When lawmakers are in question the very first thing that annoys me is their overnight transformation of lackeys to their party bosses into super-lackeys who are ready to publicly sacrifice their name and whatever integrity they might have been left with for serving their master's even better. It is difficult (for me) to understand how did J.C. Huizinga-Heringa (Tineke) figure it out that our country will be better off if she pushed through Parliament a law which would make it possible that we are criminally prosecuted if we refused to recognize specific "genocide" cases. She is far from a historian. Our dear Tineke studied law (Rechten) in Utrecht and achieved there a level (of what I understand Dutch is equal to a "bachelor-manquee") or "kandidaats" rang. It took her full ten years, from 1978 till 1982, to grasp that modest quantum of intricacies in Law. (Left: A woman on a horsback under the mighty Ararat, just about the places of the notorious events of crime and punishment)
She believes (Het Parol, 4 October) that large groups (especially from North Africa, thus, the always guilty Moroccans) know little about the Holocaust. So she wants "her" law to make all who apply for citizenship to be obliged to accept her views over history she has not any formal education nor verified knowledge of. On the principle that appetite grows with eating, she believes that her law would be indispensable ("onmisbaar") to fight expressions of opinion (in collusion with "officially recognized" genocide cases) on the internet. In short Tieneke wanted to put a plaster over my big mouth and be able to put me in prison if I said, as I do, that there has never been a genocide over the Armenians. She did not waste ten years of her parents or our treasury moneys studying law. She clarifies (or mistifies) her law by stating that it is OK to say "It is not true". But it is criminal offense (one goes to prison) if the same thing is phrased differently, like "Those are all lies" or "liars". Addie Schulte of Het Parool had the guts to ask Tineke whether Nebahat Albayrak will be prosecutable for stating that the Armenian (victims?) collaborated with the enemy (of the Ottoman state) and with other words explaining that there was no genocide at all. Tineke said she did not know exactly (TEN YEARS of Royal University studies) that the decision would be in the domain of the justices, but she, eventually, thought no (Albayrak would not be prosecuted).
Then this Tineke (third on the list of the Christian Union) points out that in Belgium you go to prison if you purely negate that there was a a genocide in Armenia. She wanted to say that her proposal was much milder form than the Belgian stupidity. Now, this is no joke. This means that we must work very hard to disassociate from the legal bondage within the Benelux. A bunch of Armenian zealots may prosecute me out there in some Vallon village and if their court finds me guilty - Beatrix will extradite me to those butchers not only of free speech but of history, the mother of all science. Screw the neo-nazi blogging here. This is 1000xmore serious. Just think about it a little bit. This is becoming a witch-hunt. This Armenian issue. The louder this dogmatic ChristenUnie says it is not a witch-hunt - the more one is persuaded it is. What has been done to Nebahat Albayrak is shameful, it is a public intellectual and consciousness rape. The whole nation, the Dutch Society should be ashamed. But then, of course, it is easier to accept the lies and distortions and fight the Turks for whatever the Ottomans did or did not do, for what the crazy Greek Megali Idea resulted to or what were the consequences of a partizan warfare and civilian involvment during war-time military operations. It is harder to face the Armenian murderers with their own fabrications. But such an attitude speaks more of us than about the Ottomans. They were innocent of genocide because their world, their realm was an uma. Ind if you know what is uma you would understand why they did not recognize, why they were unaware of a term or existence of a "nation". Even judged from that single position there was no chance of a "genocide" because it (the genocide) cannot exist without a notion of a nation.

Volgend artikel in dit blog