Armenian Genocide (viewer discretion advised) - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The First World War (1914-1918).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#13855271
Yet few of the 'equal' examples you've given are actually comperable to the Armenian example. You keep raising Iraq and Afghanistan, which leads me to believe that you either have no concept of current events, no concept of the Armenia example, or both. Or I suppose you're just being intellectually dishonest.

If you really wanted equality, nothing stops you from 'promoting' these other supposed examples you've raised. Instead you've raised them with the express purpose of distracting or diminishing what was done to the Armenians. That's not 'equality', it is a standard tactic of negationism.


My problem is that countries which had a bloody history that are full of genocides and massacres try to blame us for such things. France is trying to urge us to accept this so-called genocide even when the blood on their hands has not yet dry. I said, if Armenians accept their massacres, so will we. That's equality. But if we are expected to accept this when the massacres and genocides toward Turks are ignored, no way.

When massacres of Turks by Armenians are raised by historians, this doesn't happen.


It was expressed by many historians but they can not be brought into questions as much as 1915 events with the influence of terrible armenian diaspora and anti-Turk world media.

It's a comperable incident. Your approach has been (if we pretend you have been consistent about anything...) that these things happen in a conflict. I've shown you an example that even where things happened during a conflict it wasn't found to be acceptible. An example which highlights that massacres can occur during a conflict, which have nothing to do with that conflict.


But some people try to justify their massacres toward Iraqi Afghanistani Palestinian people because it's for the sake of fight against terrorism so don't be hypocritical about that. When it comes to your barbaric actions they are acceptable but when we try to suppress a revolt in our lands this is genocide. So people ask me why I'm getting more and more anti-west, because they are always such hypocritical against Turks.

Do you think you magically know something about the massacres because of your physical presense a considerable time afterward? You haven't been to Afghanistan, but apparently nothing will shut you up about that.


Normally I do not give a fuck about what's happening in Afghanistan, Iraq or Palestine as long as it does not concern my own nation. But I always use them as an argument for those who try to blame my nation unfairly for nothing and I want to make the see their own post-genocides and massacres toward oppressed people. For example although I'm not so interested in Algeria, I will talk to the admins of my party to give a proposal in the assembly for the official recognition of Algerian Genocide and applying a serious punishment to those who attempts to deny that.

I do not touch anybody as long as they do not touch me either.

My place is on this forum where I can express an opinion. You won't answer the question, because if your family was moved there as part of a resettlement program, your bias towards the Alevis and Kurds would be completely apparent.


I have nothing to hide, but I was so annoyed in front of your terrible insolence to question my ancestries without any knowledge. My mother's ancestries were the settlers of Dersim for centuries. I don't even know why I feel necessary to explain this but I can not stand your rants about my ancestries. You do not really know the background of what actually happent in Dersim.

the people who would have had little good to say about the Kemalists from Dersim are probably dead or have been driven off the land. That's kind of the point I've been making. Thanks to significant crimes against humanity though I will struggle to defeat your rigged test however .


Again some efforts to warp the history. Here are the population changes of Dersim between 1935 (3-4 years before the operation) and 1940 (1 year after the end of the operation)

Image

Around 12.000 people were settled to other cities, the rest ones are killed rebels (don't even count that there were also people who died in natural ways during the year inside those 1-2 thousands of losses). But it seems that the regular population of the province was not damaged in any way. Even if we consider that there were at least 20.000 dead civilians in the operation (although it contradicts to official statistics), it's not bigger than how many innocent people were murdered in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya by imperialist NATO.

So, my grandma (who experienced the events) used to tell me that Ataturk saved them from the persecution of landowner aghas (kurdish tribal chieftains). That's why Alevis are so grateful to the great leader. If you go to any cemevi, you'll see that we put Ataturk's picture on the walls. Dersim resists the unfair kurdish invasion from the provinces around.

But I think it's so hard to tell somebody who suppose that Alevis and Kurds are the same. So, you have nothing related to Dersim so you can not try to lecture me about this. Dersim people were proud of their Turkishness for whole the history.

Some clown will call the police and I'll be locked up for insulting Turkishness?


Actually we have another law called '' Insulting to Ataturk '' but there will be no need, cause the people would lynch you theirself. So, don't even try to talk about Dersim next time. It's still one of the strongholds of Kemalism along with Izmir and Thrace. And just noting that it was the city who gave the biggest support to Ataturk's party in the last elections as an answer to those who try to use it as a tool to blame Turkish state and Ataturk.
#13855894
Devrim wrote:My problem is that countries which had a bloody history that are full of genocides and massacres try to blame us for such things.

You know, you haven't actually shown it wasn't a genocide. And as I've already pointed out, there isn't any basis to 'everybody does it' as a defence.

Devrim wrote:That's equality.

No it isn't, you are setting conditions that only suit one party.

Devrim wrote:It was expressed by many historians but they can not be brought into questions as much as 1915 events with the influence of terrible armenian diaspora and anti-Turk world media.

...so the first part of this sentence confirms my point, which shows that your earlier claims were in fact made up bullshit. The latter part of your post revolves around some unproven conspiracy theory, which proves nothing.

Devrim wrote:But some people try to justify their massacres toward Iraqi Afghanistani Palestinian people because it's for the sake of fight against terrorism so don't be hypocritical about that.

I repeat, Iraq and Afghanistan were not genocides. Every time you say this it makes you look ridiculous.

Also, while this defence is trotted out again and again all over the world, it is never acceptible. So your utilising the same excuse (while apparently be indignant about the other examples :roll: ) is also not acceptible. Facts are facts, face them.

Devrim wrote:When it comes to your barbaric actions they are acceptable but when we try to suppress a revolt in our lands this is genocide.

Most of the Armenians killed were not involved in a revolt, you whole point is based on a miserable lie. The scale of the Armenian revolt actually escalated with the genocide, because previously apolitical or even loyal Armenians realised they had to defend themselves.

Devrim wrote:For example although I'm not so interested in Algeria, I will talk to the admins of my party to give a proposal in the assembly for the official recognition of Algerian Genocide and applying a serious punishment to those who attempts to deny that.

Thanks for admitting you're basically just here to post your party propaganda :|

Devrim wrote:Again some efforts to warp the history. Here are the population changes of Dersim between 1935 (3-4 years before the operation) and 1940 (1 year after the end of the operation)

Your fucking stupid chart doesn't note the ethnicity of the inhabitants. As I keep pointing out to you, Dersim was resettled with Turks after the massacres. Which is not a normal reaction to 'banditry', but quite common in an ethnic cleansing operation.

Devrim wrote: the rest ones are killed rebels (don't even count that there were also people who died in natural ways during the year inside those 1-2 thousands of losses).

Even Turkish army narratives note that women and children were killed by the soldiers. They weren't rebels, and being smoked out in a cave isn't natural causes.

Devrim wrote:it's not bigger than how many innocent people were murdered in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya by imperialist NATO.

Go and look up a definition of genocide, and show me how it applies to those examples.

Devrim wrote:But I think it's so hard to tell somebody who suppose that Alevis and Kurds are the same.

If I thought they were the same, I wouldn't have made a point of mentioning both groups, would I? The only person in this discussion who hasn't got a fucking clue about anything is you, but that doesn't stop you being condescending about it. Apparently you believe you can learn Dersim's history by osmosis :roll:

Tell you what, why don't you go ahead and tell me the actual inaccuracies of this piece:
http://www.let.uu.nl/~Martin.vanBruines ... ellion.pdf

Devrim wrote:Actually we have another law called '' Insulting to Ataturk ''

Another example of how undemocratic your country is. How proud you must be that Ataturk's record can't be debated in any way, because you need a law to defend it from scrutiny.

Devrim wrote:but there will be no need, cause the people would lynch you theirself

... are you trying to tell me Turks kill people for being different or disagreeing with them? While telling me this isn't the case for the Armenians etc.?
#13856243
You know, you haven't actually shown it wasn't a genocide. And as I've already pointed out, there isn't any basis to 'everybody does it' as a defence.


No you don't get my point, if we are to be blamed, there are much more terrible things to be blamed first, like algerian genocide and hiroshima-nagasaki. Did USA and France face their murders ? no, so I say, who are they to call us murderers.

so the first part of this sentence confirms my point, which shows that your earlier claims were in fact made up bullshit. The latter part of your post revolves around some unproven conspiracy theory, which proves nothing.


What conspiracy theory ? I think one must be a blind not to see armenian diaspora's influence in western countries with a terrible propaganda.

I repeat, Iraq and Afghanistan were not genocides. Every time you say this it makes you look ridiculous.


Gencoide or massacres, whatever you call it. But those imperialist countries are trying to blame us with their bloody hands, that's what I'm trying to say.

Also, while this defence is trotted out again and again all over the world, it is never acceptible. So your utilising the same excuse (while apparently be indignant about the other examples ) is also not acceptible. Facts are facts, face them.


We have nothing to fear from our history. The state calls every nations to meet at a international conference about those events, do they dare come and discuss ? no. Because they do not want evidences to be revealed. Imperialists are the ones who hesitate to face their own bloody history.

1915 events can not be called that way as if it's a physical fact today, when there are still many important historians who came up with antithesises such as Justin McCarthy, Eberhard Jäckel, Stanford J. Shaw, Guenter Lewy, Gilles Veinstein etc. not to mention that most countries have not recognized it yet, and there is not even a UN decision.

Your fucking stupid chart doesn't note the ethnicity of the inhabitants. As I keep pointing out to you, Dersim was resettled with Turks after the massacres. Which is not a normal reaction to 'banditry', but quite common in an ethnic cleansing operation.


Only a Turk-hater can blame the Turkish state with such unfounded claims. Let me understand, you claim that Dersim was totally wiped out, and then Turks were resettled there ? the statistics refute that.

Resettlement law was applied even before the events started. The aim was to break the heterogeneous structure in the East. You can call it Turkification, but since there was worst ones in the western history, I see no problem here. We have the examples of Aborigines assimilation, Americanization etc.

Only 12.000 people were resettled. In Dersim operation, 13.000 people were killed in total. But I showed you the population change in Dersim, which makes a total population change impossible. So, Dersim did not lose anything from its original population. My family was not touched for example.

Even Turkish army narratives note that women and children were killed by the soldiers. They weren't rebels, and being smoked out in a cave isn't natural causes.


Sorry but I should ask for a source. Heads of the rebellion (around 50-60) were judged in the court, and only 7 ones of them (who were accused of murdering 33 Turkish soldiers) were sentenced to death. If the State was that furious to even kill children and women, why would they forgive most of the rebels in the court ?

o and look up a definition of genocide, and show me how it applies to those examples.


You need that. As long as you call Dersim a genocide without any proofs, I will call Iraq and Afghanistan genocides too. Those things even happent in front of our eyes, whole the world saw dead bodies of women and children there.

If I thought they were the same, I wouldn't have made a point of mentioning both groups, would I? The only person in this discussion who hasn't got a fucking clue about anything is you, but that doesn't stop you being condescending about it. Apparently you believe you can learn Dersim's history by osmosis

Tell you what, why don't you go ahead and tell me the actual inaccuracies of this piece:
http://www.let.uu.nl/~Martin.vanBruines ... ellion.pdf


This fucking article can not even prove that there was a genocide. Half of this is about Iraq anyway. And it mostly includes resettlement law and personal comments on Kurdish issue. Still, it's not a genocide.

If there is a Turkification, yes it's true and I fully support this, there is nothing wrong. But I can not understand, Resettlement law only included Dersim, but this article claims that all of Kurds were tried to be Turkificated. If the state really had some problems with Kurds, it would not only deal with Dersim which contains the least Kurdish population in the area.

So, it's really enough that you tried to blame my hometown and my ancestors. I'm proud of Dersim and its history, and of course I know it much better than you. Nobody can dare say anything about my ancestors, at least in front of me. We've settled in Dersim for centuries and some haters can not even question that. Now go away and talk about native genocides in your country. Talk about hiroshima-nagasaki massacre. Talk about massacres in middle east.

Another example of how undemocratic your country is. How proud you must be that Ataturk's record can't be debated in any way, because you need a law to defend it from scrutiny.


This is the rule, like it or not.

are you trying to tell me Turks kill people for being different or disagreeing with them? While telling me this isn't the case for the Armenians etc.?


Well, the people are sensitive about the values. One should not complain for what would happen to him if he tried to insult national values of Turkish people. Actually you should like such laws because they protect insulters from being lynched by the people. Let them go among people and then see what happens :lol: Turkish flag, Turkish people, Ataturk, those are the things that can not be insulted in any way. As I said, we're happy with our own rules, it concerns nobody. We have no any intent to seem so nice to some fucking western nations anyway.
#13857159
Devrim wrote: there are much more terrible things to be blamed first, like algerian genocide and hiroshima-nagasaki.

In terms of scale and in the action involved, these are nothing like the Armenian Genocide. Second compared to the Turks and their 'Armenian Question', the French and Americans have been far more open to debate and contrition about these events. It's not that I don't get your 'point', it's that your point is not based on fact or logic. You make false comparisons (I see you didn't answer the challenge to explain how these events could be considered genocide) and are apparently ignorant of evidence against the position you've set out.

Devrim wrote:I think one must be a blind not to see armenian diaspora's influence in western countries with a terrible propaganda.

This doesn't prove a conspiracy theory. I'll add this to the list of things you talk about but don't have a clue about.

Devrim wrote:Gencoide or massacres, whatever you call it.

They are quite distinct actually, though one can be a component of the other. And again there is the question of scale. Did NATO try to deport all the Iraqis or Afghans? Or even a part of their population? No. In fact the NATO powers were, compared to the Turks in their dealings with the Armenians, quite careful to avoid civilian casualties. They even apologise to the families of Afghans who are killed by accident.

Devrim wrote:The state calls every nations to meet at a international conference about those events, do they dare come and discuss ? no.

What conference is this in reference to?

Devrim wrote:915 events can not be called that way as if it's a physical fact today, when there are still many important historians who came up with antithesises such as Justin McCarthy, Eberhard Jäckel, Stanford J. Shaw, Guenter Lewy, Gilles Veinstein etc.

None of these historians deny Turkish massacres of Armenians. McCarthy rolls out the same nonsense "civil war" excuse that you've used and I have discredited. Funny you should mention Lewy when he in fact had this to say:
"none of this [Armenian killings of Turks] can compare or compensate for the special calamity of the Armenians, who lost not only their lives but also their existence as an organized ethnic community"
So despite trying to cite Lewy in your defence, his own view is apparently in conflict with your own views. Apparently many important historians would disagree with you Devrim...

Devrim wrote:Let me understand, you claim that Dersim was totally wiped out, and then Turks were resettled there ? the statistics refute that.

How is that? All they show is total population. It doesn't show the ethnic, cultural or religious demoninations. So if there were an influx of resettled Turks, or course it would offset any deaths from massacres.

Further, I never said Dersim was completely wiped out, that is a pathetic strawman you just made up. I guess you would prefer fabrication to truth.

Devrim wrote:but since there was worst ones in the western history, I see no problem here.

Apparently because your morality and logic is completely defective. Try convincing a judge that someone is not guilty of murder because there have been worse murders. :roll:

Devrim wrote:Only 12.000 people were resettled. In Dersim operation, 13.000 people were killed in total.

This isn't in your stupid chart, where is your source?

Devrim wrote:So, Dersim did not lose anything from its original population.

You just told me 13,000 people were killed. Of course there was a loss of population, even if settlement offset the losses.

Devrim wrote:Sorry but I should ask for a source.

It was detailed in the link I previously provided, which in turn cites a variety of primary sources.

Devrim wrote:As long as you call Dersim a genocide without any proofs

I never said Dersim was a genocide, again you are just making things up.

Devrim wrote: Half of this is about Iraq anyway.

You didn't read it, you liar! The word Iraq only appears in the whole thing twice.

I don't believe this. This is disgraceful, that you would tell such an obvious lie. That you would say something so obviously fraudulent. Denying Turkish war crimes must be easy for someone able to be so ridiculously dishonest.

Devrim wrote:If there is a Turkification, yes it's true and I fully support this, there is nothing wrong.

Wiping out other cultures for no reason other than they don't fit in with the point of the view of the then party of power? Thank you for again proving your moral sense is completely defective.

Devrim wrote:I'm proud of Dersim and its history

Proud of the murders of civilians?

Devrim wrote:This is the rule, like it or not.

Which makes you a staggering hypocrit for criticising the genocide denial laws of other nations.

Devrim wrote:One should not complain for what would happen to him if he tried to insult national values of Turkish people.

Once again you blame the victim and accept no responsibility. Turks are, in your imaginary and surprisingly dystopian fantasy, never responsible for their own actions.

Devrim wrote:Actually you should like such laws because they protect insulters from being lynched by the people.

This contradicts what you've previously claimed. Oh wait, you are bloody lying again.

Devrim wrote:We have no any intent to seem so nice to some fucking western nations anyway.

When your political party was in power, I seem to remember Turkey was quite eager to make nice with the European nations.
How ISIS replenishes its ranks

@Palmyrene Currently, the reason why you see r[…]

ATTEMPTED STABBING OF US MARINE VET BY ANTIFA h[…]

What did you think of the Panorama "document[…]

The Evolution Fraud

Living things provide abundant evidence of their[…]