Comment enough with this shit already (Score 1) 220
"Oh yeah, how many websites on the Armenian genocide can you bring up in Turkey?"
How about every single one of them? Actually, none of the websites about the genocide are banned. It is not illegal to talk about the genocide, nor to accept it. The crushing majority still denies it, and would hate your guts if you supported the claims, but they can't legally do anything.
No journalist have gone to prison for reporting on Armenian genocide. Hrant Dink got convicted of "insulting turkishness" because of a misinterpretation of a article he wrote in newspaper. His sentence was "postponed", which really meant that he wouldn't really serve it if he didn't get convicted of the same charges. (Since it was a misinterpretation, it was unlikely)
Coincidentally, he was talking about how the Armenians should leave aside the bad blood between Turks and them. (The mistranslation was kind of like "Armenians should get rid of the bad blood of Turks in their veins.)
It wasn't the state who prosecuted Hrant Dink, it was a private lawyer called Kemal Kerincsiz, a fascist jackass who only pressed charges to draw attention to himself. He also pressed charges against other prominent public figures who supported the Genocide. Nevertheless, all these charges were dismissed by the courts, since article 301 is very vague and doesn't really say anything about genocide. This in turn put Hrant in the crosshairs of an über-nationalistic minority, and he got murdered.
While everybody knows that he got murdered, no one here really mentions that more than 50.000 people marched in his funeral, shouting out "We're all Hrant, we're all armenians!". That's the single most number of people attending a civilian funeral in Turkey. (barring aside the ex presidents and such.) (link : http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/2 3/1530254)
Denying the genocide doesn't make it go away, but making it illegal to say that it didn't happen doesn't necesserally make it right neither, as in France. (link : http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/19/opinion/edk inik.php)
Freedom of speech means you have to be willing to hear both sides, right or wrong.
How about every single one of them? Actually, none of the websites about the genocide are banned. It is not illegal to talk about the genocide, nor to accept it. The crushing majority still denies it, and would hate your guts if you supported the claims, but they can't legally do anything.
No journalist have gone to prison for reporting on Armenian genocide. Hrant Dink got convicted of "insulting turkishness" because of a misinterpretation of a article he wrote in newspaper. His sentence was "postponed", which really meant that he wouldn't really serve it if he didn't get convicted of the same charges. (Since it was a misinterpretation, it was unlikely)
Coincidentally, he was talking about how the Armenians should leave aside the bad blood between Turks and them. (The mistranslation was kind of like "Armenians should get rid of the bad blood of Turks in their veins.)
It wasn't the state who prosecuted Hrant Dink, it was a private lawyer called Kemal Kerincsiz, a fascist jackass who only pressed charges to draw attention to himself. He also pressed charges against other prominent public figures who supported the Genocide. Nevertheless, all these charges were dismissed by the courts, since article 301 is very vague and doesn't really say anything about genocide. This in turn put Hrant in the crosshairs of an über-nationalistic minority, and he got murdered.
While everybody knows that he got murdered, no one here really mentions that more than 50.000 people marched in his funeral, shouting out "We're all Hrant, we're all armenians!". That's the single most number of people attending a civilian funeral in Turkey. (barring aside the ex presidents and such.) (link : http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/
Denying the genocide doesn't make it go away, but making it illegal to say that it didn't happen doesn't necesserally make it right neither, as in France. (link : http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/19/opinion/ed
Freedom of speech means you have to be willing to hear both sides, right or wrong.
