Armenian Knowledge Base  

Go Back   Armenian Knowledge Base > Thematic forums > History and Politics
Register

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02.08.2004, 19:29   #16
Banned
 
Jessika's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08 2004
Location: Yerevan
Age: 42
Posts: 417
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Reputation: 0 | 0
Default

Вы даже не представляете насколько всерьез.
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 19:49   #17
Banned
 
Jessika's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08 2004
Location: Yerevan
Age: 42
Posts: 417
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Reputation: 0 | 0
Default

Ой как он упорно молчит. Сума можно сойти. Моно!!! Але!!!
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 19:50   #18
Moderator
 
Mono's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10 2001
Location: Yerevan
Posts: 5,466
Downloads: 1
Uploads: 0
Blog Entries: 1
Reputation: 110 | 5
Default

Да Изабелл она принимает меня всерьез потому что в 1992-ом знал об этой статье. А раз знал значит знает куда тянутся все нити.... Или может ей кажется что знает. Скорее всего второй вариант.

Джессика

Если ваш приятель так уверен что это ложь то мы приглашаем его на ОТКРЫТИЙ дебат.

Хотя я почему то не уверен что он придет. Нет.

Что касается рыцарей. лооол. Если вы думайте что это союз арийцев. лоол Рыцари которые знают про Систему такие ИМЕНА НЕ ВЫБИРАЮТ.

Арийцев НЕТУ. Это миф. Миф.
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 19:52   #19
Moderator
 
Mono's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10 2001
Location: Yerevan
Posts: 5,466
Downloads: 1
Uploads: 0
Blog Entries: 1
Reputation: 110 | 5
Default

Да про Лоуренского.

Вы правы он был черезчур болтлив. Наверное его экстровертная натура была такая. И поетому его убили. Так ударили машиной когда он ездил на велисопеде к своему другу.
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 19:55   #20
Banned
 
Jessika's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08 2004
Location: Yerevan
Age: 42
Posts: 417
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Reputation: 0 | 0
Default

Я за других не могу отвечать, и потом он сейчас не в Армении.
А то, что ты мне так и не ответил на мой вопрос это плохо.
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 19:56   #21
Moderator
 
Mono's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10 2001
Location: Yerevan
Posts: 5,466
Downloads: 1
Uploads: 0
Blog Entries: 1
Reputation: 110 | 5
Default

Я добавил 4-ую и последную страницу.

Джессика

То что вы назвали Армянскую Цивилизацию Паразитической не делает вам честь.
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 19:58   #22
Moderator
 
Mono's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10 2001
Location: Yerevan
Posts: 5,466
Downloads: 1
Uploads: 0
Blog Entries: 1
Reputation: 110 | 5
Default

А то, что ты мне так и не ответил на мой вопрос это плохо.///

Джессика вам так трудно дать один аддресс эмайла ???
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 19:59   #23
Banned
 
Jessika's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08 2004
Location: Yerevan
Age: 42
Posts: 417
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Reputation: 0 | 0
Default

Я сказала, что с точки зрения Британской цивилизации, некоторые чопорные Англичане могут так считать. Вот например госпожа Посол плевать на нас хотела с жердочки!
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 20:03   #24
Moderator
 
Mono's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10 2001
Location: Yerevan
Posts: 5,466
Downloads: 1
Uploads: 0
Blog Entries: 1
Reputation: 110 | 5
Default

А разве он был англичанином ???
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 20:03   #25
Banned
 
Jessika's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08 2004
Location: Yerevan
Age: 42
Posts: 417
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Reputation: 0 | 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mono
А то, что ты мне так и не ответил на мой вопрос это плохо.///
Джессика вам так трудно дать один аддресс эмайла ???
Я не понимаю зачем тебе е-mail? Напиши ПМ.
Reply With Quote
Old 02.08.2004, 20:04   #26
Banned
 
Jessika's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08 2004
Location: Yerevan
Age: 42
Posts: 417
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Reputation: 0 | 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mono
А разве он был англичанином ???
Кто он? И почему был?
Reply With Quote
Old 11.08.2004, 08:32   #27
Cheloveka!
 
Join Date: 05 2003
Location: Burkina Faso
Age: 39
Posts: 314
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Reputation: 0 | 0
Default

Mono jan, texnikakan harts... Sa inch-vor parberakanic a? Vacharvum/taratsvum a inch-vor tex?
Reply With Quote
Old 11.08.2004, 17:56   #28
Banned
 
Jessika's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08 2004
Location: Yerevan
Age: 42
Posts: 417
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Reputation: 0 | 0
Talking

Армянской источник утверждает, что интервью называлось "Armenians are Impossible", но в отличие от господина Vartkes Sinanian –а Мистер John E. Mack [Pulitzer Prize-winning author and professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School] (см статью ниже) не акцентирует на этом, оказывается это интервью было посвящено совершенно другой тематике и вскользь затрагивался Армянской вопрос (см выделенное in bold). Ну а есть интересная статья T. E. Lawrence Studies (http://www.telstudies.org/research/tel_and_zionism.htm
), но там на сайте нет и слова про это интервью.
К стати есть и общество посвященное Лоуренсу (http://www.telsociety.org.uk/society.htm), но когда на сайте общества делаешь search на имя Steffens результат нулевой. Вот так!
Если кто либо хочет удостовериться на 100% есть два варианта: пишете письмо T. E. Lawrence Society (http://www.telsociety.org.uk/contact.htm) и ссылаясь на статью Мистера John E. Mack просите прислать вам интервью с Лоуренсом, либо пишете самому Мистеру John E. Mack-у(http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/ej...cle.asp?id=136) и просите ему прислать интервью, либо указать где вы его можете ОФИЦИАЛЬНО приобрести. К стати на сайте The John E Mack Institute есть форум, можете попросить их форумчан они помогут.

Quote:
His only book "The Seven Pillars of Wisdom" is still popular with scholarsand others who are interested in the history of that region. When he finished writing, the manuscript was mysteriously lost so Lawrence had towrite it all over again from memory. He was reluctant to talk about his role and requests for interviews were unanswered probably because he feared repudiation by the British Foreign Office. One of the rare interviews that he granted was with Lincoln Steffens a well-known American writer, magazine editor and author, who had achieved fame as an interviewer. Steffens described his interview with Lawrence as the "queerest I ever had in all my interviewing life. English humor consists, in part, at least in what it is said; the British in what a Britisher doesn't say." In his interview titled "Armenians are Impossible" he writes of Lawrence "I offer the curiosity as I wrote it at the time (in Paris during the Peace Conference in 1919) and I'll have to leave it to those who read it to guess what it's all about, if anything." 1919 was a fateful year in Armenia's history. It was the aftermath of the Armenian Genocide with its disastrous consequences and our people were still licking their wounds. However, there was a renewed hope because of the creation of the Armenian Republic.
By Vartkes Sinanian
http://www.armeniandiaspora.com/foru...hp/t-2112.html
Другой источник:

Quote:
If Lawrence of Arabia Were Viewing the War
by John E. Mack, M.D.

Originally published on February 17, 1991
New York Newsday, p.54
Reprinted on occasion of the renewed conflict with Iraq.

T. E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia) would, I think, have been appalled by the scale of destruction and loss of human life now taking place in the Mideast. In October, 1916, as a young English intelligence officer stationed in Cairo, he went to Arabia to explore the value of supporting the stalled Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Turks, then allied with the German forces. A brilliant student of Arab psychology, Lawrence, with minimal enemy and allied losses, guided the guerrilla campaign in the desert, which ended two years later after the fall of Damascus to British troops and Arab irregulars.

The Arab Revolt was but a sideshow to British Field Marshall Edmund Allenby's main Egyptian Expeditionary Force, which drove the Turkish armies out of Palestine and Syria. But its dramatic success and Lawrence's colorful personality guaranteed his lasting renown. Today Lawrence. it is true, is a symbol to some of the arrogance and meddlesomeness of the British Empire. But as British liaison officer to the Arab irregular forces, Lawrence was scrupulously attentive to Arab history, culture and religion as well as psychology. As early as 1920 he understood the central importance of Iraq for the future of the region--"for very sound reasons or economics and population." He would, I suspect, have loathed Saddam Hussein and feared, as we have, his bid for power in the region. But I doubt Lawrence would have recommended the heavyhanded methods that we have applied to the problem Hussein has presented--methods, I understand, adopted without the advice of Arab and Mideast experts within our government.

Lawrence was always careful to work through and behind the Arab leaders. He would support, influence, cajole the tribal leaders and, of course, provide them with arms and other supplies. But he scrupulously avoided offending Arab pride by appearing to dominate the campaign. By contrast, the current allied campaign, though including Arab countries, is clearly dominated by U.S. policy-makers.

More significant than the military achievements of the Arab Revolt was the powerful stimulus it gave to the passions of Arab nationalism and the bolstering of Arab claims during the peace conferences that followed the war developments we will anxiously confront at the end of the Persian Gulf war.

The captured Ottoman territories were divided into British and French spheres of influence, and by 1921 the modern borders of the Arab countries of the Mideast, including present-day

Iraq, were largely established. Lawrence worked feverishly during the years after the war to support Arab self-determination. His greatest success, perhaps, was his influence upon Winston Churchill, then head of the British Colonial Office, in installing Faisal as King of Iraq, where he remained until his death in 1933.

At the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, where the victors of World War I convened to divide the spoils, Lawrence gave an interview to the American reformer Lincoln Steffens, who was a conference observer. The ostensible purpose of the meeting was for Lawrence to try to persuade the United States through Steffens to administer Armenia during the post-war period. There was no realistic chance of this, so Lawrence used the opportunity to take out on Steffens his frustration with the peace process and to tell him what he thought of the arrogance and hypocrisy of Wilsonian America.

Lawrence spoke of America's "Christian idealism," our ability to espouse the highest of moral principles, including official support for selfdetermination, while at the same time to massacre and sequester our native Indian population. Lawrence suggested sarcastically that we could probably abuse the Armenians in the same way--"with thoroughness, gradually, but completely"--without international scandal. "He reminded me," Steffens reported, "that we were so idealistic and enjoyed such repute for philanthropy that we seemed to be able to do anything within reason without losing either our idealism or our good name."


He went on to attack the United States' disavowed imperialism through Steffens, who never seemed to catch on to how he was being tweaked:
"There was no scandal, was there, over your Indian policy?" Lawrence asked. "And you never ceased to think that what you did was right? You have conquered part of Mexico, you have occupied Hawaii, taken the Philippines and Puerto Rico by force of arms from Spain; freed Cuba and kept a mortgage on it; and you have put your Marines ashore in Central America and forgotten them . . . And yet . . . you are still for self-determination for small nations. You are a small empire, and you have warned us in your Monroe Doctrine that you are going, when you get ready, to be a great empire. And yet you are anti-imperialists. You have just fought a war against German imperialism, and.

"So did you," I shot in.

"Oh, that is different," he fired back. "We frankly call ourselves an empire and we fought honestly for our empire against the Germans' empire. But you . . . you fought against empire for . . . self-determination."
I find it remarkable how much of this interview is relevant, more than 70 years later, to the United States' current actions in the Mideast. Our stated policy of stopping a brutal dictator from imposing his will upon the region, and free-ing a country he unjustly invaded, is certainly worthy if not philanthropic.

However, our war policy goes far beyond these aims and, as an increasing number of world leaders are saying, it may be exceeding the United Nations' authorization. With the sanctimoniousness that Lawrence identified as characteristically American, we repeatedly declare our intention to avoid targeting civilians and to minimize the loss of civilian life in Iraq. Yet the bombing has been so overwhelming that the loss of human life ("collateral damage") is verging on massacre, The people who survive are without water, heat or electricity, and children are dying in hospitals for lack of adequate medical supplies. The damage on the ground appears to be so vast that nothing less than the destruction of the country seems to be occurring.

In the sharp reduction of the Persian Gulf conflict to a matter of black and white, of good versus evil, we have brushed aside the great complexity of the issues. President George Bush has even gone so far as to invoke the just-war doctrine and to declare self-righteously that we are "on the side of God," despite the fact that the majority of Roman Catholic and Episcopal clergy state that the gulf war fails to meet the just-war requirements. In particular, they point out, the war was initiated before it was a last resort, the damage that has been done to noncombatants is disproportionate, and there is little likelihood of the war's resulting in a "just and secure peace."

Further evidence of our oversimplifications is our refusal to consider Iraq's serious grievances against vastly richer Kuwait, which was stealing its oil and driving the price so low through overproduction that it threatened Iraq's economic survival.

In the background to all this is the history of Arab suffering in the past century at the hands of the Western powers--not least the British, as Lawrence well understood--of which the present war is only the most recent episode.

One example from the past is the British provocation and suppression of a tribal rebellion on the lower Euphrates in 1920, which soon spread through much of Iraq, then called Mesopotamia. The rebellion had been provoked by the harsh policies of the colonial administrator, Arnold Wilson. Lawrence wrote, "We have killed about 10,000 Arabs in this rising this summer. How long will we permit millions of pounds, thousands of imperial troops, and tens of thousands of Arabs to be sacrificed on behalf of a form of colonial administration which can benefit nobody but its administrators?"

We, too, claim to be attacking Iraq to stop aggression and, ultimately, to bring peace and order to the region. Yet we, like the British in 1920, have overlooked the damage to our future relationship with the Arab world that the destruction of Iraq and the killing of Arabs will bring. Tufts professor Laila Fawaz has pointed out that the imbalance in American support for Israel in relation to its Arab neighbors over the past 44 years has "eroded Arab trust in American ability to act as an honest broker in solving the problems of the Middle East." We can expect Hussein to appeal, however cynically, to the divisions within the Arab world that have grown out of its colonial and post-colonial history, especially those relating to the great inequalities of wealth and opportunity in the region.

The United States aspires to play a constructive role in the peace process that will follow this frightful war. But our ability to do so will depend on achieving political maturity, which would enable us to empathize with the plight of troubled and needy people in cultures unlike our own. Were we to acknowledge our own imperialistic proclivities, as T.E. Lawrence did of Britain's, the higher values to which we hold ourselves would likely compel us to admit that international political confrontations do not yield to aggressive ultimata and purely military solutions. In the meantime, there is a real danger that the exuberant misapplication of our extraordinary technological capability and military power will cause further terrible suffering and bring the world to the edge of annihilation.


John E. Mack, M.D., is a Pulitzer Prize-winning author and professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Mack is the founder of the Center for Psychology & Social Change. He is the author or co-author of eleven books, including A Prince of Our Disorder, a Pulitzer Prize-winning biography of T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia). Most recently, he contributed a chapter to Chris E. Stout's anthology.
http://www.johnemackinstitute.org/ej...cle.asp?id=136

Last edited by Jessika; 11.08.2004 at 18:08.
Reply With Quote
Old 11.08.2004, 18:14   #29
Banned
 
Jessika's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08 2004
Location: Yerevan
Age: 42
Posts: 417
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Reputation: 0 | 0
Default

Резюмируя хочу отметить, что пока тут нам не покажут официально присланную статью из какого либо архива или желательнее библиотеки Конгресса США спорить о качестве и достоверности Русского и Армянского переводов статьи и речи быть не может!
Reply With Quote
Old 22.08.2004, 19:42   #30
Moderator
 
Mono's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10 2001
Location: Yerevan
Posts: 5,466
Downloads: 1
Uploads: 0
Blog Entries: 1
Reputation: 110 | 5
Default

неМарина

Это газета Союза Арийцев. Так называется ихная газета которая выходит раз в месяц. Купить его невозможно но если вы хотите то можете звонить им и они каждый месяц принесут. Кстати вот Джессика нашла линк

http://www.armeniandiaspora.com/foru...hp/t-2112.html


Джессика

А с какой стати я должен задавать такой вопрос Джону Маку. ??? И почему я должен доверять ему ?? Пулицер это что?, эталон чистоплотности или наоборот медаль за верноподанство.
Вопрос задать то я могу но почему то я знаю какой будет ответ.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Reply

Thread Tools


На правах рекламы:
реклама

All times are GMT. The time now is 15:16.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.