From: cza@maestro.bellcore.com (Cengiz Akgun)
Subject: Re: What kind of people are Turks?
Organization: Bellcore (Red Bank, NJ)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 21:50:34 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.163811.19331@hasler.ascom.ch> kevinh@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch writes:
>
>In article <1992Aug17.141344.4142@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, cza@prefect.uucp (Cengiz Akgun) writes:
>
>
>Why for once will a Turk not address what is under discussion, is it
>that impossible?, rather than just insult the person he doesn't like
>the views/opinions of.

Insults on people making generilization based on a sample
or using that sample as excuse only brings insults as an
answer.  What is under discussion?  The displeasure
with HBM or making generilization on Turks.  Ha. I get
it.  Since dragging AT&T's name into HBM postings worked
and AT&T took a responsible action by cutting of the HBM
account as his employer.  I guess this has worked nicely
before, you would like to bring Turkisness into the
discussion to outrage Turks to stop HBM for you.   Is
that it why you or the Finlander before you are yearning
about?   Look, everybody is here to represent himself/herself
unless they declared that they are the spokesperson of a
group.  This is the underlying assumption.  If one start
questioning a persons' nationality, race, creed, family,
friends or employer to make a blanket statements is either racist 
or juvenile delinquent.  Because none of the above have a
bearing on why a person say or do in USENET as an
individual.  Needless to say, I have seen many of us had
resorted to take precautions like placing disclamers
underneath of their postings such as "The opinions were
experessed here are solely mine and they are not
representing my Employer's opinion whatsiever."  Why?  Because of
many jerks that cannot distinguish (or not willing to
distinguish because of their indecency) the simple thing like that, 
unless they are not directly being told so.  I cannot belive this
despicable callousness of those people who cannot deal
with the individual but resort to that kind of behaviour
to implicate the company or family  or race or nationality.
Unfortunately, Mutlu has adopted the policy of company
name dragging into the discussions (as in IBM case) for
his avenge since his company AT&T was used against him.
Of course, two wrongs  do not negate each other.
If one wants to pick a bone with HBM, should do so on
individual basis.   Not to bring his nationality on the
table to insult all group of people.  If this is too much
to understand, they should go back to their sandbox.

>
>Does HBM (and the author of the article i'm responding too) really represent
>the honest,typical, middle of the road Turk's view/attitude. I don't think so
>but we have very little evidence to the contrary. 
>
>|> C. Akgun
>
>kevinh@hasler.ascom.ch

What was wrong in my behaviour?  Should I let go by this
outrageous assertions and generalization on Turks by that
Finlander without a deserving answer in same vein?

Are you representing in this net the honest, typical,
half way decent people's view, that you belong to?  Or
better yet, if a couple of Turks says "yes" and a couple
of people says "no" to your question above on Turkish
attitude or no one cares to reply, what type of conclusion 
you would draw on this nonsense?  Those are rhetoric
questions.  Somehow, I know your answer already.

C. Akgun



Xref: sparky soc.culture.turkish:8941 talk.politics.mideast:18679 talk.politics.soviet:7026 soc.culture.greek:7586 soc.culture.europe:7371 soc.history:7406 news.sysadmin:1208