Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Genocide-deniers AIPAC and Anti-Defamation League "out" themselves

Genocide-deniers AIPAC and Anti-Defamation League "out" themselves
Thread Tools
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2010, 11:32 PM
 
Suddenly, the Israel lobby discovers a genocide.

How much of a hypocritical jack-hole do you have to be to regard the Armenia Holocaust as a convenient tool to ensure Turkey ignores the Palestinian situation and buys Israeli military hardware? These people have no sense of morality or shame. They are beyond the pale, as Jews like to say.
( Last edited by lpkmckenna; Jun 25, 2010 at 12:37 AM. )
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 24, 2010, 11:46 PM
 
Check your link.
     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 12:36 AM
 
Hey that sucks! Ok, I'll fix it. But here is the wrong one anyway: Sex Tape Hacker: Man Accused of Stealing Sex Tapes on Computers, Then Demanding More
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 02:36 AM
 
lpk, your Jew-hatred is extreme. I'll be sure to mention your name to the Mossad at the next meeting of the ZOG council.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 03:57 AM
 
What exactly are examples of Jews being "genocide deniers"? The article had not a single solid example.

And no, I don't really think "not supporting congressional resolutions commemorating the 1.5 million Armenian victims" equates to "Genocide denier".

How does it even follow that congress commemorating Armenian victims is strictly up to whether or not "Teh Joos!" support it or not? Sounds to me like it's simply NOT THEIR CAUSE.

This just in: Buddhists aren't breaking down doors to push commemoration of the Armenian genocide either. Why those evil Buddhist genocide deniers!
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 04:00 AM
 
And as a matter of fact, I was taught growing up to remember the Armenian Genocide. My parents taught me that if the world had recognized the Armenian Genocide perhaps it would not have ignored the Holocaust.

Oh and btw, I as a Jew am no real fan of the ADL in most respects.
( Last edited by Big Mac; Jun 25, 2010 at 04:12 AM. )

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 08:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Suddenly, the Israel lobby discovers a genocide.

How much of a hypocritical jack-hole do you have to be to regard the Armenia Holocaust as a convenient tool to ensure Turkey ignores the Palestinian situation and buys Israeli military hardware? These people have no sense of morality or shame. They are beyond the pale, as Jews like to say.
Is this sort of political behavior really all that surprising? Maybe I am just inured on the significance of this matter after seeing the US do it so many times, but I am not the least bit surprised when a country suddenly changes its stance on a long-held political belief for the sake of political expediency. To me this type of behavior is altogether too common. I am sure that when it becomes politically useful to ignore the circumstances of the Armenian genocide Israel will again do just that.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 08:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
lpk, your Jew-hatred is extreme. I'll be sure to mention your name to the Mossad at the next meeting of the ZOG council.
Big Mac, Why do you assume a stance critical of Israel makes someone a "Jew-hater"?
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 10:04 AM
 
Calling AIPAC and the ADL genocide deniers is just plain false and is highly indicative of Jew-hating a bias. It just is. This wasn't only an anti-Israel post by lpk, it was anti-Jewish generally.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 10:28 AM
 
Why is it not cool to be called a racist yet it is cool to call somebody a Jew hater?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 10:41 AM
 
I think it's interesting that the article says Israel had been using this to club Turkey.

"Hey Turkey, if you destabilize relations with us we will so let the Americans pass that bill. Put that in your hookah and smoke it."
     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 11:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
lpk, your Jew-hatred is extreme.
I don't hate Jews. I've never said an unkind thing about them.

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE View Post
What exactly are examples of Jews being "genocide deniers"? The article had not a single solid example.

And no, I don't really think "not supporting congressional resolutions commemorating the 1.5 million Armenian victims" equates to "Genocide denier".
I do. And I never said "Jews" were genocide deniers. I said AIPAC and ADL were genocide deniers.
How does it even follow that congress commemorating Armenian victims is strictly up to whether or not "Teh Joos!" support it or not? Sounds to me like it's simply NOT THEIR CAUSE.
Did you miss the part in the article where AIPAC members visited members of Congress to specifically encourage them to vote against recognizing the genocide as genocide? AIPAC and ADL are making it their cause.
This just in: Buddhists aren't breaking down doors to push commemoration of the Armenian genocide either. Why those evil Buddhist genocide deniers!
The Buddhists aren't trolling the halls of Congress to lobby against it like AIPAC and ADL.
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
And as a matter of fact, I was taught growing up to remember the Armenian Genocide. My parents taught me that if the world had recognized the Armenian Genocide perhaps it would not have ignored the Holocaust.
Very true. For the Israeli lobby to deny the Armenia Holocaust makes them hypocrites. You're very lucky for having such great parents.
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy View Post
Is this sort of political behavior really all that surprising?
Unfortunately no.
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Calling AIPAC and the ADL genocide deniers is just plain false and is highly indicative of Jew-hating a bias. It just is. This wasn't only an anti-Israel post by lpk, it was anti-Jewish generally.
That's absurd. Criticism of the Israeli lobby policies isn't anti-Israel and isn't anti-Jewish. I criticize Canadian policies all the time; does that make me anti-Canadian?

AIPAC and ADL publically denied that the Armenia Genocide was a genocide. Worse, they were denying it for short-term political gains and using it as a political football. And now, they are flop-flopping because of a minor incident on a Turkish boat. It's so petty.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 12:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Calling AIPAC and the ADL genocide deniers is just plain false and is highly indicative of Jew-hating a bias. It just is. This wasn't only an anti-Israel post by lpk, it was anti-Jewish generally.
I can't quite decide if you were always this idiotic, or if I'm just noticing it more lately.

Either way, it's a completely and utterly stupid statement, especially when combined with your "threat" about the Mossad.

greg
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 01:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Criticism of the Israeli lobby policies isn't anti-Israel and isn't anti-Jewish.
This is correct.

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
AIPAC and ADL publically denied that the Armenia Genocide was a genocide. Worse, they were denying it for short-term political gains and using it as a political football. And now, they are flop-flopping because of a minor incident on a Turkish boat. It's so petty.
This is correct as well.
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 01:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I think it's interesting that the article says Israel had been using this to club Turkey.

"Hey Turkey, if you destabilize relations with us we will so let the Americans pass that bill. Put that in your hookah and smoke it."
Clearly Teh Joos control every bill in the US congress.

So until Teh Joos give the okay, there's no way to pass a bill recognizing the Armenian genocide, which of course means it didn't happen.
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 05:38 PM
 
Actually, all we've got to go on is this one editorialist's statement. I'm not saying that he manufactured any of it, but he does have an axe to grind in that he lost his job over this opinion.

Even if every word he's written is true, he has no evidence he cites about AIPAC. He mentions them in passing as he cites Jack Weiss, and then quotes Weiss.

So, throw AIPAC out of the argument until he's got something more substantial.

He's got Abe Foxman (ADL) fairly clearly talking about ADL's interest in helping Israel. The author doesn't appear to have actually confronted Foxman about the mission of ADL to secure "justice and fair treatment to all." I wish that he had confronted Foxman with that. It would have done Foxman good to have to evaluate his statements in light of the professed mission statement. I get the sense that Foxman was frustrated with the tenacity of the interviewer by his asking the author if he was Armenian, as if Foxman felt he was being bullied by the author. That's the way I read that interview as the author has written it here.

As for Jack Weiss, he's expressing an opinion outside his role as city councilman. As far as I know, city councilmen have very little to do with foreign policy. About the most they can do is the ceremonial "sister-city" type program, where they link their city to a city somewhere else in the world.

I happen to agree with Weiss' opinion - there's no pride in denying what took place. Turkey insists on denying it, Turkey wants into the EU, this remains a point of contention. But again, I have no evidence of a specific policy of denial, by Israel, by Aipac, or by the LA city council. There's an absence of evidence presented by the author. I'm inclined to believe they hadn't formalized any policy on it either way, and the author has not made a convincing argument otherwise.

Israel, to my knowledge, had no specific policy of denying that Turkey committed this. The author doesn't cite a policy of denial by Israel. The author says he revealed this in 2007. In an article that never got published, and resulted in his firing. His very charged sentence is
"On one side were the conservative, Likud-devoted lions of the major Jewish organizations who championed the virtues of Turkey, the first Muslim country to formally recognize Israel. As long as Ankara continued to cooperate in Israeli military exercises and purchase Israeli war machines, it deserved special treatment. Israel itself had adopted an official policy of denying the Armenian Genocide. Its supporters in the U.S. were obliged to do the same."
Except that being the first Muslim country to formally recognize Israel is worth recognition and is virtuous. That doesn't mean that recognition comes in the form of special treatment. It also doesn't mean that there's any official policy of denying what Turkey did to the Armenians.

Those last two sentences aren't logical conclusions from the first, and the author provides no evidence of them other than referring to his 2007 article that never saw publication.

He cites the article on his editor being pushed out as vindication that his article was factual. That reference is published at The Armenian Reporter. I don't know that they're an objective reporter, and I don't know that their article says Arax's writing is factual - it just says that his editors did not cite a problem with its content, facts or bias, when talking to the Armenian Reporter. That's not quite the same as saying the article that never saw publication was factual. Additionally, we can't read it to judge it on its merits.

Lastly, the "Israel Lobby" is a bit of a red-herring. AIPAC is a lobby group. ADL is not. Jack Weiss is not. There aren't meetings between those three where they get together and plot. Basically, using the term is a way of derision, suggesting that there's improper manipulation. Politics in the US is structured so that citizens can lobby their representatives. The Constitution prevents Congress from infringing on the rights of the people to associate, so lobby groups are on good legal grounds. So, if lobbying groups and individuals are well-accepted, then deriding people for petitioning their government on the topic of foreign relations, is well, ugly.

Without evidence for the claims in the article, what we have is a person who has strong opinions and was fired for them, and one interview of which we don't have the whole text, and I would have liked to see more questions asked of the interviewee.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2010, 08:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Why is it not cool to be called a racist yet it is cool to call somebody a Jew hater?
If the shoe fits, besson, if the shoe fits. If one thinks another person is a racist then it's fine to say so. So too if a person is obviously spouting Jew-hatred - I'll say so without any regret.

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton View Post
I can't quite decide if you were always this idiotic, or if I'm just noticing it more lately.
Sticks and stones, greg. (Convenient that I get to use two aphorisms in one post.) Let's see, I'm losing ground with Shortcut but have been gaining it with Wiskedjak. I'm fine with that.

Either way, it's a completely and utterly stupid statement, especially when combined with your "threat" about the Mossad.
Did I have to spell it out that it was said in jest? I guess I should have done so for the dim bulbs in the audience. Do you know what ZOG stands for? Do you think I actually support ZOG conspiracy theories? I was poking fun at a guy who obviously thinks evil Jew lobbies run the world. Such people also often believe in ZOG type conspiracies. Sorry my humor was beyond your capacity to understand, greg.

Seriously, though, if you ever think for a moment that you're smarter than I, you're deluding yourself.

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
I don't hate Jews. I've never said an unkind thing about them.
I think you did. Talking about AIPAC and the ADL being genocide deniers with no valid proof points to Jew-hatred. Complaining about the Israel lobby as a monolithic super entity makes me think you may be the type to get up in the middle of the night and take your white bedsheets with you. Maybe that was a snap judgment on my part but I've seen more than enough Jew-hating rhetoric to know it when I see it.

I do. And I never said "Jews" were genocide deniers. I said AIPAC and ADL were genocide deniers.
Well then you should know you're just plain incorrect. If you do a Google search limited to adl.org you'll find that there are 71 pages with the keywords "Armenian genocide." That's not a very effective form of denial, now is it? As for AIPAC it doesn't have the same coverage of the topic, but that makes sense given that AIPAC is specifically and narrowly an American-Israel political action committee. There is, however, one page found on its site with Congressional quotations about the Gaza flotilla incident that references the subject. It's not a core issue to AIPAC, but it's not as if AIPAC actively denies it was a genocide, either. Active denial is what you imply those organizations are engaging in, and it's simply a false claim.

Did you miss the part in the article where AIPAC members visited members of Congress to specifically encourage them to vote against recognizing the genocide as genocide? AIPAC and ADL are making it their cause.
Even if, for the sake of argument, your claim is correct that those two organizations were lobbying Congress to vote against recognizing the Armenian Genocide, you would be incorrect to infer that that automatically makes them "genocide deniers." Do you not see that there are other political forces at play that may influence support or opposition to a vote like that? Until the election of a theocratic leaning Islamic government in Turkey eight years ago, Turkey was looking to be a very promising modernist Muslim country that wanted to be allied with the West. There are a lot of very tolerant Islamic leaders in Turkey who spread very positive messages in the Muslim world. But if the Islamists continue to move the country in the wrong direction we're going to lose it to radicals completely. Turkey falling to radicals puts a lot more pressure on the region. That's not a good thing. Therefore, at this time of heightened tension between Turkey and Israel and Turkey and the West, it's a good idea to be cautious about condemning the country for old atrocities. Did you even stop to consider for a second that statecraft is a delicate process and that maybe that's what those Jewish groups are doing if you're correct about them discouraging a vote that would potentially worsen conditions in Turkey? Or did you just jump at what you saw as an opportunity to condemn the evil Jews? I think we all know the answer to that question.

Very true. For the Israeli lobby to deny the Armenia Holocaust makes them hypocrites. You're very lucky for having such great parents.
Condemning the mythic "Israel lobby" as a whole for actions of two particular Jewish organizations (one of which is not an Israel lobby group) makes you sound like a Jew-hating bigot. It's something you should consider for the future. Thank you for the compliment for my parents, though. I don't think they were unique among Jews in teaching that subject, which is why I was particularly annoyed over the generalizations you appeared to be making about Jews.

That's absurd. Criticism of the Israeli lobby policies isn't anti-Israel and isn't anti-Jewish. I criticize Canadian policies all the time; does that make me anti-Canadian?
Perhaps, if you were to lump together all Canadian interest groups together and speak about them negatively as a monolithic "Canada Lobby" and especially if Canadian hatred was as prevalent and virulent as Israel lobby bashing, Israel bashing and general Jew-hatred is. I can guarantee that the type of rhetoric you've been using in this thread can be found on places like Stormfront.org. And I'm not the only one here who believes your conduct in this discussion smacks of Jew-hatred. CRASH does as well.
( Last edited by Big Mac; Jun 25, 2010 at 10:34 PM. )

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 26, 2010, 05:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
Actually, all we've got to go on is this one editorialist's statement. I'm not saying that he manufactured any of it, but he does have an axe to grind in that he lost his job over this opinion.
That's false, for two reasons. Arax didn't get fired, he quit, and then sued the paper and won. Second, a quick google for "armenian genocide aipac" or "armenian genocide adl" will display how contentious this issue has been within the Jewish-American community. For instance, American Jewish community ends support of Turkish interests on Hill specifically mentions the AIPAC connection.
Even if every word he's written is true, he has no evidence he cites about AIPAC. He mentions them in passing as he cites Jack Weiss, and then quotes Weiss.

So, throw AIPAC out of the argument until he's got something more substantial.
AIPAC has been instrumental in lobbying against the genocide resolution all these years, until now. See here: "Jewish lobby" denies Armenian genocide.
He's got Abe Foxman (ADL) fairly clearly talking about ADL's interest in helping Israel. The author doesn't appear to have actually confronted Foxman about the mission of ADL to secure "justice and fair treatment to all." I wish that he had confronted Foxman with that. It would have done Foxman good to have to evaluate his statements in light of the professed mission statement. I get the sense that Foxman was frustrated with the tenacity of the interviewer by his asking the author if he was Armenian, as if Foxman felt he was being bullied by the author. That's the way I read that interview as the author has written it here.
You think Foxman was being bullied by Arax? Are we reading the same article?
As for Jack Weiss, he's expressing an opinion outside his role as city councilman. As far as I know, city councilmen have very little to do with foreign policy. About the most they can do is the ceremonial "sister-city" type program, where they link their city to a city somewhere else in the world.
Not sure why you're commenting here. Weiss is speaking as a critic of the denial policy, not as an advocate. Arax isn't claiming he's a lobbyist.
I happen to agree with Weiss' opinion - there's no pride in denying what took place. Turkey insists on denying it, Turkey wants into the EU, this remains a point of contention. But again, I have no evidence of a specific policy of denial, by Israel, by Aipac, or by the LA city council. There's an absence of evidence presented by the author. I'm inclined to believe they hadn't formalized any policy on it either way, and the author has not made a convincing argument otherwise.

Israel, to my knowledge, had no specific policy of denying that Turkey committed this. The author doesn't cite a policy of denial by Israel. The author says he revealed this in 2007.
You don't need proof anymore. The web is loaded with commentary on this issue. Google "armenian genocide aipac" and see for yourself.

He cites the article on his editor being pushed out as vindication that his article was factual. That reference is published at The Armenian Reporter. I don't know that they're an objective reporter, and I don't know that their article says Arax's writing is factual - it just says that his editors did not cite a problem with its content, facts or bias, when talking to the Armenian Reporter. That's not quite the same as saying the article that never saw publication was factual. Additionally, we can't read it to judge it on its merits.
Uh, the editors didn't cite a problem with "contents, facts, or bias" but that's not the same as being factual??
Lastly, the "Israel Lobby" is a bit of a red-herring. AIPAC is a lobby group. ADL is not. Jack Weiss is not. There aren't meetings between those three where they get together and plot. Basically, using the term is a way of derision, suggesting that there's improper manipulation. Politics in the US is structured so that citizens can lobby their representatives. The Constitution prevents Congress from infringing on the rights of the people to associate, so lobby groups are on good legal grounds. So, if lobbying groups and individuals are well-accepted, then deriding people for petitioning their government on the topic of foreign relations, is well, ugly.
I'm not using the term as a way of derision. And ADL is a lobby group. And neither I nor Arax suggested anything about plotting, conspiracy, undermining the US constitution, whatever. I used "Israel lobby" as a shorthand for AIPAC and ADL, that's all.
Without evidence for the claims in the article, what we have is a person who has strong opinions and was fired for them, and one interview of which we don't have the whole text, and I would have liked to see more questions asked of the interviewee.
We're never gonna see the article, it's the property of the Times now. Read my other links, the flop-flop by AIPAC and ADL is everywhere.
     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 26, 2010, 05:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Did I have to spell it out that it was said in jest? I guess I should have done so for the dim bulbs in the audience. Do you know what ZOG stands for? Do you think I actually support ZOG conspiracy theories? I was poking fun at a guy who obviously thinks evil Jew lobbies run the world. Such people also often believe in ZOG type conspiracies. Sorry my humor was beyond your capacity to understand, greg.

Seriously, though, if you ever think for a moment that you're smarter than I, you're deluding yourself.
Once again, I need to point out how illiterate you appear. I never claimed "evil Jew lobbies" run the world. I said AIPAC and ADL lobbied against the Armenian genocide resolution. (Until this year, actually.) While AIPAC and ADL were instrumental in blocking these resolutions all this time, that's a far cry from "running the world." And far from *being smarter than greg*, you can barely understand basic english.
I think you did. Talking about AIPAC and the ADL being genocide deniers with no valid proof points to Jew-hatred. Complaining about the Israel lobby as a monolithic super entity makes me think you may be the type to get up in the middle of the night and take your white bedsheets with you. Maybe that was a snap judgment on my part but I've seen more than enough Jew-hating rhetoric to know it when I see it.
I never claimed anythying about monolithic super-entities. Just like visions of bedsheets, it's in your head, not my words or intentions.
Well then you should know you're just plain incorrect. If you do a Google search limited to adl.org you'll find that there are 71 pages with the keywords "Armenian genocide." That's not a very effective form of denial, now is it?
You should consider reading some of those pages. They all say the same thing: ADL lobbied against the congressional resolution. ADL even *fired* a regional director for publicly asserting that the Armenian Genocide was genocide. Read and weep: ADL local leader fired on Armenian issue, Genocide question sparked bitter debate. Only after a public shaming did Foxman admit that it was "tantamount to genocide," but he still lobbied against the congressional resolution.

As for AIPAC it doesn't have the same coverage of the topic, but that makes sense given that AIPAC is specifically and narrowly an American-Israel political action committee. There is, however, one page found on its site with Congressional quotations about the Gaza flotilla incident that references the subject. It's not a core issue to AIPAC, but it's not as if AIPAC actively denies it was a genocide, either. Active denial is what you imply those organizations are engaging in, and it's simply a false claim.
I never claimed it was a "core issue," but that AIPAC was meddling in an issue for their own benefit, against the legitimate interests of Armenians. And trolling the halls of congress to enable Turkey's denial is "active denial" to me.
Even if, for the sake of argument, your claim is correct that those two organizations were lobbying Congress to vote against recognizing the Armenian Genocide, you would be incorrect to infer that that automatically makes them "genocide deniers." Do you not see that there are other political forces at play that may influence support or opposition to a vote like that? Until the election of a theocratic leaning Islamic government in Turkey eight years ago, Turkey was looking to be a very promising modernist Muslim country that wanted to be allied with the West. There are a lot of very tolerant Islamic leaders in Turkey who spread very positive messages in the Muslim world. But if the Islamists continue to move the country in the wrong direction we're going to lose it to radicals completely. Turkey falling to radicals puts a lot more pressure on the region. That's not a good thing. Therefore, at this time of heightened tension between Turkey and Israel and Turkey and the West, it's a good idea to be cautious about condemning the country for old atrocities. Did you even stop to consider for a second that statecraft is a delicate process and that maybe that's what those Jewish groups are doing if you're correct about them discouraging a vote that would potentially worsen conditions in Turkey? Or did you just jump at what you saw as an opportunity to condemn the evil Jews? I think we all know the answer to that question.
Would you accept such "delicate statecraft" from Holocaust deniers? Because I'm certain some Arab leaders craft exactly the same kind of equivocations for their denials.
Condemning the mythic "Israel lobby" as a whole for actions of two particular Jewish organizations (one of which is not an Israel lobby group) makes you sound like a Jew-hating bigot.
AIPAC and ADL *do* lobby on behalf of Israel. There's nothing mythical about it. I think you're hyper-sensitive.
Thank you for the compliment for my parents, though. I don't think they were unique among Jews in teaching that subject, which is why I was particularly annoyed over the generalizations you appeared to be making about Jews.
I didn't make any generalizations about Jews. I wrote about the actions of AIPAC and ADL. You are yet again infering something I never implied. It's that illiteracy of yours kicking in again. Neither did I intend to suggest you parents were unique.
Perhaps, if you were to lump together all Canadian interest groups together and speak about them negatively as a monolithic "Canada Lobby" and especially if Canadian hatred was as prevalent and virulent as Israel lobby bashing, Israel bashing and general Jew-hatred is. I can guarantee that the type of rhetoric you've been using in this thread can be found on places like Stormfront.org. And I'm not the only one here who believes your conduct in this discussion smacks of Jew-hatred.
I don't know what happens on Stormfront. And frankly, when AIPAC and/or ADL act like morons, they should be bashed. They deserve to be bashed for treating Armenians like pawns instead of friends.
CRASH does as well.
I think Crash is a sock-puppet. I mostly ignore him.
     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 26, 2010, 06:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
He's got Abe Foxman (ADL) fairly clearly talking about ADL's interest in helping Israel.
I want to emphasize the truth of this statement. ADL and AIPAC showed absolutely no regard for Armenians and their cause. It was callous, it was selfish, it was indefensible. What struck me about this story, and the reason I posted it, was that I expected the exact opposite.

The fact that both Bush and Obama promised to recognize the Armenian Genocide, and then flip-flopped, is just one of the many disappointments they inflicted on their supporters. But for victims of the Holocaust to behave like this is just a let-down. It's like watching a child abuse victim grow indifferent to other children benig abused, instead of standing up for them. You think he would know better, behave better. It's heartbreaking to watch.
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 27, 2010, 09:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
I want to emphasize the truth of this statement. ADL and AIPAC showed absolutely no regard for Armenians and their cause. It was callous, it was selfish, it was indefensible. What struck me about this story, and the reason I posted it, was that I expected the exact opposite.
I'll be sure to remember that when the Mothers Against Drunk Driving aren't actively rallying against pot-smokers as a part of their platform, or the Susan G. Komen foundation against Breast Cancer aren't actively rallying against Parkinson's disease.

We all agree these things are terrible, but outside the publicly stated reasons for these organizations existing.

Except for the ADL, which the author of the article should have confronted Foxman with the words "justice and fair treatment for all" and he didn't.


The fact that both Bush and Obama promised to recognize the Armenian Genocide, and then flip-flopped, is just one of the many disappointments they inflicted on their supporters.
Again, the Arax article doesn't offer any proof of this statement.
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.

     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 27, 2010, 10:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
That's false, for two reasons. Arax didn't get fired, he quit, and then sued the paper and won.
The article you cited written by Arax said he lost his job over the unpublished story. In American English, when people say they've lost their job, it means they were fired, laid-off, or otherwise been removed from employment against their will. If he quit, then he's lying when he writes that he lost his job.
Second, a quick google for "armenian genocide aipac" or "armenian genocide adl" will display how contentious this issue has been within the Jewish-American community. For instance, American Jewish community ends support of Turkish interests on Hill specifically mentions the AIPAC connection.
AIPAC has been instrumental in lobbying against the genocide resolution all these years, until now. See here: "Jewish lobby" denies Armenian genocide.
The hateful language "Jewish Lobby" in the second link renders it a tainted source. It claims that AIPAC petitioned Congress to not recognize the Armenian Genocide, but provides no sources for that. It cannot be considered as a factual news source, although it's certainly an opinion piece.

The most interesting thing in the first link is Morris Amitay. About Morris J. Amitay
shows that he's had the Government of Turkey as a client in the past, as the Times article says. So, in that role, I would expect him to lobby in Turkey's interests. In his AIPAC role, I would expect him to lobby in the scope of AIPAC.
You think Foxman was being bullied by Arax? Are we reading the same article?
Yes, we are. Arax appears to have bullied Foxman to the point of Foxman getting flustered and asking if Arax is an Armenian - a totally unnecessary question as to motivation of the interview. I suspect that the interview went on at length and Arax is only quoting the useful portions for his opinion piece. We don't know that, but I suspect it to be the case. Otherwise, it's a pretty short interview.

The problem I have is that Arax concludes by showing Foxman's interview contradicting with the "fair treatment and justice for all" statement- and he didn't confront Foxman with that, or he would have quoted Foxman's response. I would have liked to see that, and consider it a failure on Arax's part as interviewer for not doing so.

Not sure why you're commenting here. Weiss is speaking as a critic of the denial policy, not as an advocate. Arax isn't claiming he's a lobbyist.
Arax's article is about the "Israel Lobby" discovering a genocide suddenly. He uses Weiss as one man's opinion to support his thesis? That's poor writing. The correct way to do it would be to quote an AIPAC representative commenting on the "newly-found" genocide, not an LA city councilman. The fact that he didn't makes it very clear: Arax isn't concerned with facts and proving his story, this is him writing an opinion piece with no need for facts. After all, if what you say is true, he already lied at the top of the story when he said he lost his job over his 2007 unpublished article.

You don't need proof anymore. The web is loaded with commentary on this issue. Google "armenian genocide aipac" and see for yourself.
It's your thread, it's up to you to make your case. You cited Arax. Arax didn't provide proof. If you want to do the job Arax failed to do, you can provide links, and I could evaluate them when you do so.

Also, "You don't need proof anymore. The web is loaded with commentary..." is absurd. You DO need proof. There's commentary on the web stating that Bush is a part of a Lizard alien race sent to be overlords to our human race. Commentary is fine on its own, but we need proof more than ever.
Uh, the editors didn't cite a problem with "contents, facts, or bias" but that's not the same as being factual??
When the Armenian Reporter asked the editors, the editors didn't cite a problem with content, facts, or bias to the biased Armenian Reporter. They didn't cite the factual problems, but that doesn't mean they weren't present, it just means that's not the reasons they gave the Armenian Reporter. Do you see the difference?
I'm not using the term as a way of derision.
It is a term of derision. You do know that. It's the same problem that people legitimately interested in preserving the 9th and 10th amendments of the Constitution have when discussing "states' rights" - people hear "I wanna go back to pre-1865 civil rights" instead of "states and people have all powers not reserved for Congress in the Constitution, and we think the federal government is encroaching, grabbing powers not reserved to it."

You can talk about how that's wrong, and terms shouldn't be perverted to mean hateful things, but the fact is that they have been.

And ADL is a lobby group.
ADL is a little different than a lobby group, you must admit. ADL goes to college campuses,works with non-US governments, writes to state government representatives, and as a part of its "fair treatment, justice for all" has involvement in hispanic / latino / South American countries, working to fight against bigotry.

Where traditionally, we think of lobby groups in the US as those which petition Congressmen in D.C., ADL is not that. ADL does petition Congress, but not usually directly. See their action item on immigration reform: Comprehensive Immigration Reform Can't Wait - this also seems to fit within the "fair treatment for all" rubric.

In this way, ADL is not like AIPAC.

And neither I nor Arax suggested anything about plotting, conspiracy, undermining the US constitution, whatever. I used "Israel lobby" as a shorthand for AIPAC and ADL, that's all.
We're never gonna see the article, it's the property of the Times now. Read my other links, the flop-flop by AIPAC and ADL is everywhere.
Using "Israel Lobby" as shorthand for AIPAC and ADL when others use it as a pejorative is not helpful.

Your other links in your reply to me didn't support your claims. Your declaration that I don't need facts, when I can have opinion pieces similarly doesn't support your claims.

Thanks for the civil conversation. I'm going back into lurk mode instead of participation mode.
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.

     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2010, 12:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
The article you cited written by Arax said he lost his job over the unpublished story. In American English, when people say they've lost their job, it means they were fired, laid-off, or otherwise been removed from employment against their will. If he quit, then he's lying when he writes that he lost his job.
Arax doesn't say "he lost his job" at all. There's a serious reading comprehension problem in here; you and Big Mac should take some remedial courses together or something.
I once tried to blow the whistle on the Israel lobby's denial of the Armenian Genocide -- and I had to leave my job.
After an ugly public fight, I left the paper.
He was not fired, he didn't say he "lost his job," he left.

It's really, really hard to debate complex issues with people who can't seem to parse basic english.
The hateful language "Jewish Lobby" in the second link renders it a tainted source. It claims that AIPAC petitioned Congress to not recognize the Armenian Genocide, but provides no sources for that. It cannot be considered as a factual news source, although it's certainly an opinion piece.
You obviously didn't read that source, because it does provide a source (Jerusalem's Armenians want Israeli recognition of 'genocide' By Agence France Presse, but sadly behind a pay wall) and he completely agrees with you about the "Israel lobby" phrase. He says:
Originally Posted by Bill Weinberg
An incredibly depressing April 21 AFP report picked up by Lebanon's Daily Star notes that despite the lobbying efforts of the 5,000 Armenians who inhabit Israel and the West Bank, Israel refuses to officially recognize the Armenian genocide. Worse still, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC, the putatively powerful pro-Israel lobby in Washington) has repeatedly petitioned the U.S. Congress not to pass a resolution officially recognizing the Armenian genocide.

Predictably, this allows Jerusalem Armenian leader George Hintlian to blame the "Jewish lobby" (by which he presumably means AIPAC) for Washington's continuing denial of the genocide against his people.

Does Hintlian really think the "Jewish lobby" had either the power or the necessity to "prevent" Congress from passing the genocide resolution? Or has it occurred to him that Washington has strategic priorities of its own where this question is concerned?

So shame on them all: Shame on Ankara for refusing to own up to crimes now nearly a century old. Shame on both Tel Aviv and Washington for playing along with this revisionism. Shame on AIPAC for betraying the Armenians and historical truth. And shame on Hintlian for blaming the "Jewish lobby" for a sleazy accomodation that really belongs to the White House and Congress.
I really don't know anything about Bill Weinberg. I found his page thru Google, and I chose it because it was clear and concise and credible, just like Arax's story. I can recognize a trustworthy article when I read one, even knowing absolutely nothing about the author. Too bad you can't, even when they agree with you.

I really wasn't aware that "Israel lobby" is some kind of red flag. You and Big Mac are probably right: "Israeli lobby" is likely a favorite term with antisemites; I really wouldn't know. Like I said, I used it as shorthand for "AIPAC and ADL," and didn't intend to suggest anything else. I don't say this in any way as an apology. Like Orwell said, 2+2=4, even if Hitler agrees. AIPAC and ADL, two groups that lobby on behalf of Israel, did lobby against the recognition of the Armenian genocide. Those are facts, and I stand by everything I posted without apology.

And Bill Weinberg is right: it was the White House and Congress that had the power to pass the bill, not AIPAC nor ADL. I don't deny that those American politicians are facilitating Turkey's denialist stance, and bear their own guilt for doing so. But my point of the thread wasn't to talk about Turkey's denial, or Congress' denial, or the various presidents' denials. My point of the thread was: AIPAC and ADL sold their souls for cheap political gains. I was appalled by the irony that two groups who work to condemn Holocaust deniers would participate in the Armenian genocide denial. It's a bit like the abusive priests scandal in the level of irony and moral betrayal involved.

The most interesting thing in the first link is Morris Amitay. About Morris J. Amitay
shows that he's had the Government of Turkey as a client in the past, as the Times article says. So, in that role, I would expect him to lobby in Turkey's interests. In his AIPAC role, I would expect him to lobby in the scope of AIPAC.
Ok, but what was interesting about it? What I found most interesting was that it says "Jewish organizations" changed their stance, not because of the flotilla incident, but the 2006 conflict in Lebanon:
Barry Jacobs, the American Jewish Committee's former director of strategic studies in the office of government and international affairs, also noted Turkey's critical stance toward Israel's 2006 invasion of southern Lebanon to root out Hezbollah terrorists attacking the Jewish state.

"This started in 2006 when I remember one Israeli diplomat complained that Turkish support for Hezbollah had 'out-Arabed the Arabs,'" Mr. Jacobs said, adding that Turkey's unconditional support for Hamas since 2007, combined with Jewish discomfort with defending the Turks on the Armenian issue, led to a dampening of support.

"The major Jewish organizations decided in 2008 that the question of the Armenian genocide resolution was so sensitive we would no longer take public and private positions to oppose it," Mr. Jacobs said.
And of course, the intro of the article is very interesting, since it quotes an AIPAC member asserting that AIPAC lobbied hard for Turkey:
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert had promised to bring a resolution commemorating the Armenian genocide to the floor for a vote, a move that Ankara said would be a slap in the face to a NATO ally.

The Turks called up Keith Weissman, a senior researcher from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and asked him to intervene.

Mr. Weissman said in an interview this week that AIPAC lit up the phones and managed at the last minute — with the help of the State Department — to persuade President Clinton himself to write a letter to Mr. Hastert saying a vote on the resolution would cause strategic damage to U.S. interests.

The last-minute push worked. Mr. Hastert removed the resolution from the floor, and the full Congress has yet to take up the matter to this day.
The Turks called AIPAC, and AIPAC did their bidding, and then President Clinton did their bidding. Lots of dirty hands here.

The source of that is Berman endorses Armenian genocide resolution from JTA.org, "the Global News Service of the Jewish People."
Yes, we are. Arax appears to have bullied Foxman to the point of Foxman getting flustered and asking if Arax is an Armenian - a totally unnecessary question as to motivation of the interview. I suspect that the interview went on at length and Arax is only quoting the useful portions for his opinion piece. We don't know that, but I suspect it to be the case. Otherwise, it's a pretty short interview.

The problem I have is that Arax concludes by showing Foxman's interview contradicting with the "fair treatment and justice for all" statement- and he didn't confront Foxman with that, or he would have quoted Foxman's response. I would have liked to see that, and consider it a failure on Arax's part as interviewer for not doing so.
I don't see Foxman being flustered by Arax bullying him, I see Foxman flustered by his own guilt, grasping at anything to defend himself.
Arax's article is about the "Israel Lobby" discovering a genocide suddenly. He uses Weiss as one man's opinion to support his thesis? That's poor writing. The correct way to do it would be to quote an AIPAC representative commenting on the "newly-found" genocide, not an LA city councilman. The fact that he didn't makes it very clear: Arax isn't concerned with facts and proving his story, this is him writing an opinion piece with no need for facts. After all, if what you say is true, he already lied at the top of the story when he said he lost his job over his 2007 unpublished article.
Actually, Arax's article is about his personal relationship to current events - that AIPAC and ADL have done a 180 regarding the Armenian Genocide - and he was impugned because he was Armenian, by people who worked professionally to deny the Armenian Genocide (Foxman of ADL and his managing editor Frantz). He mentions AIPAC in passing, because they had publicly changed their stance. Kinda pointless to "prove" something that AIPAC since admits.
It's your thread, it's up to you to make your case. You cited Arax. Arax didn't provide proof. If you want to do the job Arax failed to do, you can provide links, and I could evaluate them when you do so.
Oh, I think I've done that - in spades.
When the Armenian Reporter asked the editors, the editors didn't cite a problem with content, facts, or bias to the biased Armenian Reporter. They didn't cite the factual problems, but that doesn't mean they weren't present, it just means that's not the reasons they gave the Armenian Reporter. Do you see the difference?
No.
It is a term of derision. You do know that.
No, I really didn't.
Originally Posted by me
The fact that both Bush and Obama promised to recognize the Armenian Genocide, and then flip-flopped, is just one of the many disappointments they inflicted on their supporters.
Originally Posted by you
Again, the Arax article doesn't offer any proof of this statement.
Prove that Bush and Obama flip-flopped and disappointed their supporters? Why would Arax need to prove that?
ADL is a little different than a lobby group, you must admit. ADL goes to college campuses,works with non-US governments, writes to state government representatives, and as a part of its "fair treatment, justice for all" has involvement in hispanic / latino / South American countries, working to fight against bigotry.

Where traditionally, we think of lobby groups in the US as those which petition Congressmen in D.C., ADL is not that. ADL does petition Congress, but not usually directly. See their action item on immigration reform: Comprehensive Immigration Reform Can't Wait - this also seems to fit within the "fair treatment for all" rubric.

In this way, ADL is not like AIPAC.
You're doing a lot of hairsplitting over nothing. Ok, unlike AIPAC, ADL does more than lobby, but they do lobby, and they did lobby against the genocide resolution, and they've since changed policy. Is that granular enough for you? Are you ready to admit ADL shouldn't have been meddling in the issue to begin with?
Thanks for the civil conversation. I'm going back into lurk mode instead of participation mode.
I've made my case and demolished yours. I don't mind having the last word, since that's what you seem to prefer.
     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2010, 01:07 AM
 
Apparently, there's a book about Israeli denial of the Armenian genocide: The Banality of Denial.
This book examines the current attitudes of the State of Israel and its leading institutions toward the Armenian Genocide. While numerous Jewish scholars in and outside Israel affirm the Armenian Genocide without reservation, the book explores both passive, indifferent attitudes of Israeli institutions and government, as well as active measures to undermine attempts at safeguarding the memory of the Armenian Genocide.

Yair Auron is a Senior Lecturer in the field of contemporary Judaism and genocide in Israel. Dr. Auron has been researching in the area of indifference and denial since the early 1990s. The Zoryan Institute actively supported the author in research, editing and publication of this book, which will be coming out at the end of May. Dr. Auron is a member of Zoryan's Academic Board of Directors.
     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2010, 01:34 AM
 
This is the oldest article on this issue I've come across, from 2005: Jewish Split Marks Armenian Genocide from jewishjournal.com

Notice this paragraph:
Barry Jacobs, director of strategic studies at the American Jewish Committee's Washington office pointedly refused to agree or disagree with the judgment of Holocaust and genocide scholars on who was responsible for the slaughter of Armenians.
Now this one, which I posted above:
"The major Jewish organizations decided in 2008 that the question of the Armenian genocide resolution was so sensitive we would no longer take public and private positions to oppose it," Mr. Jacobs said.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2010, 01:39 AM
 
lpkmckenna: King of Triple Posting. It's a good thing I have you on ignore or this page would be much longer.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2010, 01:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
lpkmckenna: King of Triple Posting. It's a good thing I have you on ignore or this page would be much longer.
Do you have him on ignore because you disagree with him, or because he has offended you? If the latter, I haven't been reading this thread extremely closely, but I definitely missed the part where he said anything offensive or any other threads where this has been an ongoing thing between you guys...
     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2010, 01:45 AM
 
What a coward. Calls me a jew-hater and then refuses to hear me defend myself so he won't have to apologize.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2010, 01:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
What a coward. Calls me a jew-hater and then refuses to hear me defend myself so he won't have to apologize.
I guess I'll avoid posting Daily Show clips in threads you participate in
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2010, 01:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Do you have him on ignore because you disagree with him, or because he has offended you? If the latter, I haven't been reading this thread extremely closely, but I definitely missed the part where he said anything offensive or any other threads where this has been an ongoing thing between you guys...
I had lpk on ignore long before this thread because he has sufficiently annoyed me in the past. I selectively read the posts of the four or five screen names I ignore if a topic gets my attention.

And for the record lpk, I read your response to me from a couple of days ago. I don't find it too credible. However, I apologize again (and I think this is my second apology to you) if I indeed misjudged you as a Jew-hater based on what you wrote in this thread. Your rhetoric just seemed far too similar to the type found on bonafide Jew-hating repositories. At the same time, however, I'm not convinced my initial reaction was too far off the mark.
( Last edited by Big Mac; Jun 28, 2010 at 02:02 AM. )

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2010, 10:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
Arax doesn't say "he lost his job" at all. There's a serious reading comprehension problem in here; you and Big Mac should take some remedial courses together or something.
He was not fired, he didn't say he "lost his job," he left.
He says he "had to leave" - but he didn't. If he wasn't fired, then he chose to leave, he didn't have to do so. If he did have to do so, then he was fired or pressured to leave under some sort of threat that he would be fired. He can't have it both ways.
It's really, really hard to debate complex issues with people who can't seem to parse basic english.
Yes, it is. You have difficulty parsing the article you cited as your first example. You also can't seem to understand that the editors of the LA times not citing factual errors to the biased Armenian Reporter doesn't mean that there aren't factual errors - it just means they don't wish to be called genocide deniers by the Armenian Reporter.

Then when I ask for sources because your primary article doesn't use any, you say that I don't need facts, the commentary all over the internet will suffice instead.

I stop posting, and you post links and say "you obviously haven't read my source."

Trying to have a conversation with you is difficult and gains us nothing. You've adopted a position, and are defending it.

My only position here has been that your initial article is not credible, and your defense of it with more commentary instead of facts is not serving your position well.

Having the last word seems important to you, rather than furthering understanding.
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.

     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 1, 2010, 02:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks View Post
He says he "had to leave" - but he didn't. If he wasn't fired, then he chose to leave, he didn't have to do so. If he did have to do so, then he was fired or pressured to leave under some sort of threat that he would be fired. He can't have it both ways.
He had to leave because he wanted to sue them for discrimination. Besides, would you want to be a reporter at a paper that wrongly censored you?
Then when I ask for sources because your primary article doesn't use any, you say that I don't need facts, the commentary all over the internet will suffice instead.
That's *not* what happened at all. You said:
So, throw AIPAC out of the argument until he's got something more substantial.
So I suggested a search, and gave an example I found thru a search here:
Second, a quick google for "armenian genocide aipac" or "armenian genocide adl" will display how contentious this issue has been within the Jewish-American community. For instance, American Jewish community ends support of Turkish interests on Hill specifically mentions the AIPAC connection.
Despite the fact that this link mentions the Turks calling up Keith Weissman of AIPAC calling the White House on the first page, you say the only thing interesting is some comment on the third page.
I stop posting, and you post links and say "you obviously haven't read my source."
But you couldn't have read my source, the one about "Jewish Lobby Denies Armenian Genocide," because you said:
The hateful language "Jewish Lobby" in the second link renders it a tainted source. It claims that AIPAC petitioned Congress to not recognize the Armenian Genocide, but provides no sources for that. It cannot be considered as a factual news source, although it's certainly an opinion piece.
But I showed it did have a news source (AFP) and your "hateful language" comment made no sense since it was being critical of "Jewish Lobby" terminology like you were doing. Rather than read it, it looks more like you scanned it without bothering to understand it.
My only position here has been that your initial article is not credible, and your defense of it with more commentary instead of facts is not serving your position well.
I think the original article is very credible, and if you weren't happy with the proof before, I've provided much more since, including a book by a Jewish scholar, and an article from Jewish Journal. But frankly, my first link in response to you should have been enough.

I read Arax's column, and having despite never having heard of this issue before, I immediately knew it was true. I can't believe you still think Arax's article "isn't credible."
     
lpkmckenna  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 1, 2010, 02:30 AM
 
So I provided you with a factual link at Washington Times as an example of "commentary all over the net." Don't make it sound as though I didn't make my case with evidence. You were being obtuse.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:57 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,