"Most Islamic" Nation

  • Thread starter Thread starter bartdanr
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 69
  • Views Views 11K
Status
Not open for further replies.
islamirama said:
There were some western organizations that wanted to spend millions of dollars on restoring the statues. The Taliban requested that money be donated to Afghan civilians who were dieing of starvation and what not. The western organizations didn't care one bit about suffering of the humans and wanted only to waste the money on a statue. The statue had stayed there without Talibans or anyone else destroying it. But when it became a western issue of "saving" the statue over the human lives, the owners of the land decided to do what they thought was best for their nation.



From an humanitarian point of view, that was the best thing to do in the world. Please educate yourself before you go on about archeology and "militant tribal leaders" and other western media parroting.
Click to expand...
What you are conceding is that Taliban rule brought to pass "civilians who were dieing of starvation and what not" and in such a situation, they expected Western organizations to feed them. Would they have destroyed mosques if Western organizations had offered money to restore mosques?
 
K.Venugopal said:
What you are conceding is that Taliban rule brought to pass "civilians who were dieing of starvation and what not" and in such a situation, they expected Western organizations to feed them. Would they have destroyed mosques if Western organizations had offered money to restore mosques?
Click to expand...

You have missed the point; instead of the money being spent on civilians dieing of starvation, the money was spent on some idols. It's a matter of human priority that is at stake here: Feed a starving child or erect a statue? I know what I'd choose!
 
aamirsaab said:
You have missed the point; instead of the money being spent on civilians dieing of starvation, the money was spent on some idols. It's a matter of human priority that is at stake here: Feed a starving child or erect a statue? I know what I'd choose!
Click to expand...
You also appear to have missed the point. The point is it was not Taliban's money that was sought to be used for restoring the Bamiyan. If Taliban was not agreeable to it, they should have simply rejected the offer. Instead, Taliban wanted to decide how Western organizations' money was to be used and when they were unable to, they destroyed the Bamiyan statues in a fit of anger. That spoke of the level of culture of the Taliban.
 
K.Venugopal said:
You also appear to have missed the point. The point is it was not Taliban's money that was sought to be used for restoring the Bamiyan. If Taliban was not agreeable to it, they should have simply rejected the offer. Instead, Taliban wanted to decide how Western organizations' money was to be used and when they were unable to, they destroyed the Bamiyan statues in a fit of anger. That spoke of the level of culture of the Taliban.
Click to expand...

Taliban is setting the standard in their own turf...
this isn't about culture, it is about control.. if the west thinks it can squander money on paganism to make a moot point of who is running things, the taliabn are defining the limits.. It is as simple as that!

whomever originally is funding this project, has no decent intent..
1- either promoting paganism on Muslim land
2-wanting to highlight how the west allegedly likes to help when it actually squanders on needless projects
3-missed the point entirely, for starters should look for the looted treasures of Sumaria which they were the cause behind its destruction and smuggling from Iraq
4-wants to play up how the taliban is oh so bad and they are oh so good..


there is no culture in a buddha statue.. apparently they erect one every year of butter and eat him after the festival is over.. perhaps you can go to one of those countries and join in the festivities there?


cheers
 
I don't expect people who consecrate cows and bathe in dung to understand the difference between effigies, and cultures.. under early Islamic states which spanned regions like Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Iran etc, all their pre-Islamic monuments are still standing erect, and in fact if any -'non-cultural' acts occured it was under the occupation of the so-called recoverers of ancient cultures.

If it were an Islamic practice to destroy cultures it would have happened when the world was under actual Islamic rule, instead we saw the age of reason!

so take your sanctimonious crap to your hindu forum!

cheers
 
K.Venugopal said:
....That spoke of the level of culture of the Taliban.
Click to expand...
You really need to sort your priorities out; the lives of human beings could have been saved with that money but no it's used to refurbish some idols. Do you know how unbelievably stupid that sounds? Shall I examplify it for you?

You see a hungry kid. He asks you for some money so he and his family can LIVE. What you do is say: ''well you know what kid, here have a poster. I'll pay for it.'' And then you have the nerve to speak about culture when that kid's family rip that poster in half.

What those afghans did was send a clear-cut message: ''Don't insult us. We asked for food, not a bloody idol!''
 
I understand that we go offtopic, but did the destruction of the Buddha statues feed the poor Afghani people?
BTW its hard to name a most islamic country nowadays i think. For example Malaysia has too many non muslims to be named like that. Calling taleban Somalia or Afghanistan as most islamic states should be a offence for muslim civilization which once was so innovative in Andalusia. Since the wave of islamization got to almost all muslim countries, I dont see the differences in level of devotion in muslim world.
 
aamirsaab said:
What those afghans did was send a clear-cut message: ''Don't insult us. We asked for food, not a bloody idol!''
Click to expand...

Its interesting to know what would You say if it was an ancient mosque destroyed by lets say hindus in similar situation.
 
Aaron85 said:
Its interesting to know what would You say if it was an ancient mosque destroyed by lets say hindus in similar situation.
Click to expand...

Destroying centuries old mosque and a religious house of worship was an act of terrorism. The hindus that did this belonged it hindu extremist party. It is very poor taste of you to compare the two, but then again not much can be expected by your kind.
 
islamirama said:
Destroying centuries old mosque and a religious house of worship was an act of terrorism. The hindus that did this belonged it hindu extremist party. It is very poor taste of you to compare the two, but then again not much can be expected by your kind.
Click to expand...

I wasnt talking about the Babri mosque in India.
But again the question is, did the destruction of that Buddha statues feed the poor Afhanis?
 
What has this to do with the thread's subject?
 
It is really difficult to point out which is the most Islamic country, because some are good at some things but worse in other things. But overall I think Qatar, UAE, and Malaysia.
 
K.Venugopal said:
Mohammad did not see them in the idols he destroyed in Mecca. Like Prophet, like followers!
Click to expand...

This is so insulting...:enough!:

Prophet Muhammad destroyed the idols because some idiots put it in a monotheistic worship place.... it has nothing to do with cultural values... go to Egypt, Iraq, Malaysia, Turkey ... many ancient civilisation statues are still preserved.... for the sake of history and reminder for Muslims to thank Allah for not worshipping idols..
 
Last edited:
Aaron85 said:
I wasnt talking about the Babri mosque in India.
But again the question is, did the destruction of that Buddha statues feed the poor Afhanis?
Click to expand...

It sure didn't feed the budha belly or let the westerner's have their way. You are off topic, I suggest you go open another thread if you want babble about this any further.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top