10 June 2017

3634) Who Was Roger Casement?

Who Was Roger Casement?
by Dr Pat Walsh

The following talk was given on 9th June 2017 in Donegall Street, Belfast, in launching the pamphlet ‘Roger Casement on the Great War: a commentary’. The pamphlet contains two of Casement’s lost writings: “Sir Roger Casement on Sir Edward Grey” and “A Pacific Blockade” originally published in the Continental Times, October and December 1915, as well as a commentary.

Who was Roger Casement? He was undoubtedly unique out of all of the leading figures of 1916. He was someone who was special and who did something of a greater magnitude than any of his comrades against British world domination. He publicly disputed the Great War narrative of Britain with an insider’s knowledge and then acted with ruthless consistency against it in alliance with Germany to bring about a multi-polar world. The British realised he was the most dangerous thing they had ever encountered from Ireland and he had to be hung. . . .

Read The Full Post by Clicking Here Read Full Post !

02 June 2017

3633) Armenian Weekly Magazine April 2017


Armenian Weekly Magazine April 2017

Read The Full Post by Clicking Here Read Full Post !

23 April 2017

3632) “Fatal Philanthropy” – James Bryce And The Armenians by Pat Walsh

© This content Mirrored From  http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com
“Fatal Philanthropy” – James Bryce And The Armenians by Pat Walsh


To understand the point of this paper we need to revisit something that George Curzon (later Lord) said as Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in the course of defending traditional British policy with regard to the Ottoman Empire, on behalf of Lord Salisbury’s Government:

“We were not prepared at any moment to go to war for the sake of Armenia. We were not prepared to plunge Europe into a Continental war for the sake of Armenia. We were not prepared to jeopardise the interests of this country and I will go further and say the interests of the Armenians themselves, in pursuit of… what might, in the last resort, have turned out to be a perilous, if not a fatal philanthropy. [Loud Cheers.]” (1).

James Bryce both personified what Curzon called “fatal philanthropy” and did much to realise such a thing in reality, in relation to the Armenians.

Firstly, in discussing this issue we should say something about the importance of James Bryce. Bryce was a tremendously gifted all-rounder: a Historian, jurist, and statesman. He was Regius Professor of civil law at Oxford University, 1870-1893. In his political career he was elected as a Liberal MP in 1880 and from 1885 to 1907 he was Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs; he was Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (1892); and President of the Board of Trade (1894–95). He became Chief Secretary for Ireland (1905-6), British Ambassador to the United States (1907–13) and the President of British Academy (1913-17) during the Great War. He was also involved in the estab-lishment of the League of Nations, and served at the International Court at The Hague.

He was author of a large amount of publications including most notably The Holy Roman Empire (1864), Transcaucasia and Ararat (1877), The American ...
. . .

Read The Full Post by Clicking Here Read Full Post !

3631) Justification –The Claims For An Armenia by Justin McCarthy

© This content Mirrored From  http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com

In all the emotion, the propaganda, and the declarations on genocide, the most important factor of Armenian history has been neglected: Is there any justification for the creation of an Armenian state?

Various reasons for the creation of an Armenia are given by Armenian Nationalists:

Historical Claims

It is stated that there should be an Armenia because Armenians once ruled there. Indeed, at one time or other there were parts of Eastern Anatolia and the Southern Caucasus that were ruled by Armenian kings and local lords. Map One shows what might be called the maximalist position. It is a great amount of land, but most of it was ruled by Armenians for only 20 to 25 years. Many other than Armenians ruled the territories for much longer, often centuries. The claim of Armenian national -ists to all this land because it had Armenian kings is thus unsupportable.

There were two regions in which Armenians ruled much longer (Map Two), although even in these regions Armenians often were vassals to others, such as the Mongols. Does the existence of these kingdoms mean Armenians can claim these lands? No. Armenian lords were by no means the first rulers of that land. At one time or other, Hittites, Assyrians, Phrygians, Seleucids, and others ruled. Armenian kings were only part of a long line of sovereigns. If modern-day countries were to be created on the basis of past kingship, many would have claim to the lands called ...

Read The Full Post by Clicking Here Read Full Post !