The stolen heritage

[Harut]

how would have Khorenatsi written about Bagratuni's (or WHY would he?) if Bagratuni's reached to higher levels after Khorenatsi's times???

[khodja]

Harut,

 

Sorry, I did not credit the proper historian.

I will research and credit the correct name.

[khodja]

Harut,

 

I always give any comment on this forum the "benefit of doubt." You caught me off guard. My original comments were correct. Khorenatsi's "History of Armenians" was written between 480 and 483 A.D. under the auspices of Prince Sahak Bagratuni. That the pinnacle of Bagratuni power was achieved centuries later has no bearing on the Bagratuni lineage. BAH! BAH! BAH! I am Khodja! Are you playing the role of Nasraddin Khodja?

[MJ]

Ali,

 

Given my limited time, I will respond in a Question and Answers format:

 

"I am literally out the door for my weekly trip, and can address the issue at this time only very briefly. Hopefully would revisit it later. And I would much appreciate that in the future you request clarifications from me instead of calling me names. Not that you are not at liberty to call me racist, but you couldn’t be further away from understanding the apparent controversy." -MJ

 

I cannot see how I called you names. I merely pointed you that the manner in which you have used a Turkish (or Muslim) name to refer to your opponent was very much comparable to my experience as "artin suat". I am not claiming that you are racist or whatever, but tell me yourself, were you at our best there?-Ali

 

I am glad I have misread you. Let me also ask you, please, when you go to these Turkish circles where they call you “Artin,” do you introduce yourself as “Artin” or is it something that they insinuate? I am sure you see the difference. I can see how my calling of someone Mustafa in an ironic key might’ve insulted you. I am sorry to have insulted you. That was not my intention. Was I at my best there? Probably not. But I am sort of tired to be at my best, especially when some don’t have appreciation for it.

 

 

"First, when people call you “Artin,” do you get insulted? Clearly this is just a rhetoric question. Is Mustafa a Turkish name or an Islamic name? I have thought Islamic." –MJ

 

Well, if they know my real name and insist on calling me by another, yes, not because there is anything wrong with artin or being armenian, but simply because I am neither artin nor an armenian and never pretended to be. If you know who I am, then why do you insist on calling me something that we both know that I am not?

I thought that by referring to khodja as mustafa or mehmet you were calling him a turk. Obviously, the armenians have more to sort out with turks than other muslims, right?-Ali

 

First, about calling him a Turk – I am not of that good opinion of him. If your questions about sorting things out with Turks are about sorting things out with the individual Turkish people, then my answer is, “no, we have not much more to sort out with the Turks, but rather with the state that represents them.”

 

 

"Another question, when you go to these Turkish circles and express your opinions on the Armenian Genocide do you introduce yourself with a name like “Saradarabad,” for example?"-MJ

 

No, because 1) I have my own name which has served me reasonably well so far, and 2) I do not know that much about sardarabad to adopt it as a name, and 3) most turks would not have heard of it. -Ali

 

My point was not about Sardarabad, therefore I am very flexible about it. Tell me please, what is the most painful chapter in the Turkish history, and I can use its name as a metaphore that I wanted to use. Additionally, the thing is that we have heard of “khodjas,” we know them well, and we are well aware of their legacy – we have to cope with that legacy hundreds of years later.

 

"The title “Khodja” given to an Armenian is indicative of the Armenian enslavement throughout history and our assimilation."-MJ

 

There were armenians who were referred to as "khodja" in the ottoman empire.-Ali

 

Exactly. But is it good or bad? There are also accounts of some Armenian priests serving as informants for the Turkish special detachments during the Genocide (at least we have had one such account in our forum in the past), there have been Armenian merchants who had sold Armenian women to slavery, and there have been other traitors, too. What is the point of attesting to the existence of “Khodjas?”

 

 

Besides, so many armenian surnames have turkish components. Shall we call this indicative of turkish enslavement, too? Maybe you should develop a healthier attitude toward the past. –Ali

 

Yes. You are right, and it is indicative of Turkish enslavement. I give to the past what belongs to the past. I think it should be obvious that my anger is directed at the “resurrection” of the past, which has caused such a tremendous pain and loses to our nation. So that to be more explicit about what I am saying let me assert that the forced and unforced assimilation of our nation has inflicted damage to the social fabric of our nation to several magnitudes higher than the Genocide.

 

About the genocide we are agreed (I presume). But it is about the rest of the last 1,000 years that you have to come to terms with. Turkish dominion on the lands in question is a fact. You were not the only nation to experience it. On the other hand, extensive loss of central asian culture in favour of an anatolian one and adoption of an essentially anatolian lifestyle is also a fact for us. If it weren't for our language and high (as opposed to everyday) religious affiliation, what difference would there be between us an the rest of the anatolians, past and present? One more thing: armenians have, throughout history, have proved very resistant to assimilation, at least the voluntary one. Forced assimilation is another matter and the title of "khodja" probably has nothing to do with it. (if his title were "yataghan" or "jizyah", then o.k., I would have agreed with you)-Ali

 

I am not arguing the fact of the Turksih dominion of the lands here, right? I have no comments on the differences of the Anatolian Turks and Central Asian Turks. As to Armenians and assimilation, there are two ways of assimilation – one is based on a pressure (like paying excessive taxes for being a Christian), and the other one based on the benefits, such as trade benefits and so on (for example you become “Khodja,” and give something else away). Is one at liberty to chose his lifestyle and loyalties? Sure. But than be a little considerate when giving lectures, right?

 

 

"Tell me please, what is in your opinion the statement that the person coming to this forum is trying to make here? He says it is the title of his grand grandfather – shame on him." -MJ

 

 

You have instantly put almost all ottoman armenians of note to shame.-Ali

 

Not really. As you say, some of them “were not as meek.” Additionally, my point is not that Armenians have assimilated. We know that they have. I have stated this many times. The issue here is in taking pride in it by some.

 

 

MJ, with all due respect, you are starting to sound like the Turkish nationalists that I am encountering over here. First, his opinions - and, o.k. background - may differ from yours, but that does not mean that he is stabbing the nation from behind.

It simply means that you two differ. And as a legal alien (if I may use that term for myself) I have seen much sense in a good deal of his arguments. -Ali

 

Ali, I would appreciate that you first articulate how do I sound like Turkish nationalist, which statement of mine is nationalistic for you, additionally which opinion of his I oppose, where do our opinions differ, which arguments are you referring to.

 

 

"His entire behavior is one of a fly, which gets attracted to the manure." -MJ

 

 

It is a time-honoured intellectual practice. -Ali

 

Which one? Feeding off of the manure or cleaning it out?

 

The fly is there because the manure is there.-Ali

"And if there is no manure, he creates it himself." -MJ

 

I doubt this last one.-Ali

 

That’s your right.

 

"His primary thesis in this forum, which he is carefully coming out with is that Armenians are of Jewish genetic makeup."-MJ

 

This wasn't the impression I got of his thesis. All he was trying to say - as far as I got it - was that the Armenians have a habit of seeing themselves as a racially pure nation, whereas in fact they are jus as mixed as any other middle eastern nation.-Ali

 

Then you haven’t read him well. As to Armenians being a racially pure nation, in this forum we don’t advocate such nonsense. We understand that there is no such thing as “racially pure nation.” We don’t make a big deal neither from being “racially pure,” nor “mixed.” We don’t care about the genetics, but the consciousness. For example, if you identify yourself as “Artin,” (per se and allegorically speaking), and share our values and aspirations, you would be embraces as Armenian.

 

"First of all, scientifically speaking this is inaccurate (it doesn’t insult me however). But the most puzzling thing for me is that he is trying to make a statement out of it. He is trying to “prove” that Armenians are not a “pure” nation. First of all, who cares." -MJ

 

 

Those who protest at it. If you didn't care, you wouldn't protest at it, would you?-Ali

 

I protest also at bogus statements on Global Warming. Not because I care (don’t care because don’t see an alarming evidence), but because scientifically it is a misrepresentation. However, if this was just an academic statement, I wouldn’t indeed care. Who cares, as I said. But the implication is that “because we are of Jewish genetic makeup, we have to develop special relationship with Jews, and they would support us if they knew we were Jews.” Living aside the political immaturity of such statement, I think in such form it is a pure racist mentality. We don’t define our allies and our enemies along racial or genetic lines, but rather on the basis of who identifies with us in which way. This is not about the Jews and Armenians. It is about the so-called “genetics.”

 

Second, in my view, anybody who tries to make classifications of nations on the basis of the genetics, and suggest policies on that basis, as he does, belongs to the fringes of the human society and is the real racist, if you are searching for racists here. This is part of the reason he disgusts me. - MJ

 

I got the impression that he was trying to make precisely the opposite, namely to point out that classifications of nations based on perceived differences in the past - which include genetics - will soon be shown to have no basis in fact. In this he might have a point: in many cases, there are no convincing characteristics to distinguish a nation fro the others other than a national language and an awareness of a common past, but then again, our awareness of a common past, including our awareness of our own ethnicity - is at least partly shaped by a number of commonly held notions, many of which are either distorted or in the most extreme cases have the flimsiest connection to scientifically demonstrable realities. This is what I think he is trying to say and I see no racism here, rather the precise opposite. -Ali

 

First, I think you misunderstand him. Speaking of genetics, and taking the high road, there are no differences between the humans in general. Nations are not distinguishable necessarily on a genetic basis. It is the self-consciousness of the nations that makes them different form each other. This consciousness gives rise to cultures. While we may be very similar (per se) genetically, we may frequently be very different culturally.

 

The person in defense of whom you rise, totally denounces the Armenian Sovereignty and Statehood, promotes an idea (among other such ideas) that Armenians where better off under the Ottoman Empire, because his ancestors had reached high positions in the Ottoman establishment, for example.-MJ

 

If he said that (that the Armenians were better of under the Ottomans) then I missed it, I have to re-read his postings. And if he connected it to the sole example of his own family (which I doubt) then you would have been right. -Ali

 

First, you can read just this thread, again. Second, the point is not that that statement is maid on the basis of only his own family. Let’s assume that there were many Armenians better off (for the sake of the argument). How does it denounce the necessity of the Armenian Sovereignty?

 

The question is at the expense of what? –MJ

 

I agree with you here. Certainly, independence and sovereignty is best for a nation, and the Armenians did lose certain things under the Ottomans, even though their treatment up to Abdulhamid II was considerably better than the treatment of other subject peoples in other empires.

 

I am glad you do. However, I find that you were wrong claiming that Armenians were better off until Sultan Hamid II. Maybe you meant to say Armenians had not been massacred before. However, given your agreement, if we analyze further, you can understand where my (and I believe of many others’ resentment to the person subject to controversy comes from. And it is not an issue of conflict of opinions. There is certain threshold that makes the opinion to become more than an opinion. We all have some basic underlying norms. We express our opinions within these norms. There are some limits that we observe. For example, if one would say in this forum “I think we have to go out and kill all Turks,” it stops being an opinion. It becomes an offense, regardless if he is indeed going to go to kill them.

 

As I have said many times in this forum, I have many Muslim friends – very close ones, I have no racial or ethnic issues with Turks, I have no anger for the past, etc.

MJ, your anger for the past occasionally pops out. I don't blame you for it in any way: even though I am no armenian, I have a certain anger for what happened to the armenians, especially when I think that certain maniacs did it in the name of my entire nation. But I despise the Ottomanized Armenians like Khodja, while I may very much be supportive of the Turks – these Ottomanized Armenians are the liability of our nation. Another interesting thing to notice is his degree of Ottomanization being born (I assume) in America. By his own recognition, his family has been denounced by the Armenian Community. -MJ

 

 

These ottomanized armenians form a very significant proportion of the armenian community. Besides, don't forget: to be ottomanised is to become a natural part of of a multi-ethnic world empire. It is by no means the same as losing your ethnic identity and becoming a turk. If his family made a living in the ottoman empire and rose to high posts, how could he not become ottomanised? Can you be anything in america without being americanised? --Ali

 

We know that. The issue is not that we are not tolerant towards them. The issue is that some of them (as witnessed) rather than cleaning their minds up, or at least being neutral, advocate those who are not Ottomanized to become so. Much like a criminal having a non-criminal associate wants the guy to commit a crime, so that to become “one of them.” –MJ[/b]

 

 

I have to run. I will still revisit the issue – hopefully from a more conceptual and broader perspective.

 

One last thing. Don’t remember where it was, but lately you claimed that about 100,000 Armenians had participated in the French legion. Two questions (I don’t know much about the history of the Cillician adventurism of the Franch), where does this info come from, and when was the French legion (chronology) been formed – just curious, so that to see things in perspective. Another comment of yours was that Armenians were not exactly “meek.” I would like to say that some were meek, others were not. The issue at hand is not that the Ottomans have “eliminated the non-meek,” but that they have eliminated Armenians on the basis of their ethnic identity, regardless if they were “meek” or not. That’s why it is not qualified as “civil war,” “punishment of traitors,” etc, but as Genocide. I expect that we are going to be in agreement here too.

 

Will try to revisit the issue, as suggested above, over the weekend, if I find enough energy.

 

 

P.S. At some instances lately you have compared my to Grey Wolves. I would appreciate if you could articulate which opinions or statements of mine make me look like a “Grey Wolfe,” which opinions and statements of mine qualify me as a nationalist, and how did you arrive to that opinion. Was it something that I said, or was it because if I was one, it would’ve been easier to “argue with me?”

 

[ October 23, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[khodja]

Ali, MJ,

 

How interesting that the enlightened Turk understands me so well, while the knee-jerk Armenian misconstrues and misinterprets my statements. If my ancestors have sold out their fellow Armenians, my father would not have been cleaning toilets and being a "hammal" in Paris at a young age. He would have been living in a palace above the Bosphorous and manipulating his vast international holdings. As I have stated before, an individual Armenian's worst enemy is not the individual Turk but some of his fellow Armenians.

[MJ]

I guess the moral is that selling out doesn't save one's skin.

[MJ]

Óne more thing, Ali. How did your example about a girlfirend relate to my quoting of the phrase of Maslow? I fail to see the connection. Please help.

[khodja]

Martin,

 

I have copies of a biography documenting my ancestors written by an established Armenian writer. There is not even an implication in this that these men, my ancestors, in any way sold out to the Ottomans. Your perceptions of the matter are very skewed. If I had not tasted the venom of my fellow Armenians for reasons not related to my family or anything related to Armenians, I would scan this and e-mail it to you. You are making gross assumptions when you don't know the persons of whom I am speaking. In your perception were all the Khojas throughout history, in Persia, India, etc. also sellouts? I do not understand you. Please explain yourself.

[aurguplu]

mj, khodja,

 

i am writing this out without having gone through the entire thread (maybe i should). i thought that mj had got the wrong impression of khodja's stance, indeed my impression of khodja's stance differed from that of mj, then mj pointed out diligently where i misread him, meanwhile khodja replied that i understood him so much better than mj.

 

i hope to be excused if i told you i am slightly confused by now? who is who? who is trying to say what? and who is trying to say that the other one is trying to say what? (the first casualty in a confused mind is the grammar, excuse me).

 

i think that you both either have a perception problem, or expression problem, with each other's postings, or find it rather difficult to come to terms with perhaps unpalatable facts that either of you put forward.

 

i shall take one thread, that jewish one, it is one i can tackle:

 

first of all, there is a hebrew ethnic identity, based on pretty much what all ethnic identities are based upon. tyhen there is the jewish identity, and all you have to do is read your old testament, jewish history of the last 2,000 years, and look at the present-day jews, to realise that to say they all came from a single genetic source is sheer nonsense. most jews wouldn't do that. judaism was a proselytising religion, it has recently re-started that (at least adopted a more hospitable attitude toward the converts).

 

it is known that jews were all over the middle east, and that not all of them stayed as jews. the armenians may very well have some jewish or some other semitic blood, just as i may have some armenian blood (i would be surprised if i didn't have any). it amounts to nothing. the armenians may also have many jewish cultural traits, which also amounts to no great deal. we have them, too. every nation which professes a monotheistic religion inevitably has them and there is nothing wrong (or right) with that. it simply should not any longer be an issue at this day and age. now if your battlefield is the presumed presence or absence of jewish traits amongst the armenians, then you are a bit like the clerics in gulliver's travels (was it gulliver's travels or alice in wonderland?) who wage war against one another over the question of whether to break the egg from the pointed end or the blunt one.

 

if the issue is the ottoman influence on the armenians, well, it was there, it is there, and it will have to be there to a certain extent unless you are willing to say goodbye to a good part of your present-day culture. and as for trying to ottomanise armenians, i think it is a losing battle (if there is anyone who is fighting it, which i cannot see), if only because there are no ottomans anymore, and will never be, simply because the nation that started it all finished it all out of its own accord. as the ottomans (the remnants) themselves say, ottoman is merely "a nice sound in the vault" (kubbede kalan hoş sada, sorry for the admittedly awful translation).

 

as armenians you have the task of building up the republic of armenia, normalising relations with turks, (including the azeris) and becoming first class members of the family of nations. you are not that far from that, but you will find it much harder as long as you cannot formulate a reasonably coherent attitude toward the past and its implications that it adopted by the clear majority of the armenian community. i regret to say that i got the impression in this forum over the past year or so that you have some work to do to this end.

 

i believe that there will be peace between our two nations one day, and hopefully in my own lifetime, but this will not be before you have peace within the armenian community.

 

hope this helps a bit.

 

i shal reply to the other issues mj raised later.

 

take care & try to make peace,

[MJ]

Ali,

 

I don't have the time right now to go through the details of this conversation. I will just say this: I have been posting in this forum for more than a year, now, and I think my claim on the subject of clarity may sound credible: it should be clear to the reader where do I stand on the principal issues, my postings are clear-cut in terms of the message I try to communicate, there is no ambiguity in them, etc. If there is a confusion about my message, that may be of two reasons:

1. Somebody is trying to twist my message and present it the way he would like to have had it expressed, because for his "hammer," he needs a "nail;"

2. Occasionally, my messages may be not as trivial as one may be used to.

 

Sorry, cannot go into great lengths now.

 

P.S. I think we have agreed in the past that our most serious problem is of internal character. As ironic as it may sound from the outset, we are in a nation building process. In my view (and many others like me), the ethnicity doesn't constitute a nation. If somebody is ethnically Armenian -25%, 50% or 300%, if he has had one Armenian mother and five Armenian superstar fathers (I am referring to the American comedy "Twins,") it may still mean that an Armenian of my type has nothing in common with him. That ethnic commonality is of an accidental and insignificant character.

 

Armenians like me identify with each other not on the basis of the ethnicity but the proper recognition of Armenia and our aspirations for its future. And it is an "Open house" policy. Everybody is welcome to join, as far as he/she shares the promise of Armenia.

 

Now, one may use it for political purposes, and say "before you resolve your issues with us, resolve it among yourselves," or would understand that in the big picture of things, these "distractions" are of an inconsequential character.

 

[ October 24, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[aurguplu]

mj,

 

1) the hammer and the nail: frankly, i didn't think it was going to evolve into such a big issue. i know that quote, it was one that i had used too, (both the quote and the philosophy) and got little benefit out of it.

 

but my point remains that 1) very few people only have a hammer, they are usually inclined to use only a hammer if they have one (if they looked around more carefully, they could see other tools) and 2) if all you have is a hammer in tackling the problem, and if your problem is a broken vase to be mended (just and example), you might consider looking for other tools, and if you can't acquire them, start making your own by very clever use of the hammer (it is amazing how far you can go starting with one tool, if you use it intelligently), for one thing is certain, treatng the broken vase with a hammer as if it were a nail is only going to produce smaller bits of the same vase and a bigger puzzle to solve.

 

i hope this lays this hammer business to rest. (and i shall not delve into the girlfriend business, it is inconsequential, irrelevant to the topic, and not something that i would argue strongly about, anyway)

 

mj, during the course of our conversation in the forum, i did not always agree with you, but i do not recall to have questioned your integrity, at least in the discussions. and i think that i am subjected to the same treatment by you. after all, there is no point in arguing with someone if you know beforehand that he is dishonest, is there?

 

and as for my last remark re your quarrel with khodja, i thought thta both of you were right in certain respects, but both of you (or at least you, to be honest) either misunderstood certain things the other said, or perhaps did not try to make the effort necessary to get the message because it clashed with your strongly held opinions. i don't blame you for that, we all do it every now and then, but we should keep this in mind and not forget that we are not immune to error.

 

as for my remark about the armenians having to sort out their differences, i agree with you that what you are undergoing is part of the nation-forming process, but i keep to my opinion that it would help you a good deal more if you had at least broad consensus amongst the armenian community on these vital issues. this is not the impression i got from this forum. not to discredit any member for it, but it is my candid observation. now that armenia is our neighbour and, believe it or not, i personally wish them well and want to see my nation normalising and then improving its relations with armenia, it is only too logical to expect at least a degree of consensus within the armenian community on such issues that ultimately concern both of us. if i were a turk that took delight in armenian disunion, i would not have intervened at all but watched gleefully as you two (i take you bth as representatives of two opposing trends, opinions, weltanschauung, whatever you may call it) were at daggers drawn. no. instead i want peace and stability in my region, and a peaceful nad stable armenia both within itself and with its neighbours is going to contribute positively to that.

 

this was what i was trying to get at. clear now?

 

regards,

[aurguplu]

mj,

 

re the lowest point of turkish history.

 

the sevres treaty

 

hope this will help.

 

cheers,

[khodja]

Ali,

 

I will not respond to every point made but will respond to a few.

 

Recent studies by prominent geneticists have shown that almost all Jews have SOME genetic tie to the Jews of Jesus' time. This means intermarriage with the converts. The studies have also shown that Jews of different regions have some very different genetic traits and genetic diseases. As for the Armenian tie, the most critical evidence in this regard is the finding of a statistically high percentage of Armenian men who carry the Kohanim gene and the fact that Armenians and Oriental Jews have the highest (approximately 25% of the population) carrying the gene for the disease Familial Mediterranean Fever while it is found in only about 5-7% of Arabs and Turks.

 

As for the opposing world views of MJ and myself, you have only to look at the Armenian diaspora. The majority of Anatolian Turks living today were raised in Turkey and were formed by the perceptions of the Turkish state. The majority of Armenians living today were raised in the Diaspora. Ths process did not commence in 1915 but early in Armenain history. Can anyone expect Armenians raised in Poland, China, Holland, India, France, Singapore, The Phillipines, America, South America, Australia, etc., etc., to all have the same world-view? I was raised in America in an odar Protestant church by parents who had been Armenian Catholics. MJ was raised in Armenia in the bosom of the Armenian Church. How could one expect all Armenians to have the same world-view? Only if all Armenians were raised under the indoctrination of the Armenian Church and in an Armenian community environment. For many Armenians in the diaspora that is/was not the case. From my perspective being raised in the bosom of the Armenian Chruch and community seriously skewers one's thinking.

[MJ]

This is where your world outlook is so primitive (perhaps not the only instance and category), and this is where you lack adequate understanding of where does Armenia come in, where do the Armenians come in, and where is your place in that spectrum. And that is fine. But before you give lectures to others, and point to their failures, try to understand your own shortcomings, first, and to find your place in the broad spectrum of the multi-color Armenian reality.

And the entire referenced passage is indicative of my story of the “hammer and the nail.”

[khodja]

MJ,

 

I am very aware of my own shortcomings as I have consulted with professioanls at critical times in my life-academic problems, marital problems, etc. etc.

 

As for Armenia's place in the world, politically and economically it is insignificant. It is merely a pawn to be used by the stronger powers adjacent to it and elsewhere in the world. It has been so through most of our history.

 

As for where the Armenians come in, we can limit our influence to a few individuals. Gulbenkian retains some influence through his Foundation. Maybe Kerkorian, Manoogian Family and the Manoukians of London. At most 20 persons. The rest of us are totally insignificant.

 

As to where I come in, it is at the perifery of the Armenian spectrum. How many Armenians worked closely with the Kennedys? How many Armenians were involved in the US civil rights movement. Maybe 3% of Armenian-Americans. But given the perennial failures of the Armenians as a group (not as individuals) I am very proud to be at the fringe of the spectrum. Who would want to be a typical Armenian? So may of the most prominent of our people wouldn't be caught dead admitting that they are Armenian. And you claim that it is I who is primitive?

[MJ]

Raffi Hohannessian may or may not be a good choice. However, he would not be elected or not on the basis of him being Diasporan Armenian or not. In fact, he is not a Diasporan Armenian for 10 years, now. The citizens of Armenia will elect their future President based on his qualifications (hopefully). Now, tell me who is the tribalist here.

As to my cleanness - don't worry about it. I am clean. It is well established. And using the well-known Americanism, I have to add that I am too old to play the "you show yours, I'll show mine" game. Hope it doesn’t sound too vulgar.

[khodja]

MJ,

 

You do not understand the nuances of American idiomatic expressions. "Come clean" has nothing to do with cleanliness of any sort, body, home or mind. It has to do with being "up front" about your loyalties. Furthermore, should you misconstrue this idomatic expression also, it has nothing to do with the other "things" that you have alluded to. LOL

 

Your loyalties are very apparent. It is not unusual at all for Armenian communists to come to America and become conservatives. Even many former Jewish-American communists are now close allies of the President. Political ideology is not linear but circular. It does not take much effort to jump from one end of the spectrum to the other. Most of us in the middle of the spectrum, however, remain fairly close to where we were 20 to 30 years ago.

[MJ]

Bedros,

I can assure you that you have no idea as what are the things that I understand. Your primitivism in judging your opponent is also very puzzling. Out of good will, let me just suggest you not to underestimate an opponent that you don’t know well (after all I have watched you for much longer than you have even been aware of my existence). Those enjoying the taste of blood and preferring “easy victims” would love to argue with you. I am not one of those. I am taught not to "shed blood" unless there is no way around it. It is one of the credos of my life. And with you, I find it easy to not violate that credo.

For your benefit, and for the sake of helping you to have a good and relaxed sleep, let me inform you that I am almost always apparent and transparent. Don't see a point to play games with no significant opportunity of payoff.

As to the communists, I think if you had the ability to analyze yourself, it would've also been apparent who has the sump of communism on his forehead here.

About me being conservative... I would rather be labeled conservative than leftist, even if it is not an accurate characterization of me. And since your world consists of conservatives and leftists – thank you for the respect.

As to you staying fairly close to where you where 20-30 years ago, the fact is I observe you not even being able to stay close to your own early stance throughout your tenure in this forum - it is enough for a strong personality to address a slight positive statement towards you, i.e. to please your narcissistic inner dimension, and you would flip-flap 180 degrees in one discussion session, as done already several times.

But I would like to end this "love ordeal" because it makes me hate myself for perturbing the state of your mind. But you are consistently pushing me to do it. From what I understand you are a person of a rather senior age. Out of respect to your age, and not necessarily to the persona you have introduced (though I think you are a better person in life), I would like to end this unproductive polemics. I promise to not "flirt" with your mind and ego, as long as you don't in another suicidal outburst "throw" yourself "at my feet" not giving me alternatives to not step over your "body."

If you feel you have anything positive or constructive to contribute to this forum, feel at liberty to exercise that option. Otherwise, there is no point in exercising “out of money” options.

Let God give you peace of mind and soul and comfort if He wishes so.

[MJ]

Dear Ali,

I have no questions about your integrity. Sorry if I have made you feel otherwise.

I just whish that we don't put words in each others' mouth or ascribe thoughts to each other which we don't contemplate.

[khodja]

MJ,

 

I am aware that you have watched me for a long time, even before I was aware of your presence. I ask you, why do you find me so fascinating or so dangerous? Must we all be sheep?

[MJ]

Then why don't you stay where you are, and let those who are not at the fringes of the nation and common sense try to help it march further towards its promise.

As to your affiliation with the Kennedies, I am glad you are honest enough to confess the absurdity of your orientation in life.

[khodja]

If history is any example at all, any march toward further progress for the Armenian nation will come from the perifery. I would like to see a Diaspora Armenian, perhaps the son of Richard Hovanissian, as the future leader of Armenia.

 

For clarification, my comment about Armenian primitivism had to do with Armenian chauvinism and the inability to find solidarity on critical issues. Tribalism has never worked for us, why should it work now?

 

MJ why don't you come clean and let us know you political affinities. I have done so, why don't you?

[aurguplu]

khodja,

1. i can agree with you on te jewish genes and the amenian-jewish genetic connection. after all, no nation is racially pure and jews and armenians live in geographical proximity of one another, and it is entirely possible, in fact very probable, that the two peoples mixed. as for the kohanim gene, i know about it. so there is a point in arguing that they do share a partly common ancestry. but ten again, you look at the jews of israel, and you see people with mongol features, nordic features, mediterranean features, and african features. i am sure if they had carried out the same genetic tests concerning these genes, they would have found that significant portions of jews share a lot of genes with the peoples of the lands where they lived for centuries.
the thing is, what does it all boil down to? all nations are likely to have some common genes, because people tend to marry from within their own community. all nations also are likely to have other genes, because people also tend to have exceptions to that rule. to me at this day and age, and after such horrific experiences like the holocaust, the gene business must perhaps be studied as a complement to history (i personally find it very interesting and illuminating in many respects, and in my area of interest, i.e. languages, there are cases where genetic evidence confirms linguistic theories to some extent, so i think it is also useful), but i think one should ot exaggerate and set too much store to genetics at the expense of other factors in nation building.

also, at this point, i am a bit at a loss as to where this whole business started and later evolved into such vilification between you and mj.

i do not know enough about the armenian diaspora experience, so i leave commenting on that to others. but as far as the turks go, i would challenge the view that the majority of anatolian turks today were formed by the perceptions of the turkish state (if you mean their world outlook) we do on the surface subscribe to the official stories and their implications, but a surprisingly large and ever-growing minority challenges that, and have been doing so since the foundation of the republic.

i get the impression that in fact we agree on many points but have some trouble realising that.

re your quarrel with mj, i was a bit disappointed with mj, especially the language that he used against you, to me it sounded like bordering on the insultive (this was not an attack on you, mj, but just an observation). but as for the content of the disagreement, since i am not an armenian and have never had enough contact with either diaspora armenians or armenian armenians, i don't have the background to comment.

meanwhile, i would like to get some feedback on what you think of my earlier postings re the usurped armenian wealth issue.

regards,

[khodja]

I am fascinated by recent advances in genetic technology. This discipline can assist us to affirm or refute established theories of the origins of various peoples using historical records or liguistic patterns. History is usually subjective and peoples have been known to have acquired a new language. The Anatolians (now Turks)and the Armenians are both good examples of this. I see DNA genetics as one more tool.

 

As for the issues between MJ and myself, they are based upon divergent views of the world. From what I can ascertain from his postings, although he is a rebel of sorts as I am, he seems to be very respectful of the established order of things, especially as it pertains to maintaining an Armenian identity. Armenian Catholics and Protestants were anathema to mainline Armenians when these millets were established in the 19th century, but are accepted today. Those like my brother, married to a Jew or myself who will probably marry a Buddhist are anathema. It is called the "White Genocide." My brother and I both travelled in Armenian circles for years. Our Dad was a journeyman Engineer. We were not wealthy. The Armenian beauties wanted to marry money. I have been told that I am very attractive man, especially for an Armenian and even today in my older years. This trait is important for Armenian women but not for Armenian men. So we went outside of the community. I ended up marrying an Armenian (first time around) only by chance and not through the community.

Without arranged marriages such as that of our parents this assimilation will continue. Both this and the acquisition of a non-Armenian world view is very upsetting for Armenians like MJ. We are seen as a threat to the propagation of the "race."

[aurguplu]

khodja,

i can knock out the word armenian in your posting, replace it with turk and your story would be that of countless turkish families who had to leave turkey on the eve of the collapse of the empire (or those balkan and russian refugees who came to turkey).

and as for women, they almost always marry money, it is not confined to the armenians, believe me.

the worst thing is when they think that you must automatically be wealthy if your ancestors were. my ancestors were very wealthy, i have relatives who swim in money, but my part of the family just about makes ends meet. the heaviest burden is a cloak that you don't even have.

gotta dash again,

cheers