@CanbackRasmus and @jchribuisson @NikolPashinyan @AraratMirzoyan @realDonaldTrump @DonaldJTrumpJr Aliyev yapping away explained in greater detail as how their efforts undermine international law and dehumanize those afflicted by such situations by making those sufferings a mockery of justice and human rights. The right of return, in the context of international law and human rights, is generally associated with individuals or groups being allowed to return to their homeland or place of origin after being displaced or exiled. When discussing the “right to return” in the context of indigenous populations versus colonizers, it is important to consider historical, moral, and legal distinctions. Why the Right to Return is Often Associated with Indigenous Populations: 1.Historical Displacement and Marginalization: Indigenous peoples are the original inhabitants of a land. Colonization often resulted in their forced displacement, dispossession of land, and systematic oppression. The right to return for indigenous peoples is viewed as a remedy to historical injustices and a way to restore their cultural and territorial rights. 2.Ties to Ancestral Land: Indigenous peoples have deep spiritual, cultural, and historical connections to their ancestral lands. These lands are often integral to their identity and survival. Their claim to the right of return is rooted in their enduring relationship with the land. Protections: International frameworks, such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), recognize the right of indigenous peoples to maintain or return to their traditional lands. These protections stem from an acknowledgment of the systemic harms caused by colonialism and the need to restore justice. Why Colonizers Do Not Hold the Same Right: 1.Colonial Context: Colonizers are individuals or groups who arrived in a land through processes of conquest, settlement, or exploitation, often displacing the indigenous population. Their presence is typically associated with the imposition of foreign systems and the disruption of native societies. 2.Lack of Indigenous Status: Colonizers are not indigenous to the land they settled on and they often originated from another region or country. Their connection to the land is typically not ancestral or cultural but rather opportunistic or political. 3.Moral and Historical Accountability: Granting a “right to return” to colonizers would imply validating the historical displacement and subjugation of indigenous peoples. It could also perpetuate the inequities established during colonial rule. Law and Justice: Modern legal frameworks focus on correcting injustices against populations that have suffered systemic oppression, rather than supporting the claims of those who benefited from systems of colonization. In summary, the right to return aligns with efforts to rectify historical injustices and protect the rights of marginalized groups. While indigenous peoples have legitimate claims based on their historical and cultural connections to the land, colonizers, as agents of displacement and oppression, do not hold the same moral or legal standing for such rights.

The Turkish-speaking Iranians are, first and foremost, Iranians whose language shift does not erase their deep rooted connection to Persian heritage and values. Unlike the Turks of the north, often referred to as “Osmani Turks” by Iranian Turks… sometimes disparagingly as “dirty Osmani” due to their misappropriation of identity and culture… Turkish speaking Iranians maintain strong relations with Armenians and uphold the dignity and honor characteristic of Iran’s broader cultural fabric. During the war, many so-called “Azerbaijanis” migrated to Iran and obtained Iranian citizenship. However, it is important to distinguish them from the indigenous Turkish speaking population of Iran. For instance, those who sang the “Karabakh” song in the Armenian square were not representative of Iranian Turks from the Iranian region of Aderbaijan but rather actual Azerbaijani Turks (osmani) that migrated to Iran (under identity of Aderbaijani Turks) individuals whose behavior does not reflect the refined character, class, and respect traditionally associated with the Turkish-speaking Iranians, who remain an integral part of Iran’s diverse yet unified national identity. The ottomans goals have been to divide the people and gain control of their one true competitor Iran itself…

Who wants to tell this chump, native… is Armenian… not Turkish …

@elonmusk Well well well when one acts with impunity the conduct is considered acceptable … 2020: Turkish mob looking for Armenians to kill 2024: repeat “looking” for Armenians…

@SpeakerJohnson Most “benevolent” … perhaps we should revisit the education system again …top of the list Luxembourg … the lowest is USA … under these circumstances, America First? … there was an America second? When? Lmao don’t kid us kids we know better … thanks ChatGPT, you are my hero

@ArmeniaReserva Your social media rep should be fired … and be forced to read book once in a while

Turks from Turkey and Azerbaijan have to work twice as hard to maintain same output as their European counterparts …

@elonmusk Unmanned aircraft and users/AI needs to increase ten fold…

@bpalomathedove Bintheredundat what else you got Copernicus?

Mike’s racial absurdities … digested: : 1.Dismisses Artsakh’s Significance: Calling Artsakh a “fantasy” trivializes its cultural, historical, and political importance to Armenians and ignores the self-determination struggle of its population. 2.Attacks Diaspora Armenians: Claiming they “worship” Artsakh unfairly caricatures them as irrational and divisive, despite their critical role in supporting Armenia globally. 3.Oversimplifies Geopolitics: Linking Artsakh solely to Russia and Iran erases the agency of the local Armenian population and oversimplifies the region’s complex history. 4.Fosters Division: His rhetoric pits Armenians in Armenia against those in the diaspora, promoting disunity at a critical time. 5.Culturally Insensitive: The dismissive tone disregards the historical struggles and identity of Armenians, bordering on anti-Armenian bias. Mike’s statement is misinformed, divisive, and dismissive of Armenian realities.

@HerikaBola @AvaGregoire @TheArtsian

@HerikaBola @AvaGregoire @TheArtsian You have five chances to convince me of treason rather than disappointment/ disrespect in one’s conduct or policy … should you resort to childish tantrums you already fail … begin …

Peaceful relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan do not depend on Armenia, they depend entirely on Turkey and Azerbaijan’s willingness to take meaningful steps toward justice, accountability, and respect. So far, there have been none. Neither Turkey nor Azerbaijan has shown any effort to build trust. They continue to disrespect and erase Armenian culture and heritage, while simultaneously mocking the Armenian Genocide. At times, they deny it ever happened, and at other times, they brazenly express pride in committing it, even threatening to do it again. This is not the path to peace, it is a declaration of hatred and violence. We cannot afford to let our guard down. A hundred million Turks should not be indoctrinated to hate and fear two million Armenians. This poison only perpetuates conflict, ensuring that past atrocities remain unresolved and future ones inevitable. If Turkey and Azerbaijan want peace, they must first correct their ways. They must abandon their campaign of denial, end their rhetoric of destruction, and finally honor the dignity and humanity of the Armenian people. The world must stand firm. Peace cannot be built on the foundations of hate and lies. The only way forward is through truth, justice, and respect. Let this be the turning point. @NikolPashinyan @ArsTorosyan @UNArmenia

@HerikaBola @AvaGregoire @TheArtsian Erika and Avag please refer to my post admonishing ad hominem attacks …

For a moment, when I read “unpunished crimes only encourage new atrocities,” I thought you were speaking about Turkey and Azerbaijan. Because guess what? The Armenian Genocide, left unpunished, paved the way for the Jewish Holocaust. The ethnic cleansing of Armenians in Artsakh by Azerbaijan, left unpunished, emboldened the war on Ukraine. We are living in a world where history repeats itself, a decade defined by mass atrocities and injustices born from the selective application of justice. Those in power shape a new world order where might makes right, not the rule of law. This era threatens to be one of chaos, oppression, and unchecked aggression. Where are the signs of course correction? Where is the justice that holds the seeds of hope? Remember the Armenians. The world’s salvation begins with confronting even the smallest acts of aggression before they unravel the fragile threads of peace. A better future depends on standing against injustice at every turn. If this has tugged on your heart strings even a little, then share it and let it be known that we will do better, we will be better.

@nomadaesthetic Perhaps the Uyghurs living in China have their heads in the sand and forgot that it’s Chinese new year and perhaps the hotels are in fact legitimately booked like how Vegas is booked a month in advance for new years … Chinese new year … 🧧 Wed, Jan 29, 2025 – Wed, Feb 12, 2025

@arsensamurai Arsen? This is Turkish propaganda to support erdogans expansion into Syria and northern Iraq … planned pan turkism and Neo facist Revanchism

The Turks are revanchist … wanting to rebuild the Ottoman Empire at the expense of the Armenian People often chanting “ we will finish what our fathers started” a tongue in cheek affirmation of their intentions on restricting the Armenian people a continuation of the mass Genocide… see posts both by Azerbaijan and Turkey … while Armenias advocacy of the Armenian homeland is far from Revanchism but founded on the principle of rectifying historical injustice and preserving the Armenian culture and heritage and identity. The statement you referenced could certainly be interpreted as revanchist by those who view it through a modern geopolitical lens, particularly in regions where Armenians have territorial disputes, like with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh. However, for Armenians, such statements are often tied to the unresolved trauma of the genocide and the desire for justice and recognition, rather than an active political plan to redraw borders. Ultimately, whether these claims are viewed as revanchism or a response to colonial oppression and indigenous dispossession depends on the lens through which one interprets history. For Armenians, the focus is often on seeking acknowledgment of historical injustices and preserving their identity, not revenge. Many Armenians view these territorial issues as matters of cultural survival and justice rather than nationalistic expansion. The loss of these lands is seen as intertwined with the destruction of Armenian cultural heritage… churches, monuments, and communities wiped out over the past century.

When Azerbaijan was presented not “accepted” the Armenian Republic was recognized along with Kharabagh, Zangeuzur and Nakhejevan as a part of said republic … These are excerpts straight from the League of Nations meetings. Eventually League of Nations kicked Azerbaijan out for their claims and anti Armenian pogroms. Kharabagh wanted to be an independent state but then changed its position in April and agreed to join Armenia… League of nations allowed Soviet Russia troops into Kharabaghand labeled it as a disputed territory. Azerbaijan and Georgia agreed that Nakhejevan Kharabagh and “Zangezur” were a part of Armenia… SSR started giving Armenian lands Nakhejevan to Azerbaijan Kharabagh independence but reporting to Azerbaijan… and Kars to Turkey for open borders trade and transportation and communications … a geopolitical manifestation of “Azerbaijan” to goad Iran and Turkey into SSR…