Politics & Stuff

[Emir 105]

Hey you hypocritical aussies, Je Suis Scott McIntyre, anyone?

1) It's their land, not yours. They've lived there for over 2500 years, long before the Ottoman Empire ever existed.

2) No one here has any interest for or against Turkey or Armenia, while the people telling you it didn't happen, namely your government, have every interest and hide the facts. Think about it, who is more likely to be lying?

3) If you really are interested in history, there have been some incredible academic work, especially in the past 30 years or so, on this subject. There have also been some incredibly well researched books. I'd recommend "The Burning Tigris" and "Black Dog of Fate" or you can even read "A Shameful Act" that is actually written by a Turkish historian if you want to learn about the motivations behind the genocide.

4) As a Lebanese, I naturally know a lot of Armenians and have spoken to children of survivals. And hearing the accounts from survivors from all over the world, you can see that the stories are always very consistent and hence are incredibly unlikely to be made up. Actually, I don't know of a single notable neutral historian who does not recognize the Armenian genocide simply because the evidence is overwhelming. As is the case for several other atrocities committed by the Ottoman empire during that period including right here in Lebanon.

Bottom line is, if your only source of information is what you are told and taught by the authority that has an interest in lying to you then you are hardly an expert on the subject. And this isn't aimed as an attack on you and certainly doesn't make the Turkish people "bad", every nation has its "black history", but there is no sense except in living up to it.

My point is: ALWAYS question what authority tells you, my friend.

I stop reading after your first quote it's their lands? Last time i checked it says Turkey not Armenia and it doesnt really matter to me how many years they lived there. We came and took it. That's all matters. Its like saying we ouuuw we lost the game but we played better!

That is my point mate.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

I stop reading after your first quote it's their lands? Last time i checked it says Turkey not Armenia and it doesnt really matter to me how many years they lived there. We came and took it. That's all matters. Its like saying we ouuuw we lost the game but we played better!

That is my point mate.

It's not a football match it's people's lives?

While your lack of empathy for other human beings disturbs me deeply, it is clear that you enjoy your indoctrination too much to even consider other other perspectives. Shame.

[Emir 105]

It's not a football match it's people's lives?

While your lack of empathy for other human beings disturbs me deeply, it is clear that you enjoy your indoctrination too much to even consider other other perspectives. Shame.

I didnt say anything about enjoying anything..

[Emir 105]

I didnt say anything about enjoying something.

And if genocide happened, i'm not proud of it either i dont want anyone to misunderstand me.

[We Hate Scouse 10,261]

I stop reading after your first quote it's their lands? Last time i checked it says Turkey not Armenia and it doesnt really matter to me how many years they lived there. We came and took it. That's all matters. Its like saying we ouuuw we lost the game but we played better!

That is my point mate.

"We came and took it" so that completely invalidates your first point. It's not yours.

The reason you stopped reading is because you know he's right and you have absolutely nothing to argue back with...

[CHOULO19 24,332]

And if genocide happened, i'm not proud of it either i dont want anyone to misunderstand me.

Well, that's a start, at least

[Emir 105]

All i'm saying is i actually didnt do any research about it. But when you say its not your lands its theirs i'm gonna stop you right there. Take care

[Spike 12,049]

Hey you hypocritical aussies, Je Suis Scott McIntyre, anyone?

He is just an idiot that is shitting on people that gave their lives for something they believe in. The ANZAC's military actions of WWI and WWII were not born of any imperialistic needs. The first war was a bunch of kids volunteering to fight a war they knew nothing about, the second was to defend Australia from Imperial Japan. ANZAC Day is to remember the courage and very few beautiful parts of very dark times. Not to 'cultify' who shot who or what atrocities were committed. There is a reason why people like John Simpson Kirkpatrick are remembered, not the guy who shots the most Turks.

Secondly, the fact that he brings up the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki show an ignorance of history and what ANZAC Days stands for. I for one, don't see a bunch of people saluting the fucking Enola Gay on ANZAC Day. What does it have to do with Australia? Australians didn't build the bomb, drop and kill a lot of people. Australians didn't give the order to murder a bunch of innocents. Hiroshima wasn't even meant to be bombed, but a cloudy conditions caused the pilot to make a call and he made a fucking terrible one.

Thirdly, he crucifies the ANZACs as rapists, thieves and murderers. Not only is this an unsubstantiated claim but he drags the names of those that fought against these things through the mud. He speaks of other nations as they are not guilty of these disgusting atrocities. He should criticise the entire human race, not the ANZACs. He mentions the bombings of Japan but doesn't acknowledge the Rape of Nanking.

[cosmicway 1,261]

It's a strange thing with the Armenians and I 'm curious why Turkey responds negatively.

It happened in 1915 and it was partly instigated by the Germans. World war I German militarists were not nazis but were n't far from it either.
Later, Kemal Ataturk the founder of the modern Turkish state, condemned the atrocities and punished numerous of the perpetrators.
In today's world if you ask the Germans about the holocaust, they condemn it. If you ask the Italians about the torpedoing of Elli flagship by the fascists, they condemn it. So why Turkey has a problem about what is in any case a historical fact ?

[CHOULO19 24,332]

He is just an idiot that is shitting on people that gave their lives for something they believe in. The ANZAC's military actions of WWI and WWII were not born of any imperialistic needs. The first war was a bunch of kids volunteering to fight a war they knew nothing about, the second was to defend Australia from Imperial Japan. ANZAC Day is to remember the courage and very few beautiful parts of very dark times. Not to 'cultify' who shot who or what atrocities were committed. There is a reason why people like John Simpson Kirkpatrick are remembered, not the guy who shots the most Turks.

Secondly, the fact that he brings up the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki show an ignorance of history and what ANZAC Days stands for. I for one, don't see a bunch of people saluting the fucking Enola Gay on ANZAC Day. What does it have to do with Australia? Australians didn't build the bomb, drop and kill a lot of people. Australians didn't give the order to murder a bunch of innocents. Hiroshima wasn't even meant to be bombed, but a cloudy conditions caused the pilot to make a call and he made a fucking terrible one.

Thirdly, he crucifies the ANZACs as rapists, thieves and murderers. Not only is this an unsubstantiated claim but he drags the names of those that fought against these things through the mud. He speaks of other nations as they are not guilty of these disgusting atrocities. He should criticise the entire human race, not the ANZACs. He mentions the bombings of Japan but doesn't acknowledge the Rape of Nanking.

Assume that the above is all true, does it mean that he should lose his right for free speech and expression because his opinion is unpopular, even ludicrous? Should he lose his job because of his political interpretations?

Charlie Hebdo is a racist propaganda machine, does that mean they deserved to die? As long as freedom of speech is onlu protected when we agree with the content then it's not freedom, just sensoring.

[Spike 12,049]

Assume that the above is all true, does it mean that he should lose his right for free speech and expression because his opinion is unpopular, even ludicrous? Should he lose his job because of his political interpretations?

Charlie Hebdo is a racist propaganda machine, does that mean they deserved to die? As long as freedom of speech is onlu protected when we agree with the content then it's not freedom, just sensoring.

I wasn't even talking about free speech. Of course he can say what he wants but he can deal with the consequences. The consequence is that the SBS doesn't want to associate with his opinions and they don't want him representing them. It's that simple. Same goes for any job where you represent an orgnaisation. He is an adult, he must take responsibility for his actions. It's not like his twitter account has been deleted, his posts redacted and his voicebox destroyed.

Free speech isn't the issue here. There isn't an issue at all. Some guy in the media voiced his opinion, his employers disagreed and he was fired. The entire incident will be forgotten in a week.

His right to free speech isn't even in jeopardy. FFS, blown way out of proportion.

I mean if you are so concerned with free speech, then stop banning people on here. Same thing.

[Spike 12,049]

People need to understand that will every action comes a consequence. Free speech is not exclusive to this rule. Say what you wish, but there will always be a consequence. Some weightier than others.

[Spike 12,049]

If I were to work for and represent a company and I said something that conflicted with their core philosophy, i wouldn't be surprised if I were fired.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

I wasn't even talking about free speech. Of course he can say what he wants but he can deal with the consequences. The consequence is that the SBS doesn't want to associate with his opinions and they don't want him representing them. It's that simple. Same goes for any job where you represent an orgnaisation. He is an adult, he must take responsibility for his actions. It's not like his twitter account has been deleted, his posts redacted and his voicebox destroyed.

Free speech isn't the issue here. There isn't an issue at all. Some guy in the media voiced his opinion, his employers disagreed and he was fired. The entire incident will be forgotten in a week.

His right to free speech isn't even in jeopardy. FFS, blown way out of proportion.

I mean if you are so concerned with free speech, then stop banning people on here. Same thing.

People need to understand that will every action comes a consequence. Free speech is not exclusive to this rule. Say what you wish, but there will always be a consequence. Some weightier than others.

Yes and the cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo lost their lives as a consequence of their racist opinions and provocation and insulting of people with a certain faith. Does that make it okay?

"His freedom of speech is not at jeopardy" yet he just lost his job and had his life messed up because of a political opinion that has absolutely nothing to do with his work.

NO. Company should NOT be able to sack people based on opinions and beliefs especially when they have nothing to do with the actual work. That is at the very core of the freedom of speech, expression and beliefs. Just like companies in the USA for example should not be allowed to sack people because they are democrats or republicans, and are punished if they refuse to hire qualified people that are Hindu or homosexual and should not be able to choose if they serve customers that are transsexual or black.

So this is at the very heart of freedom and civil rights and the hypocrisy of when and for whom they seem to apply or don't according to whether the opinion lies inside or outside the state approved narrow margin of allowed opinions in which 'democracy' as we know it only exists.

[Spike 12,049]

Eh, you are right. I just don't think it's unreasonable for someone in the media to lose their jobs like that. The media is just a different entity than every day life.

[DDA 9,570]

UKIP??

[We Hate Scouse 10,261]

UKIP??

Is a wasted vote.

Tories. They've started something, they've made change, they've reversed the destructive labour governments unforgivable mistakes.

Not to forget it would stop a Labour SNP coalition.

Up the Tory Lib Dem coalition

[DDA 9,570]

Is a wasted vote.

Tories. They've started something, they've made change, they've reversed the destructive labour governments unforgivable mistakes.

Not to forget it would stop a Labour SNP coalition.

Up the Tory Lib Dem coalition

It won't be a wasted vote. There's probably no chance at all of Nigel Farage becoming PM, but if enough people vote then the Tory seats will have no choice and will be forced to adopt some of UKiP policies.

There's alot of what UKiP has to say that should be taken seriously and into consideration.

The backing of Nigel Farage is growing rapidly because he says what everyone else is afraid to say.