Hacker News Reader

Comment by torstenvl | Hacker News Reader

Absolutely indefensible position. Destroying artifacts and evidence of the past simply because we don't agree with what happened in the past is a vile sin that our descendants will never forgive us for.

View on HN

As a Marine, you are probably aware Marines assisted the toppling of the famous Saddam Hussein statue?

And you are probably aware that Saddam was alive and had just been deposed at that time. It wasn't the past, nor was it an artifact. It wasn't in a museum or a library's special collection. And the Marines didn't destroy it (though the Iraqis appear to have).

Afaik Marines did burn his LM002, which is a piece of art and important historical artifact :-)

https://www.carscoops.com/2007/10/war-crimes-soldiers-destro...

Would it be okay if the skin, instead of being from an anonymous hospital patient it were from Abe Lincoln, or Sitting Bull, Mahatma Gandhi or Susan B Anthony?

the book itself was re-bound.

I believe Harvard destroyed all the nude student photos, would you have insisted they kept those too? I don’t see much value in either.

I agree, destruction of important heritage with absolutely ridiculous claims. Taliban level shit.

If one were to slice the ear off of a dead body, mount it, and frame it on their wall, at what point does it stop being gross evidence of a crime and start becoming an important historical artifact and part of our heritage?

How many months, how many years? Does it matter if the person who did it is a respected scholar or a convicted serial killer?

85 years and 3 months

with an extra 10 years for respected scholars

That's the standard.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com