h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

>Okay. And you're right, Arnie. But if it eventually passes Congress then it will be seen internationally as the US viewpoint, not just Bush's and his cronies.

Except that, as I mentioned, 40 US states have recognised it as genocide.

What? Let's clarify - the bill before Congress *would* recognize the genocide.

Hi Arnie,

Yes I did, and in response to Psycorp Googled a bit too. See post 28.

I still find it hard to comprehend the wholesale breaking of treaties by the Us Govt., those involved never seemed to grasp that they were dealing with people with a better natural undestanding and higher moral standards than their own.

Different standards I grant you, but in my view superior to the white folks, driven by greed. I suppose you could argue that gold, and land being the objective for removing the Indians, was marginally less horrible than trying to kill them for their beliefs? but it wouldn't wash with me.

Thanks Arnie

Novo

Novo, you're being slippery. Why did you ask "Who's tears?" then, in response to my post? If you read the link, the question couldn't be sincere.

"I still find it hard to comprehend the wholesale breaking of treaties by the Us Govt., those involved never seemed to grasp that they were dealing with people with a better natural undestanding and higher moral standards than their own."

This makes no sense. How do you make the connection that b/c the US govt broke a treaty they didn't know they were dealing with a people with higher moral standards. You left something out...


Lastly, what does your continuing rant have to do with anything related to the armenian genocide? Or even any of the recent topic drift?

Hi Arnie,

1.Slippery? Well to be honest I googled first and read the link last night, a crime I presume.

2.OK , lets say they assumed the Indians were inferior. Or perhaps they just broke the treaties because in truth they never intended to keep them.

3.Thirdly , perhaps nothing. And if you think I was ranting you are mistaken.

Novo

"1.Slippery? Well to be honest I googled first and read the link last night, a crime I presume."

You still haven't answered what you meant by your question "Who's tears?". And let's remember the original question - do the teach about the atrocities committed by the US against the native americans? The answer being yes.

Hi Arnie,

1 I didn't read your link first.
2 Had I done so the question would have been irrelevant and pointless
3 I responded too quickly to your reference about your History Book
because I am 'working' - I thought it could have referred to the
the wagon trains from the East
4 I am pleased that what was done to the native Americans is taught.

Novo

From what I can gather, congress has passed the bill despite the appeasement pleas of the Bush administration and Turkey has withdrawn its ambassador in protest.

Thanks Novo, I appreciate the clarity.

"On the other, there are laws in Turkey which prevent free speech and criminalise criticism of the country. On that basis, who gives a monkey's what a backward, repressive nation of barbarians calls an historical event?

You know, if you want to be taken seriously then I suggest you avoid any of this sort of borderline-racist tripe in future."

I assume your comment refers to the second sentence of the original post, because the first sentence is accurate. (Just for clarity)

Yes. I dealt with the first part of the post in the same reply.

Oh, sorry, I thought you meant *first paragraph*.

Yes, I know perfectly well that Turkey criminalises what the Turkish state regards as unpatriotic behaviour (which includes calling the genocide by its name) and stating that most certainly is not racist in any way, indeed only a crank would claim so.

My objection was to the description of Turks in general which was classic racist talk.

<<>
Is this a fact, Psycorp? How do you know this?
az>>

I've noticed there is a gaping hole in the awareness of Japanese people about certain events in their history.
My Japanese ex didn't know anything about it, and neither have others.

Similarly, BBC journalists in China found that kids in their teens and twenties had no inkling of the whole Tiennamen Square thing. When shown those famous pictures of the chap facing down that tank, they looked completely blank and hadn't a clue what it was about.

It seems all references to the massacre have been erased from the media and internet there.

<>

The writer Orhan Pamuk, Turkey's only Nobel Prize winner, was imprisoned for coming out and saying the country's denials of the Armenian atrocities amounted to a scandal, and that Turkey needed to face up to its past.

(He was awarded his Nobel Prize after his imprisonment.)

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article3010188.ece

The Japanese are rewriting their history again

We should never, ever deny /negate,/ disaffirm, genocide.


Amsterdam, Netherlands,

Alfredo

I can see why people make such a fuss about genocide but to be honest it is a classic case of distraction by Governments and a political football issue.

So the Democrats are trying to show how upstnding they are by waging a finger at Turkey. Id be a little more impressed if they took up the cases of people at risk of genocide more strongly.

What is genocide anyway? Is it a word reserved for people from one area, an ethnic group or people of just a general skin shade or who share a facial feature.

In Wales there was a small village who had an entire generation of children wiped out because the people who ran the local coal mine didnt care enough to make sure that the slag heap pile up precariously on the hill above their school prsented no danger.

Time and again big businesses are allowed to put peoples' lives at risk by governments more concerned with the bottom line than peoples' lives.
For the part of the British we have written out our involvement int he deaths of mllions of people.

We can all be clever after the fact and find "slippery" ways of mitigating or even denying our involvent. what would impress me is if the US government made reparations to the millions who are still suffering directly and inderctly from the policies adopted by past administrations. They wont though so this move stinks of hypocrisy and the Turkish government while wrong to argue against it are given a way to claim that they did nothing wrong.

As with all things the best way to teach is by example. It would cost nothing for the British Government to say a public sorry by placing an extra wreath for the civillians killed at Dresden. To Publicly apologise for this countries role in the slave trade and for stealing wealth from China, India and Africa. They wont and with this attitude in place it is hardly surprising that other countries wont do this either.

one love

Now *there's* a turn up for the books.

Genocide is the specific targeting for extermination of one group of people because of their race, culture or religion.

And you don't think that's so bad? You think it's not only ok for a country to deny it ever happened but to imprison anyone who mentions it?

Well well well.

A little eplanation for the hard of understanding amongst you.

"I can see why people make such a fuss about genocide

That's me acknowledgeing that other people think its bad and...

"Turkish government [are] wrong to argue against it"

that's me saying its bad that people deny doing it.

"To Publicly apologise for this countries role in the slave trade"

This is what I think the UK shold be doing about the genocide committed as an adjunct to slavery. Normally an apology follows something that is bad...ergo...I think it is bad.


"Id be a little more impressed if they took up the cases of people at risk of genocide more strongly.

Do you need me to draw you a picture?

After you have crammed all that into you poorly functioning mind you can come back and I'll teach you all about rhetorical questions which is something else you appear to have a problem comprehending.