freediver wrote on Nov 19
th, 2019 at 11:26am:
You claimed that they only started killing students after the US invaded.
No I didn't FD. This is how you fail - you just don't get the whole concept of burden of proof.
I never said the taliban only started killing students after the US invaded. All I have ever done is point out that you have not presented a shred of evidence that it happened. Big difference.
You do this time and time again, and it amazes me you never learn. You make a BS claim, I point out you have no evidence, you then flail around for 20+ pages giving me every debating trick you can think of - everything
except providing me evidence - whether its falacious logical leaps, inferring meaning from what the sources don't say, and your favourite - personal attacks ("is this a muslim thing?"). I then continue pointing out you still have no evidence - and of course you have a hissy fit and scream that you have already provided it - which of course you haven't. This invariably refers to when you posted an article that contains no evidence whatsoever for your actual claim, but evidence of another claim you introduce into the discussion later. Case in point - the wiki article that contains not a single example or reference of a single school girl getting executed as per your claim.
Quote:Other than that you barely disagree with the "outrageous porky". Would you like to start backpedaling?
Your "outrageous porky" was that the taliban had an actively enforced policy of shooting school girls for not going to school - and moreover that under 8 pre-schoolers were shot for reading non-Quranic material. It is totally 100% without any basis. You invented it all by yourself out of thin air - because you have no shred of factual basis for it. If you did, you would obviously have produced it by now - instead of relying on the ridiculously absurd reference to girls who "risked execution" and activities post Taliban regime. Thats what we call a lie, or an "outrageous porky". Let me know if you're still not keeping up FD.
Quote:This is a peculiar strategy for defending the Taliban Gandalf. Why did you choose the US invasion for the starting point of your baseless claim?
Because you made the original claim in specific reference to why the US were right not to negotiate with the taliban post-9/11 - as an alternative to invasion. Thats what we were discussing. I said the taliban were up for negotiating, and that the whole nearly 20 years of bloodshed could have been avoided. You retorted by saying it would be an outrage to even give the regime the time of day - *BECAUSE* (among other things), they had an "actively enforced policy" of executing toddlers for reading non-Quranic material. It was therefore right and proper to invade.
Of course if you would like to take this opportunity of clarifying that you in fact didn't mean that the pre-2001 taliban regime that ruled Afghanistan had an "actively enforced policy" of lining up toddlers and school girls and shooting them in the back of the head - then go ahead. Somehow though I think you really did mean that - right?