Armenian Genocide Bill 2007

[Louise]

There is nothing in history, or any evidence in the present that indicates that somehow an awareness of genocides in the past, is going to prevent others from occurring. The whole 'we must make sure people know so it won't happen again' argument is fallacious.

So this is about revisionists? Would you also support anti-free speech laws like they have in France, which penalize those who question the genocide or the sacred holocaust? They have such laws in Turkey for the opposite effect. Are we no better than them?

What do you mean by seeking 'justice'? Don't pussyfoot around and beat around the bush. Say what you mean. Do you perchance mean reparations? Do you perchance mean 'getting lands back'? If those are the things you mean, you are outwitting yourself.

What?

No amount of 'bills' passing will get the Turk to 'face the truth'. This isn't like Nazi Germany. These are two different situations which is why the reasoning won't apply here.

 

So, to conclude, when I look at this bill, it serves no purpose other than a general unambiguous reference 'oh yea, it was a genocide.' Now, if that is all that matters, then good for the bill, but from what you divulged and expanded upon, it seems you want this bill or expect it to do more magic than it can. It cannot.

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

 

In anyway, reconciliation (verahashdutyun) is impossible.

[hyethga]

I have reservations about the bill and how much good will come from passing it. With this whole cluster*** in Iraq Americans have gotten themselves into, a bill estranging Turkey from America is only going to blow back against Armenians living in the United States.

 

As much as ANCA (and the Assembly) has done in pushing for this bill, they've hardly considered what sort of effects will ensue if it does, and have poorly handled the response to the measure's portrayal in the media.

 

It's not so much that a resolution recognizing the "events of 1915" that is needed because many things can be recognized as such and such but a call for Turkey to end its denial of the genocide itself.

 

I find the term itself as offensive and insulting.

[Anonymouse]

It shouldn't be about revisionism. History is reconsidered and revised all the time as new facts or points of views emerge. Nobody has an issue with that. It's about negationism: the deliberate denial of a historic event intended to offend and insult the victims or the descendants thereof. Compare it to "hate speech" and the laws against that.

 

How is this going to combat deliberate denial of a historic event? Other than saying "Well, ok, so it was a genocide." it makes no aims to combat denial or otherwise. Stamping the official seal of approval on a certain idea or discourse does not correlate with or cause those who deny it, and in fact have a vested interest in denying it, to all of a sudden change their views.

 

If the bill is only about recognition of the "tragic events of 1915" as genocide, then it indeed serves no other purpose than perhaps bullying Turkey a little.

 

Okay, so it's a bill designed to bully Turkey a little bit.

 

If the bill, however, demands of the American government to actively urge Turkey to come to terms with its history, it could have some effect.

 

To my knowledge the bill does not demand any such thing from the American government, but, let's say, for the sake of argument it does, so what? Do you expect that somehow this "could have some effect" on Turkey? I wouldn't kid myself over it.

 

It remains that Armenians themselves don't seem to know what they want out of this bill, or indeed, recognition of the genocide. Let's do a little thought experiment. Let's assume almost all of the nations in the world pass resolutions calling the Armenian genocide a genocide. What then? Do you believe that this will somehow force Turkey to admit it? Not a chance. Will this cause all the nations to invade Turkey on behalf of Armenians and impose this non binding decision of what actually happened? Not a chance.

 

[Aratta-Kingdom]

'Anonymouse'

There is nothing in history, or any evidence in the present that indicates that somehow an awareness of genocides in the past, is going to prevent others from occurring. The whole 'we must make sure people know so it won't happen again' argument is fallacious.

 

Are you saying the Germans will again kill the jews the way they did during WWII. Do you honestly belive sometime in the future any ethnic group will ever be targeted in any of the E.U. member countries as it happened 60 years ago. If the bill was to been passed 30 years ago, the turkish pig named ozal wouldn't have a guts to say ' we'll teach the armenains the lesson of 1915'. If a bill like that would have stop the Armenian massacres in Baku, Sumgait, Kirovabad, Shushi.

 

 

 

 

 

'Anonymouse'

"So this is about revisionists?"

 

 

Including the revisionists.

 

 

 

 

'Anonymouse'

"Would you also support anti-free speech laws like they have in France, which penalize those who question the genocide or the sacred holocaust?"

 

Questioning the genocide or the holocaust, or aggressively denying it for the purpose to gain something are two separate things.

 

 

 

 

'Anonymouse'

"They have such laws in Turkey for the opposite effect. Are we no better than them?"

 

 

The turkish law is the reflection of the turkish value system-the turkish way of life. The french law defends the people from the hypocrats who use the french way of life to aggresively advance their their own interests.

 

 

 

 

'Anonymouse'

"What do you mean by seeking 'justice'?"

 

I see the word 'justice' scares you a lot

 

 

 

'Anonymouse'

"Don't pussyfoot around and beat around the bush."

 

Which part of saying seeking juctice wasn't clear for you?

 

 

 

 

'Anonymouse'

Say what you mean. Do you perchance mean reparations? Do you perchance mean 'getting lands back'? If those are the things you mean, you are outwitting yourself.

 

 

What you call a 'land'...is in fact the home and the birth place of the Armenian people. After what the armenians have experience in 1915, no one would have belived the armenians could come back and demand their rights. You like it or not, the armenians will make the turks to pay for what they did.

 

 

 

'Ananymouse'

What?

 

 

Which part of 'a bill like this will put an end to cultural genocide' wasn't clear for you?

 

 

 

 

 

'Ananymouse'

No amount of 'bills' passing will get the Turk to 'face the truth'.

 

What makes you be so sure of that? Are you the spokesperson for the turks by any chance?

 

 

 

'Ananymouse'

"This isn't like Nazi Germany."

 

You got that right.

 

 

 

'Ananymouse'

"These are two different situations which is why the reasoning won't apply here."

 

Explain yourself. Oterwise, this seems more like a trash talk to me.

 

 

 

 

 

'Ananymouse'

"So, to conclude, when I look at this bill, it serves no purpose other than a general unambiguous reference 'oh yea, it was a genocide.' Now, if that is all that matters, then good for the bill, but from what you divulged and expanded upon, it seems you want this bill or expect it to do more magic than it can. It cannot."

 

 

 

If that is the case, why do the turks spend all their energy and resourses to deny the truth? For the turks this is a question of defending their "ego"..."their pride"..."the fake identity they have created for themselves. For the armenians, this bill means to tell the butchers that we are back- and we are back to defend our right.

[MosJan]

H.Res.106: mourning wreath laid to U.S. Embassy in Baku

19.10.2007 13:04 GMT+04:00 Print version Send to mail In Russian In Armenian

 

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The world congress of Azeris and Azeri-Turk women’s organization signed a “statement of protest” over adoption of the Armenian Genocide resolution, H.Res.106, by the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee.

 

The statement says “the decision will damage not only Turkey-U.S. relations but also Azerbaijan-U.S. relations.

 

The WCA claimed that discussion of the “unjust” resolution in the United States, the advocate of human rights, “conflicts with all international conventions.”

 

The protestors laid a mourning wreath to the U.S. Embassy in Baku, ANS TV reports.

 

[MosJan]

to drants mer@ yev manuk@

 

inch anem inch anem .... hmmm.... yes el chgitem

[AVO]

H.Res.106: mourning wreath laid to U.S. Embassy in Baku

 

...The protestors laid a mourning wreath to the U.S. Embassy in Baku, ANS TV reports.

 

They took Jon Stewart's suggestion of mass flowers? After Armenian Genocide gets properly recognized, next will be recognition of many massacres committed by the baboons.

[Anonymouse]

Are you saying the Germans will again kill the jews the way they did during WWII. Do you honestly belive sometime in the future any ethnic group will ever be targeted in any of the E.U. member countries as it happened 60 years ago. If the bill was to been passed 30 years ago, the turkish pig named ozal wouldn't have a guts to say ' we'll teach the armenains the lesson of 1915'. If a bill like that would have stop the Armenian massacres in Baku, Sumgait, Kirovabad, Shushi.

 

That is the wrong argument to make. No one has claimed that the Germans will commit another genocide. That is not the point. The argument that I am arguing against, the argument which is often raised, which you now seem to be running away from, is that education on genocides or this or that, will help prevent others from taking place. And since, that has not been the case, and nor have you provided any evidence to the contrary other than blanket assertions of the way it should be, such argument fails.

 

As far as the massacres in Sumgait, Shushi, etc., yes I have heard and read about those. Tragic they were, but that proves precisely my point, that such massacres will still occur despite such resolutions or educations passing. Furthermore, it doesn't look too good for us Armenians either when we engage in similar pursuits.

 

Khojaly Massacre

 

 

Questioning the genocide or the holocaust, or aggressively denying it for the purpose to gain something are two separate things.

 

No they are not. Tell that to people in Europe or Canada who have tried to question the Holocaust, be they David Irving, or Ernst Zundel, or a host of many others. The difference between "questioning" and "denying" is essentially pointless as language is fungible and while people who claim they were only questioning were either exiled, imprisoned, or fined for "denying."

 

But beyond that, you have merely asserted (yet again) a blanket assertion that there is a difference between questioning and denying without offering any evidence of this.

 

Furthermore, do you actually support such anti-free speech laws? Why? If something can stand on the merits, why the need to resort to official judicial decree to hold on to such truths.

 

The turkish law is the reflection of the turkish value system-the turkish way of life. The french law defends the people from the hypocrats who use the french way of life to aggresively advance their their own interests.

 

The Turkish law is the reflection of the Turkish way of life, but the French law is not? What you meant to say is, because the French law agrees with what we think, therefore it is just and noble, but the Turkish law, because it disagrees with what we say, is not.

 

I did not imagine Armenians to be so hostile to free speech. Apparently, we are no better than the Jews or Turks.

 

 

I see the word 'justice' scares you a lot

 

Justice is a very sublime word. It's just that it's misunderstood, misinterpreted, and misapplied by many, including you.

 

 

 

Which part of saying seeking juctice wasn't clear for you?

 

What you call a 'land'...is in fact the home and the birth place of the Armenian people. After what the armenians have experience in 1915, no one would have belived the armenians could come back and demand their rights. You like it or not, the armenians will make the turks to pay for what they did.

 

Which part of 'a bill like this will put an end to cultural genocide' wasn't clear for you?

 

What makes you be so sure of that? Are you the spokesperson for the turks by any chance?

 

Do you think I don't realize this? The point is, this is irrelevant. 'Land' is subject to the same centrifugal forces of history as anything else. All history is, is a process, and a change in time. With that change, peoples, populations, cultures, empires have changed, shifted, appeared and disappeared. You cannot point to some point in the past and use it as a valid yardstick of measure, as to what the things in the present ought to be. All peoples have some claim or another to some land or another at some point in time.

 

With time, and historical change, lands and peoples change, whether by war, genocides or simply of their own accord due to population implosions or intermixing. Every person has a claim to some land. The Basques claim some lands, the American Indians claim others, the Mexicans claim theirs, the Eritreans claim theirs, we claim ours, etc. What about the Kurds and their supposed claims to land? Indeed much of what the Kurds assert is their land was actually ours. The map of what was 'Armenia' or 'Greater Armenia' etc., has changed over time. Which specific time period are you going to use as the proper measure of what are or are not our 'rightful lands'? There were populations shifts and changes.

 

Do you see how pointless this is? Just accept the fact that pointless resolutions and admissions by government's official organs of this being a 'genocide' is not going to get any lands back or reparations paid, if that is what we mean by the word 'justice'.

 

That form of 'justice' is what is called vengeance, and it is never remedied unless one adopts the policy of might is right. The meek do not inherit the earth, the mighty do. So if we want justice, and we want something that was rightfully ours and taken, we have to take it. But how do we do that with our current state as a people? We cannot.

 

The only way Armenians will ever get their justice is if they breed at astronomical rates like Mexicans do here in the southwest United States and gradually move in and spread their numbers or take it by force. That is not happening because Armenians are numerically insignificant, and Armenia itself has growth problems. Nor is it militarily capable of doing such a thing. So where does this leave these resolutions? In the dustbin of history.

 

 

Explain yourself. Oterwise, this seems more like a trash talk to me.

 

When Germany was defeated, it was occupied. By virtue of occupation, all sorts of crimes and retroactive laws, treaties and obligations were imposed on Germany, as a vanquished nation. It accepted whatever terms were thrown at it, as it had no choice.

 

Turkey was never occupied and never conquered. It was not subject to the same post-war treatment as Germany ever was, and consequently, it had no obligation to admit its crimes.

Edited October 20, 2007 by Anonymouse

[Lev7]

will someone please ban this azeri troll?

[Anonymouse]

will someone please ban this azeri troll?

 

Azeri troll? I'm as Armenian as they come shit for brains. If you don't like differing opinions, and seek to silence and hush those you don't agree with, go to Myanmar. Otherwise, your distaste for a thing called a free flow of information is somewhat unsettling.

 

I like Azeris about as much as I like you, which isn't much. You will find you have more in common with the bloodlusting Turk or the Jew who seek to suppress free speech and dissent, than you do with any real Armenian. Now kindly, find a hobby.

[Lev7]

Azeri troll? I'm as Armenian as they come shit for brains. If you don't like differing opinions, and seek to silence and hush those you don't agree with, go to Myanmar. Otherwise, your distaste for a thing called a free flow of information is somewhat unsettling.

 

I like Azeris about as much as I like you, which isn't much. You will find you have more in common with the bloodlusting Turk or the Jew who seek to suppress free speech and dissent, than you do with any real Armenian. Now kindly, find a hobby.

 

I smell a turkish rat a mile away, stop flattering yourself

 

and putting "LA" as your obvious location makes you even more transparent

Edited October 20, 2007 by Lev7

[Louise]

I smell a turkish rat a mile away, stop flattering yourself

 

and putting "LA" as your obvious location makes you even more transparent

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

 

freedom of speach has limits: not in press but by the law

 

www.rencontresaverroes.net

[nairi]

How is this going to combat deliberate denial of a historic event? Other than saying "Well, ok, so it was a genocide." it makes no aims to combat denial or otherwise. Stamping the official seal of approval on a certain idea or discourse does not correlate with or cause those who deny it, and in fact have a vested interest in denying it, to all of a sudden change their views.

 

It may not change their views, but it should make them think twice before opening their mouths. As to Irving: he does not question the Holocaust. He negates it.

 

It remains that Armenians themselves don't seem to know what they want out of this bill, or indeed, recognition of the genocide. Let's do a little thought experiment. Let's assume almost all of the nations in the world pass resolutions calling the Armenian genocide a genocide. What then? Do you believe that this will somehow force Turkey to admit it? Not a chance. Will this cause all the nations to invade Turkey on behalf of Armenians and impose this non binding decision of what actually happened? Not a chance.

 

For it to make a difference, Turkey needs to be put in a position where it has no choice but to come to terms with its history.

 

I in no way support the passing of such bills without any consequences at all.

[Louise]

[

I in no way support the passing of such bills without any consequences at all.

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

 

any offence has to be penalized.

Louise

[Anonymouse]

I smell a turkish rat a mile away, stop flattering yourself

 

and putting "LA" as your obvious location makes you even more transparent

 

Your sense of smell is off.

 

It's amusing that you would immediately jump to conclusions because you don't like my response. Instead of actually addressing the points I raise, why bother, right? We may as well just close ourselves into the little orbit we agree with and shrug off the rest. If we happen to perchance stumble upon any that do not see eye to eye, we will just call them a Turk!

 

Just because an Armenian happens to not be an automaton robot agreeing by the rank and file does not make him a Turk, shit for brains.

 

 

[Anonymouse]

It may not change their views, but it should make them think twice before opening their mouths. As to Irving: he does not question the Holocaust. He negates it.

 

I'm unaware of Irving ever "denying the Holocaust." He has questioned aspects of it, but then again, after his trial, he recanted all those views.

 

For it to make a difference, Turkey needs to be put in a position where it has no choice but to come to terms with its history.

 

And that is where I see the problem with such bills. I don't believe they put Turkey in any position to come to terms with its history. The reason Germany did, as I already pointed out, had more to do with the geopolitical consequences of WWII, than any such bills.

 

I in no way support the passing of such bills without any consequences at all.

 

Let's hope you're right.

 

[DominO123]

Mixing hate speech and mere taking position of without hate speech element.

 

While it is true that freedom to hold opinions should not be restricted, exemple include questioning the Armenian Genocide, the Holocaust etc., the Holocaust law in France was incorporated to a law forbidding hate speech in France to be able to pass without having to deal with the freedom of speech issue, it was the same here in Canada when dealing with Zundel.

 

Differences between both:

 

''The Armenians are known to lie'' --- This is a hate speech

''The Armenian tragedy is not a genocide'' ---This is not a hate speech

 

''Blacks have an IQ by average lower than Whites'' ---This is not hate speech

''Blacks are less intelligent than Whites'' ---This is a hate speech

 

Restricting a group or stereotyping them is a hatespeech, and can not be justified under the pretext of freedom of speech.

 

Halacoglu had a trial on his head on Europe, he was not merely denying the Armenian genocide, he was making hatespeech, he was streotyping Armenians. The perversion of the French anti-hate speech law could not be used by opressive regimes like Turkey to justify their own repressives laws. The 301 penal code is not under an anti-hate speech law, it is under the ''don't question the Kemalistic Turkey legacy.''

[Anonymouse]

Mixing hate speech and mere taking position of without hate speech element.

 

While it is true that freedom to hold opinions should not be restricted, exemple include questioning the Armenian Genocide, the Holocaust etc., the Holocaust law in France was incorporated to a law forbidding hate speech in France to be able to pass without having to deal with the freedom of speech issue, it was the same here in Canada when dealing with Zundel.

 

Differences between both:

 

''The Armenians are known to lie'' --- This is a hate speech

''The Armenian tragedy is not a genocide'' ---This is not a hate speech

 

''Blacks have an IQ by average lower than Whites'' ---This is not hate speech

''Blacks are less intelligent than Whites'' ---This is a hate speech

 

Restricting a group or stereotyping them is a hatespeech, and can not be justified under the pretext of freedom of speech.

 

Why not? Why should any speech be restricted? All speech should be allowed to be freely expressed no matter how disconcerting to you it may seem. To hold otherwise, is to endorse a form of thought control.

 

[Էլիա]

ANCA SPECIAL REPORT

Call for Justice!

The time is now to pass H.Res.106

The Genocide Resolution!

Tune in to hear updates about how we will win the Congressional vote for House Resolution 106, the Armenian Genocide Resolution.

Դիտեցէք եւ հետեւեցէք նորութիւններուն՝ թէ ինչպէս կրնանք յանգիլ ներկայացուցիչներու տան մէջ հայկական ցեղասպանութեան բանաձեւին քուէակութեան:

Sunday, October 21, 2007

5:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. (PST)

Horizon Television

(Or log on to www.horizonarmeniantv.com)

To learn more, log on to www.anca.org

Edited October 21, 2007 by Էլիա

[nairi]

Let's hope you're right.

 

Right about what?

[Z'areh]

Just curious Anonymouse, why did you feel the need to put a link in your post to an article from Wiki about the Khojali killings?

[Error 404]

Hey

 

I followed your comments in this thread. Seems like you are the only one to dispute the genocide recognition.

 

What is not so clear for you about the res 106 ?

 

What is your point? What are you trying to say? You dispute the conventional ways of genocide recognition but what do you suggest? If you don't have anything substantial to offer in our struggle for genocide recognition then please show us your avatar in other threads (like chit chat or humor).

 

I am all for freedom of speech too. Remember you are free to express yourself but you are responsible for what you are saying.

I won't question the facts and I won't let other cynics question the fact of armenian genocide too.

[Anoushik]

By Samantha Power

 

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8...1672790,00.html

This article is is in this week's TIME, p. 26, commentary section. I didn't really realize that it's the actual TIME when I posted the above a couple of days ago from the magazine's web (honestly, I didn't think they'd publish it) but today when I got the magazine I was pleasantly surprised. I'm looking forward to the letters from readers.

[Anonymouse]

Hey

 

I followed your comments in this thread. Seems like you are the only one to dispute the genocide recognition.

 

What is not so clear for you about the res 106 ?

 

What is your point? What are you trying to say? You dispute the conventional ways of genocide recognition but what do you suggest? If you don't have anything substantial to offer in our struggle for genocide recognition then please show us your avatar in other threads (like chit chat or humor).

 

I am all for freedom of speech too. Remember you are free to express yourself but you are responsible for what you are saying.

I won't question the facts and I won't let other cynics question the fact of armenian genocide too.

 

Why would you or others assume without any justification I am denying the genocide, as an Armenian. Seriously, you folks need to get a grip over yourselves. Why can't you accept that there are alternative opinions, and perhaps not everyone is all apples about this resolution or others like it. I have not indicated an aversion to it, but I have indicated that it serves no real world purpose beyond what it says. If that's enough great, but to me, it doesn't change anything and most importantly, it does nothing to Turkey. I repeat, nothing.

 

I just don't happen to see conventional methods being any help and I've indicated the non-conventional modes. I guess you could say I'm more of the person who seeks tangible results as opposed to intangible ones.

[Anonymouse]

Just curious Anonymouse, why did you feel the need to put a link in your post to an article from Wiki about the Khojali killings?

Why not? If that is true, should we not face it?