TGAA wrote: ↑25 Jun 2020, 19:15
There is no comparison between the intellectual giant, Lorate Tsegay G/Medhen and Achameleh. However, there is no denying the fact that Achamelh provides enough resources to back up his claim or counterclaim. I haven't found anyone worthy of his name who disproved Achamelh by providing counter resources to debunk his claim. It is not to say it isn't possible to but attempts have not been made so far to do that. Regarding Achameleh though I appreciate the resourcefulness of his argument points, I usually lose him though when he try to use his evidence to advance a narrow political agenda. To go back to Achallu , I don't expect him to know history at the level of a historian. We really don't know what motivated him to say what he said, but one thing is for sure, what he said was so preposterous he should have recognized the boldness of his lie while it was coming out of his mouth. Again that is not worrisome to a point because he is just one individual albeit a well-known one, however;to know a fertile ground for this kind of nonsense, to be taken seriously, has been prepared for many years,and that as long as one hates (along with a crowd) a targeted group of people and marks them as an enemy one can say whatever he wants and nobody questions the veracity of the truth. That is the scary reality in today's Ethiopia.
TGAA,
i tried to highlight the time dimension of his claim and said he is talking about today's or yesterday's events (these description were according Laureate Tsegaye Gebremedehin's own time scale).
Ato Achamyeleh is trying to negate Hacalu's claim based on the events of today's morning or at best of yesterday. The Laureate said the 800 years when Saint Amhara, whom he said were the Agew people, migrated to the south was simply yesterday, after the major part of our longer history, and Achamyeleh is talking about what has allegedly happened before 400 or 300 years and trying to ridiclue with it the claim of Hacalu (which I already said based on ignorance, according to my understanding).
So, if we accept the principle of single source of truth, then there can't be two sources of truth and that single source of truth either lies in the claims of the late Laureate or in that of Achamyeleh, but can't be both at the same time). In that case you could have asked yourself how much truth Achamyeleh himself had before claiming "I haven't found anyone worthy of his name who disproved Achamelh by providing counter resources to debunk his claim".
Like I said before Ato Achamyeleh can find his comparison in the likes of Jawar Mohammed but not in the likes of the late Laureate Tsegaye Gebremedhin.
The choice is now ours, I think, because the Laureate has also indicated that there could be events of tomorrow which can pose a similar challenge to our long history and threaten our tomorrow. Ato Achamyeleh should have known it if he is indeed someone who has no counterpart in the releam of history.