Will Turks be a member of the European Union?

[Fadix2]

I am totally neutral on this issue.

I believe that a large scale HISTORICAL investigation of international proportions needs to be initiated to settle this thing irrefutably.

So far both sides are extremely political, and perhaps rightly so.

But this issue will forever be debated, and nothing gained unless a scientific comission researches facts and comes up with an answer.

Read Andrew Mango's latest book, "Turks of Today".

You know Sir. I can very well decide to register another account and claim to be a Frenchman, or an Arabic or whomever else... what is important is someones arguments.

I have read your posts and it seems fake to me. First, one wonder why an anglo-saxon will need to repeat many times his impertiality as a non-Turk. You know what? I don't give a thing in what social construct you are indexed in, what I am interested in is what you have to offer.

It is amazing still that we have an anglo-saxon that land up in this forum after 3 or more Turks in an interval of about weeks... when the forum in question is the second major Armenian forum on the web, and that any search engines lead to the first one as first choice and when in this same "first" forum most of the major discussions regarding this issue have been discussed. And what is even more amazing is that our "anomalious" pall uses words such as "genocide claims" or pejoratif questioning the veracity of the Armenian genocide.

I am afraid that things just don't add-up, you must understand my skepcism pall, but I do not buy your sincerity, as an "anglo-saxon" that came on this board and only participated in threads regarding Turkey and the Turks, and even questioned the genocide.


For your information, there is no such thing as "scientific comission researches" for past crimes where those accused are not alive, neither the Hague or any other international body could lunch such a commission because this is not a dispute between two countries, or people accusing others for having commited a crime. For me to present a cases of murder against someone, obviously the murderer should be alive.

Oh and, I don't understand your logic, how and why such a comission would be possible only after that Turkey become a member of the EU? You Mr. Anomalous pall, explain me your logic here.

More, the historicity of past genocides are treated like any other cases of historical events.

Those are basic rules in the human sciences that study history. In order to consider a genocide as certainly a historical truth, 3 cathegory of evidences must be present.

1- The event is reported to happen even before it happen. For instance in this cases, German officials reported Ottoman officials intention to liquidate the Armenians. Mind you here that this first set of evidence is even not present in the cases of the Shoah.

2- The event is reported when it happens. The evidences here are abound, from various sources, even Ottoman allies, including reports from Ottoman officials.

3- The results. If it was reported that a genocide happened for instance, and that we discover that people are missing in an entire region, the results confirm the reports during the event, the the reports during the event confirm what was reported to happen. Materials, like the Turkish court martial etc... and various others like German, Austrian, US etc... are clear about the intend(before the event happened) reports during it happened, and finally after it has happened.

Mind you here that 1 is not necessary, but when it is present it makes the evidences even more stronger. Let me explain you how.

Your friend come and tell you he will kill someone, you alert the authorities about your friend intention, but it was too late or the authorities did not take you seriously, it end up that your friend do kill the person in question... the fact that you have reported before the murder the intention of your friend makes the cases even better documented and is a strong evidence of premeditation.

Turkish claims fail in all 3 cathegories.

1- The only reports of any Armenian intentions were build by the Ottoman war intelligentsia headquarters, and one of the leading head of that same headquarter affirmed that those reports of Armenian intentions were build pieces by pieces to justify the intentions against the Armenians. No any other reports exist of any Armenian intention.

2- During the event, from 1915-1917, not any serious reports of any Armenian mass crimes or even localised worthy of being taken seriously were reported. Even McCarthy in his works doesn't find any, in his collection that he presented during the Turkish historical conference, where he was supposed to cover crimes by Armenians from 1914-1917, the only things he could have come up with were from the end of 1917 to later. Even Nogales said memoires contradict the Turkish theses.

3- After the event, this probably is the one that contradict the most the Turkish cases, since every villages where Armenians were living, its population was replaced after the event... if Armenians commited crimes or genocide, it would have been the other way around.

In somme, if the Turks could have tried to make any cases in court, none of the 3 cathegories of evidences needed could be supported, it would even not stend pre-investigation.


As for Mango, Mango is not a credible scholar, he has been used by the Turkish government as a propaganda tool, and he was even permitted in the military archives to write his "works." I think the fact that he was born in Istanbul and used his family name "Mango" to appear less biased have helped people like you to use him, because people like you think that if they were Anglo-saxon, Chienese, alien or any other living organism beside Turk, people will take those writers more seriously.

Truly yours.

[Armenian]

You couldn't shoot a pig in the head even if you owned a farm full of them. You self-grandeurizing, deceitful, internet geek. Don't speak one more word of hiding behind a computer until you, "Armenian" post proof that you have actualyy done SOMETHING, ANYTHING concerning the moronic things you claim. Because I sincerely believe you are a hopeless sociopath, all talk no action.

You might as well have said:

Yeah man yeah, dats rite. Ma pinus is biger dan yers - yik, yik, yik, yik...

I is a Turd, but I tries to sound like a rednik to fool the dog gonnit pesky little Armininanes - dang, how do ya say dat frigin word?

[HyeJinx1984]

Armen.. mekitch shinork tsoos door.

[Virgil]

You might as well have said:

Yeah man yeah, dats rite. Ma pinus is biger dan yers - yik, yik, yik, yik...

I is a Turd, but I tries to sound like a rednik to fool the dog gonnit pesky little Armininanes - dang, how do ya say dat frigin word?

Armenian, Turd is actually a "Anglo".

[anomaly]

Fadix, believe what you will. I can't verify that I really am Anglo-Saxon.

Because hey, maybe a visiting Turkish janissary boned my great great great great great grandmother when she was spinning a wheel in Westminster. Maybe the last name Kavanagh is Turkic in origin. Who knows.

In either case, I am stating my views, and that shouldn't bother you. Quit being so insecure. It only strengthens the stereotype of Armenians being self-victimizing poster children for the word "whine".

The fact of the matter is, I have both Armenian and Turkish friends. And I really am interested in this matter. What more is there to say?

[Fadix2]

Fadix, believe what you will. I can't verify that I really am Anglo-Saxon.

Because hey, maybe a visiting Turkish janissary boned my great great great great great grandmother when she was spinning a wheel in Westminster. Maybe the last name Kavanagh is Turkic in origin. Who knows.

In either case, I am stating my views, and that shouldn't bother you. Quit being so insecure. It only strengthens the stereotype of Armenians being self-victimizing poster children for the word "whine".

The fact of the matter is, I have both Armenian and Turkish friends. And I really am interested in this matter. What more is there to say?

Dude, as I said previously, I don't give a thing of your barrowed ethnicity; afterall, are ethnicity not social constructs? So index yourself in anglo-saxonism.

But one thing though, by doing such you are forcing me to not take you seriously, because it is obvious that you are not an anglo-saxon. This has nothing to do with your opinions, I already exchanging with a real Englishman whom had your views, and I knew he was not a Turk... this is about ones psychology. In your cases, your defense mechanism is too obvious. Words such as "neural" and "impartiality" won't be repeated this way each time ones opinion is contested, unless ones has a barrowed ethnicity that he found to hide himself behind it. Words such as "I have both Armenian and Turkish friends" won't be used by an Anglos-Saxon this way when justifying his views.

For an Anglo-Saxon to know so much about Turkey and the regional situation, as far as knowing the pseudo-ethnicity of ministers etc...(which in this cases the only media of information was Turkish press), one has to be a very wellread individual... but your broken English make it apparent that you are not a well read individual if in fact English is your native language. You use terms and words in some cases that are misused for the circonstances, such mistakes that are very unlikely for a native English that is well-read enought to even know the ethnicity of ministers or having gone as far as reading Turkish press for personal information.

Those are basic examples, but there are many other ellements, like the fact that you land up here and post only on threads where Azerbaijan, Turkey are involved... and this comming from someone whom claim having both Armenian and Turkish friends. This is "interest psychology" which adding to all other facts bring us to conclude that unless a cat is a dog, you are not whom you claime to be.

Dude, the question left, is why do you need to forge an identity? Do you think I will take you less seriously if you were a Turk? It doesn't matter by whom the statment 1+1 = 3 was made, since whomever said it, it won't make it more true.

My offer stand, PM me, I do find that you have a good sense of humor.

[Hayq]

The European Union is having a hard time supporting itself. The problems, even if we do not consider the culture and genetics, are very serious.

Turkey will have more power than Germany in the Union. Turkey will have a larger population than Germany but the same economy as Holland.

bringing a state like Turkey to European code will mean canceling EVERY SINGLE SOCIAL PROGRAM in EVERY EUROPEAN COUNTRY so that the Turks can live better. That is asking too much.

[anomaly]

Fadix.

If English is not your native language, then who are you to judge me on my grammar?

Show me one instance where I have misused the English language. Make sure that your example is not a product of me typing hastily or the such.

Sincerely yours,

Kevin Kavanagh.

[anomaly]

Hayq.

Having a EU country bordering Iraq will mean big business for EU itself.

That is why, ultimately, Turkey will be accepted this December.

[Fadix2]

Fadix.

If English is not your native language, then who are you to judge me on my grammar?

Show me one instance where I have misused the English language. Make sure that your example is not a product of me typing hastily or the such.

Sincerely yours,

Kevin Kavanagh.

My English is good enought to find out your misuses of words... I won't go far enought to find out what I call misuses... because I have just to use this post of yours that I am answering.

"I have misused the English language." This statment uses Altaic language structure.

It doesn't sound right to say misused of the English language, a native English speaker won't misuse words like that, those kind of mistakes are done by people like you and me. It is words in the English language that are misused not the English language. Your statment is grammatically incoherent. You could have used "misuses of the English language," but the way you have used does not exactly mean what you have implied.

"is not a product of me," sounds poor vocabulary to my ears, the kind that I use because my knowledge of English is limited.

If you want me to dig your other posts, I will... I just used this example to show you how easy it is for me to find such "misuses." Face it dude, your English is apparently not the one of a native speaker. Many of your phrases are too short, words are not appopriate, and your texts in their structures are too poor in order to be equilibrated by the synonims of words you replace in Word.

As for the name you have provided, I can as well name myself whom I want. It is amuzing thought to see you using a name that participated in the production of Lawrence of Arabia.

And for your information, Kavanagh is not Anglo-Saxon, it is Irish in origin, the word is even derived from the Irish Gaelic name Caomhànach, alluding to the followers of St. Caomhall. The name is fervantly Catholic and has nothing Anglo-Saxon.

I am patiently waiting your theories now about how your grandmother married an Irish or something.

Truly yours.