Re: Castrated Armenian carpets!
The above is a perfect example of what I was talking about regarding Armenian organisations and their ability (or lack of ability) to ask proper questions. It is a completely counterproductive letter.
Firstly, it is a letter from a lobbying group (the ANCA). The White House will immediately ask "what business can a lobbying group have with the academic exhibition of an artistic object?" This immediately puts the whole request in a dubious light and makes the proposed exhibition of the carpet seem less than innocent.
The writer talks about "removing any obstacles", so he is admitting that there ARE obstacles! Since some obstacles are NOT removable, his own words will give the White House the wriggle-room it needs to make sure the carpet is not provided to the Smithsonian. I can think of no legitimate reasons why the carpet cannot be supplied, there are no legitimate "obstacles" - so why on earth is the writer giving credability to spurious reasons by talking about "obstacles"? He should just be asking for the reasons or concerns why the carpet cannot be supplied so that those reasons or concerns can be addressed.
Then things get far worse, a completely off-topic descent into "Armenian Genocide/Obama" stuff, put there for no other reason than to satisify what the writer thinks the community would like him to say. This now politicises something that should be a simple request and allows the White House all the wriggle-room it could wish for. And then even worse - he actually mentions law-suits and US courts!
Originally posted by Haykakan
View Post
Firstly, it is a letter from a lobbying group (the ANCA). The White House will immediately ask "what business can a lobbying group have with the academic exhibition of an artistic object?" This immediately puts the whole request in a dubious light and makes the proposed exhibition of the carpet seem less than innocent.
The writer talks about "removing any obstacles", so he is admitting that there ARE obstacles! Since some obstacles are NOT removable, his own words will give the White House the wriggle-room it needs to make sure the carpet is not provided to the Smithsonian. I can think of no legitimate reasons why the carpet cannot be supplied, there are no legitimate "obstacles" - so why on earth is the writer giving credability to spurious reasons by talking about "obstacles"? He should just be asking for the reasons or concerns why the carpet cannot be supplied so that those reasons or concerns can be addressed.
Then things get far worse, a completely off-topic descent into "Armenian Genocide/Obama" stuff, put there for no other reason than to satisify what the writer thinks the community would like him to say. This now politicises something that should be a simple request and allows the White House all the wriggle-room it could wish for. And then even worse - he actually mentions law-suits and US courts!
Comment