Tragicomic situation of Armenia about occupied region of Karabakh

[Mosov]

That's in your view. In my eyes they are just as bad because they are involved in using their adopted country as a vessel to help the old one. If anything you could compare it to someone becoming a citizen of a town and then using the city's treasury to send money to help his old city. Do you realise that if they would do that during wartime (in the unlikely event that there would be a state of war between the United States and let's say Greece, Cuba or Armenia) then that would be seen as treason.

Make no mistake here: having dual loyalties means having no loyalties to the new country.

I can't speak for their loyalties, but all I can say this practice is done by various groups and it's been done throughout history. I understand your principles against it, but don't make it as if though Armenians are the only people that do such activism. While, Turkish government accounts for most of the lobbying efforts, there are also Turkish grass roots efforts.

No Mosov. I don't care how you twist it: it's exactly the same thing.

The cause is different. Having a foreign government pay money to politicians is different from having a citizens of that country petition the government. In the end, you have a similar result, but the cause is different. For example, the Armenian Grassroots agenda is not parallel to the Armenian Government policies.

[The Lawspeaker]

I can't speak for their loyalties, but all I can say this practice is done by various groups and it's been done throughout history. I understand your principles against it, but don't make it as if though Armenians are the only people that do such activism. While, Turkish government accounts for most of the lobbying efforts, there are also Turkish grass roots efforts.

I just condemned Turkish lobbying too did I ? I have very strong principles against it and I will actually repeat the question:


Let's just turn the question around for a moment: suppose that Canada killed, make it 1.5 million, Americans back in 1915 and now the Canadian government is actively lobbying in Armenia and so are American Armenians living in Armenia ?

How would you, being Armenian, think about those Americans ?

The cause is different. Having a foreign government pay money to politicians is different from having a citizens of that country petition the government. In the end, you have a similar result, but the cause is different. For example, the Armenian Grassroots agenda is not parallel to the Armenian Government policies.

Whether the cause is different or not is irrelevant. Completely irrelevant. What matters here is that they do the same thing the Turks do: lobbying. Trying to influence foreign and domestic policies of another country and is the central tenet of the debate.

[Mosov]

I just condemned Turkish lobbying too did I ? I have very strong principles against it and I will actually repeat the question:


Let's just turn the question around for a moment: suppose that Canada killed, make it 1.5 million Americans back in 1915 and now the Canadian government is actively lobbying in Armenia and so are American Armenians living in Armenia ?

How would you, being Armenian, think about those Americans ?

Banning foreign lobbying would probably help Armenians more than hurt, because of the heavy amount of Turkish lobbying that is done for pro-Turkish issues.

Whether the cause is different or not is irrelevant. Completely irrelevant. What matters here is that they do the same thing the Turks do: lobbying. Trying to influence foreign and domestic policies of another country and is the central tenet of the debate.

You can ban foreign lobbying by foreign governments. It's harder to prevent citizens from petitioning lawmakers on issues that is dear to them.

[The Lawspeaker]

Banning foreign lobbying would probably help Armenians more than hurt, because of the heavy amount of Turkish lobbying that is done for pro-Turkish issues.

Then why do the Armenians keep doing it ?

You can ban foreign lobbying by foreign governments. It's harder to prevent citizens from petitioning lawmakers on issues that is dear to them.

If Armenians in the Netherlands would be involved in this I would be in favour of stripping them of their citizenship (as they have clearly acquired it under false pretences) and throwing them out of the country. The same goes for British, Germans, Irish, Turks, Papua.

All that needs to be done is a change in the law.

But you didn't answer the question so I will ask it again:

Let's just turn the question around for a moment: suppose that Canada killed, make it 1.5 million Americans back in 1915 and now the Canadian government is actively lobbying in Armenia and so are American Armenians living in Armenia ?

[Mosov]

Then why do the Armenians keep doing it ?

So Armenians stop lobbying and let Turkish lobbying take control? Why in the world would we do that?

If Armenians in the Netherlands would be involved in this I would be in favour of stripping them of their citizenship (as they have clearly acquired it under false pretences) and throwing them out of the country. The same goes for British, Germans, Irish, Turks, Papua.

All that needs to be done is a change in the law.

But you didn't answer the question so I will ask it again:

Let's just turn the question around for a moment: suppose that Canada killed, make it 1.5 million Americans back in 1915 and now the Canadian government is actively lobbying in Armenia and so are American Armenians living in Armenia ?

I would favour banning foreign lobbying in Armenia.

[The Lawspeaker]

So Armenians stop lobbying and let Turkish lobbying take control? Why in the world would we do that?

I would favour banning foreign lobbying in Armenia.

That's weird because you support Armenian lobbying abroad.

[Mosov]

That's weird because you support Armenian lobbying abroad.

If in a country lobbying is legal I do support it, because predictably there will be Turkish lobbying coming from the other side. If we don't lobby for example, and in that country lobbying is legal, then the Turkish lobby will influence policies to a much greater pro-Turkish bias. Why should I want that?

Of course, it depends on what you are banning. If you ban foreign government from lobbying, that doesn't mean you have banned citizens of that country from petitioning their law makers.

[The Lawspeaker]

If in a country lobbying is legal I do support it, because predictably there will be Turkish lobbying coming from the other side. If we don't lobby for example, and in that country lobbying is legal, then the Turkish lobby will influence policies to a much greater pro-Turkish bias. Why should I want that?

You need to be consistent in your viewpoints here because if in a country lobbying would be illegal then the Turks themselves couldn't do it either.

IOf course, it depends on what you are banning. If you ban foreign government from lobbying, that doesn't mean you have banned citizens of that country from petitioning their law makers.

It should be banned for people with "acquired citizenship" to petition their lawmakers to change laws in favour of the country they have left behind. It shows that they are not loyal to their new country but are merely using it as a vessel.

You just said this:

I would favour banning foreign lobbying in Armenia.

When I asked you this:

Let's just turn the question around for a moment: suppose that Canada killed, make it 1.5 million Americans back in 1915 and now the Canadian government is actively lobbying in Armenia and so are American Armenians living in Armenia ?

[Mosov]

You need to be consistent in your viewpoints here because if in a country lobbying would be illegal then the Turks themselves couldn't do it either.

Well, we should clarify what kind of lobbying would be made illegal. If it's lobbying by foreign governments made illegal, than Armenian activists really wouldn't be affected. If you are banning the right for citizens to petition their lawmakers than that's a whole different story.

It should be banned for people with "acquired citizenship" to petition their lawmakers to change laws in favour of the country they have left behind. It shows that they are not loyal to their new country but are merely using it as a vessel.

You just said this:

I would favour banning foreign lobbying in Armenia.

When I asked you this:

Let's just turn the question around for a moment: suppose that Canada killed, make it 1.5 million Americans back in 1915 and now the Canadian government is actively lobbying in Armenia and so are American Armenians living in Armenia ?

Most of the Armenian activists that petition lawmakers in US for example are usually 2nd or 3rd generation American. Yes I would favour banning foreign government lobbying in Armenia. I don't see how a 2nd generation Armenian in Armenia petitioning his lawmaker on a certain issue would qualify as "foreign lobbying".

[The Lawspeaker]

Well, we should clarify what kind of lobbying would be made illegal. If it's lobbying by foreign governments made illegal, than Armenian activists really wouldn't be affected. If you are banning the right for citizens to petition their lawmakers than that's a whole different story.

Of course they would be allowed to petition lawmakers on American issues.

Most of the Armenian activists that petition lawmakers in US for example are usually 2nd or 3rd generation American. Yes I would favour banning foreign government lobbying in Armenia. I don't see how a 2nd generation Armenian in Armenia petitioning his lawmaker on a certain issue would qualify as "foreign lobbying".

If it is lobbying in favour of a foreign matter not pertinent to, let's use your example, the United States then that should be considered foreign lobbying as well.

Make no mistake: I have no problem with a bunch of Armenian Americans coming together and lobbying Washington to finally build a new motorway around Newark, NJ but when they would lobby Washington and asking them to build a motorway near Yerevan then that should be classed as foreign lobbying.

Unless there would be some planned suburb in America called Yerevan.