Talk:Robert Napier, 1st Baron Napier of Magdala/Archives/2013/November

POV Banner added: Defending thiefs and looters (when they are white) Live on Wikipedia

Hello, Here is the edition of the article that was performed on 31 October 2007, 00:08, that is to say, less than two hours after my edition: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robert_Napier%2C_1st_Baron_Napier_of_Magdala&diff=168198783&oldid=168184287

It is quite ironical that this modification was performed without ANY reference. Given all the links that I had provided, in particuler this text http://www.ethioembassy.org.uk/fact%20file/a-z/Looted%20Treasure/Afromet%20Memorandum%20on%20the%20Loot%20from%20Maqdala.htm from the ethiopian embassy and signed by Richard Pankhurst, who is one of the major figure of ethiopian history. It is clear that the actions of Napier and his troops are clearly classified as a deliberate looting, thief and burning of Maqdala, from the historical point of view, whatever your little brain want to think.

Now can the bleacher responsible for this edition, give a single reason why the burning of the imperial library was completely suppressed of the edit? Do you have any source proving it false (if so call all the historians who are wrong!!) or was it suppressed to clear napier of all his murders, both human and cultural.

It would not surprise me that you do not give a f* whether all these parts of ethiopian history are returned to their original owners, that is the people of Ethiopia, though some people have fought for that through the Afromet association for instance.

PS: This is an extract of the above mentionned text

In doing so AFROMET wishes to emphasise that the looting of Emperor Tewodros's mountain fortress of Maqdala in 1868 can in no way be justified in international law, and was therefore, we believe, in fact an act of injustice. We would further emphasise that the British looting of Maqdala involved the seizure of church property in the possession of the Church of Madhane Alam, or Saviour of the World, at Maqdala, and was therefore an act of sacrilege.

-- Zheim 87.88.183.107 19:22, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The British did loot Magdala and there is no reason not to acknowledge the fact openly in the text of the article. That such actions were common and customary does not vitiate the fact and does not violate the NPV rules. I have amended the text to acknowledge the looting. Acad Ronin (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello,

I have put back the banner, it seems that a certain user can not stop editing this page, to clear Napier of all of his crimes. So to the user who want to take this banner off, I say it again:

- Napier did NOT lead any "punitive" expedition, it's the Emperor Theodross who emprissonned the British has a punitive measure because the Queen did not bother to answer to one of his letters

- Theodros did NOT commit suicide "at the news". Theodross commited suicide because he refused to surrender, and he prefered to die than being caught prisonner by the British. This act is an act of heroism, and his spirit is one of the bases of the ethiopian memory: it was a model for the fighters of Adwa, even for the Derg, and still in Ethiopia nowadays

- Napier did NOT burn Maqdala as any "punitive" measure, he burned Maqdala out of anger because he coul not catch Theodross, he did not received any order to do so from his superiors

- Napier DID BURN DOWN the historical imperial library of Maqdala

ALL THESE FACTS CAN BE FOUND IN ANY BOOKS mentionning this exepdition, particularly in any books about the History of Ethiopia. Consider Richard Pankhurst for instance who is one of the major specialist and has written about this country for 40

THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO REASONS WHY THESE FACTS ARE SYSTEMATICALLY DELETED FROM THIS ARTICLE, if you have ANY sources to prove them wrong, give them or stop behaving like a little child. You have NO proofs, NO facts, NOTHING, and you keep on editing things that do not fits your agenda about the biography of someone who is definitely a war criminal.

Zheim (talk) 19:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The dispute appears to have petered out. There are a lot of assertions above, but what comes across is a POV -- that Napier must be a bad man because he invaded Ethiopia. The article doesn't seem unduly biased in any direction. The way for those above to add facts is to add an extra section; something like "Modern Ethiopian Views of the Magdala Campaign", and add referenced statements into it. In the mean time I will remove the banner. Roger Pearse 11:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roger Pearse (talk • contribs)