(Original post by Folderol)
I didn't want any evidence. I don't know where you're getting that from. I asked a question rhetorically and answered it. The reference to substance was about the fact you posted a link without adding any subtance of your own. You just gave me a link.
Yes I did only give you a link, thinking you'd get the point. But you certainly did give the impression you weren't in agreement with the report I posted, when you tried to disprove my point by arguing that "Massoud's crime were actually committed by Sayyaf". Go read that
again. I link a report which, in part, attributes some nasty stuff to Massoud, and in response, you tell me that the pillaging and looting was actually carried out by Sayyaf. What kind of a response is that for someone who acknowledges Massoud's misdeeds?!
I did so because I was pre-empting arguments I have seen before - and while you're about wrong about the quote being in my favourites, it is stuck in my mind. I was not making a blanket defence of Massoud - that would be absurd and inconceivable. If you've looked through my posts (which it appears you might have), you'll find a debate with a Pashtun guy who talks specifically about that. But, even the quote itself: it did not refer to anything aside from a single incident of looting etc. - there's no way that could have been a defence of anybody.
I can't see any other reason for you even posting that quote on multiple occasions unless you're trying to stick up for him.
And can you stop with these retarded assumptions please, he isn't my "hero".
We are not talking about judgements but the mere fact that he did fight the Taliban which you seemed to doubt here: "And there's you in your naivety responding with "He fought against the Taliban". Pff."
Nope, no doubt. I never indicated that he didn't fight the Taliban (though he didn't always stick around for a fight, but once again, this isn't the point). I just found it slightly funny that you'd point out him fighting the Taliban when I was more concerned with his human rights record. Fighting the Taliban won't pay for his sins.
No, actually, most of the time its about who he was, how he fought the Taliban, why I have him in my avatar etc. I've only ever encountered one or two Pashtuns who are determined to show me these "new" facts.
I'm not going to insult your intelligence and suggest you would put up an avatar of Massoud and not expect someone bring you up about the guys doings. Seems you're well aware of what Massoud did, just not entirely comfortable when others mention it. (As if he was your hero one may say!)
Even then, I don't deny that Massoud was responsible for the deaths of civilians. I was trying to combat the bloodthirsty image they had created of him ("innocent people he killed becouse he was power hungry and the hate he had for pashtuns" etc.). But well done for searching through my old posts. You must really have some stake in this or something. Oh, and can you, again, stop with the assumptions: the quote is not saved in my favourites.
By combating you mean saying, "Look, I know he did some nasty things and he's no saint, but see here, he didn't do this particular act at this particular event." I mean, sorry, but just don't bother with statements like that...water off a duck's back. What you've done is akin to me having an avatar of Bin Laden (though avatars are
the issue) and then being quick to point, but you know, although Bin Laden was bad, he didn't actually kill that one guy on that particular day. I'd be his fanboy if I did. (Don't take the favourites things too literally. You don't need to favourite something you've memorised!)
Facts have not changed. I never made Massoud out to be a saint, I said this to you early on. Your only evidence is that it was my avatar (or according to your later assumptions "more than an avatar" )
Sorry mate, but when one of your first replies is in defence of the guy (even if its only one particular and specific quote), your viewpoint of Massoud is pretty clear. I don't think I need to spell this out.
Both of which would be assumptions. It's not the first one because, quite frankly, I know my stuff about Afghan history - and I'm glad you've accepted that it isn't the first. As for the second, no. Having someone in your avatar does not mean you think their completely saintly. It also does not mean you absolve them from past responsibility. Churchill said a lot of retarded things, he was behind some pretty abhorrent crap as well. He was voted the number one Briton - you think Britons approve of everything he did? This debate was elongated because of the assumptions you have made about my position.
I could have a pretty accurate guess at to what you think of the guy. Let's leave it at that because neither of us needs this explained.