2. sayfa (Toplam 8 sayfa)

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 15 Kas 2014, 03:40
gönderen TurkmenCopur
Criminal conviction for denial that the atrocities perpetrated against the
Armenian people in 1915 and years after constituted genocide was unjustified
In today’s Chamber judgment in the case of Perinçek v. Switzerland (application no. 27510/08),
which is not final1
, the European Court of Human Rights held, by a majority, that there had been:
a violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights
The case concerned the criminal conviction of Mr Perinçek for publicly challenging the existence of
the Armenian genocide.
The Court found that Mr Perinçek, who during various conferences in Switzerland, had described the
Armenian genocide as an “international lie”, had not committed an abuse of his rights within the
meaning of Article 17 of the Convention.
The Court underlined that the free exercise of the right to openly discuss questions of a sensitive and
controversial nature was one of the fundamental aspects of freedom of expression and distinguished
a tolerant and pluralistic democratic society from a totalitarian or dictatorial regime.
The Court also pointed out that it was not called upon to rule on the legal characterisation of the
Armenian genocide. The existence of a “genocide”, which was a precisely defined legal concept, was
not easy to prove. The Court doubted that there could be a general consensus as to events such as
those at issue, given that historical research was by definition open to discussion and a matter of
debate, without necessarily giving rise to final conclusions or to the assertion of objective and
absolute truths.
Lastly, the Court observed that those States which had officially recognised the Armenian genocide
had not found it necessary to enact laws imposing criminal sanctions on individuals questioning the
official view, being mindful that one of the main goals of freedom of expression was to protect
minority views capable of contributing to a debate on questions of general interest which were not
fully settled.
Principal facts
The applicant, Doğu Perinçek, is a Turkish national who was born in 1942 and lives in Ankara
(Turkey). Being a doctor of laws and the Chairman of the Turkish Workers’ Party, Mr Perinçek
participated in various conferences in Switzerland in May, July and September 2005, during which he
publicly denied that the Ottoman Empire had perpetrated the crime of genocide against the
Armenian people in 1915 and the following years. He described the idea of an Armenian genocide as
an “international lie”.
The association “Switzerland-Armenia” filed a criminal complaint against him on 15 July 2005. On 9
March 2007 the Lausanne Police Court found Mr Perinçek guilty of racial discrimination within the


1 Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, this Chamber judgment is not final. During the three-month period following its delivery,
any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges
considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final
judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution


meaning of the Swiss Criminal Code, finding that his motives were of a racist tendency and did not
contribute to the historical debate.
Mr Perinçek lodged an appeal that was dismissed by the Criminal Cassation Division of the Vaud
Cantonal Court. In that court’s view, the Armenian genocide, like the Jewish genocide, was a proven
historical fact, recognised by the Swiss legislature on the date of the adoption of Article 261bis of the
Criminal Code. The courts did not therefore need to refer to the work of historians in order to accept
its existence. The Cassation Division emphasised that Mr Perinçek had only denied the
characterisation as genocide without calling into question the existence of the massacres and
deportations of Armenians.
The Federal Court dismissed a further appeal by Mr Perinçek in a judgment of 12 December 2007.
Complaints, procedure and composition of the Court
Relying on Article 10 (freedom of expression), Mr Perinçek complained that the Swiss courts had
breached his freedom of expression. He argued, in particular, that Article 261bis, paragraph 4, of the
Swiss Criminal Code was not sufficiently foreseeable in its effect, that his conviction had not been
justified by the pursuit of a legitimate aim and that the alleged breach of his freedom of expression
had not been “necessary in a democratic society”.
The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 10 June 2008. The Turkish
Government submitted written comments as a third party.
Judgment was given by a Chamber of seven judges, composed as follows:
Guido Raimondi (Italy), President,
Peer Lorenzen (Denmark),
Dragoljub Popović (Serbia),
András Sajó (Hungary),
Nebojša Vučinić (Montenegro),
Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque (Portugal),
Helen Keller (Switzerland),
and also Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar.
Decision of the Court
Article 17
The Court, in first examining whether Mr Perinçek’s comments were to be excluded from the
protection of freedom of expression on the basis of Article 17 (prohibition of abuse of rights),
reiterated that ideas which offended, shocked or disturbed were also protected by Article 10. The
Court found it necessary to point out that Mr Perinçek had never questioned the massacres and
deportations perpetrated during the years in question but had denied the characterisation of those
events as “genocide”.
The limit beyond which comments may engage Article 17 lay in the question whether the aim of the
speech was to incite hatred or violence. The rejection of the legal characterisation as “genocide” of
the 1915 events was not such as to incite hatred against the Armenian people. Mr Perinçek had
never in fact been prosecuted or convicted for inciting hatred. Nor had he expressed contempt for
the victims of the events. The Court therefore found that Mr Perinçek had not abused his right to
openly discuss such questions, however sensitive and controversial they might be, and had not used
his right to freedom of expression for ends which were contrary to the text and spirit of the
Convention.

Article 10
The Court took the view that the term “genocide” as used in the relevant Article of the Swiss
Criminal Code was likely to raise doubts as to the precision required by Article 10 § 2 of the
Convention. The Court nevertheless agreed with the Federal Court that Mr Perinçek could not have
been unaware that by describing the Armenian genocide as an “international lie”, he was exposing
himself on Swiss territory to a criminal sanction “prescribed by law”.
The Court found that the aim of the measure in issue was to protect the rights of others, namely the
honour of the relatives of victims of the atrocities perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the
Armenian people from 1915 onwards. However, it regarded as insufficiently substantiated the
Government’s argument that Mr Perinçek’s comments posed a serious risk to public order.
The Court pointed out that it was not called upon to address either the veracity of the massacres
and deportations perpetrated against the Armenian people by the Ottoman Empire from 1915
onwards, or the appropriateness of legally characterising those acts as “genocide”, within the
meaning of the relevant Article of the Criminal Code. The Court had to weigh up, on the one hand,
the requirements of protecting the rights of third parties, namely the honour of the relatives of the
Armenian victims, and on the other, Mr Perinçek’s freedom of expression.
The question whether the events of 1915 and thereafter could be characterised as “genocide” was
of great interest to the general public. The Court took the view that Mr Perinçek had engaged in
speech of a historical, legal and political nature which was part of a heated debate. On account of
the public interest of his comments, the Court found that the authorities’ margin of appreciation was
limited.
The essential ground for Mr Perinçek’s conviction by the Swiss courts was the apparent existence of
a general consensus, especially in the academic community, concerning the legal characterisation of
the events in question. However, the Federal Court itself admitted that there was no unanimity in
the community as a whole concerning the legal characterisation in question. According to Mr
Perinçek and the Turkish Government, a third-party intervener in the case, it would be very difficult
to identify a general consensus. The Court shared that opinion, pointing out that there were differing
views among the Swiss political organs themselves. It appeared, moreover, that only about twenty
States out of the 190 in the world had officially recognised the Armenian genocide. Such recognition
had not necessarily come from the governments of those States – as was the case in Switzerland –
but from Parliament or one of its chambers.
Agreeing with Mr Perinçek, the Court took the view that the notion of “genocide” was a precisely
defined legal concept. According to the case-law of the International Court of Justice and the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, for the crime of genocide to be made out, the acts must
have been perpetrated with intent to destroy not only certain members of a particular group but all
or part of the group itself. Genocide was a very narrow legal concept that was, moreover, difficult to
substantiate. The Court was not convinced that the general consensus to which the courts referred
in convicting Mr Perinçek could relate to such very specific points of law.
The Court thus doubted that there could be a general consensus as to events such as those in issue
here, given that historical research was by definition open to discussion and a matter of debate,
without necessarily giving rise to final conclusions or to the assertion of objective and absolute
truths.
In this connection, the Court clearly distinguished the present case from those concerning the
negation of the crimes of the Holocaust. In those cases, the applicants had denied the historical facts
even though they were sometimes very concrete, such as the existence of the gas chambers. They
had denied the crimes perpetrated by the Nazi regime for which there had been a clear legal basis.
Lastly, the acts that they had called into question had been found by an international court to be
clearly established.


The Court took the view that Switzerland had failed to show how there was a social need in that
country to punish an individual for racial discrimination on the basis of declarations challenging the
legal characterisation as “genocide” of acts perpetrated on the territory of the former Ottoman
Empire in 1915 and the following years.
Two developments also had to be taken into account. Firstly, the Spanish Constitutional Court, in
November 2007, had found unconstitutional the offence of negation and had taken the view that
the mere negation of a crime of genocide did not constitute direct incitement to violence. Secondly,
in February 2012, the French Constitutional Council had declared unconstitutional a law which made
it a criminal offence to deny the existence of the genocides recognised by the law, finding it to be
incompatible with freedom of expression and freedom of research. In the Court’s view, the decision
of the French Constitutional Council showed that there was in principle no contradiction between
the official recognition of certain events as genocide and the conclusion that it would be
unconstitutional to impose criminal sanctions on persons who questioned the official view.
Lastly, the Court pointed out that the United Nations Human Rights Committee had expressed its
conviction2
that “[l]aws that penalize[d] the expression of opinions about historical facts [were]
incompatible with the obligations that the Covenant [on Civil and Political Rights] impose[d] on
States parties ...” and that the “Covenant [did] not permit general prohibition of expressions of an
erroneous opinion or an incorrect interpretation of past events”.
In conclusion, the Court doubted that Mr Perinçek’s conviction had been dictated by a “pressing
social need”. The Court pointed out that it had to ensure that the sanction did not constitute a kind
of censorship which would lead people to refrain from expressing criticism. In a debate of general
interest, such a sanction might dissuade contributions to the public discussion of questions which
were of interest for the life of the community.
The Court found that the grounds given by the national authorities in order to justify Mr Perinçek’s
conviction were insufficient. The domestic authorities had therefore overstepped the narrow margin
of appreciation in this case in respect of a matter of debate of undeniable public interest.
There had accordingly been a violation of Article 10.
Just satisfaction (Article 41)
The Court held that the finding of a violation of Article 10 constituted in itself sufficient just
satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by Mr Perinçek.
Separate opinions
Judges Sajó and Raimondi expressed a joint concurring opinion and Judges Vučinić and Pinto de
Albuquerque expressed a joint partly dissenting opinion. These opinions are annexed to the
judgment.
The judgment is available only in French.
This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,
judgments and further information about the Court can be found on http://www.echr.coe.int. To receive
the Court’s press releases, please subscribe here: http://www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on Twitter
@ECHRpress.
Press contacts
2 General comment No. 34, given in 2011, on freedom of opinion and expression under Article 19 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.


echrpress@echr.coe.int | tel: +33 3 90 21 42 08
Denis Lambert (tel: + 33 3 90 21 41 09)
Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel: + 33 3 88 41 35 30)
Nina Salomon (tel: + 33 3 90 21 49 79)
Jean Conte (tel: + 33 3 90 21 58 77)
The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Membe

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 29 Haz 2015, 22:12
gönderen TurkmenCopur
Musso yazdı:Armenians never had intent of destroying Turkish people. The Turkish Leadership along with their Army had a direct intention of exterminating the Armenians of Anatolia of that time. I'm sure some Turkish, Kurdish, Arab people were also killed in this time, especially in the Balkans, but when it comes to Anatolia, the intent was to exterminate and/or assimilate the Armenians of Anatolia.

If it were simply Turkish and Armenian civilians killing each other, then it would be a whole different issue.


Most important examples are the cities Erzurum and Van, the Armenians committed a genocide on the Muslim Turks and Kurds just to fullfill the orders of their Tsar Russian and English masters. The same unhuman situations were performed in all regions of Türkiye.

I really want you to understand what i mean in a good intended way. Think of it like this:

-There is a First World War ongoing.

-Majority of all Muslim men in Ottoman Türkiye did join the Ottoman army to fight against the Tsar Russians and British.

-The villages are left only with women, old people and children.

-Then all the sudden, Armenian terrorist groups like Hinchaks ve Tashnaks whom wore the military uniforms of the Russians, French and British, and were publicly in the service of the Russians, French and British armies, killed and raped the innocent civil(not soldiers) Turks and Kurds and burn and destroy as much as villages as possible(Van and Erzurum completely) with whom they lived together for 1000 years in peace.

-This is treason, and this treason is performed while the majority of the men were fighting in the battle fields against the real enemy armies of the British and Russians and their puppets(like French, Italian, etc.).

-The head of the state of the Ottoman Empire did not give any kind of order to massacre the Armenians that committed treason. The Ottoman Army was stabbed in the back, while the Ottoman Army was fighting in war, at the civil regions Armenians were commiting treason. The Ottoman state decided only to deport the Armenian population from "Türkiye"(Anatolia) regions to the region of Syria which was then still under control of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman State(The Turks) DID NOT in any kind of way perform any kind of massacre or genocide against the Armenians. Use your logical instincts, if an Armenian group of terrorists kills many of the relatives of a Turk who was in duty in the Ottoman Army, what would a Turk have to do to defend the remaining members of his family in his village? The fact is that the Armenians wore Russian and English military uniforms and tried to take over our country with the performing of hundreds of unhuman campaigns, and we Turks DEFENDED OUR COUNTRY, OUR FAMILIES AND OUR HONOUR SUCCESSFULLY, this is NOT GENOCIDE, this is a WAR, and the Turks were the ones being invaded. Of course, many unfortunate situations, revenge killings have happened, but if you look at the Ottoman records, you can see easily that the Ottoman State, executed(sentenced to death) dozens/hundreds of Turks/Kurds whom murdered against the law.

-Reading the following Report of Hovhannes Kajaznuni, the first Prime Minister of the First Republic of Armenia, shows that all my arguments above are completely true:

http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12301 yazdı:CONGRESS REPORT TO THE TASHNAK PARTY

Hovhannes Kajaznuni, or Hovhannes Katchaznouni (Armenian: Յովհաննէս Քաջազնունի) (1 February 1868 – 1938) was the first Prime Minister of the First Republic of Armenia from May 30, 1918 to May 28, 1919. He was a member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation.

Hovhannes Kajaznuni, has submitted a report to the Congress of the Tashnaksütyun Party which was held in 1923 in Bucharest-Romania. In this report, Hovhannes Kajaznuni bravely tells the truth about what happened during and after the First World War.

The Summary of the Report of Hovhannes Kajaznuni is like this:

"The Tsar Russia, England and France DECEIVED us Armenians. They told us that they would give us a state reaching from a sea to another sea, and hereby they armed us(gave us weapons) and send us to the fire(to risk ourselves, to die for them, to kill innocent people for them, for what they promised us).

The Turks acted in the pupose of defending. Mutual massacres happened. We massacred the Muslim population. Guiltiness(The ones that did wrong) should not be sought outside of the Dashnak Party. In this case, htere is nothing left to do for the Dashnak Pary. The Dashnak Pary should dissolve itself.
"
The remaining other Armenian statesmen did also write reports like this.


-Also, looking at the Turk Genocide in 26 February 1992, which was committed by the Armenians against the Azerbaijani Turks in the Khocali region, we can CONCLUDE, finally that we TURKS DID NEVER COMMIT ANY KIND OF GENOCIDE. The Armenians murdered in any kind of horrifying unhuman way within only one day, hundreds of innocent Azerbaijani Turks who did not have the proper weapons to defend theirselves. Please have a look at the following pictures to understand what kind of horrifying massacres/genocides the Armenians committed to us Turks in 1992 and understand that the same kind of unhuman acts(massacres/genocides) were also performed during and before the World War 1(1914-1918) against the Türkiye Turks in the Anatolia region.

http://www.turktoresi.com/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12279 yazdı:Resim

Resim

Resim

More photos of this horrifying unhuman Khocali Genocide can be seen at: viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12279


http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showth ... ost3661339

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 01 Tem 2015, 17:23
gönderen TurkmenCopur
Sockorer yazdı:Very good.

Then I better not hear any whining when we deport you filthy wogs to your country of origin.


Is there a war ongoing from whatever country you are coming from? Did the Turks stab your people in the back, of with whom they lived for dozens of years in peace together in the country you are living in? Did the Turks wore the uniform of the enemy of your country and join the enemy army and participated in a war that is presently ongoing in your country, and did the Turks kill thousands of your civil innocent people in a non war period? No! No! No! Then your short comment does only show your unhuman and non logical hate crime against the Turks. You can not reply to the contents of the arguments i wrote down above, so your words do not have any kind of value indeed.

XenophobicPrussian yazdı:Was Armenia already independent by this time? I'm pretty sure it was still part of the Russian Empire in 1919. If not, I'd probably say it is genocide.

If there was a country called "Armenia" and said Armenians in Turkey were forcefully relocated to this country, I wouldn't call it genocide, as they still get to exist as a group. The killing would just be mass murder, not really genocide. Again, if Armenia wasn't independent then, I would consider it a genocide.


First of all, the Armenians got deported to Syria, which was also part of the Ottoman Empire in 1915. So, the Armenians got deported from several Ottoman regions to a single Ottoman region.

And for the refreshing of our minds, the date of the First World War was 1914-1918. The Ottoman Empire was being invaded by the English and Russian armies. The Armenians joined the English, French and Russian armies, and officially wore their uniforms, these are historically proven facts. The Armenians attacked thousands of non military civil villages full with innocent Turks and Kurds, they burned cities like Van and Erzurum completely, and raped, killed the innocent populations(like they did in the more recent Khocali Genocide in 26 February 1992), their own neighbours without hesitating while the Turk and Kurd men were not present in these villages because they were in duty in the Ottoman Army.

What did the Ottoman State decided to do? Only deportation! To give a present day modern example, look at the random killings in the US performed against the African people. Without any kind of reason, the US state is just randomly killing African people just because they are racists. Did you know that the Nazi movement(whom performed the Genocide on Jews) was officially a puppet of the US and the UK states? What would the US state or any other West European state have done if the present day Armenians would have killed and raped thousands of innocent civil Americans, when there was a Third World War ongoing against other enemy states? Deportation in such a complicated situation(First World War, 1914-1918) only proofs more and more how merciful the Turks werer and still are. We Turks defended our country against the enemies who tried to take over our country by invading our country, we did not allow this to happen.

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 01 Tem 2015, 17:50
gönderen TurkmenCopur
Queen B yazdı:How manipulative is your post.
It's not a decision whether there was a genocide or not by ECoHR.

Its was a verdict between Perincek and Swizerland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perin%C3%A7ek_v._Switzerland


Are you blind, cant you read the following statements of the European Court of Human Rights? Let me rephrase the statements of the European Court of Human Rights:

STATEMENT 1:

The Court took the view that the term “genocide” as used in the relevant Article of the Swiss Criminal Code was likely to raise doubts as to the precision required by Article 10 § 2 of the Convention.

STATEMENT 2:

The Court pointed out that it was not called upon to address either the veracity of the massacres and deportations perpetrated against the Armenian people by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 onwards, or the appropriateness of legally characterising those acts as “genocide”, within the meaning of the relevant Article of the Criminal Code.

STATEMENT 3:

In this connection, the Court clearly distinguished the present case from those concerning the negation of the crimes of the Holocaust.

By the way, the official source for the results of the European Court of Human Rights about this matter are to be found at the following pdf file: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/webservices/c ... 32-5581451

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 02 Tem 2015, 01:06
gönderen TurkmenCopur
The Real Genocides Committed by the West European and American Germanic States

Petros Houhoulis yazdı:Me? I wasn't writing about my country or my nationals' actions. I was talking about that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubSZWTXz_xw

We'll see if you shall get deported peacefully from the Nordic countries... Or if they shall open gas chambers again...

You are living in the Netherlands eh? You must be scared...
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showth ... cide/page2


You are a good example which proofs that racist people of institutions(with no knowledge of the obvious historical, anthorpological and genetical facts) like yourself are NOT QUALIFIED to equal other nations or historical events as genocide. Your kind knows very well that the Armenian deportation is not a genocide.

Then what is a genocide? And why do the following real genocides not get enough attention from the non scientific racist states like the US and France?

List of Real Genocides performed by West European Germanic originated states who made their states and elite companies rich by making innocent people slaves, and trading the slaves with an unhuman honourless system:

1. Dutch Genocides in Indonesia(Rawagede Genocide in 1947, Batavia Genocide in 1740)

2. French Genocides in Algeria and Rwanda(Algeria, Sétif and Guelma Genocides and the continuation of these: 1945-1962, Rwandan Genocide: 1994)

3. German Genocides in the Western European countries were Jews lived(Holocaust Genocide: 1939–1945) ==> Hitler was a British agent, and the Nazi leaders of Hitler were all secret agents of the US/UK and after the 2nd World War all these Nazi leaders were in critical duties in the US government institutions like the CIA.

4a. US American Genocides in the American continent, performed on the Native Americans and the African Americans(Hundreds of Genocides, such as the Wounded Knee Genocide in 1890, the Wiyot Genocide in 1860, and hundreds of years of African American slavery and hundreds of genocides on African Americans, and even today the statistics show that EVERY 28 HOURS 1 AFRICAN AMERICAN IS BEING KILLED ON PUPOSE BY THE RACIST POLICE OF THE US STATE)

4b. US American Genocides performed in Japan(Hiroshima Genocide in 1945), Afghanistan/Iraq(MUSLIM GENOCIDE, 2 MILLION INNOCENT MUSLIMS WERE KILLED AND THE LIFES OF MILLIONS OF OTHER MUSLIMS WERE MADE A HELL, BETWEEN 2003-2015) and Bosnia(Genocide on Muslim Bosnians in 1995, performed and setup by the CIA agents like George Soros whom openly created the Bosniac genocide with the set up of dozens of racist foundations in Jugoslavia which made the Bosniacs and Serbs hate each other, it is proven that the Dutch Army which is a puppet of the US, ourpose with orders of the US did nothing to prevent the Srebrenica genocide).

5. Genocides performed by the UK on the Indigenous Australians and Irish people, such us for example the Mistake Creek Genocide in 1915, the Bedford Downs Genocide in 1924, the Irish Potato Famine Genocide between 1845-1852.

6. Genocides performed by the Armenian state(puppets of the Russian and US states) on the Azerbaijani Turks in the Khocali Region, Within only one day at 26 February 1992 the Armenian soldiers murdered hundreds of innocent men, women, children, babies, old people who did not have the proper weapons to defend theirselves, the whole world(except the other Turk states and populations) kept quiet after the Genocide performed on the Azerbaijani Turks.

All in all, the Western European and American Germanic countries are the mother of all genocides, and devilish unhuman slave trading. ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SO EXPERIENCED IN THE PERFORMING OF GENOCIDE, WILL HAVE THE URGE TO FALSELY TRY TO CHARGE OTHER NATIONS WITH "GENOCIDE" WHILE IT IS OBVIOUS WITH HISTORICAL SCIENTIFIC DOCUMENTS THAT THE TURKS DID NEVER COMMIT ANY KIND OF GENOCIDE!




Petros Houhoulis yazdı:You clearly don't understand English. If the following sentence:

Was put on English exams in Turkey, all Turks would fail to understand it...


Hahaha:) Denial problems, does it hurt in your behind, when the European Court of Human Rights CLEARLY ADMITS THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GENOCIDE IN THIS SITUATION?

Keep on with the denial stuff, you make your self only more and more ridiculous, have fun :)

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 02 Tem 2015, 01:54
gönderen TurkmenCopur
Queen B yazdı:I see very well, thank you.
You didn't even read what I wrote.

Your title is misleading, since you imply that ECoHR ruled that there was no genocide.
The ECoHR simple ruled that Perincek's sayings fall under the ''freedom of expression'' category, and he was faulty criminilized, based on Swiss law.

The European court of Human Rights have not any ''say" to if there was a genocide or not. This is a job for ICJ (International Court of Justice)
The ECoHR deals with applications alleging that a contracting state has breached one or more of the human rights provisions concerning civil and political rights set out in the Convention and its protocols. (in this case, freedom of expression)


See bold. As used in the Swiss Criminal code.


Read it and have fun with the denial stress you are experiencing:)

The Court pointed out that it was not called upon to address either the veracity of the massacres and deportations perpetrated against the Armenian people by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 onwards, or the appropriateness of legally characterising those acts as “genocide”, within the meaning of the relevant Article of the Criminal Code.

In this connection, the Court clearly distinguished the present case from those concerning the negation of the crimes of the Holocaust.

If you would have read the full contents of the PDF file published BY the European Court of Human Rights about this case you would have seen what the Swiss Criminal Code is equal to. Let me educate you guys step by step.

The non scientific false and hate crime(against Turks) contents of the Swiss Criminal Code:

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/webservices/content/pdf/003-4613832-5581451 yazdı:The association “Switzerland-Armenia” filed a criminal complaint against him on 15 July 2005. On 9
March 2007 the Lausanne Police Court found Mr Perinçek guilty of racial discrimination within the meaning of the Swiss Criminal Code, finding that his motives were of a racist tendency and did not contribute to the historical debate.

Mr Perinçek lodged an appeal that was dismissed by the Criminal Cassation Division of the Vaud Cantonal Court. In that court’s view, the Armenian genocide, like the Jewish genocide, was a proven historical fact, recognised by the Swiss legislature on the date of the adoption of Article 261bis of the Criminal Code. The courts did not therefore need to refer to the work of historians in order to accept its existence. The Cassation Division emphasised that Mr Perinçek had only denied the characterisation as genocide without calling into question the existence of the massacres and deportations of Armenians.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/webservices/content/pdf/003-4613832-5581451


After the appropiate NEUTRAL RESEARCH of The European Court of Human Rights, they decided that the "deportations and massacres committed to the Armenians" IS NOT EQUAL TO THE TERM 'Genocide". The Swiss Criminal Code describes the events as "genocide", and the European Court of Human Rights decides that the Swiss Criminal Code is WRONG.

The Decision of the European Court of Human Rights:

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/webservices/content/pdf/003-4613832-5581451 yazdı:The Court took the view that the term “genocide” as used in the relevant Article of the Swiss Criminal Code was likely to raise doubts as to the precision required by Article 10 § 2 of the Convention.

The Court pointed out that it was not called upon to address either the veracity of the massacres and deportations perpetrated against the Armenian people by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 onwards, or the appropriateness of legally characterising those acts as “genocide”, within the meaning of the relevant Article of the Criminal Code.

In this connection, the Court clearly distinguished the present case from those concerning the negation of the crimes of the Holocaust.

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/webservices/content/pdf/003-4613832-5581451

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 02 Tem 2015, 02:11
gönderen TurkmenCopur
XenophobicPrussian yazdı:So much ignorance. Most blacks lynched in the US were serious criminals, there was a case of a black guy being lynched for whistling at a white women, but again, most were serious criminals including murderers.

For your information, the Nazis also wanted to simply deport Jews first, for the same reasons the Turks deported Armenians, treason. The US and UK didn't allow them to, so they turned to mass murder.


You are the ignorant one. Look at the following video, and see how and with what kind of racist system, the US state is committing a GENOCIDE ON THE AFRICAN AMERICAN POPULATION:



Today, not 1000 years ago, in the so called modern times of the US state, the Police of the US state is MURDERING ONE AFRICAN AMERICAN PERSON PER 28 HOURS, THIS IS A STATISTICALLY PROVEN FACT! If they act like this today, what do you think about how the US state performed their sytematic genocide on the African American people in the 1930's, 1940's or even earlier in the 18th-19th centuries? Do you have a soul to accept these facts? Or do you only have the urge to spread your lies against the Turks because of the Hate Crime feelings you have towards the Turk Nation?

The Jews did not kill anyone in Germany, nor did the Jews wore the uniforms of enemy state armies, nor did the Jews try to divide the German state, their only problem was that their companies became richer and richer and began to dominate the economy of the racist Nazi state which was a puppet of the UK and the US. After the loss of Germany in the First World War, the constitution(The main laws) were written by the UK(=US). The UK state was using their secret agent Hitler, to bring down the economical rise of the Jews just before the Second World War. These Jews were of Khazar Turk origin, and this was the racist reason for the Germanic UK/US/Nazi's to perform a genocide on these Jews.

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 02 Tem 2015, 02:16
gönderen TurkmenCopur
XenophobicPrussian yazdı:What is a hate crime is importing foreigners like you against the will of the people and making Europeans first minorities in their own countries then extinct. That's the real hate crime, and that's the latest genocide going on in the world.


You only keep denying my comments, it only shows how unsufficient you are. Read my previous comments of the details of the situation that was present during the FIRST WORLD WAR, and what the Armenians did before the Deportation. I do not feel it necessary to repeat my arguments hundreds of times, it is meaningless. If you prefer, you can keep on with the denying strategy, altough this will never change the real truth and the scientific facts, dont worry about it.

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 04 Tem 2015, 01:47
gönderen TurkmenCopur
Queen B yazdı:What you fail to understand? ECoHR's is about.. HUMAN rigths. Crimes and crimes against humanity are of ICJ.

:picard2:


Lol, hahaha, in phase one you start the denying process, in phase to you make a 180 degree turn and accept the truth, and you dont value the decision made by the European Court of Human Rights.

1:
The State of Switzerland and France are openly violating the HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE TURKS(approximately 1 million Turks, including Doğu Perinçek) that live in Switzerland and France, by declaring them murderers while it is a scientifically proven fact that there was no genocide performed on the Armenians, while on the other side the Armenians committed openly many genocides on purposely on innocent civil Turks. The states of Switzerland and France are openly punishing people who are following the scientific truth and deny the false genocide.

2:
The Armenian slander is a false accusation, there was never committed any kind of genocide against the Armenians. The Armenian slander has to do with the human rights of Turks and Armenians, so this accusation is the work of the European Court of Human Rights.
During the First World War, the present Armenian state did not yet exist, but the Ottoman state was present, and Türkiye is the following state of the Ottoman Empire. So the Armenian slander clearly has to do with the human rights of the present day and historical(around 1914-1918) civil individual Turks and Armenians. The punishing with a law, according to a false(historically proven to be false) slander, is against the terms of the European Court of Human Rights. If the European Court of Human Rights publishes a result in which they say that there was no such thing as a "genocide" on Armenians, then all members(governments of for example France and Switzerland) of the European countries MUST follow this decision, also all other courts MUST AUTOMATICALLY follow this decision, because all these European courts are integrated to each other.

Read the following content on the following page of the International Court of Justice: http://www.icj-cij.org/information/index.php?p1=7&p2=2

The International Court of Justice differs from the European Court of Justice (the seat of which is in Luxembourg), whose role is to interpret European Community legislation uniformly and rule on its validity, as well as from the European Court of Human Rights (in Strasbourg, France) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (in San José, Costa Rica), which deal with allegations of violations of the human rights conventions under which they were set up. As well as applications from States, those three courts can entertain applications from individuals, which is not possible for the International Court of Justice.


The page clearly writes that the European Court of Human Rights can deal with matters of states and individuals together.

3.
Read the contents of the following article at:

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/01/turkey-armenia-switzerland-genocide-perincek.html#

The case being heard in Strasbourg, where Clooney is representing Armenia, centers on the hotly debated genocide Armenians say Ottoman Turks perpetrated a century ago against 1.5 million of their forbears.

The Armenian claim, though it has significant international political and academic support, is nevertheless questioned by the Turkish judiciary in terms of the strict legal definition of genocide. Turkey officially denies the claim, although it acknowledges that hundreds of thousands of Armenians were among the millions of Ottomans killed during World War I.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/01/turkey-armenia-switzerland-genocide-perincek.html#ixzz3erqvLRnQ


In this case of the European Court of Human Rights, Amal Clooney was representing the country Armenia, and Doğu Perinçek was representing the country Türkiye. So, the subject of the case is the "Armenian slander", and the European Court of Human Rights had to make a decision which showed that either the country/state Türkiye, or the the country/state Armenia was right.

4.
The European Court of Human Rights investigated the subject and made a neutral solid research. They published(http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/webservices/content/pdf/003-4613832-5581451) the result of their investigation and research with the following solid data which openly proofs that there was no such thing as a "genocide", this decision MUST be followed by all European governments and courts:

-The Court took the view that the term “genocide” as used in the relevant Article of the Swiss Criminal Code was likely to raise doubts as to the precision required by Article 10 § 2 of the Convention.

-The Court pointed out that it was not called upon to address either the veracity of the massacres and deportations perpetrated against the Armenian people by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 onwards, or the appropriateness of legally characterising those acts as “genocide”, within the meaning of the relevant Article of the Criminal Code.

-In this connection, the Court clearly distinguished the present case from those concerning the negation of the crimes of the Holocaust.

EuropeanCourtHR: "Armenian Deportation Is Not a Genocide"

MesajGönderilme zamanı: 04 Tem 2015, 15:55
gönderen TurkmenCopur
Queen B yazdı:Of course I value the decision of ECoHR.

You still haven't understand shit, though.
This case is between Perincek and Switzerland.
Its not between Turkey and Armenia.


Keep on with the denying :) I just need to rephrase a part of my previous post:

"In this case of the European Court of Human Rights, Amal Clooney was representing the country Armenia, and Doğu Perinçek was representing the country Türkiye. So, the subject of the case is the "Armenian slander", and the European Court of Human Rights had to make a decision which showed that either the country/state Türkiye, or the the country/state Armenia was right."

Countries like Switzerland create a law in 2005 based on the hate crime against Turks. The law includes the devilish rule, that if someone refuses the Armenian slander(scientifically proven that there is no genocide), he/she will go to prison. Like i mentioned before, there are tons of other REAL genocides committed by the West European and American countries. Countries like Switzerland do not seem it to be necessary to create laws associated with these real genocides. The fact is that countries like Switzerland and France are political puppets of the US and the UK, and when the US/UK orders and forces these puppet governments to create such non logical laws, they immediately do this. An Independent Türkiye and Independent Turks, is a big threat for the plans the UK/US has in the Middle East, the UK/US cant expand their rule in the Middle East, because the country Türkiye and the Türk Armed Forces created by Atatürk is fully independent, and blocks the expansion of all devilish unhuman plans of the UK/US in the Middle East. Thats the reason why the UK/US gives orders to their puppet countries to create laws based on hate crime and international lies.

1- Doğu Perinçek goes to Switzerland in 2005, together with Rauf Denktaş(former and building president of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus) and dozens of other Turk scholars(also many historians like the former president of the Türk History Institute Yusuf Halaçoğlu went to Switzerland at this period) and statesmen, and gives a democratic conference to a huge group of Turks, and tells in summary: "The Armenian genocide is an Imperialist Lie".

2- In 2007, Switzerland sentenced Doğu Perinçek for 90 days of prison.

3- Doğu Perinçek files a complaint in 2008, at the European Court of Human Rights against the state of Switzerland.

4- In 17 December 2013, the European Court of Human Rights, made a neutral investigation and research about the scientific/historical realities(the truth) regarding the falsely accused genocide against the Armenian population in 1915. The conclusions of the European Court of Human Rights about the truth about the Armenian slander subject, after their neutral investigation and research were:

-The Court took the view that the term “genocide” as used in the relevant Article of the Swiss Criminal Code was likely to raise doubts as to the precision required by Article 10 § 2 of the Convention.

-The Court pointed out that it was not called upon to address either the veracity of the massacres and deportations perpetrated against the Armenian people by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 onwards, or the appropriateness of legally characterising those acts as “genocide”, within the meaning of the relevant Article of the Criminal Code.

-In this connection, the Court clearly distinguished the present case from those concerning the negation of the crimes of the Holocaust.

5- Because the European Court of Human Rights decided and believes there was no such thing as an Armenian genocide in 1915(read my previous posts about the details of what precisely happened at this period of time), the European Court of Human Rights sentenced Switzerland, for violating the freedom of expression of Doğu Perinçek.

6- All European countries and all European courts MUST follow the contents of the decision the European Court of Human Rights has made.

7- In March 2014, Switzerland lodged an appeal against the decision and sentence of the European Court of Human Rights. The European Court of Human Rights, planned a new appointment for the evaluation of the lodged appeal.

8- In January 2015, this new appointment for the case was carried out. Now, the state of Türkiye represented Doğu Perinçek, and the states of Armenia and France represented Switzerland about the discussion and evaluation of the decision, sentence and results the European Court of Human Rights had published in 17 December 2013. So, the complete case(2008-2015) is a case associated with multiple present day and historical European states, because the decision in 17 December 2013 included a conclusion of "THERE WAS NO GENOCIDE PERFORMED ON THE ARMENIANS IN 1915".

The Armenians in 1915 wore the military uniforms of France, England and Russia, they were in duty of the armies of these countries, and performed treason against the Ottoman state in which they lived for 1000 years in peace, by the killing and murdering of innocent civil(non military) Muslim Turks and Kurds to fullfill the orders of the countries France, England and Russia which were the enemies of the Ottoman state during the ongoing First World War(1914-1918). Hovhannes Kajaznuni, accepts all these facts courageously, but neither the modern Armenians, nor the other European countries seem to be interested in the scientific truth based on historical facts which are found from Russian, Ottoman and Armenian historical documents. The Swiss Criminal Code, their evil law that punishes people who deny the Armenian slander, did not need the assistance of historians and historical facts, so the reason for creating their law was on purposely because they got the orders from the UK/US states in order to perform pressure on the present day modern Turks and the modern Türkiye state. This is infact a really obvious hate crime against the Turks. Since the Armenian state was not present in 1915, the Swiss state was represented, in January 2015, by the combination of the states of France(European) and Armenia, which is logical because France was according to Hovhannes Kajaznuni one of the states(together with Tsar Russia and England) which clearly used the Armenian population during the period of 1915 to commit treason against the Turks and the Ottoman state.