Post by OghuzKhan on Jun 25, 2009 8:20:30 GMT -5
more wordplay BS from you , you are trying to limit and control how people speak or discuss things under the guise of some supposed political correctness. I am posting in a forum where people are having a discussion I am not writing a University paper you idiot. Have a look around you slander is occuring all the time on these boards. I have already explained the purpose of presenting information about JM and said it was mostly to indicate his bias and pro Turkishness this also included a suggestion that he was on some payroll, that suggestion didnt originate from me but I have explained it is not proven untrue and nor do I necessarily believe its not true, ok idiot.
Oh, Oszkar seems to be acting like an idiot himself
I am not trying to limit or control anything. You are free to do anything you may want to provided you can substantiate them with evidence and not by slanderous rhetoric or trash words with no substance. YOU CLAIMED McCarthy is on the payroll and not the garbage article you pasted. The trash article you pasted says he received academic grants from ITS and this is total different thing than being on the payroll. As I explained ITS had never sponsored a study on the Armenian issue. It is based in Georgetown University and has given grants to people like Enging Akarli who call it Genocide. Its board members included people like Fatma Muge Gocek who calls it genocide. This is something quite far from being on the payroll. Following your logic, these people (who call it genocide) are on the payroll too. Yet you are speechless in giving any satisfactory explanation to this and not mention the fact that you have FAILED to back up what you claimed.
First and foremost my own views about JM's bias were established from simply reading his article which was the first uncourced post in first of this thread I have already spoken on this and my specific commentary about certain paragraph that shows his bias. Then I went on to discuss how he suggests Armenians and Turks should be best friends that didnt occur but suggests they are not due to the treacherous Armenians ... then I went on to give examples of things Armenians had reason not to feel happy about , then followed these words with post yes from Wiki article .
Circular logic. I did not take up any issue with your comment on his article or anything. I myself noted he is pro-Turkish. What I took issue with was that you claimed he is on the payroll. This is a serious accusation with grave implications. Well I ask you simply to prove it. Up to now you failed to do it and time and again keep mentioning his statement or something else other that BACKING what you claimed. In addition you have made your mindset and moral standards quite clear with the way you expressed your view on “payment” being normal thing.
so what you already character assasinate Balakian and Taner Achkam , you did try to do the first thing I knew you will try to do
after my post you did look to discredit them in any way, you focus on few words they wrote or about them
after my post you did look to discredit them in any way, you focus on few words they wrote or about them
I don’t character assassinate them. I provide solid evidence showing that they are unreliable as a point reference. My sources for doing this is based on how they manipulate their sources which is not exactly something that an honest scholar would do.
If I wanted to pick on their personality (rather than what they wrote) I would do exactly what you have done. There are plenty of rumors about Akçam getting paid by the Armenians and that many writings about his past accusing him of being a former terrorist. Yet I never used such sleazy tactics as you did. Unlike you, I would not make accusations which I cannot prove.
but you ignore or dont comment on majority of what they have said , so dont pretend you are not full yourself with double standards I have seen already many example that I could shown already in all your posts.
Oh you truly amazing . You pointed to a few points and I addressed them. These were
1- The Stupid law in Turkey and McCarthy’s alleged speechlessnesss: I have made it clear that I do not support that particular law and criticize the enactment of such a law in Turkey. And I pointed out how your unreliable sources manipulated the video so as not include McCarthy’s critical comment on Turkey despite your stupid and unfounded claim that he was speechless.
2- Prosecution of people in Turkey with critical opinions. I criticized as frankly as possible such practices in Turkey and noted that Turkey needs to do a lot more to improve itself. SEE what I wrote above:
I am not favoring any sort prosecution or imprisonment of people for their critical or any sort opinions as long as it does not lead to violence. So there is no excuse for Turkey or any other country to do engage in such nasty practices.
3- You claimed something on the basis of an REUTERS article which YOU have not even SEEN. I pointed you the article and asked you prove your case from it. Instead you preferred squibble over the link I posted and preferred to engage in scholastic exercise rather than proving your point.
So I addressed the issues and then I reminded you that while you unjustly criticize McCarthy (who criticized the law) of speechlessness, your man Balakian defends such laws and this is something contradictory for your position. It is not exactly the type of source one can accuse somebody of speechlessness.
After addressing these issues, I provided some solid indications showing that they are dishonest. This is based on critique in an Academic Journal and a further critique by a former Oxford University Professor who characterizes Balakian’s claims as being “grotesque” etc. Another academic article showing how Akcam manipulated his sources changing the words “pillage-plunder” into “massacre.”
Now you claim that I ignore what they said. You are truly unbelievable.
Get real idiot, scholarly integrity , it might sound nice on paper come down to the real world. What happens in reality is not a result of my moral standards you fool.
Oh how funny, Ozskar is trying to cover up his poor understanding of academic world and lack of moral standards, by pointing that I am unrealistic. And then while claiming this, he cannot provide any substantiation for his unfounded slanderous claims.
grave implications lol what do you think will possibly happen from my implications you fool. If JM has already attained this reputation well before I stated anythuing then what has that got to do with me.
Yes grave implications, you are trying to discredit someone as being on the payroll without having any evidence for it. I would like remind you further that he was not the only person that you implied to be on the payroll you moron.
look how you portay in many instances what I have said and what I have explained about what I have said are not in many cases the same thing , you are one who does twist and imply a certain implication or try to say I mean exactly something eg ' mass murder" or its same way how you called me crusader same how you mixed words about my comment "he was on payroll of Turkish Gov" their are several examples how you dont accuratly portay what I said and meant.
Sheer demagogy! What I claimed was concerning for your failure to back up what you claimed. You claimed he is on the payroll and yet you failed. You claimed most of the civilians in Anatolia died in the enemy fire, (which is only laughable), yet you failed. You claimed most of the Armenians in the Caucasus (numbering at 1.2 million) were ex Ottomans that fled during the time of 1890s massacres, yet you failed to prove it. Stupidly enough, you expect me to counter-prove some of them, with YOU yourself as the one who claimed them cannot back them up with any solid source.
I have explained the situation of my comments about JM too many times and you still cant get it so dont bother.
You have explained something which has nothing to do with what I took issue. You claimed he is on the payroll and yet you cant prove it. Now you twist right and left commenting he is biased. Fine but this has nothing do with your claim.
Why you are so obsessed with him , is he your idol?
No he is not. But it is great fun to take down the ignorant and howling idiots who claim things which they cannot prove and see how they get low and twist in the process.
I have explained myself I dont need to back up anything , if you are so obsessed with implications that have been made by others or my oppinion then spend all your time to try prove they are not true.
If you accuse some of something, then you have to back it up. Likewise when you claim something you have back it up with solid sources. Up to now, you have failed in doing this. You claimed McCarthy is on the payroll and you failed to prove it. You claimed he is speechless about the stupid laws in Turkey which was wrong and which you could not prove. You claimed he is accused in a Reuters article, withouth EVEN seeing the article and again you failed to prove it. You claimed something so gibberish as “most of the Armenians in the Caucasus were ex Ottoman Armenians” WITHOUT even knowing the number of the Armenians in the Caucausus.
this is good example how you mix things up , I said based on your logic about how you imply something I say means something else , then because you have said A it means B eg that Arm masacres were justified, my point was to show how you reason and how this was a double standard , that point I made was about double standards.
No it is your limited grasp of things. You were reminded of the massacre of Balkan Muslims and your argument was to claim something on Ottoman Conquest/control. I did not mention the Armenian massacres on Muslims as a response to the Armenian deportation, massacres and the tragedy that befall on them. You dismissed the Armenian massacres of Muslims and only upon this I brought evidence of it. This is the christal clear example of your double and twisted moral standards. In addition you contradict yourself in that you yourself mention Ottoman Conquest/Control to make it understandable in the case of Balkan Muslims and at the same time you complain of the Turkish official position for invoking the argument on Armenian treachery.
I said I am not certain about to what degree massacres occured ifyou consider that a dispute well call it what ever you like. I used the word supposed massacres for that reason, i.e which massacres and how many. Thats a different thing to a general denial of their being massacres which is what you have implied.
Using your logic, the Turks in this forum or elsewhere can speak of supposed massacres of Armenians. This is a stupid logic. And you said the civilians were killed mostly by enemy fire which is tantamount to denying the massacres committed on Muslims.
a double standard if it were true that I justyfy killing of civillians which was your assertion I have stated before you even made that assertion that I dont. much of what I had posted in beggining of this thread was reactionary , and was reactionary to people making posts that suggest what happend was justified due to claims of treachery and amongst reacting to comments like ... Turks are innocent Armenians got what they deserved and "Take that Armenians piece of s hit" etc so keep that in mind.
most of the rest your post here is just the same rubbish about stuff we spoke about several time, often in many cases with you deciding what I meant and using specific implications that are not accurate to what I have said or meant , and we have already gone over this . I will focus next post to discuss further the topics which I have said I am researching and relating to the original flow of initial points discussion of this thread from its beginning.
most of the rest your post here is just the same rubbish about stuff we spoke about several time, often in many cases with you deciding what I meant and using specific implications that are not accurate to what I have said or meant , and we have already gone over this . I will focus next post to discuss further the topics which I have said I am researching and relating to the original flow of initial points discussion of this thread from its beginning.
As I said before I only judge what you wrote. So you go judge such people rather justifying your position to me. You try to make it look understandable in the case of the Balkan on the basis of some stupid remarks about the Ottoman conquest or Control with arguments which had nothing with the time period and , by invoking such stupid claims you justify and legitimize it. Whilst on the other hand, you complain of or criticize the official Turkish position “well it is generally amongst the views takien by official Turkish position , that the Armenians were treacherous etc” And it is a clear example of your double standard.
As rergards to the rest of what I wrote: No not really. These are the issues that your biased character with twisted moral standards prefers not to counter. You always claim things which you cannot prove. And when you asked the prove them YOU twist and resort to demagogy. Still you could not prove anything you claimed. You dont even know the number of Armenians in the Caucasus yet you claim most of them were ex Armenians. Truly amazing.