That all you got? The only facts Mr. Hun needs to gather are the words written not-so-very long ago by C. U. There is no burden on him to seek out a rebuttal.
To Tim: You seem way more interested in defending Cenk's sullied honor than determining whether he still believes the vile things he wrote. He is free to respond, though I don't want to read anything into his nonparticipation so far; I have no way of knowing if he even looks at these posts. Yes, he's no one's dancing monkey. But your willingness to do his dancing for him is not very dignified. Exactly what do you get out of it?
To those others who think Atilla is trying to blame Cenk for the historically factual Armenian genocide, or get him to apologize for actions that happened before he was born - you aren't paying attention. He merely wants Cenk to acount for things he said - he did say them, and if he stands by them today it does matter to some.
I don't want to keep going around in circles here. You called Atilla's post accusatory, I don't see anything but neutrality. He even allows as how it seems quite likely that Cenk has changed his mind about the things he once wrote. He probably hopes so. I defend Atilla's right to ask about it. If it means Cenk has to keep answering the same question over and over - so sad! About something he wrote 10 whole years ago? Tender mercies! But he does sit behind that desk and ask us to listen to his views on a lot of topics, so I don't see why we're not allowed to check under the hood.
