It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

French lawmakers face ire of Turkey in vote on punishing denial of genocide of Armenians

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


I don't see that as a justifiable reason in my opinion, do you?




posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by GLontra
 


I'm not denying that happened though.

If we don't recognise the mistakes of the past, we are condemned to repeat them. Anyway, the original source used here said that the crime would be to "deny or “outrageously minimize” the killing". This doesn't mean that elements of it cannot be legitimately questioned, does it?



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 07:57 AM
link   
You know what, I almost f***king respect genocide deniers because even though most of them are bigoted jerks, at least they have the bravery to question the history that is drilled into our heads. Even though I accept the basic things we are told about the Jewish and Armenian genocides, I do think there are some things that we need to question about ALL historical events.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by lampsalot
You know what, I almost f***king respect genocide deniers because even though most of them are bigoted jerks, at least they have the bravery to question the history that is drilled into our heads. Even though I accept the basic things we are told about the Jewish and Armenian genocides, I do think there are some things that we need to question about ALL historical events.


There is no bravery in denying millions died. Only ignorance and bigotry.

Draw a conclusion from a historical event or action, fine. Just don't ignore the evidence.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
It is now punishable by jail in France to deny the Armenian genocide. Denying a mass genocide is very ignorant, but to be imprisoned for saying it is just as sinister.
edit on 22-12-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)


It is no more ignorant of a person than denying any other matter of history, provided that thing in question actually occurred - something which cannot be reliably established if free discussion of it is prohibited under law or by prevailing moral sentiment.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 08:21 AM
link   
With half the world going broke from corruption, you would think lawmakers would try to do something that has a positive impact on the majority for once in their miserable lives.

I wonder how much the French taxpayers paid for this insanity.

I wonder how much more it will cost to enforce it.

Do they have lobbyists over there too ?



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by PoeteMaudit
 


But the point is that the Armenian Genocide has been established - it isn't something that 'might' have happened. It did, over a significant period of time - individuals were targetted based on their ethnicity and religious belief.

Whether the death toll is 600,000 or 1.5 million, it would still present as clearly falling into the genocidal category. Questioning where the death toll lies between these two polls would clearly not qualify as breaking this law as it neither denies nor outrageously minimises the event. Questioning whether it happened at all, quite rightly, would.

edit on 22-12-2011 by ComeFindMe because: Punctuation



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


It's pretty safe to say that Israeli lobbyists have been active in France for a very long time. If anyone wants a translation of the French quotes let me know, as I speak french.


The Israeli Lobby in France

In his new book, Roland Dumas – the Foreign Minister of France from 1984 to 1986 and again from 1988 to 1993 under President François Mitterrand – reveals the level of influence Israel has in France. The book is entitled “Assault: 50 Years of Shared Secrets with François Mitterrand” ["Coups et Blessures: 50 ans de secrets partatgés avec François Mitterrand"] and apparently delves into the pressure that the ex- French President received from Israel and the Israeli lobby. The most telling anecdote concerned the President’s willingness to meet with Yasser Arafat in the late 80′s, in which Mitterrand was apparently willing to meet with the Palestinian leader until he was pressured by Israel:




The Jewish lobby, as Mitterrand called it, worked ardently. The pressures were very strong when I announced that I intended to meet Arafat during his visit to the European Parliament in September 1988. I obtained permission from President Mitterrand to greet him [Arafat] after painful negotiations. After relating his concerns to me, he told me: ok, but you will assume the responsibility… maybe he wanted to insinuate that I would be fired if things went badly. “Le lobby juif, comme l’appelait Mitterrand, œuvrait ardemment. Les pressions étaient très fortes lorsque j’ai annoncé que je comptais rencontrer Arafat durant sa visite au parlement européen en septembre 1988. J’ai obtenu du président Mitterrand après de pénibles tractations la permission de l’accueillir. Après m’avoir répété ses mises en garde, il m’a dit : bon d’accord, mais tu en assumeras la responsabilité…peut-être voulait il insinuer par-là ma démission si les choses tournaient mal.”


Dumas goes on to say that:




The Israelis has their way in France, and manipulated the French information services as they wanted “Les Israéliens en font à leur guise en France, et manipulent les services de renseignements français (DST) comme bon leur semble”


And



I do not agree with Israeli policies, I was always loyal to the principle of equality established by General de Gaulle in the Middle East. The Arab people have the right to be respected. The current Israeli (Zionist) policies are not going down the right path. “je ne suis pas d’accord avec la politique israélienne, j’ai toujours été fidèle au principe d’équilibre instauré par le général de Gaule au Moyen Orient. Les peuples arabes ont droit au respect. La politique israélienne actuelle inspirée des activités proches des


Of course, all of this must be taken with a grain of salt. I have yet to read the book (only reviews here and here – French) so I have been unable to read the context of these quotations. However, assuming that this Arafat story is not fictional and that the former Foreign Minister has evidence to support his claim that Israel “controls France” (“Israël contrôle la France,”) it is clear that the United States is not the only country with a strong Israeli lobby.

Of course, with the current French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, shifting French policy to more Israeli-friendly footing due to what many have deemed an affinity for Zionism, the Israeli lobby in France might no longer have to pressure the Élysée palace.



edit on 22-12-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Thank you for another reason to be happy this Christmas.

In this case, I am happy that I am not Turkish or French.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   
Punishing ignorance and free speech... great move France... NOT.

Freaking politicians, trying to control what everyone is thinking or saying...



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by PoeteMaudit
But the point is that the Armenian Genocide has been established - it isn't something that 'might' have happened.


Many would dispute that statement, and not only Turks.


Questioning whether it happened at all, quite rightly, would.

edit on 22-12-2011 by ComeFindMe because: Punctuation


"Quite rightly." Thank you for clarifying the sentiment. This is a morality law, which belongs alongside those against adultery, sodomy, or blasphemy. Then again, the historical discourse on "genocide", particularly that in the 20th century, is one long exercise in moralising, the very existence of which is a disgrace to the name of objective historiography. Nobody has had his doctorate revoked, for, say, questioning the "genocides" in colonial South America, been publicly disgraced for revising the history of the "Burning Times", or been thrown in prison for uttering the philosophical truism that any moral judgment of Caesar's Gallic "genocide" is entirely a matter subjectivity.
edit on 22-12-2011 by PoeteMaudit because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by PoeteMaudit
 



The evidence supporting the argument that the Armenian Genocide took place far overwhelms the counter evidence.

I would suggest that a simple denial of evidence does not constitute an appropriate defence of any such actions. Discounting the validity of one genocide on the basis that others have been, is neither fair nor rational.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
tallarmeniantale.com...


Other side of the story.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by 23432
 


I'm not in agreement with that link because it claims the Armenian genocide to be a myth, which it clearly is not a myth. It did happen, to deny it is very ignorant, but should not be punishable by Jail. I hope that site isn't based out of France or the host may be in some hot water



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by 23432
 


I'm not in agreement with that link because it claims the Armenian genocide to be a myth, which it clearly is not a myth. It did happen, to deny it is very ignorant, but should not be punishable by Jail. I hope that site isn't based out of France or the host may be in some hot water



Do you ever ask yourself as to what happened to the bones of those who were killed ?

You do know that the human bones don't just disappear into thin air .

So if a Turk gets up and asks for the evidence of these killings , there is no mass graves to show for .

Seriously , where do you think these bones of the dead human beings disappeared to ?



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by 23432
 


You'll also be aware that many of the bodies were dumped in rivers - many more were strewn across the vast landscapes that groups of Armenians were forced to march over.

Are you suggesting that all the evidence - and that's not just Armenian, but Russian, Nazi, Turkish, UK and US etc - is fabricated?



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by 23432
 


I have never asked myself that question.

Are you saying that you believe the Armenian genocide never happened? If this is what you believe, may I please also ask what brought you to believe this?



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by 23432
 


You'll also be aware that many of the bodies were dumped in rivers - many more were strewn across the vast landscapes that groups of Armenians were forced to march over.

Are you suggesting that all the evidence - and that's not just Armenian, but Russian, Nazi, Turkish, UK and US etc - is fabricated?


If those bodies were dumped in to rivers , then I would suggest that it would be easier to find them .

Only lawfull trial of these killings were held at Malta by the British back in 1916 .

Brits had access to all the materials and yet found all the Ottoman officers ( 150+ of them ) innocent .

So you are sure that these " Evidences " are not politically motivated ?

Furthermore , ask yourself as to why Armenians are not able to bring a case against the Turks in a COURT OF LAW .

If there was a Genocide , all it takes is to take the evidence to a court for jury to decide .

Yet , this is not happening .

I suggest that you read the other side of these allegations .

And bones of human beings don't disappear in less then 100 years .

There is not even ONE document showing the orders to kill off Armenians .

Not even ONE mass grave is unearthed .

Yet it is accepted that the killings were a Genocide !

I think the true picture would be more akin to a civil war within the Ottoman Empire's dying days .

If you are accepting these claims as true , then you are not listening to both side of the story .



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by PoeteMaudit
 
The evidence supporting the argument that the Armenian Genocide took place far overwhelms the counter evidence.


Again, there are many who would deny that, not least of all on the basis of what constitutes "evidence".


I would suggest that a simple denial of evidence does not constitute an appropriate defence of any such actions.


Well, never mind that I think you're demanding a defence while at the same time presupposing that no such defence can exist, but assuming that this sort of speech, or "action" as you call it, has to be "defended" in the first place. This argument is a moral one, and I'm not interested in disputing it.


Discounting the validity of one genocide on the basis that others have been, is neither fair nor rational.


How can a "genocide" be valid or invalid? If you mean the validity of the claim of historicity, nobody has done so. If you mean the "moral validity" of their suffering, that is subjective by its very nature, and the "fairness" you speak of no less. It certainly seems reasonable to me to question why challenging one "fact of history" can land one in prison, and another not, not to mention why the sufferings of some dead peoples appear to be privileged over those of others.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by 23432
 


I have never asked myself that question.

Are you saying that you believe the Armenian genocide never happened? If this is what you believe, may I please also ask what brought you to believe this?


You should ask yourself that question .

Lack of evidence brings me to my current stand . Should there be a new evidence to be found , of course I would change my stand and would accept that it was indeed a genocide .

No Bones = No Evidence .

And before replying ,please think about the logistics of disposing an alleged 1.5 million human beings .

Simply put , it is impossible to kill off that many people yet leave no evidence of these killings .

No eyewitnesses , No government documents , No remains of the dead , anywhere to be found .

Do you know how difficult it is to get rid of a Human Bone ?






edit on 22-12-2011 by 23432 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join