The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> Re: are we being a little capricious?

Re: are we being a little capricious?
Posted by pancho (Moderator) - Wednesday, September 15 2010, 16:22:49 (UTC)
from *** - *** - Windows NT - Internet Explorer
Website:
Website title:

>
>@@@ You can't have it both ways.
>
>You can't claim that the Turks only committed genocide against people who rebeled, such as the Assyrians, Armenians and Greeks,

...and you canīt take for granted that the very thing we are still debating these thousands of words later has been proven because you say so...I never claimed that the Turks committed any gencoide AT ALL on ANYONE. I didnīt claim it because I donīt believe it and I donīt think itīs been proven at all... the Turks are blamed and then presumed to be guilty because they REFUSE to "admit" what they never did...much as the Iraqis could never prove to Bush that they had no WMDs, because their honest denial was seen as PROOF that they were lying and trying to hide the "truth", which Bush, much as you with the Turks, insisted they were...because "they refuse to ADMIT the charge against them"...as if all that is needed is the charge, with some "facts" from Colin Powell, Condi Rice or some other members of Seyfo.

and then when I point out that the during WW1 that other minorities who didn't rebel, such as the Shabaks, Yezidis, Chaldeans and Syriacs were also purified, massacred and homogenised you change tactic to claim that they couldn't tell the difference between these groups.

...I said they did not HAVE TO tell the difference...but even before that I dispute your claims about Shabaks and the rest...again I want to know your sources..if they are the same then I know without much more effort that Christians could make their case against the Turks better if they could claim that the Turks were killing EVERYBODY...so that it would not appear to be in retaliation for what Christians had DONE but just an "evil and Muslim inspired" desire to kill EVERYBODY and ANYBODY who was "non-Turk"...even those poor innocent Shabaks!
>
>The Young Turks were sophisticated enough to tell that the Christians had distinct churches and that the Yezidis and Shabaks weren't people of the book who they considered infidels.

...and they were also tolerant enough to have left them alone for centuries until their nation was declared a sick old man and they realized just what Christians did to sick old men....so that they became desperate to ensure loyalty, instantly...something taht would take time to effect and something they waited way too long to begin....because they were tolerant and respectful of differences for all those centuries.
>
>And then you have the issue of the Muslim Kurds who were willing Turkish accomplices during WW1 and the victims of the Turkish purification and homogenisation after WW1.
>
>How can you not see that as the European winds of nationalism blew through the Middle East that the "sick old man" followed in the European pattern of consolidation through homogenised religion, culture and language.

...will you stop with your WINDS alright already? They were not WINDS unless those that brought mustard gas and chordite with them....the Turks reacted to an unprovoked ATTACK by a coalition of Christian nations, to guns and bombs and warships and paid traitors from within and not WINDS!
>
>Religion was merely a tactic used to strategicaly consolidate the empire.

...and I suppose the Turks were the first and only to do that? What did you think Constantine forced Christianity down the throat of his empire for? For meekness and the love of Jesus?

...The Christians committed an act so horrible and unprecendented in all the bloody history of our world that a new name had to be invented for it....genocide was CREATED by the Christians who are now madly trying to dilute its original meaning and intention to include any one of a number of acts that until now were never a part of the definition or concept....and they are trying to smear Muslims with THEIR newly-created crime.

Genocides and Holocausts belong to Christians..they invented them, they OWN them. What the Turks can be rightly accused of was NEVER considered genocide until the Christians INVENTED it...and now want to go back and accuse them of THEIR crime....".massacre", "mass-murder", "group-punishment", "crimes against humanity", "war crimes", all of these terms, in existence in 1918, or soon after, could be used to describe what the Turks did, and many of them were so used...but NONE of these words was felt adequate to describe that special twist and upgrading that ONLY the Christians brought to life...for that reason a new word was needed...because what it described was brand spanking new and unheard of before...and no generic term in use at that time, no matter how horrible its meaning, was considered sufficient to cover this new and improved Christian crime...which you are trying desperately to pin on Muslims as well.



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


The full topic:



***



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9