Tthe sources vs. Turkish moral claims

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Jul 30, 2010 at 03:54

Lazman wrote :

>Ianus, so far in 5-6 days you have close to 30 postings, with nearly 18,000 words [...]You may claim that this is not a bad ratio for your writing style and mentality.<

Hard to imagine for a Turk that there are hardworking people out there in the world and that laziness is a vice and not a virtue as you remark suggests , isn't it ?

>including 100s of angry and hate-filled ones to describe Turks, such as barbarians, genocidal, massacres, rapists, killers, looters, and savages etc.<

Lazman , it is not me that describe them so. It is EXCLUSIVELY their continuous heinous acts CONFIRMED by innumerable sources that tell the whole story. Note that everywhere I quoted relevant sources which I challenge you to refute with your misplaced complaints. Start from the 1976 report of the European Commission for Human Rights, will you ?

Besides, your answer to my question about what is wrong about hating evil is very symptomatic. It is like saying why I seeing all the Turkish crimes don't simply cover them up , whitewash or explain them away and blame the victims you so you do ?

>However, someone should advice you that constant belligerent postings makes one irrelevant.<

I'd rather say that it is a lack of argument that makes one irrelevant and I raise this charge against you and that the style and subject mateter are correlated. E.G. do you think that "belligerent postings" about the holocaust make these postings "irrelevant"?

> Instead it seems like someone, somewhere misled you into thinking you can deny realities and package any old nonsense and false information into lengthy sentences, throw in some sophisticated wording and you have a whole new story to pitch as historical fact to the ignorant. <

For instance the above statement is totally missing its point. I take it as meaning that the data contained in the aforesaid report "deny realities and package any old nonsense and false information". If so I again do challenge you to show you are right and the source is wrong!

> Obviously if you make it outrageous enough and repeat it often as you do, maybe you are giving your followers what they want. And considering the character, this reminds me, I guess I have reached my Godwin's law moment with this topic.<

I know you're morally superior to me . The problem with you is though that to support your claims you produce no valid arguments. But I am not complaining. Turks don't care about valid arguments. They commit a crime and blame the victim and feel "insulted" when they are exposed !

> A couple of points: Firstly,

My previous comment to you: YET, with all that emotional outcry, and I repeat, in your nearly 10,000 words, you have not mentioned even once the words Greek dictatorship, junta, enosis, or Sampson, the key ingredients for the Greek Cypriot debacle in 1974, resulting in the Turkish invasion of the island. Yes, keep telling yourself otherwise.

To refresh your memory , I produced a document [ SG/SD/WASHDC-12/526-D48/JULE74 ] and asked you to either refute or accept it . Instead, you have chosen to ignore the document and keep repeating your point which is invalid in the light of the document whose existence you can't accept ! Keep ignoring sources and speak louder of Turkish moral claims ! It is only thus that you may uphold your "moral superiority" , you Turkish lie machine !

> Secondly,

My previous comment to you: ABSOLUTELY AMAZING – ….. I am talking about the power of hatred and indoctrination. I hope you at least felt better after that. Like I said to you in the past, I wish I could help but …. it is still beyond my expertise.

You respond: … explain to me what is wrong about exposing and hating evil.

Absolutely nothing, you can feel and fight your demons however you wish. In fact I hope this "blog therapy" helps. If not, I recommend doubling the number of postings and increasing the level of history revision.<

You might spare me your pseudo-psychoanlysis and keep to the point. I notice that you have not produced a single source and yet speak of "increasing the level of history revision" ! Well, history is too important to be left to Turkish politicians and ignoramuses while evil which Turkey embodies is too heinous to be left without being addressed and exposed .

> Other more realistic option I can see is that Turkey should just scrap the ongoing talks regarding the unification of the island.<

Tukey has long since done it - in 1974. The rest is a perfidious game of notorious Turkish lies and deceptions. Talking with Turkey is a waste of time while for Turkey it is a way to fool the world about its real intents and accomplished actions and to keep the swag more firmly in its grip .

> Things have been very peaceful as a divided island for decades;<

"Peaceful"? What an ingenious lie ! I have addressed that "peace a la turque in my comment "Turkish barbarity at work in Northern Cyprus" ! It is the well-known Turkish "peace" of the graves !

> why have a bunch of obviously fuming hateful Greek Cypriots return to Northern Cyprus to become or raise future Sampsons.<

No we have a perfidious overpopulated Turkey lurking for more looting, robberies and killings - be it "to save from genocide" the Tatars in the Crimea, the Turkified Pomacs in Western Thrace or Turkomans in Iraqi Kurdistan ...

>Sampson may be one of the realities you like to deny. Let me summarize it for you. <

Let me quote again the declassified document which you preferred to ignore to keep your sweet Turkish lies intact .

" The Assistant Undersecretary of state Sisco's visit to the Alliance, showed the decision of the American goverment to finish the Cyprus problem.
We agreed with Mr Sisco for supporting the Turkish army during the landing, as well as, in the violent expulsion of Makarios."

>In truth, trying to address your situation, I even forgot the original topic <

You admit therefore you keep forgetting things that might embarass you , don't you ?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".