You're not welcome to characterize Wikipedia's policy on vandalism, Cunctator --LMS
Why not? And was there actually anything biased or inappropriate in my text, or do you just dislike me? --The Cunctator
- willful wanton and malicious destruction of the property of others.
Destruction of something that is nobody's property can also constitute vandalism.
- More recent cases of Vandalism include the Taliban destruction of Buddhist statuary in Afghanistan.
Anyone's going to write about destruction of Communists statuary in Central and Eastern Europe after 1989 ?
Taw
- More recent cases of Vandalism include the Taliban destruction of Buddhist statuary in Afghanistan.
Removed. It was act of propaganda not vandalism.
- Was it really propaganda? or was it anti-idolatry? I think the Taliban would say the latter. Not agreeing or condoning, but think it's important to note the difference. Personally, I'd call it vandalism, but then I like my churches elaborate....JHK
- They wanted to show everyone that they are more Muslim and Quran-following that anyone else is. That seems to be the purpose of this action. --Taw
The justification for removal is fallacious. Propaganda and vandalism need not be exclusive. One can commit an act of vandalism for purposes of propaganda, which seems to have been the case here. I propose restoring the example. --AV
I agree with that. --Seb
If any one is interested this site has a statement by a Taliban ambassador on why the statues were destroyed and although arguably the action was justified, still it remains 'vandalism' in the sense listed. Perhaps then an addition saying that vandalism is not necessarily a bad thing? Anyway here's the link:
http://www.albalagh.net/current_affairs/syed_hashmi.shtml David Byron
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)