Balkan Turks

[Kharpert]

There is no such thing as a Turkish race

I still don't understand what you mean by this.

See, there's these people on Earth, and they're called Turks. Therefore, there is a Turkish race. Wasn't that simple?

If there's no such thing as a Turkish race, then why do you complain constantly about Turks getting "ethnic superiority" in your home country?

[Bulgarian]

The Turkish race is actually very very tiny. It is also a weak race.

Most people who think they are Turks are actually not ethnically Turks. Just because you Kharpert speak English that doesnt make you English. Just because Russian and Ukrainian women who were stolen from north of the Crimea for their looks and to make the Turkish nation more sexually attractive that doesnt mean that they are ethnic Turks.

THE BULGARIAN TURKS YOU TALK ABOUT ARE NOT ETHNIC TURKS THEY ARE BULGARIANS WHO BECAME MUSLIM AND BULGARIANS WHO LOST THEIR LANGUAGE.

As an Armenian I would have thought you would have known better!

[ScythianVizier]

The Turkish race is actually very very tiny. It is also a weak race.

Most people who think they are Turks are actually not ethnically Turks. Just because you Kharpert speak English that doesnt make you English. Just because Russian and Ukrainian women who were stolen from north of the Crimea for their looks and to make the Turkish nation more sexually attractive that doesnt mean that they are ethnic Turks.

THE BULGARIAN TURKS YOU TALK ABOUT ARE NOT ETHNIC TURKS THEY ARE BULGARIANS WHO BECAME MUSLIM AND BULGARIANS WHO LOST THEIR LANGUAGE.

As an Armenian I would have thought you would have known better!

Is that the reason why they ruled your forefathers for centuries? Sorry, my mistake, in fact, your forefathers used to be the Bolgar Turks of Volga, who used to speak a Turkic dialect. In fact, they used to build mosques in the city of Bolgar, do you remember? Apart from your assimilation into Slavic culture, they remained to be the Turks, and they kept their language together with their heritage. What I dont understand why you still use our title if you have so much problems with the Turkish race, symbolism or something?

[Gondorian]

I havent noticed that.

Reread our posts then.

One should always treat the others in line with the treatment that he/she expects to receive from the others. I dont know how you could still differentiate people as the "barbarians" and the "civilized" ones when it is the Europeans who did nothing about the torture planes of the CIA operated in the airzone of the EU. In fact, such "naive definition" could range from one place to another. When the barbarian for you is the guy who kills his sister for some reason, the barbarian for the ones who were tortured on such aircrafts will be simply you and the notions you stand for.

Nice irrelevant argument. The subject we are discussing is European Immigration Tests for Muslims, and the fact that questions like if your sister had sex would you kill her on it. The fact is Europe is in no way required to accept Barbarians who's honest answer to that is yes. Oh and the US Torture Camps in Poland, the Polish Government has proven they don't exist by allowing reporters into the places that conspiracy theorists claimed they where.

Well, it is nice way of expressing the reasons for the crimes commited. However, they do not change the fact that those demographic changes, plunders, mass slaughters, and forced deportations that took place in Greece and in other Balkan countries, had some reverse effects in Anatolia as far as the Armenians and the Rums are concerned. Thus, it could be deemed that the last Rum effort to expand their juristiction in Anatolia at the expense of Ottoman Muslims did also seal the fate of the remaining Anatolian Rums and the Armenians.

Even if we pretend you are correct (which you are not) it doesn't justify the Armenian Genocide. Greece did not expell Muslims untill the Population Exchange which Greece itself fought a war to try to stop. As for declining Muslim Population before that many Turks simply were not willing to be ruled by Infidels so left of their own accord. It is as I said earlier.

Well "what you think" does not matter to me and it does not matter to the Algerians, Vietnamese, or Cambotians.

There was still no genocide commited by the French against those people.

For all of those, the European colonists are the barbarians and nothing you say or do could change the fact about their losses. Nevertheless, I view these events as genocides since they all aimed a particular group of people, executed within the juristiction of the colonist countries' borders, they all aimed civilians (including elderly and children), they all included mass-slaughters, they all involved exploitation and plundering of property and capital incomes (which prevented their demographic and culturel development), forced cultural constraints, and so on.

The real killer you should know was diseases brought from Europe, not violence. Dutch Merchants killed more people then the Colonists of Britain and France combined since they directly sold merchandise from Europe filled with germs to them. I just thought some historical facts that can be verified would interest you. As for the Cultural Constraints a good like I got from Kurdishmedia.com was that Sir Charles Napier did not opress Indians by not allowing them to burn Widows. It was things like that Europeans did that you call cultural constraints.

So, if you ever visit those countries, please do not forget to ask who the barbarians are, as whether the barbarians are the French or anybody else. Sorry, but your arguments to evade some death toll involving extermination of some 250-500 million people (by the Western Europeans within their own juristictions, not due to wars) can not be disguised or can not be regarded as any part of some "advanced civilization", but a part of pure barbarism and planned genocides.

Listen you brought this on yourself but two can play this game of overusing Genocide to the point where that word has no meaning whatsoever.

In every Balkan Country Turkey Imposed the Janniasary System were 1/4-1/3 of our sons got stolen in infancy by the Turkish State, and turned into Fanatical Slave Warriors who got sent to administer Mosques when they got too old for Fighting for Islam, and Massacres where infact regular occurences. You know how the Parthenon in Athens is in ruins? Well unlike the Colloseum where the Italians themselves abused it Greeks never disrespected it, it was intact untill Turkish Cannons destroyed it. You guys also placed countless restrictions to our freedom of religion, and openly discriminated against us in our own country. Well at first I was only going to use the literal definition of Genocide, but since you insist on disregarding it and counting all European Conquests as Genocide, I guess there is no reason for me not to do the same. Like I said two can play your game, however like I said to Bulgarian not all crimes are Genocide, the French did not commit Genocide in Algeria, Cambodia, or Vietnam, and the Turks did not commit Genocide in the Balkans.

Please read a bit of resources that are not Western (or not the mainstream ones printed in the citadels of the Western Captalism and Plunderism) such as the ones printed in Asia, in the Amerikas, in Africa, and so on. By default, you must assess the "other resources" in order come up with some neutral or balanced view to the issue. If not, you fall into the category of the "barbarian" more than the ones who kill their "sisters" due to ignorance or illiteracy.

So would you suggest the garbage claiming that Israel is commiting Genocide? Or did you mean the Garbage that claims the First Crusade killed a quarter of all Muslims? Or perhaps you would like me to read that charletin Ward Churchill who pretends to be Native American, but who had the tribe he claimed to belong to openly deny he was one of them. Oh yes not believing Ward Churchill is a new prophet makes me a bigger Barbarian than a man who kills his sister for Adultery. Why don't you get yourself schooled in Philosophy and Logic, you really need to seem to need it.

Finally, read a bit more about how the Western Countries deny the crimes and genocides by evading to confront them directly.

By making Holocaust Denial a crime?

The French president, Chirac condemns the Armenian Genocide every year together with the Jewish one, but fails to express his grief for the ones executed by the fascists of France and any other western country (if one could exclude Germany).

Funny that French Writers in my experience are a lot more critical of the role France played in World War Two then Jewish ones are. Perhaps you should read more things by French People then things held at Love your Country Rallies?

Thus, they do still teach the benefits of colonial rule to the French kids in public schools.

Are you denying there where any? If not why shouldn't that be taught in school a place children are sent to learn.

Furthermore, I dont recall any recognition of the genocides executed by those countries.

Perhaps you should go see some of their history books then.

For example, the British killed some 20-29 million Indians in India in order to build that fascinating palaces of London that most tourists adore to visit.

Again not all Massacres are Genocide, two can play at this game, the Ottoman Massacres of Bulgarians, Serbs and Greeks the 19th Century immediatly come to mind. Besides Britain does accept that it commited massive crimes in India, a good person to see about it and a very reliable source on British History would be Simon Shama, however you probably would prefer ignorance and hate for Europe right?

Hence, I dont recall the British adressing any of the crimes executed
in their colonies,

Then you have not been paying attention to the last 50 years.

not to mention to how they treated the civilians in Iraq as broadcasted on TV.

What channels do you watch? No more Al Jazeera for you untill you can learn to not degrade the word Genocide to the point it has no meaning anymore ok?

In fact, the Jewish genocide was the full scale implementation of the deliberate colonial genocides back in Europe, nothing more than ordinary fascism.

No it wasn't, no Death Camps in India, Vietnam, Algeria, Canada etc etc etc. Colonialism is itself a horrible crime, but it is not the crime of Genocide which was only commited in one Colony, and that was a German, not British or French Colony.

Is that the reason why they ruled your forefathers for centuries? Sorry, my mistake, in fact, your forefathers used to be the Bolgar Turks of Volga, who used to speak a Turkic dialect. In fact, they used to build mosques in the city of Bolgar, do you remember? Apart from your assimilation into Slavic culture, they remained to be the Turks, and they kept their language together with their heritage. What I dont understand why you still use our title if you have so much problems with the Turkish race, symbolism or something?

That gave me a laugh. The Bulgars where never Muslim. They where menacing the Byzantine Empire long before Manzikert. Infact Basil II for his defeating of the Bulgarians and bringing them under Byzantine Rule (He was one of those Emperor you would do well not have mocked or antagonized) earned the title Bulgar Slayer.

[ScythianVizier]

Reread our posts then.

I did, and I am not convinced just like I am now.

Nice irrelevant argument. The subject we are discussing is European Immigration Tests for Muslims, and the fact that questions like if your sister had sex would you kill her on it. The fact is Europe is in no way required to accept Barbarians who's honest answer to that is yes. Oh and the US Torture Camps in Poland, the Polish Government has proven they don't exist by allowing reporters into the places that conspiracy theorists claimed they where.

Perhaps it is irrelevant to you. However, I dont recall any people in Iraq who invited some barbarians from the USA and Europe to tear down their infrastructure, to bomb their cities and suburb, kill their civilians, and of course videotape them when abusing and torturing. Sorry, but the notions you suggest and the reality existing does not match since yours can only exist in abstract western world, not in the real world.

Even if we pretend you are correct (which you are not) it doesn't justify the Armenian Genocide. Greece did not expell Muslims untill the Population Exchange which Greece itself fought a war to try to stop. As for declining Muslim Population before that many Turks simply were not willing to be ruled by Infidels so left of their own accord. It is as I said earlier.

Well, first of all you got to change your denial attitude here. If you can not explain the demographic changes with some deportations and slaughters for yourself, then you shouldnt ask from the others to do the opposite. Personally, my forefathers were initially deported from Caucasus and later from Macedonia, Consequently, they lost many people on their way to Anatolia even though you now tell me that all of those were incorrect. Well, what can I say, I only want to thank you for your kindness and the civilized approach you demonstrated so far.

There was still no genocide commited by the French against those people.

Dont tell it to me, tell it to the Algerians, Blacks, Vietnamese, Cambotians, and so on. I am sure they will agree on your civilized perceptions.

The real killer you should know was diseases brought from Europe, not violence. Dutch Merchants killed more people then the Colonists of Britain and France combined since they directly sold merchandise from Europe filled with germs to them. I just thought some historical facts that can be verified would interest you. As for the Cultural Constraints a good like I got from Kurdishmedia.com was that Sir Charles Napier did not opress Indians by not allowing them to burn Widows. It was things like that Europeans did that you call cultural constraints.

Well, as I told you, I did not even get involved in listing the Western/European crimes. The Dutch perhaps killed more people than the Mongols, but does hardly anyone know about it. However, you could still test how civilized the Dutchs were by asking some questions in Indonesia, but I am not sure as whether it is safe to do so or not. For the British, yes, they did kill tens of millions of Indians in order to boost their trade surpluses, and in order to finance their pretty palaces erected in London. They even cut the hands of textile weavers in India in order to establish a nice commercial market without competitors for their English-made textiles. I must say that they were quite civilized indeed....! Dont you agree?

Listen you brought this on yourself but two can play this game of overusing Genocide to the point where that word has no meaning whatsoever.

Well, when you start to assess the other side of the coin, perhaps it becomes clear to you that the notion of genocide is nothing but the direct implementation of colonial rule back at home. When you change the names of the plantation/reservation camps to the concentration camps, then you will get the idea. Even today, channeling of old colonial migrants into western prisons and gettos are all part of fascist domination to threat a certain portion of the world population. The fundamental basis of such western/european/christian privilege is that western/european/christian working people (like yourself) are spared for the fascist methods of rule so long as they remain loyal.

In every Balkan Country Turkey Imposed the Janniasary System were 1/4-1/3 of our sons got stolen in infancy by the Turkish State, and turned into Fanatical Slave Warriors who got sent to administer Mosques when they got too old for Fighting for Islam, and Massacres where infact regular occurences. You know how the Parthenon in Athens is in ruins? Well unlike the Colloseum where the Italians themselves abused it Greeks never disrespected it, it was intact untill Turkish Cannons destroyed it. You guys also placed countless restrictions to our freedom of religion, and openly discriminated against us in our own country. Well at first I was only going to use the literal definition of Genocide, but since you insist on disregarding it and counting all European Conquests as Genocide, I guess there is no reason for me not to do the same. Like I said two can play your game, however like I said to Bulgarian not all crimes are Genocide, the French did not commit Genocide in Algeria, Cambodia, or Vietnam, and the Turks did not commit Genocide in the Balkans.

The Janissary system was based upon random selection. The total number of the corps was 20.000-25.000 when the population of the empire was more than 25-30 million people even back in the 16th Century. In fact, the janissaries were taken when they are about 10-12 years old. They knew their families and their roots, and out of 40 households, only one child was chosen due to the fact that the Christians were not required to fight during the wars. For that reason, their population got increased quite a bit in the end when the number of Ottoman muslims did not increase as high as the Christian ones. When the janissaries retired, they even received pensions, and usually lived back in their home land. In a sense, that strategy was also to establish links with the Christian population by converting one of them to Islam.

The ones who did convert to Islam lived quite a nice life, and the ones who were conservative about the issues of their religion did face higher taxes, and special constraints in terms of participation in the state administration. However, this was also applicable in the Roman Empire, and in fact, the janissary system was far more humanitarian than killing the slaves for fun in the hippodromes, or burning women for being witches. On contrary, the Ottomans paid some money prize to the ones who converted to Islam, and paid pensions for the ones who converted as an elder. Similarly, even a black slave was set free when he/she announced his/her self as a muslim, so being muslim was the key of many paths one could follow, not only for the blacks, but also for the Armenians, Greeks, and others.

By the way, the Europeans executed plenty of genocides during the colonial era, and it might take some time to recognize them one by one since the compensation packages for such crimes probably could reverse all weath from West to the rest, so it will take time, but some compromise will eventually happen.

So would you suggest the garbage claiming that Israel is commiting Genocide? Or did you mean the Garbage that claims the First Crusade killed a quarter of all Muslims? Or perhaps you would like me to read that charletin Ward Churchill who pretends to be Native American, but who had the tribe he claimed to belong to openly deny he was one of them. Oh yes not believing Ward Churchill is a new prophet makes me a bigger Barbarian than a man who kills his sister for Adultery. Why don't you get yourself schooled in Philosophy and Logic, you really need to seem to need it.

Well, I dont suggest that, in fact, there are even Jewish scholars who suggest that the policies of Israel had some genocidal tools targeting the muslim Arabs. Thus, please note that it is one colonist country founded in the Middle East by the Europeans (at the expense of Arabs) to compensate for the crimes commited by the Europeans themselves, including so called civilized countries like Germany, France (Vichy Government), Norway, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and of course Italy.

By making Holocaust Denial a crime?

I dont think that Holocaust Denial should be some crime as long as the denial of the Western/European/Christian crimes is not some crime. If one is crime then the rest should also be the crimes. If one of them is not, then there is no point in worrying about the rest.

Funny that French Writers in my experience are a lot more critical of the role France played in World War Two then Jewish ones are. Perhaps you should read more things by French People then things held at Love your Country Rallies?

Well, it is time to progress and move away from the shadows of Vichy government since France was always a fascist state long before that one cooperated with the NAZIs. In that regard, let us see them tackling the genocides executed in their remote colonies, of course if they wish to be interpreted as "convincing".

Are you denying there where any? If not why shouldn't that be taught in school a place children are sent to learn.

How could you suggest that they teach how they slaughtered other peoples in remote places, and how they extracted all goods and resources for centuries whilst enslaving the rest? Those are not civilized approaches at all. We know that only uncivilized people like Turks, Chechens, Bosniaks, Vietnamese, Indonesians, Blacks, Albanians, American Indians, Cambotians, Arabs, Iranians, Chinese (and so on) could do such terrible things, not those elegant and stylish French people, dont you know that?

Perhaps you should go see some of their history books then.

I dont have to. There are private French schools in Turkey, and they never tell anything about their bloody and barbaric past and present.

Again not all Massacres are Genocide, two can play at this game, the Ottoman Massacres of Bulgarians, Serbs and Greeks the 19th Century immediatly come to mind. Besides Britain does accept that it commited massive crimes in India, a good person to see about it and a very reliable source on British History would be Simon Shama, however you probably would prefer ignorance and hate for Europe right?

Initially, the Westerners/Europeans must address all the genocises they commited, and this should be done one by one in their historical orders. Later, we could all talk about how nice and civilized the Western/Europeans are.

Then you have not been paying attention to the last 50 years.

Well let the British acknowledge their own crimes as genocides. Unfortunatley, this is also the dilemma why they can not announce the recognition of the Armenian Genocide. Once they announce such recognition, then all of their former subjects will claim the same, and that is for sure.

By the way, even various administrators/historians/figures from Turkey said how sorry they are for the Armenian losses, but the issue is about recognition of a genocide, and it is not the same thing with some wrongful policies or personal miscounducts that anybody could get involved during the times of conflicts.

What channels do you watch? No more Al Jazeera for you untill you can learn to not degrade the word Genocide to the point it has no meaning anymore ok?

Interestingly, I mostly read the western/eruopean resources, but I also read other resources, such as the human right activists, green left wings, socialists, other papers/articles in English published in varioıus countries and regions of the world. Perhaps, this is due to some sort of cultural shell shock, who knows better than you would?

No it wasn't, no Death Camps in India, Vietnam, Algeria, Canada etc etc etc. Colonialism is itself a horrible crime, but it is not the crime of Genocide which was only commited in one Colony, and that was a German, not British or French Colony.

As I told you before, colonism was the proto-fascism and was used to test various phases of genocides, exploitations and plunders. This is how the fascist mindset progresses.

That gave me a laugh. The Bulgars where never Muslim. They where menacing the Byzantine Empire long before Manzikert. Infact Basil II for his defeating of the Bulgarians and bringing them under Byzantine Rule (He was one of those Emperor you would do well not have mocked or antagonized) earned the title Bulgar Slayer.

They were muslims since the Volga Bolgars were a Turkic tribe and they converted to Islam in 922. For sure, they were later named as the Tatars after the Mongol Invasion. However, the modern Bulgar tribe you refer is only the branch of Bulgar tribes who migrated to the Balkan penisula and accepted the Orthodox Christianity. Basil (the Bulgar Slayer) was the Byzantine Empreror who fought against the Bulgar State emerging in the Balkans, however, he never slayed the Volga Bolgars who used to reside in north Caucasus, Khazar, and Transaxonia.

Did you know that the founder of Seljuk Empire was Togrul I bin Mikail? Do you know what Mikail stand for?

[Albanian]

The idea that there is a "Balkan TURK*" is a phoney and fake as the idea that the Turks were victim of atrocities in the Caucasus and the Balkans.

* There is no such thing as a Turkish race. The Turks are the only people in the Old World (ie not the American continent) that dont have a race.

They are not talking about a race. Turk = The Citizen of Turkish Republic. And also The Ottoman Empire's people who were from Anatolia named Turks since 1923. There is of course a need to call people in a common name.

[Gondorian]

I did, and I am not convinced just like I am now.

I meant with an open mind

Perhaps it is irrelevant to you. However, I dont recall any people in Iraq who invited some barbarians from the USA and Europe to tear down their infrastructure, to bomb their cities and suburb, kill their civilians, and of course videotape them when abusing and torturing. Sorry, but the notions you suggest and the reality existing does not match since yours can only exist in abstract western world, not in the real world.

Ok so because American and British Forces are in Iraq we should allow total Barbarians into our countries?

That makes no sense whatsoever, a Muslim who answers the European Immigration Tests like a Civilized Human Being may enter, a Muslim whoever who would kill his own sister for adultery, believes jews are demons, wants to destroy Europe in a violent Jihad, and wants Shariah to replace secular law is not welcome.

Well, first of all you got to change your denial attitude here. If you can not explain the demographic changes with some deportations and slaughters for yourself, then you shouldnt ask from the others to do the opposite. Personally, my forefathers were initially deported from Caucasus and later from Macedonia, Consequently, they lost many people on their way to Anatolia even though you now tell me that all of those were incorrect. Well, what can I say, I only want to thank you for your kindness and the civilized approach you demonstrated so far.

So your logic is because it happened in Macedonia it must have happened in Greece?

Dont tell it to me, tell it to the Algerians, Blacks, Vietnamese, Cambotians, and so on. I am sure they will agree on your civilized perceptions.

I don't care what their perception about it was, that isn't relevant. What is relevant is did Europeans try to whipe them off the face of the Earth, and the answer to that is no.

Well, as I told you, I did not even get involved in listing the Western/European crimes. The Dutch perhaps killed more people than the Mongols, but does hardly anyone know about it. However, you could still test how civilized the Dutchs were by asking some questions in Indonesia, but I am not sure as whether it is safe to do so or not. For the British, yes, they did kill tens of millions of Indians in order to boost their trade surpluses, and in order to finance their pretty palaces erected in London. They even cut the hands of textile weavers in India in order to establish a nice commercial market without competitors for their English-made textiles. I must say that they were quite civilized indeed....! Dont you agree?

Again what you mention was a horrible crime, but it was not the crime of Genocide. Not all killing is Genocide Scythian. However if you really want to go that way you have been commiting Genocide against Greeks since the Battle of Manzikert.

Well, when you start to assess the other side of the coin, perhaps it becomes clear to you that the notion of genocide is nothing but the direct implementation of colonial rule back at home. When you change the names of the plantation/reservation camps to the concentration camps, then you will get the idea. Even today, channeling of old colonial migrants into western prisons and gettos are all part of fascist domination to threat a certain portion of the world population. The fundamental basis of such western/european/christian privilege is that western/european/christian working people (like yourself) are spared for the fascist methods of rule so long as they remain loyal.

Says the person from a country with a policy of Kurd killing. Erdogan said he would chase a Kurdish State to the ends of the Earth. Well according to your extremely weak definition that certainly qualifies as Genocide since Turkish Forces are slaughtering Kurds.

The Janissary system was based upon random selection. The total number of the corps was 20.000-25.000 when the population of the empire was more than 25-30 million people even back in the 16th Century. In fact, the janissaries were taken when they are about 10-12 years old. They knew their families and their roots, and out of 40 households, only one child was chosen due to the fact that the Christians were not required to fight during the wars. For that reason, their population got increased quite a bit in the end when the number of Ottoman muslims did not increase as high as the Christian ones. When the janissaries retired, they even received pensions, and usually lived back in their home land. In a sense, that strategy was also to establish links with the Christian population by converting one of them to Islam.

The ones who did convert to Islam lived quite a nice life, and the ones who were conservative about the issues of their religion did face higher taxes, and special constraints in terms of participation in the state administration. However, this was also applicable in the Roman Empire, and in fact, the janissary system was far more humanitarian than killing the slaves for fun in the hippodromes, or burning women for being witches. On contrary, the Ottomans paid some money prize to the ones who converted to Islam, and paid pensions for the ones who converted as an elder. Similarly, even a black slave was set free when he/she announced his/her self as a muslim, so being muslim was the key of many paths one could follow, not only for the blacks, but also for the Armenians, Greeks, and others.

It was Genocide according to your meanignless definition, your people killed tens of thousands of Christians in their own country, you killed parents who did not want their young children turned into brainwashed fanatic soldiers, you put the obvious restriction that there was a high chance that a christian would end up with a son in slavery, you also frequently massacred lines of innocent Greeks to keep the population in line. If you call the British Occupation of India Genocide then the Turkish Occupation of Greece certainly is Genocide. I am not the one removing all meaning of the word Genocide by using it to refer to everything you are.

Well, as I told you, I did not even get involved in listing the Western/European crimes. The Dutch perhaps killed more people than the Mongols, but does hardly anyone know about it. However, you could still test how civilized the Dutchs were by asking some questions in Indonesia, but I am not sure as whether it is safe to do so or not. For the British, yes, they did kill tens of millions of Indians in order to boost their trade surpluses, and in order to finance their pretty palaces erected in London. They even cut the hands of textile weavers in India in order to establish a nice commercial market without competitors for their English-made textiles. I must say that they were quite civilized indeed....! Dont you agree?

Actually the Dutch Merchants were well meaning, they just wanted to make honest money through a new export market. Medical Technology was very poor at the time, and they had no way of knowing about the Germs and the effects they would have. The Natives didn't know either which is why they accepted the Dutch Merchants goods. It was those seemingly harmless trades that really killed natives, not wars.

As for your remention of British Crimes in India, killing to increase your trade profit is not genocide. I really think that you do not know the definition of Genocide.

Well, I dont suggest that, in fact, there are even Jewish scholars who suggest that the policies of Israel had some genocidal tools targeting the muslim Arabs.

Please tell us the name. I read Benny Morris as well, and he says nothing about Israel using Genocide Tools.

Thus, please note that it is one colonist country founded in the Middle East by the Europeans (at the expense of Arabs) to compensate for the crimes commited by the Europeans themselves, including so called civilized countries like Germany, France (Vichy Government), Norway, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and of course Italy.

No it isn't. Jews got there without any help from Europeans, and they did not steal land at the expense of Arabs, they bought the land from Absentee Land Lords. They quickly became a Majority in much of the land, and the modern State of Israel was already on it's way to statehood before World War Two. Besides I would think that a Turk like you would love Israel, well perhaps Israel should see how Turks consider it to be an example of Colonialization and then reconsider its foriegn policy regarding Turkey.

I dont think that Holocaust Denial should be some crime as long as the denial of the Western/European/Christian crimes is not some crime. If one is crime then the rest should also be the crimes. If one of them is not, then there is no point in worrying about the rest.

Look for it to be Genocide the goal has to be the elimination of a certain people, that was not the European Goal in the Colonies, hence by definition it could not be Genocide.

[Parandzem]

Listen you brought this on yourself but two can play this game of overusing Genocide to the point where that word has no meaning whatsoever.

Listen you brought this on yourself but two can play this game of overusing Genocide to the point where that word has no meaning whatsoever.

You have on countless occasions on this forum rendered your use of the term "genocide" totally meaningless by falsely accusing one side of a civil war in the Balkans of "genocide." That word has been cheapened when you use it by your lies.

[Parandzem]

I meant with an open mind



Ok so because American and British Forces are in Iraq we should allow total Barbarians into our countries?

That makes no sense whatsoever, a Muslim who answers the European Immigration Tests like a Civilized Human Being may enter, a Muslim whoever who would kill his own sister for adultery, believes jews are demons, wants to destroy Europe in a violent Jihad, and wants Shariah to replace secular law is not welcome.



So your logic is because it happened in Macedonia it must have happened in Greece?



I don't care what their perception about it was, that isn't relevant. What is relevant is did Europeans try to whipe them off the face of the Earth, and the answer to that is no.



Again what you mention was a horrible crime, but it was not the crime of Genocide. Not all killing is Genocide Scythian. However if you really want to go that way you have been commiting Genocide against Greeks since the Battle of Manzikert.



Says the person from a country with a policy of Kurd killing. Erdogan said he would chase a Kurdish State to the ends of the Earth. Well according to your extremely weak definition that certainly qualifies as Genocide since Turkish Forces are slaughtering Kurds.



It was Genocide according to your meanignless definition, your people killed tens of thousands of Christians in their own country, you killed parents who did not want their young children turned into brainwashed fanatic soldiers, you put the obvious restriction that there was a high chance that a christian would end up with a son in slavery, you also frequently massacred lines of innocent Greeks to keep the population in line. If you call the British Occupation of India Genocide then the Turkish Occupation of Greece certainly is Genocide. I am not the one removing all meaning of the word Genocide by using it to refer to everything you are.



Actually the Dutch Merchants were well meaning, they just wanted to make honest money through a new export market. Medical Technology was very poor at the time, and they had no way of knowing about the Germs and the effects they would have. The Natives didn't know either which is why they accepted the Dutch Merchants goods. It was those seemingly harmless trades that really killed natives, not wars.

As for your remention of British Crimes in India, killing to increase your trade profit is not genocide. I really think that you do not know the definition of Genocide.



Please tell us the name. I read Benny Morris as well, and he says nothing about Israel using Genocide Tools.



No it isn't. Jews got there without any help from Europeans, and they did not steal land at the expense of Arabs, they bought the land from Absentee Land Lords. They quickly became a Majority in much of the land, and the modern State of Israel was already on it's way to statehood before World War Two. Besides I would think that a Turk like you would love Israel, well perhaps Israel should see how Turks consider it to be an example of Colonialization and then reconsider its foriegn policy regarding Turkey.



Look for it to be Genocide the goal has to be the elimination of a certain people, that was not the European Goal in the Colonies, hence by definition it could not be Genocide.

Your post has consistently and flagrantly violated the forum rules.

02-09-2006, 06:02 PM #3
Tongue
Facts can't be buried!

Tongue's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: California
Posts: 885

Arrow WARNING to ALL forum members!
A recent flood of Jewish, and Holocaust related discussion has been reviewed by the administration and moderation team at ArmenianGenocide.com

Members should be warned and advised that from now on there will be no Jew-related discussion on any level permitted at ArmenianGenocide.com No matter who you are, or what you are talking about, we will not tolerate violations of this rule, and violators will be banned indefinitely. Furthermore, publicly questioning or in any way commenting about a moderator team decision to ban any member for any reason including this, or questioning of the rule, or the motives behind the rule will also result in banning.

We take this very seriously and expect you to as well.

The Moderation Team
ArmenianGenocide.com

http://www.armeniangenocide.com/forum/showthread.php?t=515

[Gondorian]

Your post has consistently and flagrantly violated the forum rules.




http://www.armeniangenocide.com/foru...read.php?t=515

Actually since he brought it up first he is the one who violated the rules not me. Besides you know that the context of this conversation isn't what that rule was meant to stop, it was neo-Nazis like you Sensei it was meant to shut up.

You have on countless occasions on this forum rendered your use of the term "genocide" totally meaningless by falsely accusing one side of a civil war in the Balkans of "genocide." That word has been cheapened when you use it by your lies.

The goal of the Serbs was to kill all Bosnians and Albanians, hence it was Genocide, and it fits the definition perfectly. If you have a problem with it perhaps you should talk to your friend Slobadan Milosovich's Ghost in Hell.