egafd.com

Well, the term terrorist is a moveable feast. When the mujahideen were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan they were the good guys as far as the UK was concerned. Then when they metamorphosed into the Taliban they became "terrorists".

When Saddam was at war with the Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam was the real good guy. When he started to look a potential threat to the West's oil interests he became a terrorist, part of Bush's "Axis of Evil".

When Blair was signing all sorts of deals with Gaddafi, Gaddafi was the good guy, but when a civil war broke out threatening stability of oil production, he became one of the bad guys. Now the people who have replaced Gaddafi, being radical Islamists, are the bad guys.

And so it goes on with stories selectively highlighted by government spokesmen and the press to back up who are the current good guys and bad guys.

Played like a fiddle? No doubt the British people are played by the government of whatever persuasion. It ain't all black and white and entirely straightforward. But you would never guess that from the majority of posts on this forum. It's as easy as stealing sweets from a 5 year old.

But if you watch or listen to the BBC there are no terrorists.
They are just militants.
Or as Brian's mother says. " He's not the messiah, he's just a naughty boy"
Maybe that is what we should call them

The Mujahideen did not become the Taliban.

"Many Muslims from other countries assisted the various mujahideen groups in Afghanistan. Some groups of these veterans became significant players in later conflicts in and around the Muslim world. Osama bin Laden, originally from a wealthy family in Saudi Arabia, was a prominent organizer and financier of an all-Arab Islamist group of foreign volunteers; his Maktab al-Khadamat funnelled money, arms, and Muslim fighters from around the Muslim world into Afghanistan, with the assistance and support of the Saudi and Pakistani governments."

The Mujahideen still did not become the Taliban.

Did every single mujahideen join the Taliban? No. Do the Taliban have their roots in the mujahideen? Yes.

However....

"The Taliban movement traces its origin to the Pakistani-trained mujahideen in northern Pakistan, during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. When Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq became President of Pakistan he feared that the Soviets were planning to invade Balochistan, Pakistan so he sent Akhtar Abdur Rahman to Saudi Arabia to garner support for the Afghan resistance against Soviet occupation forces. In the meantime, the United States and Saudi Arabia joined the struggle against the Soviet Union by providing all the funds.[10] Zia-ul-Haq aligned himself with Pakistan's Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam and later picked General Akhtar Abdur Rahman to lead the insurgency against the Soviet Union inside Afghanistan. About 90,000 Afghans, including Mohammad Omar, were trained by Pakistan's ISI during the 1980s

I will leave you to ponder your pedantry.

You do know wikipedia isn't always accurate?

Indeed I do. It is just one of many links stating the same thing.

A whole lot more verifiable than the Bible, Essex Lad! Hahahahaha!

Ever thought of a career on stage Sam ? I can't remember when I read anything so funny. I don't think I appreciated it as much as you though.
p.s. any chance of an autograph before you become really famous ?