EZ

Sorry, just this last one You called it: "Holland's limited freedom of speech" Nairi, you should really be more careful with what you say. "Holland's limited freedom of speech" as you call it, does not exist, because it's the ******** Assen Town (not Holland!) that made a couple of stupid and serious mistakes.... Yes, regarding the right to freedom of speech! They abused their power to apply censorship on the Armenians, which is very unethical. Go to a judge and he'll set them straight. That's how the system works. People, institutions, everyone, make(s) mistakes, and when they do and denie someone his rights, he can let the system work for him, to get his rights. That goes for you as well as for me, AS for the Turks. I believe they went to court and lost, right? So you can go to court and win! By the way, I may sound a little passionate here and there, but I'm not in any way trying to hurt your feelings Nairi, ok? All of this is just to set things straight because I felt it was necessary.

quote:Originally posted by nairi:I wasn't attacking you btw I was simply stating the facts as I see them. Concerning Holland's limited freedom of speech about the AG, I was actually referring to the denial policy applied by Dutch journalists in Dutch newspapers. Sorry, I forgot this one: "denial policy" We are not in denial, Nairi. Don't confuse the Dutch with the Turks please. We (the people) are ignorant, yes, and we (the government) should acknowledge the genocide, but we are not the ones who should admit having committed it, are we.

Oh, and Nairi, to not disturb Alpha and MJ in their preparings for the presidential elections I think we are ready to rap things up now and move over to the thread "Genocide recognition in the Netherlands" or to a new thread. By the way, MJ, why don't I get offered a job in your new government? I hope you're not discriminating this Dutch girl.

quote:Originally posted by nairi:Elly, you're right. Perhaps my comment was a bit exaggerated, but I guess we agree that freedom in Holland is also limited, be it for good or bad reasons. Hi Nairi, thanks. But but I don't think it was a bit exaggerated, it was not even a bit true. I do agree that 'freedom' (not to be confused with [the right to] freedom of speech) is limited. Of course. In what chaos would we be otherwise. I am very glad that we have our laws and that our judges (who have the last word in the end) are guarding them the way they do, even though it sometimes can be very difficult to judge. I'm sure you are familiar with the case of member of parliament of the Christen Unie Van Dijke, who openly insulted homosexuals by comparing them with thieves. It was the law against discrimination that got him into trouble, but it was the right to freedom of religion that got him off the hook. Now you can argue about the judge's decission. Personally I feel that the law against discrimination should have priority and that there is something wrong with a religion that discriminates. But I'm not a judge, fortunately. With discrimination being a death sin and freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc. etc. to be guarded as treasures also.... trying to be fair for everyone sure can be complicated. I have taken your claim so seriously that today I have actually started to search the archives of our major newspapers for articles like the ones you described. What I found were reports of what was going on at the time, for example in Assen, or at EU-level. To me they were either neutral reports - I also sensed 'pro Armenian' even - or they were based on interviews. Also I found some that I thought were not very accurate in stating the (note: "recent") facts as they had actually occurred, which is needlessly careless and an example of bad journalism, but it has nothing to do with 'twisting' facts for some dark reason as you insinuated. From other articles in the past I remember that the number of victims varied, but you can hardly take that as "twisting" facts either, since no one is sure about the exact number, not even Armenians. Of course, good journalism also has to do with good and thorough research and one has to be really interested, I guess, to want to go into it that deep. About "reversing events" as I believe you mentioned: I have never read a Dutch article reversing the genocide story, that is what the Turks do. But an article that let's both sides speak, well, one can hardly object to an attempt to be objective (regardless of the personal opinion of the journalist in question). I can imagine however, that it's very hurtful for Armenians to hear a Turk say in the news, or read in the paper something like: "The Armenians did it themselves, they were the ones who killed us!". As I see it, to report news (for ex. the Assen events) is one thing, but to report the past, the Armenian Genocide, that is a whole different matter. I think you should not confuse lack of interest and/or care (or not enough for your personal taste), or ignorance, with sabotage, viciousness or lack of freedom (of speech). Also I think that paranoia is not the way to change things for the better. You mentioned something about the Ministry of Internal Affairs' website. You called that "limited freedom of speech". If you were referring to the changed footnote, I think that has nothing to do with limited freedom of speech. It was their own footnote, they can change it if they want. Whether it's a good or bad thing to do is a different matter. We (at least I) never got to find out the reason for the changes, but I can imagine that it had something to do with the usual Turkish complaints about the mentioning of the genocide in the footnote. If I would have had anything to say about it, they could have complained until hell freezes and I think whoever decided to give in to that Turkish pressure, was wrong to do so. After having read more and more related material, on and off this Forum, I can see now, how terribly complicated the whole matter is. I still believe that the truth should weigh the heaviest, but I guess I have stopped to think only in black and white. Relatively we have a whole lot of Turks living in Holland, who could severely disturb the Dutch peace. Then there's this EU-situation: Turkey wants in, EU doesn't let them but doesn't want to make them mad either; USA wants Turkey in and presures Europe. There's a war with Irak in the air... there's oil, economic interests and what else do you have... Back to the initial subject. Holland is not perfect, neither are it's people. But to compare Holland with a totalitarian state is plain rediculous. I mean, Nairi... If it were that bad, why do you live here then? (Now don't tell me "because in China it's even worse" ) You are living in one of the most democratic and FREE countries in the whole ******* wide world! P.S. I am a little confused about what courtcase the Armenians won exactly. Can you give me some info or a url? P.S.2. My advice is, set up a courtcase, let the judge decide. The monument would be a good start. Get the original text back on it. Let the judge spank the mayor for influencing the text. Then prepare another, major one. Prepare it well, bring all the experts and documentation you can find. You'll set history straight and write a new one even. Have a nice sunday.

quote:Originally posted by nairi:Elly, you're right. Perhaps my comment was a bit exaggerated, but I guess we agree that freedom in Holland is also limited, be it for good or bad reasons. Hi Nairi jan. I am planning to comment tomorrow. Now just this... I don't agree with you that "freedom in Holland is also limited, be it for good or bad reasons." The difference between "good" or "bad" in your above sentence is essential. It decides whether it's legitimate (from the human perspective) or not to limit freedom. It's the difference between heaven or hell. Yes, freedom in Holland IS limited, VERY, for ALL the good reasons that people came up with in the past. It's these limitations that give us our rights as well as our obligations, the right to speak as well as the obligation to respect. If I would believe in a God I would thank him or her for letting me be born here, though I think he or she forgot to give us a little more sunshine and a little less rain. Thanks, Nairi. Tomorrow I will come back with a little more (if you don't mind).

quote:Originally posted by Stormy: quote:Originally posted by EZ:I once had a dog, who did not want to be without me. Like ours. It gets tedious sometimes.It wasn't a problem for as long as he was the only child.

quote:Originally posted by Sip: quote:Originally posted by EZ:[qb]Accelerated, you must be a very attractive guy, for a classy woman in tight pants leaning against a signpost apparently waiting to be picked up, to repeatedly show you her pink underwear, lucky you! Hehehehe ... either that or she was a "pro" smilies/lol2.gif A friend of mine says, that's what he always pictures when he hears "classy" being used to describe a woman ... also "high class" ... but Jug, if she wasn't a pro, I'd say you definitely got your xmas present early this year smilies/thumbup.gif QB] Finally someone understood (or appreciated) my Dutch humor!

I once had a dog, who did not want to be without me. So he was used to and loved to take rides in the car with me. I never understood how he could know when I was planning to take him to the vet, which happened once a year at the very most. Only then he would refuse to get in the car. He would actually try to run and hide from me.

Oh, yes, and I forgot to say that I got second place on the tournament!

ANOUNCEMENT: Harut is the new Hye Forum Chess Champion! After 32 moves I finally could resign . Well done Harut! Here's the end of the game: http://home.wxs.nl/~marte050/temp/Ezharut4.GIF

MJ, sorry for messing your Presidential Elections up. Can you help me to move this discussion (including all relevant postings) elsewhere?

quote:Originally posted by nairi:Elly, remember what the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote in their website about Armenia? I call that limited freedom of speech. My first thought is, that even the ministry of Foreign Affairs has a right to freedom of speech. But maybe after you freshen my memory up I will know what you mean. I gotto to run now. See you later.

quote:Originally posted by nairi:Elly, remember what the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote in their website about Armenia? I call that limited freedom of speech. No, please remind me.

Nairi, read the below answer #4 (and 3) of minister De Vries of Internal affairs to one of Van Dijke's questions (copied from the Forums topic Genocide recognition in the Netherlands that was posted by you). In only a few sentences it shows that: 1. a mistake was made by the mayor of Assen; 2. the mistake is not being covered up at all but openly admitted (NB: by the highest governmental authority of internal Dutch affairs!); 3. the minister even goes one step further by mentioning that a possible outcome of a (future) courtcase could very well be decided in favor of the Armenians. "4. Answer The action of the police was based on the previously negotiated agreements on among others the texts that would be carried on the banners. With that the police wanted to prevent - and that in itself is very justifiable - irregularities from arising. However to my opinion - and hereby I refer you to my answer on question 3 - the approach that the police chose was not legal. Even though the judgement on the legitimacy of the single case is the judge's concern, it is very much the question whether the made agreements could hold in a lawsuit." The mentioned answer to question 3 was: "3. Answer The decision to remove certain expressions from the banners in this case, was established by the police and the leaders of the demonstration. It is important to emphasize that public manifestations, such as demonstrations, are settled according to a system of prior notice (with the possibility of a prohibition if the required conditions are not met) instead of a permit system that implies consent to the manifestation. In the Law on Public Demonstrations (LPD) a clear rule is given for the manner in which the right to demonstrate can be regulated at a municipal level. On ground of article 4 LPD, the municipal council as such is authorized to establish rules concerning the prior notice obligation and also within the authority of the Mayor in the framework of LPD, it concerns regulations regarding the orderly course of a manifestation. In case, for instance, a serious disruption of traffic is expected, the Mayor may - after making the necessary considerations of interest - take measures to limit this effect. However the choice of the organization for the time and place of the march is decisive in the first instance and that also has to be the starting point of the local authority. A prior control and active administrative interference in the content of the viewpoints to be carried however, does not fall into the description of LPD and is illegal. The prior judging of texts on banners on their content is a breach of the prohibition on censorship like it is derived from articles 7 and 9 of the Constitution. Only afterwards, when it appears that protesters are carrying discriminating or offensive texts, can the police confiscate banners and such in questions and possibly even arrest individual protesters suspected of certain penal offences." There is no way that the above can have contributed to your conclusion (rather the opposite I would say) that: "freedom of speech in Holland is sometimes as limited, if not more, than in some of the most totalitarian countries around the world." All of this shows that Holland is not perfect, it's people aren't, but it's system is at least VERY OK and working. Even without the help of member of parliament Van Dijke, a courtcase would deal with the matter with the same fairness and objectiveness as minister De Vries' reply to Van Dijke shows in the above texts. You wrote: "The fact that I have so far not read a single Dutch newspaper article that discussed the Armenian genocide without twisting facts, playing with numbers, and even reversing events outright, is enough for me to claim that freedom of speech in Holland is sometimes as limited, if not more, than in some of the most totalitarian countries around the world." If the articles you are referring to, are reason for you "to claim that freedom of speech in Holland is sometimes as limited, if not more, than in some of the most totalitarian countries around the world." (NB: even MORE, than in some of the MOST totalitarian countries), than they must be pretty awful, so not terrible. I have read a couple myself in the past, but have not noticed any content that could lead to such serious conclusions. You will understand that I really MUST read them now. So I am waiting for you to post them or send them to me. By the way, I do not think that you are attacking me, why would you, I did nothing wrong.

quote:Originally posted by nairi:I wasn't attacking you btw I was simply stating the facts as I see them. Concerning Holland's limited freedom of speech about the AG, I was actually referring to the denial policy applied by Dutch journalists in Dutch newspapers. The fact that I have so far not read a single Dutch newspaper article that discussed the Armenian genocide without twisting facts, playing with numbers, and even reversing events outright, is enough for me to claim that freedom of speech in Holland is sometimes as limited, if not more, than in some of the most totalitarian countries around the world. Can you send me the the articles please, or post the url's here. I did not notice the-facts-as-you-saw-them myself, but then we may have a different perception of things, right? I cannot comment on it, unless you give me the material you ar referring to so that I know exactly what we are talking about. "freedom of speech in Holland is sometimes as limited, if not more, than in some of the most totalitarian countries around the world." This is a very serious thing to say Nairi, you really can't be serious But then, maybe I'm very ignorant, so I'm open for education, actually after this statement you are obliged to. Nairi, the right to freedom of speech is not "having the right to force the media to write what YOU believe to be important news". And lack of interest is not the same thing as denial. I am very curious about those articles. Can't wait to read them.

Mosjan, I think Nairi and I are discussing this subject in the wrong thread. Should we paste our discussion from here into another thread?

Nairi, I will reply tomorrow or so, other duties are calling.

Oh, about the domain. I already searched for jurisprudence (?) in this field (about 153 cases) and I think that there is a very good chance that a judge will take away the domain from the Turks to give it back to the Armenians. But I cannot help you do it, since I am not Armenian.

quote:Originally posted by EZ:By the way, Nairi, it's not at all uncommon to take the Dutch (local) authorities to court. They are known to make stupid mistakes and are not unlikely to use stupid arguments that won't hold in court. I really think that you people should set up a case to put the word "genocide" back on paper. If a judge declares that the word is legitimate because it's a true fact that happened in the past, then you have what you want, the genocide recognized in the Netherlands. By the way, have you seen this: www.armenie.nl The domain is registered by a certain G.Genc who I think is the same G.Genc that is chairman of the Turkish Forum Netherlands. And I want to add that I have been extremely angry over this, to find out that 'our' Turks even go as far as stealing the only possible real Dutch Armenian internet domain. On top of that... look at the content of the site. [ December 19, 2002, 08:10 AM: Message edited by: EZ ]

By the way, Nairi, it's not at all uncommon to take the Dutch (local) authorities to court. They are known to make stupid mistakes and are not unlikely to use stupid arguments that won't hold in court. I really think that you people should set up a case to put the word "genocide" back on paper. If a judge declares that the word is legitimate because it's a true fact that happened in the past, then you have what you want, the genocide recognized in the Netherlands. By the way, have you seen this: www.armenie.nl The domain is registered by a certain G.Genc who I think is the same G.Genc that is chairman of the Turkish Forum Netherlands.

quote:Originally posted by nairi: Btw, see my reply above about "freedom". I think we're posting across each other. I have noticed that too. B.t.w. never take anything I post personal, Ok? I'm not after hurting anyone, not lately that is.

quote:Originally posted by nairi: quote:Originally posted by EZ:In my opinion, there is either freedom or there is not. Something in between would not be the real thing, not the way I see freedom. Hmm. Yes, but my point is Armenian "non-freedom" does not equal Saudi's or China's non-freedom. Although freedom in Armenia, if you will, is limited, it is more limitless than in many other totalitarian countries. On top of that, I doubt there's a single country in the world that exercises total freedom. Let's face it, even in Holland freedom (of speech) is restricted (re: Armenian Genocide and many many more topics).Nairi, the subject is Armenia. Of course I know that limitations can vary, but that is not the issue here. We are not comparing countries' limitations. It is not a contest. The fact that there is/are even less/worse freedom/limitations is not relevant here now. And of course, Holland is not perfect, you'll never hear me say that. By the way, your example of the genocide is not a valid one. Here you can take your case to court and prove it, that's what the court is for. See, people in Holland also make mistakes, today as well as in the past, ordinary people as well as politicians. The point is that our rights here, are protected in the best thinkable way. If something goes wrong, one can go to court. If you don't have enough money for an attorny, you can even get one for free and it doesn't even need to be a bad one, since they all are obliged to take on pro deo cases. Since you brought up the subject genocide and how it's being delt with in HOlland, I feel I should set a few things straight... The mayor of Assen "requested" to the founder of the monument to leave out the word "genocide" in the inscription to avoid trouble with the Turks. The way I see it, by doing so the mayor acted unethicallly, because she abused the nasty situation in which the founder of the monument was at the time: being up against at least the whole Dutch-Turkish community which was even too much for the Town of Assen to handle. It was HIS name that appeared on TV and in the newspapers and HE was the one who lived in Assen where later the april24-demonstration was planned. I can imagine that the founder did not want to make trouble, especially knowing that he's a very peaceful man. So, he did what in his eyes was the smartest thing to do, to get his monument without causing any more trouble, he granted the majors request and "genocide" was erased from the text. The way I see it, the Dutch government does/did not know what to do with this situation and has repeatedly tried to avoid escalations. In the Assen april24-demonstration matter, if I remember correctly, it was the april24-committy that agreed on the rules of the Assen Town, to not use certain (provocative) words. (I will dive into it again later; I believe we posted a lot about that on this Forum). So the committy agreed, but the agreement was not lived by during the demonstration, giving the Town (police, whatever) the right to take action. I don't want to judge neither the founder of the Assen monument's or the april24-committy's decission to grant (in my opinion unethical, even unlawful) requests from our authorities. But it's not the fault of our Dutch system. The system works well, very well, but people should use it in the right way, well, actually the should USE their rights, period! The founder of the monument or maybe even the entire Dutch Armenian community, could still go to court to get the original text back on the monument. The april24 committy could go to court to complain about Assens 'requested' restriction, and based on our laws on freedom of speech the court cannot go around the fact that a town does not have the right to interfear with the content of what is to be expressed or published (this also goes for the text on the monument). The Turks could get mad all they want, but it would immediately mean that the Dutch government will (have to) acknowledge the genocide AS a genocide. So, in case I'm being a little chaotic now, Nairi, don't put the blame where it doesn't belong. There is nothing wrong with the freedom of speech in Holland. The only thing that will happen to me when I say outloud that the Ottoman Turks committed a genocide over the Armenians, is that 387.000 Turks (at least) may fall over me or smash my windows. And the reason the media aren't interested, is not that they are scared to write about it, they are completely free to publish on any subject. It's just that the subject is no alive to the public here. You have to bring it to life. The monument was a perfect way to let it come alive here, it did at first, but then it died and I think the Armenians were as much to blame for it as the Dutch. But back to the difference in limitations from country to country. My point of worry is (and of course any of you could tell me "what's it to you anyway"), that if people are not free to express their opinions, you don't have a way out. You need freedom to be able to develop yourself, that goes for indiduals as wel as for an entire people/country. If things need to change, how CAN they change when everything is kept in place by force. How can things change when there is no freedom to make the changes. But, Ok, if the limited freedom of the people in Armenia is not so bad, just because in your opinions in China it's even worse, well, then why even touch the subject again. That's a lot of reason to be satisfied with what you have.

quote:Originally posted by nairi: quote:Originally posted by EZ: quote:Originally posted by nairi: [qb]"critics are free to publish their thoughts in most newspapers, especially diasporan." Dear Nairi, sorry, but this sentence contradicts itself. But you get the point, or not?

quote:Originally posted by Accelerated:Funny thing happened this afternoon.... I was basically sitting in my car waiting to pick up my mum from the train station. I left my place a little early so i could feast on a sudgukh, while waiting. So I get there 10 mins early, and a few minutes later, there is this girl/young woman (prob. aged 20-22) crosses the street to my side, apparently waiting for someone to pick her up. She's very well dressed, nice tight white pants and top, and classy sunnies. Standing about 5 metres away from the car, leaning on a signpost and looking in my general direction (I cant tell if at me, because of the sunglasses). So there I am, munching at my sudgukh and staring right back at her. After a few minutes, LOL, she starts playing with her zipper (pants), and then unzips, to the point where I can clearly see her pink underwear, and zips back up....LOL This **** teasing continued for 5 mins, during which I though of driving up to her, and asking if she wanted a lift. But I decided not to, for a number of reasons I need not go into. But I must admit the whole affair was pretty damn funny, as my mum arrived and got into the car, I did a nice U-turn burnout right in front of her (in a Camry LOL) with the satisfaction that I still had half a sudgukh to go..... Let me do a good dead with Christmas coming up and all.... Accelerated, you must be a very attractive guy, for a classy woman in tight pants leaning against a signpost apparently waiting to be picked up, to repeatedly show you her pink underwear, lucky you!

quote:Originally posted by nairi: "critics are free to publish their thoughts in most newspapers, especially diasporan." Dear Nairi, sorry, but this sentence contradicts itself. "most newspapers", so not all; "especially diasporan", same thing. In my opinion, there is either freedom or there is not. Something in between would not be the real thing, not the way I see freedom. "I'll have to agree with Harut when it comes to internet users from Armenia: mostly youngsters who are more interested in life issues than politics. But even some of the older members here don't seem to have serious opinions on serious topics. Just look at this thread. You're the only one who posted some serious stuff, and asked serious questions. Everyone else is just talking around it. I've neither seen a concise summary of all the party programs nor a serious analysis of them. Well, maybe I should not stick my nose into stuff that isn't mine to start with. I mean, I don't want to force a better future on anyone. [ December 19, 2002, 05:22 AM: Message edited by: EZ ]