ElPunto;847618 wrote: There is no question that shrine worship and saint reverence is absolutely xaram and the worst of sins. But if you think that destroying shrines will solve this misguidance easily I think you're mistaken. If you don't try to change people's hearts through education you haven't really changed them. +1

N.O.R.F;847613 wrote: What I'm asking is, are they (those that destroyed the tombs) wrong considering those tombs are being used by people to pray to God through the dead 'saints'? This spreads ignorance when people copy eachother and pass on the practice to others. Who is responsible? Who should be held accountable? Those questions hold a lot of weight, and they are the sort of dialogue, and education that ElPunto was talking about, that should have been instigated instead of violence and destruction, because the latter doesn't solve anything.

ElPunto;847614 wrote: The New York Times is widely known to set the news agenda in the USA Is that a fact? What are you basing this on?

Could you clarify your positions here. You say: ElPunto;847608 wrote: I'm not unconcerned with what Muslims do. Which is interpreted to mean that what certain Muslims do is their business and should not be attributed to the wider community. And a few minutes later you state: ElPunto;847608 wrote: The correct course of action Islamically is that people not worship at shrines - but you can about 2 ways. Either destroy them or the better and longer lasting course - teach people that shrines can be no good nor harm to them and that worship is reserved solely for Allah. Which is interpreted to mean that there should be a consequence or remedy for what certain Muslims are doing. So how do you reconcile your earlier statement with the latter? On the one hand Muslims are free to do what they want and you are unconcerned with their actions. On the other hand you think what certain Muslims are doing is wrong, and that they should be conducting themselves in a specific manner which you construe to be Islamically pure.

ElPunto;847599 wrote: I don't get the reasoning that because I question the motives of a particular story - I must necessarily question all stories in order to be ideologically pure..That makes no sense. Apparently this has nothing to do with a particular story. From what I've gather so far is that you distrust Western media, which leads me to the assumption that you would question the motives of every story that comes out of a Western media outlet, or any other outlet (e.g. "Al Arabiya and company) because apparently they are all controlled by the West. Subsequently, all media would be unreliable and their motives must be questioned. ElPunto;847599 wrote: I'm basing my skepticism on western hypocrisy and double standards. The hue and cry surrounding this story while actual people die in the conflicts surrounding the very monuments western media purport to care about. I believe the stories of the actual people dying in conflicts surrounding these very monuments have been extensively covered by the "untrustworthy" Western media prior to the desecration of these monuments. ElPunto;847599 wrote: You do know Timbuktu is more than one shrine or 10 shrines destroyed or preserved. It;s about mosques, libraries a whole way of life that people preserve in their memories and histories. I'm not sure you're doing this place justice when you reduce its entirety to a shrine or shrines being destroyed. If you think there is a reduction of Timbuktu to it's shrines then you're sadly mistaken. The shrines were the first historical monuments that have been destroyed, hence the story. Who knows what will be next?

N.O.R.F;847597 wrote: Huh? What Islamic heritage is being destroyed? Are any mosques being destroyed? Any of the ancient school buildings? The report says tombs are being destroyed. And tombs are not part of Islamic heritage? The spokesperson of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), in a statement today, deplored the destruction of historical sites in Timbuktu, Mali by religious extremist groups. The spokesperson said that the sites were part of the rich Islamic heritage of Mali and should not be allowed to be destroyed and put in harms way by bigoted extremist elements. The spokesperson expressed the OIC’s satisfaction at the actions taken by the Government of the Republic of Mali against the perpetrators. He added that the OIC calls for taking necessary measures and appropriate steps for the protection and preservation of the historical sites.

ElPunto;847585 wrote: It's not defensive at all. When I question ones motives for a legitimate reason - I am not being defensive. You do know that Al Arabiya and company don't set the news agenda - it's set in the west. So you're the ultimate skeptic? You question the motives behind every news story? This reminds me of Mel Gibson in 'Conspiracy Theory'. ElPunto;847585 wrote: I haven't seen any argument from you that would lead me not to question the motives of western media regarding this story. That's rich. What are you basing your skepticism on? ElPunto;847585 wrote: I still don't get the enraged part. You haven't told me why you feel like that? i am not ignoring this story - I am with Malika on this - I think it's a shame - but I'm not that worked up about it. Enraged because it is a part of Islamic heritage that should be preserved and not destroyed and because I've read about Timbuktu as a child in Islamic Studies class and how it was part of the Islamic Golden Age.

ElPunto;847565 wrote: I am amused that newspapers like the Telegraph purport to 'care' about the destruction of the heritage of Timbuktu and what not. So much so that this news is being trumpeted across a whole bunch of media that have never ever printed the word Timbuktu in their annals ever. This is "defensive myopia". Would you have made this statement if I had posted an article from Al Arabiya, or Al Ahram or The National of the UAE? This is not about the reporting of the Telegraph, but of the event at hand. ElPunto;847565 wrote: Everyday across so many parts of the world - historical and heritage sights are destroyed or demolished - it's amazing that when Muslims do it it gets so much coverage. I will not disagree that events perpetrated by "Muslims" get the attention of the media, they do, but that does not mean that events, particularly when it is Islamic heritage that is being destroyed, should be ignored as hyperbole.

N.O.R.F;847554 wrote: The Telegraph *coughs* LOL, the BBC, Al Jazeera, Al Ahram, The National ... take your pick ;-)

ElPunto;847550 wrote: Not at all. I just love all these folks who couldn't give a rat's azz previously about Timbuktu and its shrines or the Buddhas in Afghanistan going into fits when some angry Moslemz go on the rampage. You can't help but suspect it's just another bat to bash Muslims and Islam. So you're implying that the news media are exaggerating this so as to make Muslims look bad? You're saying the Islamic community should not feel outraged and condemn these acts so as to show unity in the face of widespread Islamophobia?

ElPunto;847544 wrote: Why? Why is it enraging to you on a personal level? Why wouldn't it be? Let's erase the past and start afresh, shall we?

Just saw this, it's enraging to say the least: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/mali/9369271/Timbuktu-shrine-destruction-a-war-crime.html

The Hermet;799094 wrote: Its the same with Kosovo's Serb minority...they also think they part of Serbia...but thanks to international law...all that counts are colonial borders and legal agreements...:cool: This comparison makes no sense.

Che -Guevara;799353 wrote: I don't know what difference oil will make but people back are exhausted and tired of war. I think those of us living outside are more prone this bickering than average person living in the streets of any town Somalia. The wisest words so far in this thread.

Che -Guevara;799353 wrote: I don't know what difference oil will make but people back are exhausted and tired of war. I think those of us living outside are more prone this bickering than average person living in the streets of any town Somalia. The wisest words so far in this thread.

"Britain has no commercial interest in Somalia’s oil'' - A lie if I ever heard one...

LOL ... Khatumo did to Somaliland what Somaliland did to Somalia... i.e. secede along clan lines Karma's a b*tch

Carafaat;782904 wrote: Let me correct you sxb: -First, its not only a boost in investment and emloypment creation. But most of all because Cola is now imported less foreign currency will flow out of the country. Which is healthier for a sustainable economy. -Second, Somaliland is not a desert. there is enough rainfall, the problem is not that there is a shortage of water in Somaliland, but a shortage of water catchment, production, transportation of clean water. Cola factory will pump its own water from the nearby dry river (Jaleelo is 30km outside Hargeysa) and purify its own and therefor does not lay capacity on the water resources of the people. -Third, if Cola factory sells 1 milion liter of coke, you say they will use 3 million liters of water? that is the same amount of water 3 households use in the west on annually. If what you say is indeed true (I've heard otherwise on BBC Radio), that Coca Cola will pump and purify "its own" water from a nearby dry river (presumably from flash floods), then the issue is different. My point of contention is the use of aquifers. Furthermore, we're not talking about the "West", we're talking about Somaliland, who cares if the West wastes their resources, it is ours that we need to take care of. Anyhow, most northern countries get far more rain, and their aquifers recharge at a faster rate than a region that is dry for most of the year. Oodweyne, I just hope this doesn't spell a rush to exploit whatever resources we have left, while our people remain poor.

Although the investment give a short-term boost to the SL economy, I find it rather short-sighted that the authorities allowed Coca Cola to build a plant on top of an aquifer in a region where water is already in short supply and a precious resource. According to a University of Michigan report, Coca Cola uses an average of 3.12 to 3.75 liters of water to produce one liter of Coke When Coca Cola exhausts this aquifer, where is the water going to come from? Perhaps another aquifer, and another... and so on. Somaliland isn't as rich as the Arab Gulf countries to run a desalination plants for its drinking water needs, so what other alternative is there? Here's the an exceprt from the above referenced University of Michigan report: Starting in 2002, news of some small protests against Coke, involving local Indian farmers and activists, particularly in the state of Kerala, began to make local headlines. Coke operated three bottling facilities in Kerala and farmers claimed that the facilities were draining their groundwater supplies and polluting the local water supply, causing water shortages and contamination. At the time, Coca-Cola reported that it was pulling water out of deep bore wells, extracting about 500,000 liters of water per day to produce drinks such as Coke, Fanta, and bottled water. Protestors said that Coke was draining up to four times that amount. These protests were followed by a 2003 Kerala high court ruling that shuttered Coke’s largest bottling facility, a $25-million plant, in Kerala, Plachimada, that was operated by its local subsidiary Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages. The court determined that Coke had to find an alternative to groundwater for its operations, stating that groundwater was a national resource and the plant was siphoning off so much water that local wells were drying up completely. Somaliland will be next.

Good read. Thanks!

Jacaylbaro;753066 wrote: Germans are always racists ........ i'm not surprised ^This guy, can learn... Carafaat;753143 wrote: there is no need to generalise the 80 miljoen people in Germany. ... from what ^this guy has said.

Alderman;751733 wrote: How is it America's fault that Somalis are fighting each other?? Whereas it might not be the US's fault that Somalia is in civil war, the CIA has perpetuated the situation by arming and funding warlords which has weakened an already useless TFG, and that eventually gave rise to the curse we now know as Al Shabaab. You would think that the US would learn from its past mistakes.

Abtigiis;753109 wrote: The brother leader did not owe the longevity of his rule to his iron hand only. Some facts I got from a comment made by people paying tribute to him: -Free Health Care -Free Education -Housing scheme (literally there were NO homeless people in Lybia) -Guaranteed Employement (3 million foreigners from the region sought employment in Lybia) -Social Welfare -Each citizen had a share of the oil wealth -To top all up any Lybian wanting to study higher education abroad was allowed to do so paid for by the government. Add his support to Palestinians and black struggle in Soth Africa. He wasn't a good man, but he sure isn't the devil the west wants us to see. He hasn't killed more than Bush and Tony Blair killed, but no body sees them as killers. Why? because they didn't kill their own citizens, but instead Iraq's and Afghani's? Must you kill your own to be a murderer and a dictator? Tony Blair wants to dictate how an entire civilisation should live, let alone a small country and he is still a democrat for Albion and its lovers! This earth, bothers! What about the destruction of Gaza some years back? is there any clear the BBC and CNN want us to know about? Whatever your political orientation, it is good to look at the untold side of any given story. I feel sad when I see diaspora kids with limited horizon regurgutiating western propaganda. I don't see the point of this. Every dictator from Stalin, Hilter, Mussolini, you name it, has done good things for their people, otherwise they wouldn't be in power.

Ali Abdalla Saleh & Bashar Al Assad take note.

I thought you Canadians were a lot more 'civilized' than your neighbors to the south. This guy's obviously is a fraud, note how he keeps referring to the "Muslim" police officer. I wish someone would do that to the "Irish" and the "Italian" police officers in NYC and see what response they get.