MJ

Paul, Are you a primitive or a hypocrite? You can be both. Are you trying to cheat yourself, the Good Lord, or the others? You may be doing all three at the same time.

quote:Originally posted by Kazza: Go on my son..you know it makes sense. Actually, that's what I am struggling with.

quote:Originally posted by Thorny Rose: Just wondering, what did you say? Azat, you are...? What? Tip? What's that? Tip is slang for "character."

quote:Originally posted by bellthecat: And it didn't seem to do Charents any harm, nor Gurdjieff, nor me!) Steve Good company.

Yerevan Denies Involvement In Armenian-Turk Commission RFE/Radio Liberty Yerevan, (July 24, 2001) Official Yerevan on Tuesday distanced itself from the recent creation of an unofficial Turkish-Armenian “reconciliation commission” in the face of domestic fears that the initiative may thwart international recognition of the 1915 Armenian genocide. Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian denied any government involvement in the commission as he was challenged by the country’s leading historians who gathered at the Armenian Genocide Institute in the capital. “The government of Armenia has absolutely nothing to do with this dialogue,” Oskanian declared, denying claims by one of the commission members that the authorities had given their go-ahead to the initiative. Former foreign minister Aleksandr Arzumanian said in a newspaper interview this week that Yerevan was informed about and encouraged secret negotiations between retired senior diplomats from Armenia and Turkey. The negotiations ended in a July 9 joint statement in Geneva saying that the ten-member private group will try to foster cooperation and communication that could lead to direct talks between the two hostile neighbors. Arzumanian said the government itself offered him to join the commission. “I was really surprised to hear that,” Oskanian said. “Perhaps he thereby wants to legitimize his participation.” Oskanian insisted that the Armenian foreign ministry was informed about the process but not involved in it. “Nobody had asked us whom we want to see in the commission. Nor did we have a right to say Yes or No to any candidate,” he said. The reconciliation effort has drawn a negative reaction from several leading Armenian parties, including the nationalist Dashnaktsutyun party. Some Armenian Diaspora groups have also expressed their misgivings. Oskanian sought to dispel their fears that the unfolding dialogue could lead the parliaments of the United States and other Western nations to refrain from adopting anti-Turkish resolutions recognizing the genocide. He said: “I am sure that there will be no agreement on the genocide issue. On the contrary, the whole process could break down because of the genocide issue. And we could in turn use that to show the United States and other countries that Turkey is unable to address problems through such dialogues and that international recognition is the only way out.” Turkish members of the commission have made it clear that it will not determine the validity of the Armenian and Turkish positions. According to Ozdem Sanberk, executive director of a private foundation in Istanbul and a former Turkish ambassador to Britain, the idea is “to open new horizons for the future and enhance mutual understanding.” In a statement released on July 13, the Armenian foreign ministry welcomed the commission’s creation, but reiterated that a full normalization of relations between the two neighboring states will be impossible without Ankara agreeing to establish diplomatic relations with Yerevan.

You don't sound much of a Christian, do you, while defying your primary Christian responsibility of sharing the Gift of Eternal Life with others by bringing them to the Lord, but rather feeling satisfied that someone is not going to be part of the Kingdom.

SHOULD WE ASSUME THAT MY UNBORN CHILD WILL BE THE ENEMY OF YOUR UNBORN CHILD? An initiative long overdue. The news release issued in Geneva, Switzerland on July 9, 2001, announced the formation of a Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation committee, which has been holding secret meetings for some time, laying the groundwork for a breakthrough. As expected, the news drew mixed reactions from Turkish and Armenian circles, with good reason, and certainly more comments will be forthcoming in the weeks and months ahead, because the formation of such a commission will be testing uncharted ground. The Truth and Reconciliation Committee was put into action in South Africa, under Archbishop Desmond Tutu, with remarkable success. It was also tried in Ireland, resulting in the formation of a joint government. Of course, issues and historic reasons dividing the parties in those countries are dissimilar to issues dividing Armenians from the Turks, and the results of the newly-formed commission may vary widely from the South African and Irish precedents. However, the reconciliation commissions seem to be the order of the day, and bringing Armenians and Turks together in an effort to resolve centuries-old outstanding issues may not be all that bad. A Chinese saying holds that a 10,000-mile march begins with the first step. When we take this commission and its goals in a long-term perspective, we will not be disappointed in its performance nor its failure, should that be the case. Attempts have been made for a Turkish-Armenian rapprochement in the past, but they have failed because they tackled the issues with pre-conditions. When we have requested from the Turks to recognize the Genocide before any attempt of reconciliation, the Turks have countered that pre-condition with their own pre-condition that Armenia must renounce all territorial claim from Turkey, before sitting at the negotiating table. Of course, those tit-for-tat approaches have always ended in failure. However, the cycle of hatred and suspicion had to be broken somehow, somewhere. That is what this commission purports to do without getting overambitious. Setting pre-conditions that Turkey must first recognize the Genocide before any dialog may take place is no starter. Experience has demonstrated that a similar pre-condition is a recipe for failure. Experience has also demonstrated that along with the Turkish governments denial policy, there is complete lack of awareness among the new generation of Turks, even among scholarly circles, because no other totalitarian regime has been as successful in obliterating the truth about the Armenian Genocide as have been successive Turkish administrations. With recent legislative actions throughout Europe a crack has been opened in the wall of silence and Turkish scholars and news media have been debating the Genocide issue like never before. Therefore, engaging in a dialog will develop more awareness and perhaps, eventually, recognition, than blocking all dialog. Reviewing the “terms of reference” issued by the commission, we are reassured that it does not plan to bring quick fixes to outstanding issues. It has narrowed down its goals to develop contacts, to generate dialog and cooperation between Armenian and Turkish civil societies, and the members of the commission have been looking for “practical benefits.” Above all, the parties claim that they have been “working in an individual capacity.” Otherwise, it would have been a legitimate question as to whom they represent. At this time they do not claim to represent any government or authority. Analyzing the background of each member on the commission, one would easily detect who may be pulling the strings behind the scenes. There are six Turks and four Armenians. Perhaps it is too early to raise any questions about this disparity. However, diplomats with impressive backgrounds represent the Turkish side. The Armenian side is no match for the Turkish representation. Alexander Arzoumanian and David Hovhannissian from Armenia are strongly identified with the former administration and are in active opposition to the current administration. An enigmatic person, with unproven diplomatic skills, Alexander Arzoumanian had risen from the UN representation to the position of foreign minister through the crutches of former President Levon Ter-Petrosian. At the onset, we can state that Armenia is under-represented on this commission, if not misrepresented. The government in Armenia has refused to join in any official, semi-official, or unofficial capacity, given the presence of the self-appointed above individuals, and with good reason. On the other hand, Andranik Mihranian, as the former foreign policy advisor to the Russian President Boris Yeltsin, has diplomatic experience of world scale. The participation of Van Z. Krikorian, chairman of the Board of the Armenian Assembly, brings into the picture an entire organization, which has rightfully earned a voice in the Armenian-American community. With no offense to the traditional political parties, we must admit, in all fairness, that the Assembly, through its effective lobbying activities, has achieved more than any organization, in recent years, in raising the political awareness in the community and in influencing legislation, favoring Armenia and Armenians, be it securing financial assistance to Armenia or recognition of the Armenian genocide. The unofficial participation of the Armenian Assembly brings in a whole new dimension to the political equation: As the Assembly has wrested many significant favors from the succeeding US administrations, the assumption may be that it has to reciprocate those favors in supporting State Department foreign policy objectives abroad. As the sole remaining super power in a unipolar world, the US does not entertain many foreign policy agenda items in secret. Every initiative and every plan is out in the open. The government officials openly discuss the removal of heads of states in full collusion of the news media. Financing and arming rebel groups in unfriendly nations, tightening economic sanctions or advocating military action are openly discussed and implemented, thumbing their nose to diplomatic niceties or the international laws. The US has set precedents in the Middle East and in Europe for other nations to see the handwriting on the wall. Indeed, Iraq, the most prosperous and advanced Arab country, has been reduced to ashes and Yugoslavia has been dismembered to demonstrate to the world what could happen to any country defying US foreign policy. Therefore, it is not surprising to see most of the former Warsaw Pact members in Eastern Europe currently clamoring to join NATO. This Reconciliation commission’s initiative obviously enjoys the encouragement of our state Department, as did previous contacts between Armenian and Turkish scholars. Therefore, it is incumbent upon us to place this initiative within a broader political context. It is no secret that one of the U.S. foreign policy objectives is to bring the entire Middle East under Turkish-Israeli hegemony, and project that power into Central Asia to control oil and other natural resources, at the expense of irritating Russian sensitivities. Armenia represents a bottleneck in that thrust into Central Asia. Also, Armenia is no Yugoslavia for any military action, given the prospect of a major confrontation with Russian military presence there. Therefore, Armenia has to be lured into the fold through economic incentives and promises of improving living conditions, in cooperation with Turkey. Also, it must be noted that with its dwindling population and rampant economic woes, Armenia is perceived to be at its weakest point to accept concessions. The formation of the Reconciliation Commission drew comments from a broad spectrum of political circles in the region. It is interestingto note that a major Turkish daily Joumhuriet considers this new development as a defeat for Turkish denial policy of the Armenian Genocide, stating that “Turkey took the initiative of the rapprochement with Armenia when it realized that Armenians were succeeding in passing Genocide resolutions in the parliaments of third countries.” The Azerbaijani speaker of the parliament, Murtuz Aleskerov, on a visit to Turkey, welcomed the initiative, however, conditioning any improvement between Turkey and Armenia, with the unconditional surrender of the ÒoccupiedÓ Azeri territories by the Armenian armed forces. On the Armenian side, it was little surprise to read the strongly worded ARF Bureau declaration, which read, in part, “we strongly reject any initiative mandated by foreign powers, which involves unsanctioned individuals and which do not depart from Armenian national interests." Behind the enumeration of all valid Armenian interests, it is not difficult to detect the ARF frustration of being bypassed, when, all along, ARF has claimed to have monopoly on patriotism and holding the key to the salvation of Armenia and the Armenian nation. However, perhaps it is a necessary ingredient to inject a rejectionist position at this stage, to complete the full spectrum of the reactions to this very unusual initiative. With all the above considerations and potential pitfalls, the, initiative is a necessary step that had to be taken. It is not important who, when, where and why the initiative is taken. It is more important to find out what direction the activities of the commission will take and where they will lead. Therefore, we welcome the initiative with cautious optimism. By Vartkess Bedrossian, Armenian Mirror Spectator AZG Daily #137 24-07-2001 00:02

Yes, unfortunately, effective late 1988, Armenians of Armenia have entered an extremely stressful mode of life. It has been a combination of emotional and economic stress. Coping with it has required enormous strength. As always, some have been able to deal with it, others have not. Obviously, there are people from all walks in Armenia. Some invite admiration, others invite resentment. It all depends on where are you looking for - you would find either the one or the other.

First of all, she resided in the US at the time of giving this interview. The bakers in Armenia in the 1991-1994 period were some of the nations most stable (in terms of their income) people, when the nation was starving off of hunger due to the transportation blockade. Additionally, the bread industry has been part of the structures of organized crime in Armenia in those years. The rest in her village/town would’ve not even had the money to buy ticket “for exodus.” With all due respect, you obviously are not familiar with the realities of the issue. Her story has nothing to do with the mass exodus. She is a totally irrelevant, and in fact, shameless person in that chain. When you cannot provide your children with minimal living, or when you have other aspirations, you don’t need her story to make a decision of exodus.

The issue here is not that she has maid public something that should’ve been swept under the rug. The issue is that she has lied in a shameless manner, without an extreme necessity for it. Or she is an idiot enough not to be able to make sense out of the ordinary things surrounding her. Nobody had threatened her life, or her families life. In fact, because here father was the only baker, their family had enjoyed privileged conditions and, I am sure, better lifestyle than the others – others didn’t even have a father to provide for them. And I am sure that after ripping the rest of the village or the town off, and making enough money, they felt it is time to spend it in the US.

I am not denying her right of survival. We all do something to survive. But it doesn't give us the right to lie about the others in such public media. She didn't need to get out of her way to make that statement. It neither has helped her, nor not saying it would've prevented her from getting visa or subsequent promotions. It is a different thing if you say such things if your life, or the life of the people close to you is threatened. But this is not the case.

Let me respectfully but passionately disagree, please.

Sorry, I meant to quote her saying "The men either killed themselves because they didn't want to fight or they just never came back." By a mistake I quoted a different statement of hers, which was an innocent statement.

But we don't have to lie about others for the sake of our survival.

MosJan, I like your signature. It sheds light on the misconception of the Hell - according to the New Testament, Hell just means grave.

quote:Originally posted by Mesrob: Most men were sent to fight but her father was the town baker - the only person there to make bread - so he was allowed to stay, she said. Shame on her. Perhaps this was part of their schema to get visa to move to the US and to get a Green Card. But shame on her for such an outrageous and undignified lie.

Dragon, First, the format of your replies makes it difficult to understand without an effort where do you quote your opponent and where you provide your own arguments. Please do something about it in the future. You can use bold face in one of the cases, for example. Yes, HHSh members indeed were Hayastantsis, and HHSh was a political thought characteristic to Hayastantsis. But not everything they did was bad. Some of the crucial things they did were pretty successful. Besides, in the political spectrum of Armenia there were also other forces, which had pretty significant influence – not directly on the masses themselves, but by taking a position which forced the populist HHSh to constantly adjust its political agenda. Without the right-of-the-center forces of Armenia, HHSh would’ve been much-much worse, as every populist movement eventually becomes. However, in one sense the people of Armenia is in fault of the disgrace HHSh brought on us – it delegated too much power to HHSh, and all in the name of the Unity. It was discontent with a lot of features of HHSh. However, it thought that by diversifying the vote in the Armenian political spectrum, it hurts the Unity. This was resulted from the traditional Armenian mumbo-jumbo about Unity. Obviously the Hayastantsis were not sophisticated in politics (except some small groups) to understand that too much power degrades any organization, and you have to keep the balances and the checks always in place, and have to always exert maximal pressure on political organizations not to let them to degrade the way HHSh has done. And you have to never glorify any political organization or party. It is a shameful fetishism to glorify a political party. It degrades the nation and dooms it to what we witness today. However, it was a very troublesome time, there were too many serious problems at the time, and the people misunderstood the concept of Unity. That concept is still misunderstood by the entire Armenian nation, by in large. The democracy in Armenia was sacrificed to the altar of Unity. So much about the Unity. However, if instead of HHSh we had some of the ‘Political” organizations of Diaspora, Armenia would’ve not existed today, and would’ve drowned in its own blood. In that sense, given the circumstances, HHSh was the least evil, realistically speaking. And I also think we need to give some time, before people understand what a titanic work has been done by the ruling elite of Armenia in the last 10 years, given the circumstances. (Note that I have never been a HHSh supporter). Do I think it warrants glorifying them? Never. They should be held responsible for the failures of the last 12 years (not 10). The governance and power are or should not be considered as privileges, but a huge responsibility. I don’t know what you mean by saying “the independency of Amenia bounded to ''Karapaghu mern e'' lozunks.” If you explain, I would reply. However, you forget that I wrote in my previous note that the Karabagh issue was unavoidable. I am not asking anything from the Diaspora. I am just expecting that the few loud-mouths of Diaspora learn a little bit at least about the things that they are talking about, and understand that governing a state is not governing a partisan club, that there are huge numbers of variables in that equation, and frequently one need contradicts to the other need, and it is hard to have everything in place immediately for a state which had gone through the collapse of the traditional markets, energetic blockade, earthquake, economic blockade, sabotage of the local economy by the previous elite, that the lifestyle of the population had collapsed from the 20th century to the 19th century overnight, there were any number of forces from inside and outside to take apart everything that was remaining intact, etc. And yet, this nation managed to win a prolonged military battle and standoff with a disproportionately better positioned adversary, it managed to reverse the economic decline, and is on the track of its growth. It is very easy to sit in a safe and warm apartment 2000 miles away from were the troubles of the nation are, enjoy the system that has been built in hundreds of years by other nations, and criticize Hayastantsis vs. Diaspora for not being able in 10 years to build robust democracy or economy. It is easy, but not honest. Not the criticism, but the emotions which come with it. I suspect you might have noticed that I am never shy to criticize, however, when criticizing, one has to see them in the large realm of things. As to the Diaspora, I am not trying to separate it from the Nation, but the opposite – I am saying that its only chance of survival is its integration (not necessarily geographical) with Armenia and Hayastantsis – as much as some may hate this idea. This is if, obviously, our Diasporans may leave aside their ridiculous and narrow minded arrogance on their superiority vs. Hayastantsis. I have spoken on this subject for close to a year now in our forum, and there are large numbers of materials posted by me in this regard. Regarding the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Turkey. Apparently, I am more optimistic about it then you are. I remember the majority of people in Armenia and Diaspora saying as late as in 1990 that Armenia will never be independent and the Russians would rather drown it in its own blood then let it go, or the next day of Armenia’s independence the Turkish Army will do a parade in Yerevan. I see the recognition of the Genocide of Armenians by Turkey in a different domain. Not in the domain Turkey vs. Armenia, but Turkish progressive population against their military elite for the sake of the establishment of democracy and respect for Human Rights in Turkey. And the Armenian Genocide, being the best kept secrete (from their population) of the Turkish modern statehood, is the key to that development. Therefore, it is imperative for us, I think, to extend our hands to the progressive Turks. The recognition of the genocide of Armenia has to be perhaps more of their fight than ours. The Genocide is more of their problem than ours. After all, we have not committed it – they have. Additionally, never have I claimed that we should not try to bring pressure on Turkey through the pursuit of the recognition of the Genocide by other countries. I have always been supportive of it and have done my share along those lines. I am convinced that it is necessary. But I have claimed that that process has to be rethought out and optimized. And the optimization of that process requires a direct dialog with the Turks – the progressive ones, and even the Grey Wolves or their right-wing parties. And it has to be seen in a wider realm of things, leaving aside the narrow minded perceptions and propaganda for the sake of the partisan gains. Contrary to what you say, you know nothing about my type. First of all, because you don’t know me or about me. Second, because you should not judge people by their “type” but by their deeds and thoughts. I don’t reject the good things that the Diasporan “political” parties have done at all. But I reject taking these things out of their proportions and disillusioning and mannipulating the nonsophisticated minds of Armenian Diaspora or alienating the sophisticating minds. But I am not going to ask you to discuss it with me, if you are afraid to even bring it up. For me, tradition is one of the main power for a nation to survive and for a people to keep his identity. As a matter of general remark (not directed only at the Diaspora but also at Hayastantsis), I totally disagree with you. The tradition is the heavy stone on the neck of the nation, which drags it to the bottom of the ocean of human progress. Nations, with few exceptions only (see Japan), do not preserve their identity through their traditions, but through their aspirations for the future. The past (traditions) shouldn’t define the identity of the nation. And in our particular case, the past is something that we would be much better of to forget – there is not much there to be proud of. If the tradition defines nation’s identity, that nation gradually dies, much along the same lines as you claim that Diaspora has not been able to update its identity. …but how come we have to ignore Diaspora for current Armenia, who is not independent in fact, neither has political background (communism is the only model). To this point I can say that Diaspora still has the potential to serve Armenia in many ways, if Armenia ready to take the challenge. Armenia is a nation, Diaspora not. Big differences, but not contradictions. Where have you heard me claiming to ignore Diaspora. I think the contrary. Armenia has an obligation to save the Diaspora. Surprise-surprise! Only Armenia can save it. And that is the Armenian State – not the Church. The Church would further destroy it. And that may happen only if the Diaspora orients itself towards Armenia, and understands that the existence of Diaspora outside a strategic domain is not a purpose. I don’t see Diaspora serving Armenia. I see Diaspora becoming part of Armenia – obviously virtually (not geographically) in most of the cases, and those serving itself, first of all. Only in that case, and through rotation, Diaspora may become a viable and surviving organism. This is indeed a big topic and perhaps requires special discussions. We have made several attempts in this forum in the past, but is has not gone too far. As to the political background of Armenia or lacking such background, you are right and wrong. It is true that outside the last 10 years Armenia had not had any independent experience. So what can we do about it? Where do we take it from? That’ is our reality. I would go as far as to claim that Amrenia has not had political tradition for more than 1500 years. There is nothing we can do about it. That’s why (partially) it has been very hard for Armenia to stand on its fit in the turbulent post-Soviet era. But the fact is that the Diaspora, or better to say the Diasporan organizations have zero experience in terms of the political background, and basically zero expertise. They have never been in the position of governance, they have just governed a small portion of the Armenian Diaspora in a very limited scope, have zero understanding of the International politics or experience in it (this is not a criticism but a constitution of fact – how would’ve they had it being just a Diaspora and not representing a governement). They tend to call themselves political parties, but in fact none of them are political parties – none of them have participated in any elections on such capacity, have never occupied any executive or elective positions in th host countries, and they have no political agenda. The Hnchags basically don’t exist as a result of becoming obsolete with their traditional ideology in the post-Soviet era, Ramgavars have never had political agenda and have recognized themselves being just a club, and ARF is a small clan inside the nation, which has also lost the major part of its agenda, and has demonstrated its total inability to stand for the things that it has advocated for decades, or has demonstrated that given the opportunity it would be no different in domestic political life from HHSh and Communists (I have never had doubts about it), in fact it would be much worse, and as far as the International Politics goes, it would just confine itself to Political Charades and further isolation of Armenia, and would bring nothing more to Armenia but further disgrace. On the subject of the survivability of the Diaspora, I suspect you have a very narrow view on it. I would recommend to look at the Armenian Diaspora as a thousand years old phenomenon when making judgments about it. And there is no reasons to make projections about its future. It is enough to study its past in this case. [ July 24, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

images/smiles/converted/smile.gif

MJ-How about those Turks who accept that the Genocide has taken place, and feel sorry for it? wh00t - I don't have anything to change their minds about. Then would you be willing to engaged with them in a normal human manner, now? Or would you be still willing to insult and alienate them? MJ-Recognition by Turkey or the rest of the world? wh00t-Recognition by the rest of the world, and then Turkey. In that order. Understandably, Turkey will never acknowledge the Genocide without a reason to do so. Do you mind if Turkey recognizes before the US does? Or if the US and Canada recognize it, do you feel it is a reason for Turkey to recognize it? If yes, why? MJ-Then how do you expect and for the sake of what the US to recognize more importantly, to condemn the Genocide? Wh00t- Why is this such a shock? H. Res. 596 was easily going to pass last year. We have a good lobby in the USA, but that alone doesn't make the Armenians extremely powerful. But it didn’t pass, right? Had you read the text of the H. Res. 596? If not, you can find it in our Forum. MJ-Don’t you think that you contradict yourself? wh00t-Nope. We alone don't have a powerful voice. We need outside help. As I mentioned, we have tried to get outside help for 300 years. 300 years ago the situation was not good. 100 years ago we lost more than 2 million people while the outsiders watched it. Does it teach us something, you think? But if we are not a powerful voice, as you assert, why would any powerful party rush to our “rescue?” MJ-Somehow I don’t see Turkey being isolated, but the opposite – every major power from Russia to the US rushes to do business with Turkey. wh00t-This is true. But it doesn't mean Turkey doesn't desperately want to join the EU - she does. I don’t think it is desperate. It has other alternatives – maybe not as sexy looking, but nevertheless, other alternatives are available to Turkey. MJ-And as much as you may be surprised, Turkey’s acceptance in the EU is in the best interest of Armenia. The acceptance would obligate Turkey to “play by the rules," it would provide Armenia with increased national security guarantees, would probably force Turkey to lift Armenia’s blockade, and would open a new venue for the recognition of the Genocide, itself. wh00t-Turkey has never played by the rules, so it's not surprising to see many Armenians skeptical about any such change as a result of anything. But hey, you could be right. The situation between the nations is bound to ameliorate if Turkey is accepted.. but that isn't saying much - the situation can't get much worse at this point. In fact it has. Only we, from the position of not understanding the rules of the game, may make such assertions. Turkey has known perfectly the rules of the game throughout its existence, it has played by the rules, and that’s why it has always emerged victorious. MJ-It has in fact hardened Turkey’s position. wh00t-With a hardened position, Turkey further isolates itself from Western standards of human rights, and again they lose.. while Armenians gain nothing and lose nothing. How much do you think they care about the Western standards of Human Rights? Armenia has everything to gain and loose from Turkey’s hardening. I hope that you are never in position to make strategic decisions which such assessment. MJ-You are not alone, at all. In fact, you represent the majority, but as Soren Kierkegaard claims, “Truth always rests with the minority, and the minority is always stronger than the majority, because the minority is generally formed by those who really have an opinion, while the strength of a majority is illusory, formed by the gangs who have no opinion-and who, therefore, in the next instant (when it is evident that the minority is the stronger) assume its opinion . . . while Truth again reverts to a new minority.” wh00t- Ouff! Relax and smile.

To any Turks, Azeri, etc. who ardently proclaims that there was no Genocide, I will not attempt to pick their brain to prove that they feel that way, nor is it worth it for me to spend my time and effort to try and change their minds. How about those Turks who accept that the Genocide has taken place, and feel sorry for it? Your assertion about your time tells me again and again that you are in this for emotional satisfaction of it and not for the results, because otherwise you would’ve been open to anything available which advances the recognition of the genocide by Turkey. On the contrary, in my opinion recognition is the one and probably only key to solving this dispute in a way that does not conflict with the interests of the Armenian people. Recognition by Turkey or the rest of the world? We are a small people, our influence is limited. (Granted, we have a great lobby in the USA.) Then how do you expect and for the sake of what the US to recognize more importantly, to condemn the Genocide? Turkey laughs at our claims, and I don't blame them. The way the issue is frequently formulated by some segments of the Armenian side, not only Turkey would lough at it, but even the steamed hens (a translated Armenian gotesque-expression) would do it. Who are the Armenians, anyway? In their eyes, an insignificant people trying to destroy their national honor by accusing them of something as horrific as Genocide. We don't have a major voice. The world's superpowers do. We need them to exert pressure upon Turkey, because we can't. Don’t you think that you contradict yourself? If the EU upholds the Armenian Genocide prerequisite, for whatever political reason, Turkey will not budge and will just sit even further isolated than it is at present. Somehow I don’t see Turkey being isolated, but the opposite – every major power from Russia to the US rushes to do business with Turkey. And as much as you may be surprised, Turkey’s acceptance in the EU is in the best interest of Armenia. The acceptance would obligate Turkey to “play by the rules,” it would provide Armenia with increased national security guarantees, would probably force Turkey to lift Armenia’s blockade, and would open a new venue for the recognition of the Genocide, itself. Have the Armenians won anything by the Turkey not being able to join the EU? No. Zip. It has in fact hardened Turkey’s position. If it was in my power, I would’ve granted Turkey acceptance into EU effective tomorrow morning. Has Turkey lost anything by it? Not much. I have already mentioned above that there is no isolation of Turkey – even by its traditional adversaries. It's just a matter of how deep in isolation it goes and how much losses must they cut before they start to look at things from a different perspective. This may not be the universal Armenian standpoint, but I know that I am not alone with these opinions. You are not alone, at all. In fact, you represent the majority, but as Soren Kierkegaard claims, “Truth always rests with the minority, and the minority is always stronger than the majority, because the minority is generally formed by those who really have an opinion, while the strength of a majority is illusory, formed by the gangs who have no opinion-and who, therefore, in the next instant (when it is evident that the minority is the stronger) assume its opinion . . . while Truth again reverts to a new minority.”

Have I tried to change the minds of people with fixed mindsets against Armenian Genocide recognition? No. Then how do you know that their mind is set? …it *SEEMS* that you share Thorny Rose's view that we need to cooperate with Turkey when it comes to the Armenian Genocide. Based on these views, raising awareness among the Turks, as you suggest it, is necessary. I don’t know what you are trying to convey by your choice of word “cooperate” - you make it sound like something sinister. But I definitely thing that the issue of the Armenian Genocide may be resolved only jointly with the Turks, and I wouldn’t give a damn about the entire worlds’ recognition of the Genocide. Others are not going to resolve our problems. In 300 years, since Israel Ori, we could’ve afforded (I am tempted to think) to learn some elementary lessons from our history. Our stubborn inability of learning lessons from our own history is pregnant with more loses – ever increasingly costly. Additionally, I do admire Thorny’s persona and intellect, and I wish all Turks were like her. However, as you can tell, I can't relate with the Turkish cooperation bit. I do not entirely disagree with Turko-Armenian dialogue, but I feel we have tried that already, and it has failed, and we cannot get much good out of it. When have we tried and failed? The current reconciliation commission is a mistake; on this point, I'm with the ARF. Therefore, simply to ignore is the next best policy. With such a policy, I am more motivated to spread awareness among the rest of the world, who are more impressionable because they have been exposed to no information about the Genocide in the past, rather the Turks, who, through no fault of their own have been fed lies for their entire lives. I will not try to do anything for them, it's not worth my time and effort. You obviously are entitled to your opinion and to your affiliations. However, perhaps against your will, but your position is going to make things only harder. And your position asserts again in my eyes that you are not trying to achieve results, but rather are trying to get some emotional satisfaction out of “cornering” Turkey and the Turks, instead of trying to do anything available to pull them over – at least a portion of their population. And if I was a neutral person, i.e. a person of a third nationality, I would’ve not liked to associate myself with you finding a deficit of desire in my heart to support you, even if I felt sympathy towards the fallen.

I am not about to set upon changing the minds of people with fixed beliefs about the subject at hand. How do you know that? Have you tried it? If you are interested in raising Turkish awareness, more power to you, and I hope you are successful. If you feel this will help the Armenian cause, you should do it yourself, rather than trying to change my course of actions. It wouldn’t even occur to me to change your course of actions in a matter which is personal. However, we are discussing an issue of national significance, and “your actions” have implications “in my life.” MJ- Besides, the way you try to convince the world is not necessarily good for Armenians, because while the world “gets convinced in Turks' being barbarians,” it also gets convinced that “Armenians are not any better.” wh00t -I disagree. The Israelis have been playing this card for decades with admirable results. I also disagree with your premise. The world has a very limited capacity for that tactics. And I don’t think that the reality of Israel demosntartes a lot of admirable results. Refer to my response to your first suggestion. I would like to say "inzi khelk mi dar," but it's a bit harsher than I would like it to be . To the contrary to you, I would like to “khelk vertsnel amen mekits vor karogh e indz khelk tal.”

Dear wh00t, I would be very happy to have misread you. It’s good that you want to convince the world that there has been a Genocide, and don’t want to be a bystander. However there are better ways to accomplish that task in my view. If you can on your way also put some effort to raise the awareness of the Turks from an 11% of their population to a 55%, you would accomplish much more significant results. Besides, the way you try to convince the world is not necessarily good for Armenians, because while the world “gets convinced in Turks' being barbarians,” it also gets convinced that “Armenians are not any better.” Additionally, from your last posting I notice again that you are interested more in discharging your hatred rather than mitigating your tactics for the sake of the result. It seems to me that you deliberately “don’t understand” what your opponents are saying. As far as my recognition of the Genocide is concerned, I would advise that prior to discharging such cheap shots, you do a little bit of a homework, so that it doesn’t backfire on you. Given that you refuse to accept a very common sense recommendations from people who are sympathetic to your cause, I get an impression again that you get kick out of “exposing Turks’ barbarism.” If you are really interested in their recognition, try to help those who are swing “recognizers” to come along, and try to win them over.

I don’t feel that’s what she was saying, wh00t. And I think it was pretty clear what she was saying. I think this is an example of what I have asserted many times in the past – many Armenians prefer the problem to the solution. They would rather have Turks not recognize the Genocide, and moreover, even perhaps have them commit another one, so that to “prove to the world that they are barbarians,” instead of being interest in their direct recognition of it and being remorseful, thus, somehow mitigating the crime.

quote:Originally posted by Paul bunyan: I doubt that many azeribaijans will be in Heaven. but look on the bright side at least aliyev won't catch cold where he is going...:-) Are you happy about it or sad, Paul?