Talk:Together Against Genocide

"Alleged" Genocide?
Hi, is there a legitimate controversy concerning whether or not genocide against the Tamils actually occurred in Sri Lanka? I'm no expert but it seems to me from what I have read and seen to have been a fairly well-documented series of events, certainly there's plenty of horrible photographs and survivor testimonies. Surely the presence of a dispute doesn't mean an event must be described as "alleged" if there's a decent amount of evidence to make clear that it did in fact occur. After all, people deny the Holocaust, we don't call it the "alleged" Holocaust, though specifics may be legitimately disputed. Or am I missing something here? If the term itself is problematic, consider revising to something like "the campaign of violence against", which is less disputable. Or just add a sentence illustrating the nature of the dispute, i.e. "Some people claim reports of the genocide are exaggerated". It seems to diminish the historic importance of the event and the suffering of the victims if it's officially dismissed as an "alleged" genocide. Thanks! -HK