The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> Re: Apology to Tiglath

Re: Apology to Tiglath
Posted by pancho (Moderator) - Friday, September 24 2010, 15:52:37 (UTC)
from *** - *** Mexico - Windows NT - Internet Explorer
Website:
Website title:

>
>Armenians were refugees. They all left at once in a mass exodus right after the genocide took place.

...as would the Turks had the Armenians defeated them.

>
>Well what kind of evidence should we be looking for to prove a genocide that took place 100 years ago?

...what an odd question. It sort of makes one wonder why you want such evidence in the first place especially if it doesnīt exist or hasnīt been produced yet...why all the fuss...why the insistence that there must be evidence and thereMUST have been a genocide? Why arenīt Christians, if they are Christians, decrying the genocide of Iraqi children who were targeted by the United States government, not mobs, by Sanctions...when the stated purpose (by Secretary of State Albright) to force the grieving parents into action...while also acknowledging that those who would be hurt by Sanctions were young children the weak and the very old? Thatīs certainly a "group"...and there is no doubt about the evidence that 700,000 Iraqi children were killed, no "died", as a direct result of Sanctions and that this was the INTENT, in order to force the parents into an uprising...where is the Muslim outcry...where is the demand that this be called genocide etc?

..is the whole point here that there must have been a genocide because the Turks are Muslims and we canīt just have Christians convicted of such deeds...or is that since there are so many dead Christians (never mind Muslims) that there HAD to be a genocide...like the fact that so many Christians converted to Islam, without force, that there MUST have been wholesale massacres of Christians else, "where are they"?
>
>
> But I also ask why these things happened and through more reading and thinking I come to the inescapable conclusion that Christians in Turkey did SOMETHING to excite so much hostility so quickly...
>
>Well if that "something" was done by Turks, say a political party, they wouldn't have been "punished" the same way.

..of course they would have been...treason is treason. These were not isolated rebellions...they were directly provoked by the overtures and promises made by the invading Christians...this is waht made it so much more than "mere" treason..it was treason for foreign PAY and promises. Bradley Manning is not in jail because he is Catholic or Protestant instead of Catholic or because he is Muslim or Jewish..he is there for what he DID...if 3000 people just like him did the same thing and all happened to be Christians or Turks, it would still not be because of their religion that they are in jail...but it MIGHT be because of their religion if people of the same religion enticed them into it.
>
>That "so much hostility" was due to their religion.
>
>
> and I mean EVERY time, that Christians first started working for and with invading Christians...killing and looting and stealing and raping and all the rest of it...itīs in the record, no one is making this up.
>
>Why didn't they just go after those who committed treason? Why go after the whole community?

..but thatīs the whole point...they did NOT go after the whole community...Christians in Istanbul and other cities were left alone...the retaliation took place in those districts where the rebellion occured as well as along the borders adjacent because the Turks, from past experience, feared that Christian villages along the border would help invading armies...and in guerilla-style actions the rebels make it a point to hide among the civilian population...how are the Turks to know exactly who committed the crime and who did not? There was no time for investigations...the enemy was advancing and so, regreatable as it always is, group-punishment was the only way...but still, these conditions were forced on Turkey by the War and was nothing the Turks wanted to do or would have done if not for the war and the actions of SOME Christians. Thatīs a reality for all countries caught like that.
>
> Let me ask you...how come so many Armenians are still in Turkey? Why are churches still open and functioning? And why donīt the Christians INSIDE Turkey make these complaints?
>
>In Turkey, only 0.2% are Christians. Perhaps this shows that they did not take much effort to preserve the minority.

...thatīs still a sizeable number for a country and a people and a religion that standa ccused of always wanting to WIPE OUT Christians. If they did they would close all churches, today...as they could have done any time in the last 700 years. Christians find it very ahrd to live under Muslims if for no other reason that their Jesus is a god, unlike Muhammad, and they canīt abide the notion that their GOD lost...to a mere camel driver. Muslims, on the famous other hand, havenīt this problem, by and large...and Muslims, thoughout history have been recognized as the more tolerant of the two.
>
> Feisal had the same problem with the Marshimun in Iraq in the 20s...he simply would not SHUT UP about what Islam had ALWAYS done to Christians etc...he was trying to incite the sympathy of Christians in Europe...but what Iraq worried about was that the British would use this tired old excuse once again to enter the country on a mission to "save" Christians
>
>Faisal was a British puppet. They installed him.

...they install lots of puppets...the government of Iraq is now also a puppet. That doesnīt change the fact that the recent Christian migrants were making things hard on whatever the Iraqi government was or came for...but Feisal extended a welcome to the refugees calling them our brothers and urging them to help secure the new country...instead they sided again with the attacking Brits...this was in the 20s.
>
>...you mean four million would be more to your liking?
>
>Don’t you always talk about proofs? Well pick a number and prove it.

...there are many ways to approximate the number...I donīt think anyone says that the number is exact..but that isnīt the point...in Poland, to take one example, there is evidence of how many Jews lived there before the war...there were 500 left after the war....and they didnīt all go to Palestine either. Other countries also have records...plus there is testimony by Nazi officials and the record of mass graves, crematoria, civilian testimony as well as skulls and bones.

...It would not be diffiuclt to find how many Jews lived in Germany before the war, how many survived the war, in Europe..and how many from Europe migrated to Palestine....since they didnītgo anywhere else...the numbers missing would not be hard to figure. But whether six or twenty or 100...what makes this genocide a Holocaust was the WAY in which it was conducted....this is entirely new and unprecendented..and it is THAT part of it, the government directed and sponsored and touted Final Solution that makes it so specially horrific...and this is entirely lacking in the case of the Armenian claims.
>
>
> The point with the Holocaust and that genocide, remembering that the word was invented in the 40s for THEIR specific crime, is not the number...but the "systematic and coordinated GOVERNMENT-ordered attempt to round up and destroy every single Jew they could lay their hands on"
>
>I am personally wiling to believe that. But is there sufficient proof? If there was, Then there wouldn't still be a debate on the subject.

...there are people who swear the earth is flat..there are people who believe in the Rapture..there are people who believe they will live on a cloud whne they die...there are cranks and nuts everywhere. But they have no documents, only their "faith" and their "opinions"....while the other side has actual documents and films and testimony...as Senator Moynihan said..."we are all entitles to our own opinions, but not our own facts".

..this is a serious charge and it requires serious evidence, not hearsay and gossip and not opinion either.
>
>
> That did not happen in the Ottoman Empire...mass murders, yes, but then so too did Christians murder innocent Muslims...human rights abuses, yes...but not genocide.
>
>So now you admit that there was “mass murder”, but not genocide?

I never denied it...that and human rights abuses and denial of human rights and ALL the things that happen in war time...let those who begin a war take responsibility for forcing all sides to engage in such acts...war itself is mass murder and genocide and a crime against humanity..and that war was brought by Christians, not Muslims....there were such crimes on both sides....but no one ever mentions the many crimes of the Armenians.



---------------------


The full topic:



***



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9