Timbuktu shrine destruction 'a war crime

[The-freeman]

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.

How do you know no one gave a "rat's azz" about these things? people visit Timbuktu from all around the world because of its culture.And though you're quick to play the Islamaphobia card you'll notice it's Muslim people who have destroyed these shrines. They are the guilty party. Don't blame the victims for telling the world their story.

[ElPunto]

Somalia;847564 wrote:

It portrays Islam as an intolerant religion, that's why one is against it ElPunto. This is history being destroyed.

That portrayal is solely the handiwork of the media. And you are a tool for believing there is a link between what these folks choose to do and the tolerance/intolerance of Islam as a religion.

[ElPunto]

The-freeman;847568 wrote:

How do you know no one gave a "rat's azz" about these things? people visit Timbuktu from all around the world because of its culture.And though you're quick to play the Islamaphobia card you'll notice it's Muslim people who have destroyed these shrines. They are the guilty party. Don't blame the victims for telling the world their story.

You don't give a rat's azz if monuments and shrines are what makes the news regarding this place rather than the people their hardships and their poverty. It;s a judgement call buddy. I have not played any Islamaphobia card - I simply question their motives for publishing this story. I simply don't believe their motives have anything to do with the destruction of historical sites. Whether Muslims are the guilty party or not is upto their respective communities - not someone 5000 km away.

[ailamos]

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.

[Malika]

It;s an absolute shame. Erasing historical aspect of an era, Muslims should perhaps look back on - when places like Timbuktu were centres of trade, education and mostly religious knowledge - doesnt deserve mindless vandalism.

[Somalia]

ElPunto;847571 wrote:

That portrayal is solely the handiwork of the media. And you are a tool for believing there is a link between what these folks choose to do and the tolerance/intolerance of Islam as a religion.

The media blows up monuments? :confused:

[Che -Guevara]

I think Elpunto has point.

[N.O.R.F]

ailamos;847558 wrote:

LOL, the BBC, Al Jazeera, Al Ahram, The National ... take your pick ;-)

Ok. Care to address the other part of my post?

[Somalia]

Che -Guevara;847578 wrote:

I think Elpunto has point.

No surprise there.

[ElPunto]

ailamos;847574 wrote:

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.

 

 

 

I will not disagree that events perpetrated by "Muslims" get the attention of the media, they do, but that does not mean that events such as this one, particularly when it is Islamic heritage that is being destroyed, should be ignored as hyperbole.

 

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. But that;s neither here or there. I haven't seen any argument from you that would lead me not to question the motives of western media regarding this story.

 

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. Anymore than one gets worked up about some historic building in NY or London getting demolished.

[ElPunto]

Somalia;847576 wrote:

The media blows up monuments? :confused:

For a Puntie - you can be quite thick. The media doens't blow up monuments - it just convinces you that 20 people who do blow up monuments are the determinative factor in reaching a judgement about Islam. And clearly you have bought that - since you spew - oooh these guys are giving a negative portrayal to islam etc.

[The-freeman]

ElPunto;847573 wrote:

You don't give a rat's azz if monuments and shrines are what makes the news regarding this place rather than the people their hardships and their poverty. It;s a judgement call buddy. I have not played any Islamaphobia card - I simply question their motives for publishing this story. I simply don't believe their motives have anything to do with the destruction of historical sites. Whether Muslims are the guilty party or not is upto their respective communities - not someone 5000 km away.

Though these monuments have nothing to do with me I do care and understand that it is cherished by those who have maintained them throughout their existence. The Telegraph have done nothing but highlight the cultural oppression brought upon these simple people.

 

PS:

[Somalia]

ElPunto

Yes, my sarcasm is a result of severe trauma to the head.

 

It will be the denominating factor in the eyes of the common man, the uninformed which gets fed this by the media. It's not his fault, it's simply his only news source to the rest of the world. He sits in front of the television before going to bed and work in the morning only to repeat this over and over again. He doesn't go to the library nor does he search up history or religion for himself.

 

If you are going to continue to defend the destruction of cultural heritage then you'd find yourself in good company with the best in that field, no need to elaborate here.

[ailamos]

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]

Somalia;847591 wrote:

ElPunto

 

 

It will be the denominating factor in the eyes of the common man, the uninformed which gets fed this by the media. It's not his fault, it's simply his only news source to the rest of the world. He sits in front of the television before going to bed and work in the morning only to repeat this over and over again. He doesn't go to the library nor does he search up history or religion for himself.

 

.

This simply validates my earlier point - that this portrayal and consquent errant conclusion - Islam/Muslims is intolerant - is the work primarily of the media. Thanks.

 

I'm not defending destruction - you would know that if you actually read what I wrote - I'm simply questioning motives and not wholeheartedly in the camp of hypocritcal western media.