It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Video: Turkey Fans Boo Moment of Silence for Paris Attacks, Then Break Out Into This Chant

page: 6
21
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky

He said they'd done it because the statues received UNESCO funding to maintain them. He said that his people were poor and ignored by the international community and the statues had more value than human lives.


I understand what you are trying to say ......but coming from a place built in 305 AD and registered as UNESCO world heritage site i can tell you and them, they DO have more value than human lives.

Most people born near the pyramids or the china wall or the rome colosseum or ? would agree and know that others before them have protected these sites with their lives through all of history of human kind. And continue to do so today.

If someone thinks otherwise that is completely fine but if you take a step further and destroy an ancient site out of spite or to prove a point, you're simply a uncivilised barbarian and there's no place for you in our society.




posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Exitt

Yeah I agree, but that's our perspective. Successive Egyptian dynasties occasionally destroyed/defaced monuments of their predecessors. Taliban were making a political protest. IS are, apparently, against idolatry (hence Palmyra).

The value of monuments can be in their monetary value, their destruction or their preservation.

Personally, I side with your view and think they should watch over the petty foolishness of short-lived men and women.



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Destruction is just as important as creation in the strength of the message it conveys, sadly. They are choosing to destroy other people's monuments rather than build their own.



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Exitt
It must be cool up in the Ivory secure tower built for you, but these people have no food or water. They cant get food for their kids by looking. They are trying to draw attention to the suffering and sad as it is this is one of the ways of making people judge them. Thus making their plight known.
I personally think when someone can value an artefact more than a life then they are the problem. I understand in the past it was a symbol and important. Not any more. Life is far more important.

In England one of our prominent heiress paid 80 million £s for a greek bust to display in the hallway of her luxery apartment.
She should be prosecuted whilst children are dying of thirst in this world.



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DelMarvel
Also just found these two comments on social media:



I clearly hear that fans are NOT chanting “Allahu Akbar”, just a nationalist anti-terror chanting "Sehitler olmez, vatan bolunmez" (martyrs may die but the homeland will not be divided). It was NOT a “moment of silence” for France. It was a “minute of respect” against terrorism worldwide. That is why fans was chanting against terrorism to support our own soldiers.




Abs Pangader Actually, they're chanting "Sehitler olmez, vatan bolunmez." Which means "Martyrs never die, the nation won't be divided." This is a common slogan thrown in remembrance of Turkish soldiers who fell victim to terrorism. In Turkey, there is rarely a minute of silence that isn't interrupted by this chant. Whether its a minute of silence for a Turkish catastrophe, or something else that happened globally, this always happens.


This sounds like a reasonable explanation. Would have been a real surprise, if it were pro IS, turks know terror and are (except erdogan maybe) in general very modern and liberal.

edit on 18-11-2015 by Peeple because: Auto



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: chewi

I understand you disagree but what i said is the truth. It's simply the way we as human beings are wired (not all of us ofcourse) You may value your life more than you value the Eiffel tower but i can guarantee you if you try to destroy it there will be many, many souls who will die trying to protect it from destruction. In other words, someone values that tower more than their own life so the tower is in fact more valuable than human life.

More recent and on topic example is death of the Syrian archaelogist Khaled from Palmyra who died protecting what he felt was worth his life. How can you argue he was wrong?



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Exitt
materialism. Things of value.

Life is truly cheap isn't it.



maybe we would not have terrorist if we value their life and every other life above our own. I would die to help save any life.
edit on 18-11-2015 by chewi because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Exitt
Khaled fought admirably to save a monument. he probably raised thousands of pounds to restore it and work on it.

All the while just a few mile away the local populace were wondering why Palmyra had so much wealth aimed at saving it when they had lost so many children to disease and starvation and drought etc.

We need these 1000 yr old artifacts to remind us of our evil past where we used slaves to build them for our masters.

Feed the world first



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: chewi
a reply to: Exitt
materialism. Things of value.

Life is truly cheap isn't it.



maybe we would not have terrorist if we value their life and every other life above our own. I would die to help save any life.


I'm so glad you added the last sentence. You see it is not about material things but about history, the way we feel about saving our heritage is very, very close to saving a life or two. I have 'only' 16 centuries of ancestors to protect and honestly i would die for that cause.



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Peeple

originally posted by: DelMarvel
Also just found these two comments on social media:



I clearly hear that fans are NOT chanting “Allahu Akbar”, just a nationalist anti-terror chanting "Sehitler olmez, vatan bolunmez" (martyrs may die but the homeland will not be divided). It was NOT a “moment of silence” for France. It was a “minute of respect” against terrorism worldwide. That is why fans was chanting against terrorism to support our own soldiers.




Abs Pangader Actually, they're chanting "Sehitler olmez, vatan bolunmez." Which means "Martyrs never die, the nation won't be divided." This is a common slogan thrown in remembrance of Turkish soldiers who fell victim to terrorism. In Turkey, there is rarely a minute of silence that isn't interrupted by this chant. Whether its a minute of silence for a Turkish catastrophe, or something else that happened globally, this always happens.


This sounds like a reasonable explanation. Would have been a real surprise, if it were pro IS, turks know terror and are (except erdogan maybe) in general very modern and liberal.



Based on my research I think it is certain that all the reporting of the crowd chanting "Allah Akbar" is wrong and as you point out very out of character for what we've heard about Turkey.

What they were chanting was "Sehitler olmez, vatan bolunmez." The only question is whether the martyrs being referred to were the French civilians or the ISIS terrorists.



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: asen_y2k

Years ago, there was a lot of media heat about the Taliban blowing up Buddhist statues. They were portrayed as ignorant savages in the Press and, to be honest, that's what I believed them to be. Years later, I stumbled on an interview with one of them where he explained why they'd dynamited the ancient statues.

He said they'd done it because the statues received UNESCO funding to maintain them. He said that his people were poor and ignored by the international community and the statues had more value than human lives.

It doesn't mean that the Taliban weren't assholes for doing what they did. It just shows that our first impressions aren't always the right ones. Just like with these Turkish boo-boys, they're still assholes for booing, but their reasons are understandable and not pro-IS like people assumed.




This is pure revisionist tripe. You should have stuck with you original instinct.

The supreme leader made his intention clear in an edict - destruction of "idols".
edit on 18-11-2015 by Deny Arrogance because: Added reply

edit on 18-11-2015 by Deny Arrogance because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 18 2015 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: asen_y2k

Years ago, there was a lot of media heat about the Taliban blowing up Buddhist statues. They were portrayed as ignorant savages in the Press and, to be honest, that's what I believed them to be. Years later, I stumbled on an interview with one of them where he explained why they'd dynamited the ancient statues.

He said they'd done it because the statues received UNESCO funding to maintain them. He said that his people were poor and ignored by the international community and the statues had more value than human lives.

It doesn't mean that the Taliban weren't assholes for doing what they did. It just shows that our first impressions aren't always the right ones. Just like with these Turkish boo-boys, they're still assholes for booing, but their reasons are understandable and not pro-IS like people assumed.




This is pure revisionist tripe. You should have stuck with you original instinct.

The supreme leader made his intention clear in an edict - destruction of "idols".


Maybe? Shrugs.

It's history and done. Let's move on.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join