notes / comments

[Virgil]

Re: notes / comments

If you want to know the truth about the Catholic Church, don’t ask the Pope. This inevitably raises the question: If you can’t trust the Pope, whom can you trust? The answer is and must be: No one with power.

Has it ever occured to you that "having faith" means just that "having faith"? Ofcourse to have "faith" means you must clearly be willing to believe. Furthermore, why should I trust you if I can not at the base level trust a individaul with power? What makes you more reliable then them and furthermore, what can you offer me? Your clearly dillusional, the reality is this, if you choose to accept it, "mankind" created government because government had to have been created. We are not "Ara Baliozian", we are animals and animals for the most part must be domesticated and herded. Do we not train dogs? horses? So why should we not train men and women? Pathetic, you are truly a egotistical nobody.

If you want to know more about Armenians, don’t ask an Armenian, who may know much more about Armenians than most odars. That’s because quantity of knowledge does not always translate to quality, or objectivity, reliability, and honesty. If you want to know the truth about Turks, would you ask a Turk?

What a jackass you are? I don't really give a flying xxxx what a otar thinks about Armenians. Do I care what a European, that for 200 years has used the downfall other civilizations to increase its political and economic leverage? NO, I certainly do not, no man or woman will ever be superior to another, we all have flaws, we accept them and move on, yes, we try to better ourselves, but the shear idiocy of taking another flawed individual's opinion is just going in circles. If they have opinions on Armenians, I, certainly have stronger opinions that are based on experiences about otars.

If you want to know more about nationalism, the worst mistake you can make is to ask a nationalist. Ask instead the victims of nationalism, and if you are an Armenian, you don’t have to look for one. Ask yourself. Armenians have been the first major victims of nationalism in the 20th century.

Why not ask yourself? You in essence are a nationalist, get that through thick skull you socialist hack writer and nobody. You are living off checks signed off by Canada, how can you even attack nationalism and nationalist? You are a natinalist you imbeicle!

John Stuart Mill: “No one but a fool, and only a fool of a peculiar description, feels offended by the acknowledgement that there are others whose opinion is entitled to a greater amount of consideration than his.” Translated into dollars and cents, this means: All men are created equal, but their opinions are not.

Listen you deranged worthless man, if everyone is equal, by all means, give up your home and life to your Inuit neighbor. I am having a heartattack with the constant idioitic comments you have hidden under "wisdom", there exists no wisdom, rather, just stagnation.

I can only hope, smart and intelligent human beings will see through him. How can anyone argue with his ideology? They can't, because it is just that a "idealist vision" that will never exist. Demagogs want you to give them a pedistal, however, ask them once to be the man or woman they preach you should become and you will soon find out that they too are flawed.

[crusader1492]

Re: notes / comments

Why not ask yourself? You in essence are a nationalist, get that through thick skull you socialist hack writer and nobody. You are living off checks signed off by Canada, how can you even attack nationalism and nationalist? You are a natinalist you imbeicle!

[arabaliozian]

Re: notes / comments

Friday, January 04, 2008
************************************************
AN ABYSMALLY NAÏVE MISCONCEPTION
************************************************** *****
In life we take many things for granted, beginning with life itself, and after life, the abysmally naïve misconception that our “betters” are better and what they say is more or less true because they are more or less honest men. In this context, however, when we speak in terms of more or less, the emphasis should be on less. To cover up the less and stress the more, leaders, all leaders, political as well as religious, like to speak in the name of God and Country, two entities that cannot speak for themselves.
*
Speaking of honesty and politicians: it is said that there is nothing as dark as the prospects of an honest politician, in the same way that nothing invites violence as surely as talk of non-violence.
*
Power, propaganda, deception, and violence or the threat of violence, are inseparable. As for speaking in the name of God: Who would dare to suggest that God is capable of contradicting Himself? And yet, all organized religions contradict one another.
*
Greed for power is a malady and an addiction much more dangerous than all addictions combined because it affects not a single person but the nation and sometimes even the world. Which is why one is fully justified in saying that our “betters” far from being better may well be our worst. Which is also why the only good thing about political elections is that the losers outnumber the winners.
#

[arabaliozian]

Re: notes / comments

Saturday, January 05, 2008
************************************************
ON FAITH & RELATED ATROCITIES
************************************************** ***
The hardest thing in life is to separate the real from what is not. To a believer, faith is more real than reality. By introducing meaning into our lives, faith makes us blind to reality. That’s one way to explain the ruthless and sadistic persecution of heretics, religious wars (one of which lasted a hundred years) and suicidal terrorists who think they will be rewarded with 72 virgins.
*
The best things in life are not always free. And sometimes we pay most for the things we get for nothing.
*
A dogmatist is one who thinks only God can tell him he is wrong, and he says this in the full knowledge that he is not important enough for the Good Lord to descend from the clouds in order to contradict him.
*
A fool knows that the best way to win an argument is to be so irrational, offensive, and vulgar that no one in his right mind would consider getting involved in his verbal filth. Never underestimate the cunning of fools. Since they have been fools all their lives they have developed all kinds of strategies of survival.
*
It is written: “Let a men meet a she-bear robbed of her cubs, rather than a fool in his folly.”
*
“An Armenian’s tongue can be sharper than a Turk’s yataghan,” Zarian tells us. In what way are we different from them if we do with our tongues what they did with their yataghans?
*
To recognize the fool that resides in all of us is the beginning of all wisdom.
#

[arabaliozian]

Re: notes / comments

AN INTERVIEW
*****************************************
Much of what you say is common and known facts but still when it is phrased bluntly it is not appreciated. How do you explain this? Is it something psychological?

Dupes and brainwashed partisans may refuse to see facts, but not Armenians with the minimum degree of common sense and decency.



How many words do you need to describe a present day Armenian? Do you need to use the same vocabulary that used to describe an Armenian of the 1950s or 1920s?

There are basically two different species: The Ottomanized and Sovietized on the one hand and the born-again human beings.



Is there a magical way of solving the existing problems in Armenia? Has there been real diagnosis of the problems?

No magic is needed. Only an enlightened community.



Do you think a strong Armenia will remember the Armenian Diaspora or it will only care for the tax-payers?

I don’t have much trust in politicians and nations as much as individuals. I expect little or nothing from our politicians, whose ethics are lower than a snake’s belly full of buck shot.



What is the most effective way to support Armenia?

By refusing to support the corrupt.



You are known to express lots of ideas in few sentences, but don’t you think that sometimes details could shed more light on a particular subject?

Since I have published 30 books and written literally thousand of commentaries I find there is an overabundance of detail in my writings.



Young Armenians need to see things more clearly: how they can achieve this?

By reading more of our great writers as opposed our self-appointed pundits and academics who have no interest in our literature, only in our Middle Ages and in the massacres.



Do you think that we should work diplomatically with Arab or Islamic countries to explain them our historical presence in the area and encourage them to recognize the Genocide, or this is something that will automatically follow as the World recognizes the Genocide?

The alternative of being diplomatic is to be undiplomatic – not a viable option. As for Genocide recognition: Nations do whatever is in their own best interest. Ethics is for individuals not, it seems, for tribes, nations and empires. The British have a slogan: “We have neither friends nor enemies. Only interests”.



You have translated a lot of literature work into English. Do you think by translating Armenian works into Arabic we gain the attention of the Arabs? What kind of work should we translate?

The best works, of course. But as I said, don’t expect literary masterpieces to change a politician’s mind.

[arabaliozian]

Re: notes / comments

An excerpt from
Pages From My Diary, 1986-1995
by Ara Baliozian
*************************************************

Excerpts (Part I)
1986
Somewhere George Orwell says that at fifty everyone has the face he deserves. Whenever I catch a glimpse of myself in a mirror I can't help thinking: This isn't quite what I had in mind. But then, I say this about a great many other things: my fellow men, life, the meaning of life, or rather its meaninglessness.

1987
All people with a long history of oppression are short-tempered. When an Armenian loses his temper, the message he is trying to convey is: "I took it from the Turks for a thousand years; I don't have to take it from you." The "I" of course stands not just for himself but for all his ancestors as well—or his collective unconscious.
Whenever I read a book by an odar Armenologist, I cannot help thinking that he is more interested in our past than in our future. He values our antiquities much more than ourselves. These academics will probably be happier if we were to vanish from the face of the earth, thus providing them with a clear-cut ending and a final chapter to their field of inquiry.

Whenever I read a critical letter from one of my readers, I am reminded of a friend who runs a pizza parlor. "Armenians are hard to please", he is fond of saying. "Everyone likes my pizza, except Armenians—they always have something critical to say. Some day if you ever go into pizza business you will know what I mean."
I have never bothered to explain to him that I am myself a battle-scarred veteran of many wars; and that unlike the owner of a pizzeria, an Armenian writer is asked to bear not just the cross but also the cost of Armenian literature.

Nothing can be more repellent to me than the self-satisfied smile of someone who thinks he has got it made. Whenever I see such a smile on the cover of a magazine, I feel like going down on my knees and saying: "O God, allow me to die a miserable failure in order that I may never smile like that."


1988
A reader writes: "In one of your articles dealing with wealth, you speak of pirates and merchants as if these two terms were interchangeable. As a businessman myself, I resent that very much. I think you owe all businessmen an apology."
This businessman is right, trade is superior to piracy. But on this point, let me quote the words of an old wise man: "Trade is much superior to piracy. You can rob and kill a man but once, but you can cheat him again and again."
It is a mistake to think of writers as members of an exclusive club - self-centered eccentrics overly fond of abstractions that have little or no bearing on reality and our daily existence. There are no fundamental differences between writers and ordinary human beings.
The most important difference between an ordinary human being and a writer is that a writer has discovered a way or developed a skill which allows him to transfer his inner world onto a piece of paper—that's all.
To those who say: Since writers are no better than the rest of us, why should we bother with them? I say: To ignore a writer's words would be as risky as ignoring or dismissing the advice of a physician, an electrician, a plumber, or for that matter, a garbage collector.

The earthquake may have been an act of God, but we, all of us, must bear some degree of responsibility for its tragic—and tragic to the point of being genocidal—dimensions.
When I speak of catastrophes I have in mind the kind that can be prevented. Man-made catastrophes as opposed to acts of God. Catastrophes can be easily foreseen if we decide to open our eyes and choose not to take refuge in prejudice, ignorance, and apathy.
Again and again I have heard Armenians say: "God must have something against us!" or, "We are not God's Chosen People but Cursed People!" I say, we can no longer afford holding God responsible for all our misfortunes. We must learn to accept responsibility. Because earthquakes don't kill people; buildings do.


1989
It is a mistake to name our schools after millionaires because it sets our children a bad example. Since every illiterate may become a millionaire, a child may be justified in thinking that he doesn't have to bother with arithmetic and spelling because when he grows up he will be a millionaire; and as everyone knows, a millionaire can always hire a secretary and an accountant (who are a dime a dozen) who will handle both his spelling and arithmetic.
If the choice is between schools that bear a millionaire's name and no school at all: then let us at least have the decency to explain to our children that our hands are tied and that the name of the school is a matter of necessity rather than free choice,and that financial profit and the accumulation of wealth are not the noblest and most admirable pursuits in life.
So much valuable time is wasted in life to prove to morons that you are not a moron.

Loyal, dependable reliable: I loathe these terms. Superiors use them to describe those they exploit. I have worked for a large variety of employers none of whom was, and for that matter, cared to be, loyal, dependable, and reliable. Loyal to profit, yes. Loyal to their employees, certainly not. Loyal to principles and ideals—don't make me laugh.

The two supreme aims of American behavioral sciences: (i) How to make workers more productive; and (ii) How to make consumers more greedy. Understand this and you will understand many other facets of American life.

Thomas Carlyle: "I do not believe in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance."

Will anyone ever brag that he studied political science in Beirut, literary criticism in Teheran, historiography in Ankara, and architecture in Yerevan?

There are people whose only talent consists in being consistently wrong, and they are the very same people who insist on telling others what to think.

A novelist once said that whenever he takes a dislike at someone he puts him in a book and draws royalties on him. I do the same minus the royalty part.

Oscar Wilde in De Profundis : Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinion, their lives a mimicry, their passion a quotation."

Anton Chekhov in his Notebooks : "The university brings out all abilities, including stupidity."


1990
Sometimes in the middle of the night I receive telephone calls from distant places by individuals in search of immortality. These individuals seem to think that I have influence in those places where immortality is dispensed. I try to explain to them that I have problems of my own, that I can't even make ends meet, that my so-called influence is a figment of their imagination, that the status of an Armenian writer in our communities is that between a janitor and an unemployable misfit, and that even if I were to write to a flunky, the chances are I would be completely ignored.
The Arabs castrate rapists and cut off the hands of thieves. Both procedures may be viewed as forms of censorship. Literary censorship is even more barbaric because it attempts to castrate or maim the expression of man's mind and soul. Literary censorship is the first step on the road that leads to massacre.

Some of our academics appear to have made the brilliant discovery that, the more useless and irrelevant their field of expertise, the more they can count on institutional support. I am personally acquainted with academics who know everything that happened to us 70 or even 700 years ago but pretend to know nothing about what's happening today in their own community.

"Why have you given up writing?" I ask a friend who until very recently contributed regularly to our press.
"How can you go on writing?" he replies.
A good question. I wish I knew the answer

[Armenian]

Re: notes / comments

Let's not give Ara Baliozian the satisfaction of thinking that he is one of our "writers" and/or "intellectuals." As far as an Armenian 'writer' is concerned, Ara is only worthy of being considered a 'mediocre' writer, at best. As far as 'intellect' is concerned, Ara is an intellectual midget. And as far as being an 'Armenian' is concerned, Ara is 'not' an Armenian. The aforementioned is the fundamental reasons why Ara has been rejected from the Armenian society. While Armenians adore, even worship, their poets and writers - Kaputikyan, Sevag, Charents, Isahakian, Tumanyan, Raffi, Emin - just to name a few, this "Ara Baliozian" character remains virtually nameless. And that is why we see his anger, his disgruntlement and his self-hate. In Ara's twisted mind, had he been an American, or a Canadian, or a westerner, he would have gained fame... However, since Ara writes for "Ottomanized Armenians" and "Gazetajis" he has gotten no where...

This thread called "notes / comments" is essentially a depository of Ara's self-hate, egomania, delusion, hysteria and disgruntlement. As any self-respecting Armenian can see from his written crap, the depth of Ara's self-hate, delusion and ignorance is bottomless. I read Ara's rants just to observe firsthand the kind of psychological damage diasporan Armenian suffer from. In short: Ara's written crap is nothing but the 'brain-farts' of a self-hating egomaniac. There are Armenians who assimilate and disappear without a trace. And then there are assimilated ones like Ara... The problem with his kind, however, is that once they 'assimilate' they continue sticking around to give us 'advise.'

If I was to describe Ara's literary work with one word it would undoubtedly be - GARBAGE

[arabaliozian]

x

Sunday, January 06, 2008
*********************************************
CROSS-EXAMINATION
*****************************************
Socrates, Jesus, Galileo, Solzhenitsyn -- there are several important and revealing parallels in their lives:
They were right, their accusers wrong.
Their accusers outnumbered their defenders.
They were honest men and their accusers charlatans or ignoramuses. They wanted to share their understanding of truth or reality, their accusers acted in defense of authority, dogma, and power.
All they asked for is tolerance. What they got was is the threat of torture, exile, and death.
Next time you disagree with someone, ask yourself:
Am I on the side of power or truth?
Do I speak as I do because I represent the majority?
Do I consider dissent a capital offense?
Am I for tolerance or intolerance?
Am I on the side of executioners?
Deep inside somewhere, do I harbor a killer?
#

[Virgil]

Re: notes / comments

The aforementioned is the fundamental reasons why Ara has been rejected from the Armenian society. While Armenians adore, even worship, their poets and writers - Kaputikyan, Sevag, Charents, Isahakian, Tumanyan, Raffi, Emin - just to name a few, this "Ara Baliozian" character remains virtually nameless. And that is why we see his anger, his disgruntlement and his self-hate.

This is so true, we gave him too much credit on these boards, now that you mention it, how can this idiot be even considered a "intellectual"? If were to consider the definition of intellectual to be:

"An intellectual is one who tries to use his or her intellect to work, study, reflect, speculate, or ask and answer questions about a wide variety of different ideas"

Certainly, Ara tries to "use his intellect", but he fails on a couple points, the first and most important being the fact that he never asks nor answers questions that are pertinent to a basic intellectual discussion, it is either his way or the highway. What kind of discussions can you have with a individual that on a basic level can not understand fundimental concepts of economics and politics? All his discussion amount to are bashing Armenians, their values, and their leaders, essentially, three of the most important components of patriotism.

Two, in general, his topics focus on a narrow topic usually connected to the "failures" of Armenians and furthermore, he constantly is time and place bound. Always talks about the "leaders during the genocide", well, he better get his ass out of his head and join the the modern age because Armenians are not a pueblo people anymore, we have a state.

Essentially, the conclusion I have reach with regards to Ara, in a nutshell, Ara Baliozian spent his entire career writing about his "greatness", but failed to understand that men are not considered "great individuals" by their own self promotion. Alexander, Napoleon, and etc ... were great men by action not by self promotion. Alexander fought in the front of the army, he did not lead from the tent, likewise, Napoleon first started his career towards empire as a soldier, both never asked nor begged anyone to follow them, they lead only to be followed. Even during the modern age, we follow leaders because they have show us how to lead, how to be great, and are living and breathing examples of greatness, they are the embodiment of leadership.

Conversly, Ara Baliozian wants to be considered a "great man" and "leader" when in fact he has never lead anyone but his ego towards victory, he is a intellectual midget that has spent 72 years of his life just wasting away, reading and writing, where was when Armenia needed independence? When their electricity was out? When they were fighting a two front war? I will tell you where he was, he was in Canada, writing about the failures of Armenians, he was attacking the very same driving force and individuals that were bleeding and dieing on the balltefield so that this prick in Canada can be proud to call himself a Armenian. Disgusting, utterly disgusting, he brings stagnation and death to the Armenian people, not progression and life. Anyone that follows him, will be lead to death as a Armenian.

And after having read so many books and learned so many languages, what has he accomplished? Absolutly nothing, his attempt to get to a underlying idea revolves around self hatred of himself, his people, and his identity. Finally, his work, his work is full of other men's ideas, there exists nothing original.

You know who I consider men that have the right to critisize the Armenian people and ask them to change if he were alive today? Monte Melkonian and the rest of the Armenian fighters that bleed and died for their country and countrymen or else, all these half ass demagogs that you see coming to Armenian television with a "ultimate vision" of what "Armenians should be like" fall flat on their ass, they just want a podium to spew out nonsense and, again, when asked to put their money where their mouth is, you will soon find that more than half the time they will cook up a ridiculous excuse as to why their actions as the "preacher" is justified versus the actions of the flock.

[arabaliozian]

Re: notes / comments

Monday, January 07, 2008
************************************************** ***
CONTRIBUTION
*******************************
Perhaps my sole contribution to society has been my success in annoying some of our charlatans -- judging by the frequency and intensity of their insults.
*
MY EPITAPH
************************
“Here lies a man who may have been the cause of a few moments’ insomnia to a handful of loudmouth hooligans parading as superpatriots.”
*
DISAGREEMENT
************************************
Does disagreement justify insulting and alienating a fellow Armenian? If we use our past as an index: yes. And therein lies the source of all our misfortunes. It follows, the only way to change the line of our destiny is to replace that yes with a resounding NO! A disagreement, be it religious or ideological, should not be seen as an end but only the beginning of a dialogue leading to compromise and consensus (which does not mean agreement but a willingness to advance in the same direction). He who says disagreement and consensus are mutually exclusive concepts becomes an agent of the enemy and his divide-and-rule tactics.
To those who assert everything I write is an insult to the nation, I say, why should reason and common sense be an insult to anyone but a deranged mind? And to those who say I should ignore the words of hooligans, I suggest our hooligans echo the sentiments and thoughts of our dividers, that is to say, the propaganda of our bosses and bishops – I don’t include benefactors because their only source of authority is the bottom line.
*
Somewhere Paul Valéry speaks of man’s primitive belief in explanations. Any explanation, no matter how absurd, is better than no explanation, he tells us. Hence the undying popularity of astrology, and after astrology, the universal appeal of propaganda.
*
AN EXPLANATION
******************************
When an old Indian once predicted a bad winter, he was asked how he knew. His reply: “White man make big wood pile.”
#