Australian Politics Forum - Has there been a more outrageous porky here?

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #30 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 10:54am

freediver wrote on Aug 30^th, 2019 at 9:12pm:

I believe I was quoting from wikipedia in the original discussion and provided links.

We were talking about the Taliban regime in Afghanistan 1996-2001. Your wiki article cited taliban insurgents bombing schools a decade later. Do you need me to spell out the difference between a regime's "actively enforced policy" of shooting 8 year old girls and younger in the back of the head for reading non-Quranic material and indiscriminately bombing schools during an insurgency? Is it redundant for me to ask if you know of a single example of an 8 year old girl or younger being shot by the taliban during their rule of Afghanistan for reading non-Quranic material. I'll wager it never happened - and no, that is not apologising for the taliban.

You are not that dense FD, you are willfully being obtuse about this. Presumably because you can't bring yourself to admit to lying.

But not to worry FD, you have a loyal band of Islamophobes here only to eager to spinelessly apologise and deflect for you.

Quote:

Does Malala count?

Gee FD, lets think about that one... was Malala an 8 year old or younger shot in the back of the head by the Afghan Taliban regime during their rule in an "actively enforced policy" to punish girls from reading non-Quranic material?

Quote:

Are you actually defending the Taliban, or just being pedantic about anatomy?

I think there is a damning human rights case to be made against the taliban (in all its forms) which can be more than adequately prosecuted with the truth. And that introducing porkies into the case can only damage the case against them.

Do you always respond with this tired sort of logical fallacy when people catch you out blatantly lying - or only when its muslims doing it?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49003 At my desk.	Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here? Reply #31 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 11:39am The wikipedia article said the pre-invasion regime had the death penalty for teachers and students, for the crime of teaching girls to read. Why are you so eager to defend the Taliban?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 95724 Gender:	Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here? Reply #32 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 11:52am Karnal wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 4:45am: freediver wrote on Aug 30^th, 2019 at 6:44pm: According to Gandalf, that is freedom of speech, Islam style. How about porkies, FD? What's the matter, FD? Cat got your tongue?
Back to top	IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 95724 Gender:	Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here? Reply #33 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 11:57am freediver wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 11:39am: The wikipedia article said the pre-invasion regime had the death penalty for teachers and students, for the crime of teaching girls to read. That's right, G. Someone later took this off Wikipedia. Probably a Muslim defending the Taliban.
Back to top	IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #34 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:01pm

freediver wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 11:39am:

The wikipedia article said the pre-invasion regime had the death penalty for teachers and students, for the crime of teaching girls to read.

You are either extremely clueless, or you are lying. Again.

From the two wiki articles you quoted in this post:

1.
Quote:

During the Taliban regime, many women who had previously been teachers began secretly giving an education to young girls (as well as some boys) in their neighborhoods, teaching from ten to sixty children at a time.[26] The homes of these women became community homes for students, and were entirely financed and managed by women. News about these secret schools spread through word of mouth from woman to woman.[26]

Each day young girls would hide all their school supplies, such as books, notebooks and pencils, underneath their burqas to go to school. At these schools, young females were taught basic literary skills, numeracy skills, and various other subjects such as biology, chemistry, English, Quranic Studies, cooking, sewing, and knitting. Many women involved in teaching were caught by the Taliban and persecuted, jailed, and tortured.[26]

and

2.
Quote:

Education
The Taliban claimed to recognize their Islamic duty to offer education to both boys and girls, yet a decree was passed that banned girls above the age of 8 from receiving education. Maulvi Kalamadin insisted it was only a temporary suspension and that females would return to school and work once facilities and street security were adapted to prevent cross-gender contact. The Taliban wished to have total control of Afghanistan before calling upon an Ulema body to determine the content of a new curriculum to replace the Islamic yet unacceptable Mujahadin version.[2]

The female employment ban was felt greatly in the education system. Within Kabul alone, the ruling affected 106,256 girls, 148,223 male students, and 8,000 female university undergraduates. 7,793 female teachers were dismissed, a move that crippled the provision of education and caused 63 schools to close due to a sudden lack of educators.[10] Some women ran clandestine schools within their homes for local children, or for other women under the guise of sewing classes, such as the Golden Needle Sewing School. The learners, parents and educators were aware of the consequences should the Taliban discover their activities, but for those who felt trapped under the strict Taliban rule, such actions allowed them a sense of self-determination and hope.[14]

So the only thing even remotely related to the actual consequences of 8 year old girls attending to school is "Many women involved in teaching were caught by the Taliban and persecuted, jailed, and tortured". Every other reference to punishment mentions only the teachers, not the students.

Compare these two quotes with what you actually said:

Quote:

The Taliban presented every girl over 8 in the regions they controlled with the death penalty for learning to read, and girls under 8 with the death penalty for learning to read anything other than the Quran. It was not an isolated incident, it was an actively enforced policy.

So there are in fact several layers of lies in this claim of yours:

1. no mention of anyone being shot in the back of the head for teaching girls - students or teachers. No mention of anyone being killed by any means over girls education.

2. No mention of girls, 8 year olds otherwise, receiving any punishment for going to school - only teachers

3. No reference whatsoever to under 8s - let alone any punishment for them learning to read non-Quranic materia.

Is it dawning on you yet the extent of your dishonesty FD?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:10pm by polite_gandalf »

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95724
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #35 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:22pm

To be fair, G, FD has never upheld the use of porkies for anything else, just Islam. In most other areas, he's a staunch defender of the truth.

As Gordon, Bobby and Gonads have said, does it really matter? Something must be done about Islam. If it's brought down with an avalanche of lies, no worries. They can pick up the pieces after we invade the next place based on porkies.

I think it's fair to say that you can't discuss Islam without telling a few howlers. Muslims like you just get in the way, obsessing over every little thing people say about Islam, it's so unfair. As Bobby says, you're a bad sport for converting in the first place, so why come here and spoil everybody's fun?

You really should be more tolerant about other people's beliefs.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #36 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:58pm

Karnal wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:22pm:

You really should be more tolerant about other people's beliefs.

I'm very tolerant of FD's right to lie in the name of criticising Islam and muslims. Good luck to him. And may he receive much ridicule and scorn for it.

But tolerance doesn't reqiure spinelessly apologising and deflecting for those lies. Tolerance can also involve exposing those lies and pointing out the dishonesty of the person making those lies.

I will also warn of the dangers of lying, and that they are not just a pendatic nitpicking exercise. Bush I had the babies in the incubators howler, Howard had Saddam's human shredder. Both those lies mattered - they both undeniably galvanised the public into supporting military action. Now its FD's turn - and it is every bit as sinister and dangerous. He introduced it in response to the notion that Saudi Arabia was just as bad as the taliban in terms of treatment of women. The context of this was that FD thinks overthrowing the taliban was a no-brainer, on humanitarian grounds, yet there are no such grounds in relation to the Saudi regime. The subtext of this position should be pretty obvious - the US invaded and overthrew the taliban, whereas the Saudi regime remains untouchable. And so FD constructs his own ideological position around that reality - the west dispatched the taliban, that must have been right and proper, therefore the taliban are the worst. Yet the west continue to bend over to the Saudis - therefore this must be right and proper, meaning the Saudis mustn't be as bad.

Lies of course are central to maintaining this wholly untennable position: deny that the systematic abuses and persecution of Saudi women is taking place, and invent the most outlandish porkies about what the taliban did to little girls.

The implications of these lies shouldn't need elaborating: the abuses of the Saudi regime that we ignore or apologise for, the continued belligerance in Afghanistan - with all its destructive futility, and of course, set the tone for the next wars.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49003
At my desk.

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #37 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 3:19pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:01pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 11:39am:

The wikipedia article said the pre-invasion regime had the death penalty for teachers and students, for the crime of teaching girls to read.

You are either extremely clueless, or you are lying. Again.

From the two wiki articles you quoted in this post:

1.
Quote:

During the Taliban regime, many women who had previously been teachers began secretly giving an education to young girls (as well as some boys) in their neighborhoods, teaching from ten to sixty children at a time.[26] The homes of these women became community homes for students, and were entirely financed and managed by women. News about these secret schools spread through word of mouth from woman to woman.[26]

Each day young girls would hide all their school supplies, such as books, notebooks and pencils, underneath their burqas to go to school. At these schools, young females were taught basic literary skills, numeracy skills, and various other subjects such as biology, chemistry, English, Quranic Studies, cooking, sewing, and knitting. Many women involved in teaching were caught by the Taliban and persecuted, jailed, and tortured.[26]

and

2.
Quote:

Education
The Taliban claimed to recognize their Islamic duty to offer education to both boys and girls, yet a decree was passed that banned girls above the age of 8 from receiving education. Maulvi Kalamadin insisted it was only a temporary suspension and that females would return to school and work once facilities and street security were adapted to prevent cross-gender contact. The Taliban wished to have total control of Afghanistan before calling upon an Ulema body to determine the content of a new curriculum to replace the Islamic yet unacceptable Mujahadin version.[2]

The female employment ban was felt greatly in the education system. Within Kabul alone, the ruling affected 106,256 girls, 148,223 male students, and 8,000 female university undergraduates. 7,793 female teachers were dismissed, a move that crippled the provision of education and caused 63 schools to close due to a sudden lack of educators.[10] Some women ran clandestine schools within their homes for local children, or for other women under the guise of sewing classes, such as the Golden Needle Sewing School. The learners, parents and educators were aware of the consequences should the Taliban discover their activities, but for those who felt trapped under the strict Taliban rule, such actions allowed them a sense of self-determination and hope.[14]

So the only thing even remotely related to the actual consequences of 8 year old girls attending to school is "Many women involved in teaching were caught by the Taliban and persecuted, jailed, and tortured". Every other reference to punishment mentions only the teachers, not the students.

Compare these two quotes with what you actually said:

Quote:

The Taliban presented every girl over 8 in the regions they controlled with the death penalty for learning to read, and girls under 8 with the death penalty for learning to read anything other than the Quran. It was not an isolated incident, it was an actively enforced policy.

So there are in fact several layers of lies in this claim of yours:

1. no mention of anyone being shot in the back of the head for teaching girls - students or teachers. No mention of anyone being killed by any means over girls education.

2. No mention of girls, 8 year olds otherwise, receiving any punishment for going to school - only teachers

3. No reference whatsoever to under 8s - let alone any punishment for them learning to read non-Quranic materia.

Is it dawning on you yet the extent of your dishonesty FD?

So you proved I was lying about the Taliban killing students and teachers by leaving out the bits I quoted about the Taliban killing students and teachers? After I went to the trouble of providing the evidence for you? Who's telling the outrageous porkies now Gandalf?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49003
At my desk.

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #38 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 3:20pm

freediver wrote on Mar 5^th, 2019 at 12:12pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 4^th, 2019 at 8:26am:

freediver wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2019 at 9:28am:

The Taliban presented every girl over 8 in the regions they controlled with the death penalty for learning to read, and girls under 8 with the death penalty for learning to read anything other than the Quran. It was not an isolated incident, it was an actively enforced policy.

Can you verify this claim FD?

I'd be surprised if it turns out that capital punishment for girls under 8 was an "actively enforced policy" under the taliban.

Yep. Keep polishing that turd.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women

Women seeking an education were forced to attend underground schools, where they and their teachers risked execution if caught.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_rights_in_Afghanistan#Education

The Taliban are still opposed to education for Afghan boys and girls. They are burning down schools, killing students and teachers by all kinds of means, including chemical warfare.

Gandalf would you be so eager to defend the Taliban if the US had worked with them as you suggest, and as you criticise them for doing with the Saudis? Does your ability to criticise Muslims depend entirely on your ability to pass the blame onto the US at every opportunity?

Again Gandalf, why do you have such a hard on for the Taliban?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95724
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #39 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 4:06pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:22pm:

You really should be more tolerant about other people's beliefs.

I'm very tolerant of FD's right to lie in the name of criticising Islam and muslims. Good luck to him. And may he receive much ridicule and scorn for it.

But tolerance doesn't reqiure spinelessly apologising and deflecting for those lies. Tolerance can also involve exposing those lies and pointing out the dishonesty of the person making those lies.

I will also warn of the dangers of lying, and that they are not just a pendatic nitpicking exercise. Bush I had the babies in the incubators howler, Howard had Saddam's human shredder. Both those lies mattered - they both undeniably galvanised the public into supporting military action. Now its FD's turn - and it is every bit as sinister and dangerous. He introduced it in response to the notion that Saudi Arabia was just as bad as the taliban in terms of treatment of women. The context of this was that FD thinks overthrowing the taliban was a no-brainer, on humanitarian grounds, yet there are no such grounds in relation to the Saudi regime. The subtext of this position should be pretty obvious - the US invaded and overthrew the taliban, whereas the Saudi regime remains untouchable. And so FD constructs his own ideological position around that reality - the west dispatched the taliban, that must have been right and proper, therefore the taliban are the worst. Yet the west continue to bend over to the Saudis - therefore this must be right and proper, meaning the Saudis mustn't be as bad.

Lies of course are central to maintaining this wholly untennable position: deny that the systematic abuses and persecution of Saudi women is taking place, and invent the most outlandish porkies about what the taliban did to little girls.

The implications of these lies shouldn't need elaborating: the abuses of the Saudi regime that we ignore or apologise for, the continued belligerance in Afghanistan - with all its destructive futility, and of course, set the tone for the next wars.

Sure, so why not do the same? You could dream up all sorts of atrocities committed by the Saudis. Why not just make a few up?

If FD relies on lying, and the members here are good with it, why not just lie back? It seems to me that FD only calls you a liar when you tell the truth, G.

If anybody questions your lies, you can just jump in with your own questions. Accuse them of evasion when they ask for an answer. If they keep asking, just leave the thread.

You can wrap all this up into a defense of your rights. Demand that they stop trying to censor you, you will not be silenced. It's your freedom of speech to tell porkies.

Yes, some people will think you're deluded and shamelessly mock you or try to bring you round to the truth. You can then attack them with a barrage of inane questions.

After all, you're not deluded, you know exactly what you're doing. You're telling porkies to rile people up and get them to hate each other. You don't actually believe any of your rubbish. With any luck, someone will hear your lies and, say, gun down a place of worship. Best case scenario and they'll go and invade someone.

You'll know you've been successful when people say, WE DON'T WANT THEM HERE or SEND THEM BACK TO WHERE THEY CAME FROM.

Try it out, G. FD might start to show you some respect.

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 95724
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #40 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 4:14pm

freediver wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 3:19pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:01pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 11:39am:

The wikipedia article said the pre-invasion regime had the death penalty for teachers and students, for the crime of teaching girls to read.

You are either extremely clueless, or you are lying. Again.

From the two wiki articles you quoted in this post:

1.
Quote:

During the Taliban regime, many women who had previously been teachers began secretly giving an education to young girls (as well as some boys) in their neighborhoods, teaching from ten to sixty children at a time.[26] The homes of these women became community homes for students, and were entirely financed and managed by women. News about these secret schools spread through word of mouth from woman to woman.[26]

Each day young girls would hide all their school supplies, such as books, notebooks and pencils, underneath their burqas to go to school. At these schools, young females were taught basic literary skills, numeracy skills, and various other subjects such as biology, chemistry, English, Quranic Studies, cooking, sewing, and knitting. Many women involved in teaching were caught by the Taliban and persecuted, jailed, and tortured.[26]

and

2.
Quote:

Education
The Taliban claimed to recognize their Islamic duty to offer education to both boys and girls, yet a decree was passed that banned girls above the age of 8 from receiving education. Maulvi Kalamadin insisted it was only a temporary suspension and that females would return to school and work once facilities and street security were adapted to prevent cross-gender contact. The Taliban wished to have total control of Afghanistan before calling upon an Ulema body to determine the content of a new curriculum to replace the Islamic yet unacceptable Mujahadin version.[2]

The female employment ban was felt greatly in the education system. Within Kabul alone, the ruling affected 106,256 girls, 148,223 male students, and 8,000 female university undergraduates. 7,793 female teachers were dismissed, a move that crippled the provision of education and caused 63 schools to close due to a sudden lack of educators.[10] Some women ran clandestine schools within their homes for local children, or for other women under the guise of sewing classes, such as the Golden Needle Sewing School. The learners, parents and educators were aware of the consequences should the Taliban discover their activities, but for those who felt trapped under the strict Taliban rule, such actions allowed them a sense of self-determination and hope.[14]

So the only thing even remotely related to the actual consequences of 8 year old girls attending to school is "Many women involved in teaching were caught by the Taliban and persecuted, jailed, and tortured". Every other reference to punishment mentions only the teachers, not the students.

Compare these two quotes with what you actually said:

Quote:

The Taliban presented every girl over 8 in the regions they controlled with the death penalty for learning to read, and girls under 8 with the death penalty for learning to read anything other than the Quran. It was not an isolated incident, it was an actively enforced policy.

So there are in fact several layers of lies in this claim of yours:

1. no mention of anyone being shot in the back of the head for teaching girls - students or teachers. No mention of anyone being killed by any means over girls education.

2. No mention of girls, 8 year olds otherwise, receiving any punishment for going to school - only teachers

3. No reference whatsoever to under 8s - let alone any punishment for them learning to read non-Quranic materia.

Is it dawning on you yet the extent of your dishonesty FD?

So you proved I was lying about the Taliban killing students and teachers by leaving out the bits I quoted about the Taliban killing students and teachers? After I went to the trouble of providing the evidence for you? Who's telling the outrageous porkies now Gandalf?

You see? Just accuse them of lying back, G. Pretend you've proven your lies with a half-hearted Wikipedia quote you haven't even read.

The important thing is to never concede. Just stick to the lie. If you stay committed, people will fall for it.

One last thing - never answer a question. You might accidentally reveal the truth and this could give the game away.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #41 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 5:00pm

freediver wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 3:19pm:

So you proved I was lying about the Taliban killing students and teachers by leaving out the bits I quoted about the Taliban killing students and teachers? After I went to the trouble of providing the evidence for you? Who's telling the outrageous porkies now Gandalf?

By which of course you mean a vague sentence that said women and teachers "risked execution" by attending school. Yes, thats right folks, from that we get actual "taliban killing students and teachers", and from that, presumably, we get an "actively enforced policy" of shooting in the back of the head both over 8 year old girls for going to school, and under 8 year old girls for reading non-Quranic material.

You really are unbelievable FD.

Do you at the very least admit to inventing the part about under 8s being executed for reading non-Quranic material? Since not even your legendary powers of logical leaping could possibly get that from any of your wiki articles - given that under 8 year old girls are not even mentioned anywhere.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #42 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 5:06pm

Karnal wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 4:06pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Aug 31^st, 2019 at 12:22pm:

You really should be more tolerant about other people's beliefs.

I'm very tolerant of FD's right to lie in the name of criticising Islam and muslims. Good luck to him. And may he receive much ridicule and scorn for it.

But tolerance doesn't reqiure spinelessly apologising and deflecting for those lies. Tolerance can also involve exposing those lies and pointing out the dishonesty of the person making those lies.

I will also warn of the dangers of lying, and that they are not just a pendatic nitpicking exercise. Bush I had the babies in the incubators howler, Howard had Saddam's human shredder. Both those lies mattered - they both undeniably galvanised the public into supporting military action. Now its FD's turn - and it is every bit as sinister and dangerous. He introduced it in response to the notion that Saudi Arabia was just as bad as the taliban in terms of treatment of women. The context of this was that FD thinks overthrowing the taliban was a no-brainer, on humanitarian grounds, yet there are no such grounds in relation to the Saudi regime. The subtext of this position should be pretty obvious - the US invaded and overthrew the taliban, whereas the Saudi regime remains untouchable. And so FD constructs his own ideological position around that reality - the west dispatched the taliban, that must have been right and proper, therefore the taliban are the worst. Yet the west continue to bend over to the Saudis - therefore this must be right and proper, meaning the Saudis mustn't be as bad.

Lies of course are central to maintaining this wholly untennable position: deny that the systematic abuses and persecution of Saudi women is taking place, and invent the most outlandish porkies about what the taliban did to little girls.

The implications of these lies shouldn't need elaborating: the abuses of the Saudi regime that we ignore or apologise for, the continued belligerance in Afghanistan - with all its destructive futility, and of course, set the tone for the next wars.

Sure, so why not do the same? You could dream up all sorts of atrocities committed by the Saudis. Why not just make a few up?

If FD relies on lying, and the members here are good with it, why not just lie back? It seems to me that FD only calls you a liar when you tell the truth, G.

If anybody questions your lies, you can just jump in with your own questions. Accuse them of evasion when they ask for an answer. If they keep asking, just leave the thread.

You can wrap all this up into a defense of your rights. Demand that they stop trying to censor you, you will not be silenced. It's your freedom of speech to tell porkies.

Yes, some people will think you're deluded and shamelessly mock you or try to bring you round to the truth. You can then attack them with a barrage of inane questions.

After all, you're not deluded, you know exactly what you're doing. You're telling porkies to rile people up and get them to hate each other. You don't actually believe any of your rubbish. With any luck, someone will hear your lies and, say, gun down a place of worship. Best case scenario and they'll go and invade someone.

You'll know you've been successful when people say, WE DON'T WANT THEM HERE or SEND THEM BACK TO WHERE THEY CAME FROM.

Try it out, G. FD might start to show you some respect.

Ok, I'll give it a shot...

hey, you know, the Saudis have an actively enforced policy of forcing immodestly dressed women to suffocate to death in burning buildings. Therefore the Saudis are as bad as the taliban, who we overthrew. Therefore, why not overthrow the Saudis?

How did that go? I reckon its pretty rock solid. It is, after all based on an actual real-life incident in Saudi Arabia that we know happened - which is more than I can say for FD's whopper. He can't even come up with a single under 8 year old who was shot in the back of the head for reading non-Quranic material. Poor FD, he can only cite Malala.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46141
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #43 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 5:53pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 30^th, 2019 at 3:25pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 30^th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

OK - on topic:

nope, sorry Bobby.

Would you like to have another go? hint: the topic is FD's blatant lie that the taliban during their rule had a widespread "actively enforced policy" of shooting 8 year old girls in the back of the head for reading non-Quranic material.

Who knows - maybe you will actually produce some evidence to prove me wrong and FD right? Not hopeful though - I'll stand by for a further barrage of completely irrelevant anecdotes.

So it was not Taliban policy
to shoot her in the head, it was just Taliban (Islamic) practice
- and not splitting hairs meticulously about policy (do illiterate goatherds have dot gov dot Talib websites on their policies???) and their blatant everyday oppressive and violent practice in every utterance where the two concepts come up is what sends you into a little indignant pouting on behalf of all Islamists thus wronged.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 31^st, 2019 at 6:50pm by Frank »

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Gordon

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20588
Gordon
Gender: male

Re: Has there been a more outrageous porky here?
Reply #44 - Aug 31^st, 2019 at 5:53pm

Hey Gandalf, lets say for arguments sake there is some embellishment or poetic license taken in the post you've mentioned. Why bother arguing on behalf of the Taliban at all?

Their beliefs and regime is the most backwards life sucking force of evil on the planet.

You arguing on their behalf is about as ridiculous as someone defending Hitlers testicle count against the Colonel Bogey March song.

Back to top

IBI

IP Logged