Comparing Artsakh to Northern Cyprus

[Steph]

Vogel,

Firstly, I accept your apology, thank you!

My comment about your English was sincere and not meant in any other way.

However, I can only disagree with you on your entire discussion which is really going outside of the parameters of this forum.

To mention the disappearance of the Moslem Azeris from Artsakh is probably the most crass statement you could make. Shall we discuss where your Armenian neighbours from Nakichevan have gone to ?



I certainly don't feel the need to be "very careful" when discussing current situations in the UK, in brief, in a recent survey of Muslims approximately 130,000 supported 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings and stated they would join a Jihad in Iraq/Palestine and/or Afghanistan.

A much larger number, sorry I don't have it just now, actually called for Sharia Law to be adopted in the UK.

As regards measures Britain should take..... tell me, which of these worked best for Turkey?

Finally on Britain, the Moslem community reflects all spheres of the wider community with it's own share of poverty, wealth, social misfits and successful entrepreneurs, highly educated individuals and also underachievers.

If I have given the impression of being anti-Muslim, that was not the intention, I am not. However the examples you gave, Vogel, offered the obvious fact of ethnic and religious conflict.

If you want to further discuss the UK, could I suggest we find a different platform/forum for this?

[bell-the-cat]

The only point of divergence I have with your words is your characterization of Armenians as "occupiers" in Karabagh. I understand why you think Turks are occupiers in No. Cyprus, since that is not their native land and they were imported there for the purpose of the occupation. I'm unclear, however, as to how native peoples can be "occupiers" on their native land. Perhaps you can elaborate.

The problem is with the word "occupy", which has started to be used in a negative way. I am currently occupying a comfy chair - but that does not mean that I have pulled a previous occupant off it.

[Vogelgrippe]

Vogel,

Firstly, I accept your apology, thank you!

My comment about your English was sincere and not meant in any other way.

However, I can only disagree with you on your entire discussion which is really going outside of the parameters of this forum.

To mention the disappearance of the Moslem Azeris from Artsakh is probably the most crass statement you could make. Shall we discuss where your Armenian neighbours from Nakichevan have gone to ?



I certainly don't feel the need to be "very careful" when discussing current situations in the UK, in brief, in a recent survey of Muslims approximately 130,000 supported 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings and stated they would join a Jihad in Iraq/Palestine and/or Afghanistan.

A much larger number, sorry I don't have it just now, actually called for Sharia Law to be adopted in the UK.

As regards measures Britain should take..... tell me, which of these worked best for Turkey?

Finally on Britain, the Moslem community reflects all spheres of the wider community with it's own share of poverty, wealth, social misfits and successful entrepreneurs, highly educated individuals and also underachievers.

If I have given the impression of being anti-Muslim, that was not the intention, I am not. However the examples you gave, Vogel, offered the obvious fact of ethnic and religious conflict.

If you want to further discuss the UK, could I suggest we find a different platform/forum for this?

Steph,

Surely, I was not interested at all in the attitudes and opinions of British Muslims until you brought it up. I did see nothing wrong with bringing it up, so it evoked my interest, and I simply requested you to elaborate few things about British Moslems which you had already brought up.

Now, however, I see that you are deliberately or inadvertently twisting my words and suggesting that it was me who steered the discussion away from Karabagh/Cyprus analogy to British Muslims. If you simply misunderstood me, it is fine, and let me reiterate that I was trying to be polite and showing a sincere interest in the topic you brought up. Thus, even though I did not like your generalizations, I requested you to be more specific instead of blaming you of 'going outside the parameters' right away

if you have no interest in delving further into the topic which you brought up, it is totally fine with me. But please note that you most recent message was simply putting words into my mouth, and blaming me because I was following your off-the-topic arguments. Hence, we don't need to switch to other forums or anything, but I would appreciate it if you, as a final courtesy, let me know about the sources of the surveys you are talking about.

[Steph]

Vogel,
could you answer the 3 questions in my last post?

[Vogelgrippe]

Vogel,
could you answer the 3 questions in my last post?

Steph,

Certainly I can answer your question about Nakichevan Armenians, and say that they were, to the shame of the Azeri government, deported to Armenia some time ago (according to the best of my knowledge). In this regard, I believe we should never have double standards about victimized ethnic communities which are deported and/or persecuted. Azeris of Karabagh, and Armenians of Nachcivan therefore deserve the greatest sympathy and understanding in this regard. What you call 'crass' is for me selectively showing sypmphaty for one single group only.

I guess it is not necessary for me to answer your second questions in light of what you wrote in your previous posting. The question about the possible measures Britain should take (and a comparison with Turkish methods), definitely falls outside the parameters of this forum, according to your own words:

"However, I can only disagree with you on your entire discussion which is really going outside of the parameters of this forum............If you want to further discuss the UK, could I suggest we find a different platform/forum for this?"

Finally, assuming that your final question was about discussing Britain in other platforms/forums, I already answered it by stating that I leave it up to you, but that I personally find forum switcing unnecessary:

if you have no interest in delving further into the topic which you brought up, it is totally fine with me. But please note that your most recent message was simply putting words into my mouth, and blaming me because I was following your off-the-topic arguments. Hence, we don't need to switch to other forums or anything, but I would appreciate it if you, as a final courtesy, let me know about the sources of the surveys you are talking about.

[Vogelgrippe]

Vogel, I agree with most of your words above. You're right on target about the fact that even the status quo, as undesirable as it may be, is better than war and more bloodshed. The only point of divergence I have with your words is your characterization of Armenians as "occupiers" in Karabagh. I understand why you think Turks are occupiers in No. Cyprus, since that is not their native land and they were imported there for the purpose of the occupation. I'm unclear, however, as to how native peoples can be "occupiers" on their native land. Perhaps you can elaborate.



All of the lands surrounding Karabagh, except Lachin, is on the table. The Armenians have offered them repeatedly in exchange for freedom for Karabagh. It is the Azeris who refuse this deal. Obviously, Armenians cannot just give up those lands without gaurantees of peace and freedom from the Azeris, because without those buffer lands, Karabagh would be totally vulnerable to Azeri attacks. And don't tell me this is out of the question, given that Azeri leaders on a weekly basis threaten violence and a military solution, and brag about how powerful their military is getting and how much they are outspending the Armenians. That buffer zone is the only thing the Armenians of Karabagh have to protect them in the absence of an agreement by the Azeris to leave Karabagh alone.

As for your Nachcivan comment, I'm assuming this was a joke, and that you are fully aware that Nachcivan shares its main border with Turkey, which would obviously protect it against any aggression from anyone. I'm assuming you also know, that before 1923 Nachcivan was 50% Armenian and today it is 0% Armenian, actually it is -50% Armenian if you count the thousands of Armenian monuments and ancient headstones that the Azeris have destroyed in broad daylight.

Phantom,

Surely I can elaborate the 'native peoples' issue, at least with regard to Cyprus. As you probably know very well, the people who live in Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus consist of 3 different groups of people (regarding ethnic, religious, social, and historical background)

1) Descendants of Greek Cypriots who converted to Islam during the Ottoman rule in Cyprus which lasted from 1571 to 1878, and eventually assimilated into the Turkish community

2) Ottoman Turkish settlers (mainly from the Konya region) who were brought by Sultan's decree to Cyprus between 1571 to early 1600s

3) Settlers from Turkey who were encouraged to settle in Northern Cyprus after the Turkish intervention/invasion/liberation/occupation in 1974.

I certainly agree that the 3rd group does not qualify as native Cypriot people (in the Annan plan of 2004 Turkey has agreed to 'resettling' these people back in Turkey), since they are legally, socially, and culturally far away from being a Cypriot.

However, I will certainly consider it pure racism to deny the 'Cypriotness' of the first 2 groups of Turkish Cypriots. It would be the biggest bigotry to punish these Turkish Cypriots because their Hellenic ancestors choose to convert to Islam and eventually mix with the Ottoman Turkish settlers. Therefore, I hope you do not refer to these Turkish Cypriots when you were questioning the 'nativeness' of the Cypriot population.


Finally, I believe to have elaborated the issue of Nachijevan Armenians in my previous reply to Steph on this thread. You can decide for yourself whether I meant is as a joke or seriously.

[Turkish Pride]

For the Armenian's who support the Greek Cypriot side in the Cyprus dispute should read about:

1.) The 1963 Christmas Massacres. These were massacres perpetrated by the Greek Cypriots against the Turkish Cypriots.

2.) Read the Akritas plan.

3.) Learn what happened to the Turkish Cypriots before 1974. They didn't expel themselves from the government and civil service and they didn't kick themselves out of their homes to live in tiny isolated enclaves, it was the Greek Cypriots who forced the Turkish Cypriots to do this.

If anyone doesn't even know about these basic facts then they are not fit to write about the Cyprus problem.


Steph you talk about Muslims in a manner as if they are all outsiders and aliens. Do you believe that not a single Muslim in the UK or in Europe has integrated into their hosts culture and society? Do you think we all plot to over throw the government and implement Sharia law?

Would I be wrong in saying that the situation facing Muslims in Europe today is like the situation Jews faced in Europe prior to the Holocaust? You might say that I'm way off the mark but many Europeans said that about the Jews prior to the Holocaust. Not that I am saying a Holocaust of the Muslims will happen but there seems to be a climate of Muslims being demonized in Europe today. Would you not agree?

[Steph]

T. Pride,
You really have misread my comments regarding Muslims.
They are a long standing, well-integrated and vibrant part of our society.
The vast majority of UK citizens care not for anyone's religion, but care about one's morals, contribution to society and humanity.

However.......a sizeable majority of Muslims are intensely radical and have professed hatred for the West, Christians and Jews.......this is fact, imams have been videoed preaching hatred on our streets and in mosques.
I repeat, 130,000 have claimed they would join in jihad.
As regards Sharia law, I clearly stated that a sizeable MINORITY wished to live under Sharia law, not all. In fact, the VAST MAJORITY of Muslims in the UK wish to live according to the laws of their country.

Any demonization of Muslims in Europe today could probably be traced to the actions of a Muslim minority.
To compare the situation of Muslims today, in Europe, with the Jews prior to the Holocaust is crass beyond belief. You are perfectly correct, I would not agree

[Turkish Pride]

Any demonization of Muslims in Europe today could probably be traced to the actions of a Muslim minority.

Constant media attention on the whole Muslim population, the demonization of the whole Muslim population, people staring at you in disgust just because you cover your face. Muslim are being stigmatised. I know Muslims who now reluctantly reveal the fact that they are Muslim when speaking to people that aren't their close friends. There is tension in the air and just because you don't feel it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

To compare the situation of Muslims today, in Europe, with the Jews prior to the Holocaust is crass beyond belief. You are perfectly correct, I would not agree

Well that's your opinion. I bet in Germany several years before the Holocaust many Germans denied that the Jews were in any danger. Just look throughout Europe now and you will notice the significant increase in the number of votes the far right and fascist parties are getting. There is even a far-right coalition in the EU parliament now - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6262089.stm

[Steph]

T.Pride,
I think we'll agree to disagree on this.

Probably the Muslims who are most scared to reveal their religion are the Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq. Has the wider Islamis community nothing to say on this situation and no plans to intervene?


I suppose it depends on where you live, where I am Muslims, quite rightly, are proud, loud and friendly, with no modesty about their religion.

It's a shame your circumstances are different.