Talk:Armenian genocide/Archive 8

message: I think that this article could use some general clean-up and re-wording to fix some confusing sentences and ideas. I noticed while reading this that the section titled "The Position of Turkey" (which has a few subtitles underneath) could you some major sentence restructuring. I have corrected a good amount of these, but certainly not all. Some of them also require the original source because I cannot determine what the meaning of the sentence is.
--user:marioluigi123 04:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Er - no. --THOTH 17:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Er - YA! 83.78.101.7 18:57, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Please read Wikipedia:NPOV_tutorial#Article_names. --Army1987 11:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Writing Clean-up 

message: I had no choice other than adding the tag. Fad (ix) 04:15, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  totallydisputed tag added 

message: Recently a new editor, Karabakir, has contributed a lot to this article, I admit that I was suspicious at first but I tried to assume good faith even after witnessing the obvious and since a member has warned me that Coolcat has accused another member who contribute in this article to be me under another alias I smelled that he(Coolcat) could attempt the similar. I only became convinced that Coolcat and Karabakir were the same person just after he has created the chronology pages because of the way that is particular to Coolcat, that he was creating tables with multiple colors etc., after examining Karabakir and Coolcat style and both contributions and the chronology pages I was convinced 100%. But I refrained myself to report him because I knew that those were serious charges and could lead to Coolcat blocking, I also knew that possibly another member witnssing the way the chronology pages were done will realise the same thing as me and this is why I suggested adding a deletion tag on those pages and that it could still maybe be possible to reasonate Coolcats alter ego. This was fruitless because when I have suggested this to Karabekir he answered me with an attack. People can read my talkpage for more information on this issue.
I am writting this to warn editors about who Karabkir is really and leave them judge what should be done with his future edits as it is obvious that for now he will be denying it, but probably not for too long as both contributors posting times matches, and that some of the expressions he uses are proper to Coolcat as well as the way he build time or chronology tables. Fad (ix) 00:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just out of curiosity, do you actually have a life or do you just spend all your time on this wiki topic? Frankly im worried about you! 62.203.134.214 18:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your worrying, I'm fine thank you. :) You should take a look at my contributions first before claiming such, since you'll see I do have a life. ;) Fad (ix) 19:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  For the interest of the contributors of this article 

message: It is very, very, disappointing to witness a decision NOT on the bases of content but claims on one person (or personality). Even more disappointing that one person (can/or did NOT) work on impersonation. That is a label attached to that person, which if I were him, I do pursue on that label assigned.  HOWEVER it is more disappointing to see a group of people who takes a decision on merits beyond the information added. I have checked other genocide related page (you know which page it is); the page reverted much more aligned with that page. There were more internal links created. And if you compare until Turkish section, text is mainly same. That is what worries me. Instead of working on content, reverting whole page brings questions on the pervious information. Do people who took such an action care questions like that? I do not think so. Also personally I do not know how you can verify the “person you took the decision against” (whoever-whatever), created more balanced text. I think those were the main issues you worked against. I hope, this behavior does not signal a new set of new ethics. It seems you all contained in your own worlds, such questions do not have any importance. (PS: Are you going to question my arguments based on my alias? How I said? Though decisions.) --OttomanReference 11:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decision based on politics! 

message: I want to open this question to vote:--OttomanReference 04:40, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you got my attention... but what is the vote about? If you want to include other people from other parts of the Wiki, I suggest you list the argument (pro and contra) very clearly here, and then post a Request for comment. Good luck, The Minister of War (Peace) 08:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he means he wants the administration to review the article for neutrality. He thinks that it isn't that bad and could be easily improved, but that some people are deliberately trying to keep the POV tag to suit their own positions. At least that's what I guess he's saying. John Smith's 12:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I assume OttomanRef is referring mostly to this edit, in which case, I see his point. The addition of Kamuran Gurun seems noteworthy (is it verified?), so why not include it. The section on the Ottoman archives is not true however - certain aspects of the military archives are still closed. The Minister of War (Peace) 16:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You can add these points to the text, instead of getting rid of them.--OttomanReference 17:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: reverted edit, Instead of getting rid of all work, if there is some controversial issues are arised, they should be fixed from this point on.--OttomanReference 17:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: *This is in reference to what? El_C 16:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm reverting the text to version before the controversial editing began. Hope everything is cleared, and discussed.--OttomanReference 18:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  As it should be - reverted to a point prior to the changes. Coolcat is no newbie to this article to claim ignorance that there needs to be discussion prior to making such substansial changes to the article. He is entirely in the wrong for making such changes and they should be reverted. --THOTH 19:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Communitee attention, requesting a vote 

message: Its almost like a brainwashing session because most of them make the exact same arguments and use the exact same reference or factual material, I didnt realize that there was a race going on to come up with as many links as possible. This is turning out to be ridiculous!
: Duh - that most make the "exact same arguments and use the exact same reference or factual material" shouldn't be a surprise as this is reporting of the facts as known. I would argue that there are a great many sources of information supporting these claims - and that they all reach the same conclusion should be of no surprise. Contrast the level of scholarship and reliance on mass numbers of eyewitness accounts between the sites that support the contention of Genocide and the rather flimsy and decietful - change the subject - sites that support the so-calle (joke) "Turkish thesis" and then we can talk about what may or may not be ridiculous.--THOTH 14:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  [personal attack removed - FrancisTyers 18:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sites supporting genocide thesis is turning out to be a big joke 

message: He is claiming that Turks never killed any Armenians in 1915 - but it was entirely the other way around. He blames unamed Armenian nationalsits for killing Turks and carving a state out of Turkish lands and that this is the reason for the Turkish-Armenian animosity. I can hardly stop laughing at these contentions to post this - but I really think that this discussion is of interest for those attempting to understand the lengths of Turkish denial and unsupported "blame the victim" counterclaims made by Turkish apologists. BTW - though entire discussion is perhaps of interests - OttomenResearch's most dramatic claims are made in his last paragragh written before I posted this here.--THOTH 21:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With your words the Tashnaks are "I don't at all credit those who strove for independence during (mostly prior to) these times as being heros (THOTH)". If you do not know Armenian history and thousands who died to build First Republic of Armenia, OttomanReference can not help you. Also if there was fight, as you claim, between the Turks and Armenians and Turks were killing Armenians, that would be a civil war. I tried to tell you there was no civil war, but something else. That gets the CUP or Ottoman state out of hook from genocide claims, as the sole "aim to destroy a group, or society" would degrade under the conditions of civil war. Do you really want to claim that? I have a feeling THOTH needs to work on his concepts and his national history. You do not have to belive everything you read, but would it hurt you to take a look at the site? Be open minded!--OttomanReference 00:49, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  There was no "civil war" or nothing even close - the facts do not support your extreme propaganistic and discredited contentions which were not even remotely accepted as such even at the time - not even by allies of the Turks. Nuetral and even pro-Turkish eyewitness witnessed and reported round up and slaughter of defensless Armenian women and children. If you call this civil war then no wonder you can't understand the concept of Genocide. The very few incidents where Armenians resisted being taken away and slaughtered can in no way be considered revolt or civil war - only desperate self preservation. The few Armenians who ever preached or practiced/attempted acts which might be construed as seperatist or who commited vilence against Turks pales against the decades of extreme state sponsored violence commited against peaceful sedentary Armenian farmers, villagers and communities. The militaristic Ottoman State brought its full power against a religious-ethnic minority whom it viewed as being out of step with racist pan-Turkik doctrine pursued at the time and under cover of war moved to eliminate this population and suceeded in this effort. We call this genocide - not civil war - learn some of your own history before you flame away so imbicile like. And your tactic of attempting to use my words out of context to somehow prove (your) historical position is a testament to the weakness and unsupportability of your position in the first place. --THOTH 04:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

text:  Obviously the Dashnaks can be seen only as an utter failure for the Armenian people. They were duped and stabbed in the back by the CUP and they failed to prevent - through political means (as there was no military power to prevent) the Ottoman State from slaughtering perhaps 3/4 of all Anatolian Armenians who lived at the time. i cannot consider these people heros who played so blindly into the hands of the bloody racist CUP murderers. If your claim of civil war were true then why were no "deporatation" conveys ever interdicted and saved by one of the vast numbers of marrauding Armenian bandit forces allegedly criss crossing the Anatolian interior behind Ottoman lines while Ottoman forces were otherwise occupied and "deporation" convoys were so lightly protected by a few gendarmes each? eh? WHy? Because there were no such Armenian bandit forces fighting against the ottomans in Anatolia at this time - there was no civil war - your claims are false and highly insulting to the memories of those who suffered and lost their lives due to the genocidal policies of the CUP! --THOTH 04:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Because there were no such Armenian bandit forces fighting against the ottomans in Anatolia at this time  Whether you believe it or not, there were Armenian groups that attacked to Turkis-Muslim citizens of Ottoman Empire. Since there are lots of sources which are provided by German, France, USA and Ottoman.--TuzsuzDeliBekir 19:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry you are incorect. The corraborated eyewitness sources of the time describe in great detail a systematic campaign to cleans Armenian populations from their traditional towns and villages and also describe terrible atrocities and mass murders of these people throughout the nation. There are very few reports (and none where these "deporations" were taking place) of any armed Armenian groups attacking Turks. This claim of Armenian bandit "forces" is entirely overblown and exists primarily in the minds of Turks. The claim of "civil war" or that Armenians (who were a powerless ethno-religiou minority people within the militaristic Ottoman Empire) were doing anything even remotely complementary towards Turks as what was being done to them is both patently false and patently absurd and has no basis in fact whatsoever. I will leave you with two quotes from prominant Turks of the period (just after) which should be taken to heart:
Prince Abdul Mecid (Heir to the Ottoman Throne) -
I refer to those awful massacres. They are the greatest stain that has ever disgraced our nation and race. They were entirely the work of Talat and Enver. I heard some days before they began that they were intended. I went to Istanbul and insisted on seeing Enver. I asked him if it was true that they intended to recommence the massacres which had been our shame and disgrace under Abdul Hamid. The only reply I could get from him was: 'It is decided. It is the program.' 
Mustafa Arif - Post War Minister of Interior  (13 December 1918)
Surely a few Armenians aided and abetted our enemy, and a few Armenian Deputies committed crimes against the Turkish nation... it is incumbent upon a government to pursue the guilty ones. Unfortunately, our wartime leaders, imbued with a spirit of brigandage, carried out the law of deportation in a manner that could surpass the proclivities of the most bloodthirsty bandits. They decided to exterminate the Armenians, and they did exterminate them. 
--THOTH 15:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interested folks should read the interchange that OttomanReference and I have had on my talk page this past day or so 

message: Its one of the most comprehensive sites rebutting the "genocide" view and it contains a lot of factual information. By removing it you are in fact preventing the reader from getting a fairer view of that tragic period of history!
I suspect that your concept concerning what is "fact" leaves much to be desired. That propoganistic hate site does not even merit in any insigifigant way any consideration as a scholarly or reputable source of any kind. It is a joke and an insult. It is telling that this is the best can you can rely on to support your very weak positions. --THOTH 00:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is why you are so obsessed by not having it mentioned? Because it provides very weak positions? Have you had a look at other sites like "armenian reality"? Its almost laughable, especially its english grammer but you dont seem to mind it! [personal attack removed - FrancisTyers 15:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Armenian reality is likewise an amatursih hate site and not worth any consideration as a source of ideas/positions...TAT is the same. --THOTH 14:58, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tasc et al, stop reverting the TAT link 

message: Excerpt from the Findings of the United Nations Permenent Peoples Tribunal 1984 -
There can be no doubt that the Armenians constitute a national group within the definition of the rule outlawing genocide. This conclusion is all the more evident since they constitute a people protected by the right to self determination which necessarily implies that they also constitute a group, the destruction of which is outlawed by virtue of the rule pertaining to genocide. 
There is no doubt regarding the reality of the physical acts constituting the genocide. The fact of the murder of members of a group, of grave attacks on their physical or mental integrity, and of the subjection of this group to conditions leading necessarily to their deaths, are clearly proven by the full and unequivocal evidence submitted to the Tribunal. In its examination of the case the Tribunal has focused primarily on the massacres perpetrated between 1915 and 1917, which were the most extreme example of a policy which was clearly heralded by the events of 1894-1896. 
The specific intent to destroy the group as such, which is the special characteristic of the crime of genocide, is also established. The reports and documentary evidence supplied point clearly to a policy of methodical extermination of the Armenian people, revealing the specific intent referred to in Article II of the Convention of December 9, 1948. 
The policy took effect in actions which were attributable beyond dispute to the Turkish or Ottoman authorities, particularly during the massacres of 1915-1917. The Tribunal notes on the one hand, however, that in addition to the atrocities committed by the official authorities, the latter also used malicious propaganda and other means to encourage civilian populations to commit acts of genocide against the Armenians. It is further observed that the authorities generally refrained from intervening to prevent the slaughter, although they had the power to do so, or from punishing the culprits, with the exception of the trial of the Unionists. This attitude amounts to incitement to crime and to criminal negligence, and must be judged as severely as the crimes actively committed and specifically covered by the law against genocide. 
On the evidence submitted, the Tribunal considers that the various allegations (rebellion, treason, etc.) made by the Turkish government to justify the massacres are without foundation. It is stressed, in any event, that even were such allegations substantiated, they could in no way justify the massacres committed. Genocide is a crime which admits of no grounds for excuse or justification. 
For these reasons, the Tribunal finds that the charge of genocide of the Armenian people brought against the Turkish authorities is established as to its foundation in fact. --THOTH 21:12, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenian Genocide - undisputed as a genocide