If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I have a problem with what you said, most definitely.
Originally posted by Tongue
Again, you have a problem with me Mr. Mature?
Why do feel it necessary to repeat yourself?
Originally posted by Tongue
Also, if you got something to say, say it. Quoting every line of my 3 line post and replying with a personal attack isn't really how we do it here, you know.
I did, only two lines of what I wrote were personally addressed to you, however, you have failed to address any of my points because I know you can't. I know very well how things are done here and while I was able to address your comments, I only get an attitude and indignation as a response.
I have a problem with what you said, most definitely.
So when you don't agree with what ppl say, you use phrases like "Silly little girl" "you're confused" etc. to reply to them? And you expect your replies to be taken seriously? You have an attitude problem, that's what you have. Arguing with ppl like you is a waste of time.
Why would any Armenian agree to have the Armenian genocide debated on public TV and have people watch it? This is crazy.
I can't believe you actually wrote this stuff. It sounds like you're guilty of something and you don't want to be interviewed because you might incriminate yourself and on public television.
And what impression would that leave on the audience?
Impressions? Is that what you care about, making impressions? Such a discussion or debate isn't about making impressions, it's about strengthning our case and convincing those who have doubts or aren't sure by stating the undisputable facts.
"The Armenian genocide is debatable, no one knows what happened". Right?
Oh yea, everyone knows what happened and there couldn't possibly be anyone who isn't aware of the AG or unsure of what transpired. I suppose people should stop writing books on the AG, close down any and all websites on the AG, stop putting out information on the AG, and not participate in any genocide conferences since everyone already knows what happened, so why bore people by telling them something they already know. Right?
Specially if they're not familiar with the matter.
And it's up to us to educate those that aren't familiar with the matter, but instead, you would prefer to have people think that we have something to hide and are afraid of the truth possibly comming out in a discussion aired on public television.
And how would that benefit us?
I guess you're right. Proving the paid deniers to be liars on public television couldn't possibly benefit us.
These deniers are paid people, they're not gonna listen to our side and be like "oh wow, we were wrong, sorry".
What are you talking about? No one is saying that they're going to listen to our side or agree. We're not trying to convert the paid deniers. What we want to do is to expose them and their lies and I can't think of a better place than public television. And as a matter of fact, the more they lie, the better it is for us.
It's just gonna make people confused, and damage our image and reduce its importance, and that's the exact purpose of airing the debate.
On the contrary. It's going to make things clearer and people will be less confused. It's not our image that's going to be damaged, but their reputation will be damaged severely. If the AG is that important, then we should take every opportunity to talk about it and educate people instead of BURYING IT.
Your discussion brings to mind an old story about the ..
The old bull and the young bull looking over the pasture from the hill down where all the cows are .The youngen says to the old bull "Lets run down and do one"no my son the old bull replies "Lets walk down and getem All"
"All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident."
I agree to debate the AG issue only if every topic is debatable by deniers no matter what, even Holocaust, Zionism or political conspiracies without being called names such “anti-Semite, racist, etc. etc. or whatever. Turks want to debate the AG in US and they started a petition, are they going to broadcast the first part of the documentary on their TV? Or can anyone debate the AG in Turkey?
Your discussion brings to mind an old story about the ..
The old bull and the young bull looking over the pasture from the hill down where all the cows are .The youngen says to the old bull "Lets run down and do one"no my son the old bull replies "Lets walk down and getem All"
Your discussion brings to mind an old story about the ..
The old bull and the young bull looking over the pasture from the hill down where all the cows are .The youngen says to the old bull "Lets run down and do one"no my son the old bull replies "Lets walk down and getem All"
I like this story. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming that you are referring to me as the old bull? In other words, do you think discussing the AG with the deniers on public television could benefit us or do you think it would benefit the Turks and harm us?
A.G is not open for negotiation
denying A.G is just an attemt to lessen the charges and thats a separate iissue. The two issues cannot and must not be spoken in the same breath
"All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed;
Second, it is violently opposed; and
Third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Comment