Our silence on one of the most persecuted people in the world

[KSaiyu]

You're still peddling this minority-is-majority nonsense?

Don't understand? Minority/Majority of what?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Don't understand? Minority/Majority of what?

You say that Trojan Horse exposes children to "Islaamic Tendencies". Those perpetrating Trojan Horse were a minority yet you continue to paint such actions as characteristic of all Muslims. It's getting a bit tired, in my opinion.

 

[Scaff]

Well it's not really an aside, it's a case in point surely?

I will take that as a no then.

 

[KSaiyu]

Just as some members of the far right and Islamic radicals do with regard to the holocaust to this day?

Just as the USSR did in regard to Polish and Germans?

Just as the British did with the Boers?

Find a genocide and you will find people who deny it and/or will refuse to identify it as such

Personally as a long time fan of SOAD I am more than aware of the Armenian genocide and despite being one of those grubby liberals more than willing to call it such.

Those are examples of genocidal denial, yes? What's the point?

You say that Trojan Horse exposes children to "Islaamic Tendencies". Those perpetrating Trojan Horse were a minority yet you continue to paint such actions as characteristic of all Muslims. It's getting a bit tired, in my opinion.

Erm. I'm painting the idea that the majority of Muslims are secret (or overt) Islamists looking to subvert schools? I'm not sure where you are getting this from....

 

[Scaff]

Those are examples of genocidal denial, yes? What's the point?

Did you forget you said this?

Wait what have the Bosnian and Rwandan genocides got to do with anything?

* In case it wasn't clear for @prisonermonkeys the Armenian genocide continues to this day to cause controversy because of the unwillingness to call it a genocide. It was also Ottomans (sizeable proportion Muslims) against Armenians (sizeable proportion Christians), hence the relevance and irony.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-for-a-genocide-in-all-but-name-10203090.html

You cited the Armenian genocide as an example of how Christian persecution is ignored by the west.

My rather clear point is that genocide denial is not unique to genocide that targets Christians, but is unfortunately common to genocide.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Erm. I'm painting the idea that the majority of Muslims are secret (or overt) Islamists looking to subvert schools? I'm not sure where you are getting this from....

I'm not, I said that you were extrapolating the ideologies of those knowingly involved in Trojan Horse to all (or at least the majority of) Muslims.

You're right in believing Trojan Horse is the biggest because it provides no escape for children from Islamist tendencies. In effect, children are being paid for by the West to be educated on rejecting and hating the West.

Tendency: An inclination towards a particular characteristic or type of behaviour:

And as for;

I'm done with the thread. It's blatantly obvious it's going to turn into a "KSaiyu vs Islam" thread again and GTP and I have probably had enough of those.

Why do you think that people are taking that opinion from your arguments?

 

[KSaiyu]

You cited the Armenian genocide as an example of how Christian persecution is ignored by the west.

My rather clear point is that genocide denial is not unique to genocide that targets Christians, but is unfortunately common to genocide.

There is only one clear and present denial out of those in the West, and it is from a century ago!

I understand your point, but you're missing the glaring detail that differentiates them.

I'm not, I said that you were extrapolating the ideologies of those knowingly involved in Trojan Horse to all (or at least the majority of) Muslims.

Yes so those children can (can, although remember that in Birmingham at least a majority of the parents wanted the governers) be exposed to Islamist teachings at home, and go to a school taken over by Islamists. Hence no escape

Why do you think that people are taking that opinion from your arguments?

Because I'm the only one willing to call out every religion equally, and current affairs has a skew towards problems associated with Islam?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Yes so those children can (can, although remember that in Birmingham at least a majority of the parents wanted the governers) be exposed to Islamist teachings at home, and go to a school taken over by Islamists. Hence no escape.

Many governors are in place because a majority of the school's parents want them in place - that's how the voting works.

In an area where children of ethnic minorities represent 60% of the cohort it's natural that their parents would want their children exposed to their own culture's teachings at home and at school.

You failed to disentangle the majority of Islamist's tendencies from Trojan Horse when you said

You're right in believing Trojan Horse is the biggest because it provides no escape for children from Islamist tendencies.

Thinking like that in Trojan Horse and the students' exposure to a hardline, fundamentalist curriculum that excluded other majorities/minorities from involvement in the schools, which removed safeguarding, falsified results and utterly, demonstrably failed to interact with the communities around it is far from being what the majority of 'Islamist' parents want.

Once again you extrapolate the actions of a minority to the majority; "it happened here so it must be what happens everywhere".

 

[KSaiyu]

...but you just said if they vote for the governors, they are voting what they want. So you are saying that Islamist parents want their culture's and Islamist teaching at school, but not:

"a hardline, fundamentalist curriculum that excluded other majorities/minorities from involvement in the schools, (schools) which removed safeguarding, falsified results and utterly, demonstrably failed to interact with the communities around it"

??

 

[Scaff]

There is only one clear and present denial out of those in the West, and it is from a century ago!

I understand your point, but you're missing the glaring detail that differentiates them.

Sorry but that's not true, the campaign against the Boer's was never and has never been acknowledged as a genocide by the British Government, in fact in everyone of those cases you will find government and political bodies that deny it.

I do also find it odd that one of my examples is a hundred years old and gets and exclamation point used, given that your own example is also in that time frame as well?

As I have already said:

You cited the Armenian genocide as an example of how Christian persecution is ignored by the west.

My rather clear point is that genocide denial is not unique to genocide that targets Christians, but is unfortunately common to genocide.

 

[KSaiyu]

Holocaust = West accepted (you are using fringe groups, NOT the heads of state)

Rwanda = West accepted.

Bosnia = West accepted.

Polish + Germans (I presume Katyn??) = West suppressed at the time because the USSR was an ally.

Boer = I don't know much about the relevant history. I presume this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War

And not to be so crass as to pull a "mine is bigger than yours", but you are comparing these to a genocide that killed one and a half million people and has been refused to be called as such by the heads of state of Turkey, Britain and America at the centennary.

I stand by my opinion that out of those, there is only one clear and present denial in the West.

 

[TenEightyOne]

...but you just said if they vote for the governors, they are voting what they want. So you are saying that Islamist parents want their culture's and Islamist teaching at school, but not:

"a hardline, fundamentalist curriculum that excluded other majorities/minorities from involvement in the schools, (schools) which removed safeguarding, falsified results and utterly, demonstrably failed to interact with the communities around it"

??

Unless you have a source that directly demonstrates that parents who want a curriculum that is inclusive of the teachings of their own cultures means that those parents all want an environment of the type that the Trojan Horse schools were trying to create then I believe it's sensible to separate the two.

A lot of people voted Hitler into power who didn't necessarily want the things that he apparently (and in some cases secretly) intended. It isn't fair or sensible to extrapolate Nazism to the bulk of the German voters any more than it's fair or sensible to extrapolate the Trojan heads' extreme agenda to the bulk of Islamists... although that was exactly what you did when you described the Trojan Horse mentality as an "Islamist tendency".

 

[Scaff]

Holocaust = West accepted (you are using fringe groups, NOT the heads of state)

Rwanda = West accepted.

Bosnia = West accepted.

Polish + Germans (I presume Katyn??) = West suppressed at the time because the USSR was an ally.

Boer = I don't know much about the relevant history. I presume this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War

And not to be so crass as to pull a "mine is bigger than yours", but you are comparing these to a genocide that killed one and a half million people and has been refused to be called as such by the heads of state of Turkey, Britain and America at the centennary.

I stand by my opinion that out of those, there is only one clear and present denial in the West.

And your using the West as a blanket term when its not the entire west; yet the following Western countries do recognise it:

Austria
Belgium
France
Germany
Canada
Cyprus
Greece
Italy
Netherlands
Sweden
Vatican City

Not to mention the Eastern European countries, most of South America. the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish assemblies and 43 of the US states. Even the Ottoman empire did in its final days.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide_recognition#Countries

So a claim of the West not recognizing it is inaccurate and misleading, even saying the UK is inaccurate.

Now even one country denying a genocide is too many, but a claim of "only one clear and present denial in the West" is stretching reality a great deal and a massive disservice to those who do recognise it. If your going to make a point, at the very least do so accurately.

 

[KSaiyu]

And your using the West as a blanket term when its not the entire west; yet the following Western countries do recognise it:

Austria
Belgium
France
Germany
Canada
Cyprus
Greece
Italy
Netherlands
Sweden
Vatican City

Not to mention the Eastern European countries, most of South America. the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish assemblies and 43 of the US states. Even the Ottoman empire did in its final days.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide_recognition#Countries

So a claim of the West not recognizing it is inaccurate and misleading, even saying the UK is inaccurate.

Now even one country denying a genocide is too many, but a claim of "only one clear and present denial in the West" is stretching reality a great deal and a massive disservice to those who do recognise it. If your going to make a point, at the very least do so accurately.

Oh I am making a point, and it's blatantly obvious for all to see. You are countering with a list of Western countries and an ex-empire that do recognise it (yay!) but deliberately refusing to acknowledge that the UK and USA refuse to when represented wholly.

It is not misleading, it is not inaccurate.

You want to get technical, then by all means:

Why has Erdogan (CURRENT head of Turkey), Obama and the UK when represented as a single entity REFUSED TO CALL IT A GENOCIDE.

Why did Turkey "react angrily" when the Pope called it a genocide?

Unless you have a source that directly demonstrates that parents who want a curriculum that is inclusive of the teachings of their own cultures means that those parents all want an environment of the type that the Trojan Horse schools were trying to create then I believe it's sensible to separate the two.

A lot of people voted Hitler into power who didn't necessarily want the things that he apparently (and in some cases secretly) intended. It isn't fair or sensible to extrapolate Nazism to the bulk of the German voters any more than it's fair or sensible to extrapolate the Trojan heads' extreme agenda to the bulk of Islamists... although that was exactly what you did when you described the Trojan Horse mentality as an "Islamist tendency".

Aftermath of Trojan Horse is probably your best bet. Research the reactions, or ask me to do so.

 

[Scaff]

Oh I am making a point, and it's blatantly obvious for all to see. You are countering with a list of Western countries and an ex-empire that do recognise it (yay!) but deliberately refusing to acknowledge that the UK and USA refuse to when represented wholly.

It is not misleading, it is not inaccurate.

You want to get technical, then by all means:

Why has Erdogan (CURRENT head of Turkey), Obama and the UK when represented as a single entity REFUSED TO CALL IT A GENOCIDE.

Why did Turkey "react angrily" when the Pope called it a genocide?

First off you need to calm down and I also suggest you think before you hit the 'Post Reply' button in future.

I have never refused to acknowledge (deliberately or otherwise) that the UK, USA and Turkish governments (and that part is important) do not call it a genocide publicly, do not state that I did again unless you can quote me.

What I pointed out is that your repeated referral to "in the west" not acknowledging the genocide is inaccurate, the US, UK and Turkey are not the west. Within the western countries a good number not only acknowledge it, they have laws in place to stop people denying it.

Even within the three counties you seem to use as 'in the west' its not that simple, with the US publicly calling it a genocide up to and including Reagan and as of today 43 states within the US (so a significant majority) doing the same; within the UK the administrative bodies for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have publicly called it a genocide and even within Turkey a number of movement (both social and political) exist that both call for it to be recognized by Turkey and hold events on the anniversary to push that agenda.

So my posts have nothing at all to do with a refusal on my part to acknowledge that the US, UK and Turkey don't publicly acknowledge it as a genocide (and you will not find me saying anything even close). My posts have to do with you using three countries to represent "in the West" and seemingly being unaware that even within those countries is not as clear cut as the political refusal by these governments may make it seem.

 

[KSaiyu]

But they still didn't come out and say it when it really mattered did they..

Why do you, or anyone in the thread suppose this is. I also notice a lot of liberal minded people liked your last post, so I'm especially keen to hear their thoughts.

* This is in a way asking the title of the thread, but using an example

 

[huskeR32]

But they still didn't come out and say it when it really mattered did they..

Why do you, or anyone in the thread suppose this is. I also notice a lot of liberal minded people liked your last post, so I'm especially keen to hear their thoughts.

* This is in a way asking the title of the thread, but using an example

You're still presupposing things here. Why is it inherently "liberal" to expect people to substantiate the claims that they make?

Personally speaking, it causes me to not want to bother answering your question. Before I even start, you're already halfway out the door, ready to dismiss what I have to say as "liberal" nonsense.

Thinking critically and being skeptical of extraordinary claims isn't a political issue.

 

[Scaff]

But they still didn't come out and say it when it really mattered did they..

Really

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...Armenia-to-mark-100-years-since-killings.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-for-armenian-massacre-victims-held-in-turkey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100th_anniversary_of_the_Armenian_Genocide#cite_note-siranush-34
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32443266

I can keep going with news reports, details of world leader and figures who attended, the German recognition of the Genocide that occurred just before, the numerous memorials that have been built around the world to mark it, that the lights of the Eiffel Tower and Coliseum were dimmed in remembrance, etc, etc, etc.

Why do you, or anyone in the thread suppose this is.

What I wonder far more is why you are asking a question that presupposes your point above is true?

The Armenian Genocide happened and a growing number of countries and people around the world are coming to know about it and accept that.

That a few countries such as the UK, US, Australia and Turkey refuse to recognize that does not make their stand acceptable or moral in my eyes, but that doesn't make it an event that 'in the west' is not recognized nor does your belief that this the case make it an example of either modern Christian Persecution because of "unwillingness to call it a genocide".

Or is this another example of silence in the media about Christian persecution that in reality is covered to a very large degree?

* This is in a way asking the title of the thread, but using an example

What is?

When you add a marked footnote is normal to use the * on both the footnote and the main text it refers to, its a bit pointless otherwise (quite literally).

 

[KSaiyu]

That a few countries such as the UK, US, Australia and Turkey refuse to recognize that does not make their stand acceptable or moral in my eyes, but that doesn't make it an event.

This part.

Why do you think this is.

And yes of course it is an event. It's the biggest international recognition of the genocide and they all refused to call it as such.

 

[Scaff]

This part.

Why do you think this is.

Because they have geo-political goals that they consider more important than recognizing it, please keep in mind that three of the heads of state in question here are vocal in their Christianity, are you claiming that this alleged Christian persecution is being carried out by Christians?

And yes of course it is an event. It's the biggest international recognition of the genocide and they all refused to call it as such.

Define all?

Do you mean all as in Australia, the UK, US and Turkey? In which case that's hardly news is it?

Or do you mean 'all' as "in the west" (which has been your stand to date) or the world? If its this case then quite frankly your wrong.

Keep in mind the actual topic of the thread, as so far you have failed to demonstrate that this is current persecution of Christians.

 

[KSaiyu]

Now we're getting somewhere. What are these geo-political goals? Why would calling a genocide a genocide interfere with these goals?

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Now we're getting somewhere. What are these geo-political goals? Why would calling a genocide a genocide interfere with these goals?

And with that statement, you've just proved that you know nothing about international relations and international law.

 

[Scaff]

Now we're getting somewhere. What are these geo-political goals? Why would calling a genocide a genocide interfere with these goals?

How about you actually explain how this is current Christian persecution first, as until you manage to make a convincing argument for that, its simply off topic.

 

[squadops]

Turkey is very important to the U.S. at the moment, as the largest military in the region willing to help NATO fight ISIS etc. In 2010 they removed their ambassador to the U.S. after congress passed a bill about the genocide.

 

[KSaiyu]

We have the right answer finally. Anyone care to connect the dots on how this relates to silence on Christian persecution.

 

[Scaff]

We have the right answer finally. Anyone care to connect the dots on how this relates to silence on Christian persecution.

Upon your return you can do it, you're making the claim you support it.

That's not a request by the way. Either put forward a compelling argument for its inclusion in this thread or start a new thread in which its on-topic.

 

[KSaiyu]

I believe we're in the middle of an ideological war (no, it involves more ideologies than just Islam and the West). I'll do a thread soon.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The windiest militant trash
Important Persons shout
Is not so crude as our wish:
What mad Nijinsky wrote
About Diaghilev
Is true of the normal heart;
For the error bred in the bone
Of each woman and each man
Craves what it cannot have,
Not universal love
But to be loved alone.

 

[squadops]

Care to explain that?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

It's about the dangers of propagating the idea of an ideological struggle.