victim if you want be one.

Anyway, you did not answer my question about Koran. Do you know that or not?

tallowood wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 10:31pm:

Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 10:22pm: tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 10:18pm: Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 10:13pm: hehe...you've spent all this time searching and this is the best you found. ... No, I was counting pages in Koran while having end of day crap. Now, can you tell me in 10 seconds how many pages are in English translation of Koran? Once again you resort to insults and abuse when you cannot respond to a post in a meaningful and mature manner. FD...this is the insults and abuse I am talking about. Seems that people cannot discuss and debate in a civilised manner...and if I responded to this (which I really want too...but I won't), it would be I being accussed of being abusive. What insults  you talking about again? You made a false statement about  where I "spent all this time" and I told you where and what I did. You really are your own victim if you want be one. Anyway, you did not answer my question about Koran. Do you know that or not?

whatever....

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 10:33pm:

... whatever....

Yes. Taliban are drug dealers but though they are Muslims I don't believe that all Muslims are drug dealers. Do you disagree with me on that?

tallowood - you're a good poster here. one of the most level headed equitable people I know.

Don't let an islamic unsettle who you are.

Damn... this thread is on fire. I've given up on keeping track.

Lestat wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 10:22pm:

tallowood wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 10:18pm: Lestat wrote on Oct 13th, 2008 at 10:13pm: hehe...you've spent all this time searching and this is the best you found. ... No, I was counting pages in Koran while having end of day crap. Now, can you tell me in 10 seconds how many pages are in English translation of Koran? Once again you resort to insults and abuse when you cannot respond to a post in a meaningful and mature manner. FD...this is the insults and abuse I am talking about. Seems that people cannot discuss and debate in a civilised manner...and if I responded to this (which I really want too...but I won't), it would be I being accussed of being abusive.

1) You did respond

2) While a little vulgar, the post is acceptable.

Lestat, in all fairness to FD when you began reposting here, you knew full well that saying vulgar things about the Qur'an was considered enlightened, fair and acceptable discussion here. If you didn't agree to that, you shouldn't have resumed posting.

Abu why do you equate vulgarity with enlightenment?

I didn't, you did, with your acceptance of it as valid discussion material

So you equate 'acceptable' with enlightened? Is that how propaganda works?

Thomas in court on terrorism-related charges

Quote:

Joseph (Jack) Terrence Thomas is accused of intentionally receiving funds from Al Qaeda in Pakistan between late 2002 and January 2003. He is also accused of possessing a falsified passport. Thomas has pleaded not guilty to the charges. The Victoria Supreme Court heard Thomas was in training so he could fight with the Taliban when he came into contact with Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. The court was told Thomas was given several thousand dollars as well as a plane ticket to Sydney and told Osama Bin Laden wanted a white boy to work in Australia.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/10/14/2390589.htm