639) VI: Admiral Sees Armenian’s Claims as "Absolutely False", PeaceConference Gives Armenians Nothing:Secrets Of "Christian" Terrorist State Armenia

American Admiral Sees Armenian’s Claims as "Absolutely False" Peace Conference Gives Armenians Nothing After Hearing Their Claim for Money Damages . .

The Paris Peace Conference ended on June 28, 1919. The conference work became known as the Treaty of Versailles. European matters were dealt with and the League of Nations was born. This treaty did not deal with the Ottoman Empire. That matter was to be resolved at a later time.

The Armenians, who were refused a place at the conference, continued to hang around the treaty proceedings attempting to get handouts from anyone who would listen to them. The Armenians voiced strong objections to the fact the Allies ignored their demands of the following specific issues: "(1) to recognize the republic of Armenia, (2) to repatriate Armenian refugees and expel Muslim settlers from Turkish Armenia, [3) to undertake the military occupation of Turkish Armenia, and (4) to select forthwith a mandatory nation for Armenia. In each case, the response in Paris was either negative or indecisive» (l).

The Armenian agents were busy during this time around the Christian world seeking support for their requests for free handouts. Armenophile societies in Great Britain, France, Italy, Switzerland, Denmark, and especially the United States supported Armenia’s bid. The American Committee for the Independence of Armenia submitted petitions bearing the names of thousands who advocated recognition of the de facto government in Erevan. Even as the Peace Conference began its activities, twenty-five governors made public their hope for a reconstructed Armenia `within her historic boundaries, ` a view reiterated in separate petitions by hundreds of American clergymen. By April of 1919 several advisers to the American delegation in Paris had come to favor recognition in order to provide Armenia sufficient international stature to float a 20 million dollar loan (P 293).

This is a perfect example of how Armenians played on the heartstrings of American Christians in an attempt to get all of the above items for nothing. President Wilson, a preacher’s son, bought into their stories. Hovannissian brags about the success of the Armenian agents` work in reference to Wilson. He writes that the president "was undoubtedly stirred by an appeal from thirty state governors who asked recognition for the de facto Armenian government so that the representatives of that courageous Christian Armenian nation can participate in the Peace Conference at a time their question will be under consideration» (P 294).

This is another example of how Hovannissian deals with half-truths. The real truth is that on January 8,1918, President Wilson appeared before a joint session of Congress in Washington, DC., and set forth the aims and objectives of the United States in seeking peace after the end of World War I. He listed several specific nations to be helped: Russia, Belgium, France, Italy, Austria, Hungary, Rumania, Serbia, Montenegro and Poland. Not once did he mention Armenia. This is what the president said as to peace:

What we demand in this war, therefore, is nothing peculiar to ourselves. It is that the world be made fit and safe to live in, and particularly that it be made safe for every peace-loving nation which, like our own, wishes to live its own life, determine its own institutions, be assured of justice and fair dealing by the other peoples of the world as against force and selfish aggression.

All the peoples of the world are in effect partners in this interest, and for our own pan we see very clearly that unless justice is done to others it will not be done to us. The program of the world’s peace, therefore, is our program; and that program, the only possible program, as we see it is this" (2).

President Wilson then presented to Congress what became known as his 14 Points for World Peace. The president dealt with the Ottoman Empire in point 12: "The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but other nationals which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees" (3).

These statements differ greatly from what the Armenians claim Wilson promised and what they were to receive. All Wilson ever told the Armenians and other peoples who sought independence was, "Undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development». Armenia received such an opportunity.

The president promised "other nationalities" within the Ottoman Empire "an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development" and that was all. The Armenians got that and much more while attempting to deny the same promises to Georgia and Azerbaijan.

Christian officials asked for increased humanitarian aid and got it. (4) American charitable assistance to Armenia continued throughout the year. In fact, private charities poured money into this tiny country. The American Relief Administration alone delivered more than 50,000 metric tons of food before the fall of the year. Note that the Muslims, who suffered at much larger scale in terms of loss of life and property, didn’t even get recognition, let alone such massive humanitarian help.

In an effort to tap every possible source of free aid, one Armenian official even attempted "to secure sundry supplies and equipment from the surplus depots of the American Expeditionary Force in Europe, but, lacking international recognition and foreign credit, Armenia failed to qualify» (P 294). Hovannissian records that there was a "concentration of half a million refugees in Transcaucasia» (P 295). He states elsewhere that there were also many thousands of Armenian refugees in Arab lands. Hovannissian stated earlier in his book that there were about 1 million Armenian Christians in the Turkish war zone who were removed. Doing this simple math reveals a plain fact, that in no stretch of even an Armenian imagination, could the Turks have committed a massacre of 1.5 million of their people as claimed by the Armenian lobby today.

Hovannissian goes on to add another reason there could not have been a large-scale killing of Armenians by Turks in 1915. "Even though the Ottoman Empire had long since capitulated, Turkish Armenia still languished under the hand of the butcher, the refugee throngs, denied the right to reclaim their villages, died of starvation and disease all along the border, and countless Christian women and children remained prisoners of the harem» (P 295).

How can an unbiased historian use a phrase such as "languished under the hand of the butcher"? Clearly, he uses such adjectives in an attempt to write a new and slanted version of history to justify and excuse his native Armenia. There is no question about it: Thousands upon thousands of Armenians did die of starvation and disease. Why? Historical evidence records most of these individuals chose to follow their dictator leaders into a desolate land and this was the terrible price they paid. Other Ottoman citizens of other races (such as Kurds) who remained loyal to their country did not share this fate. To call the Turks "the butcher" is just plain nonsense. A more proper description than “languished under the hand of the butcher” should be “languished under the hand of the greedy Armenian dictator leaders”.

Hovannissian cries out that "countless Christian women and children remained prisoners of the harem». Again – this is pure nonsense. Hovannissian doesn’t name a single "harem" anywhere in his four-volume series. No names, no addresses, nothing. He couldn’t name any, because there weren’t any.

In mid-July 1919, Rear Admiral Mark Bristol of the U.S. Navy was given command of the U.S. naval forces in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. His headquarters was located in Istanbul.

Field Marshal Sir Henry Hughes Wilson became the British Permanent Representative on the Supreme War Council that was established by the Versailles Peace Treaty. In early 1918, he became Chief of the Imperial Staff. Both these two neutral military commanders became outspoken critics of the Armenian grand designs to get free land while other governments paid the bills to give it to them.

In a footnote, Hovannissian makes reference to a 1943 book written by Henry P. Beers, titled U.S. Naval Detachment in Turkish Waters, 1914-1924. The footnote states: "Bristol was an outspoken critic of Armenian aspirations and of American involvement in an Armenian mandate. Through his cables and personal letters to ranking members of the Department of State and Congress, he, more than any other American official in the Middle East, influenced the decisions that proved disastrous to Armenian interests. Bristol was also instrumental in bringing about the resumption and normalization of Turkish-American diplomatic and economic relations. Several streets, squares, schools and other establishments bear his name in Turkey today» (P 298). This author has personal knowledge of the Bristol Hospital in Istanbul named in his honor. It is also known as the American Hospital. There is a footnote from the U.S. Archives of Bristol papers stating the following:

Bristol frequently criticized the `theorists and sentimentalists` who gave undue attention to the Armenians, a people having `no past history to show that they are capable of governing themselves or governing anybody else.` His assessment that the Armenian pleas for immediate repatriation were nothing more than a bare political maneuver is enunciated in the following representative dispatch:

At a long conference with the acting President of the Armenian Republic [Khatissian], several facts were brought out. One of these is that the Russian Armenians desire to have the Turkish Armenians who are now refugees in their country repatriated to Turkey and the principal reason is that if they are not repatriated, the Armenians will lose control of so-called Turkish Armenia. Abo it is evident that the president of the Armenian republic thinks principally, if not exclusively, of the political situation rather than the suffering and starvation of the people, not only Russian Armenians but also the Turkish Armenians in the country. In reply to a question he practically stated that if trouble were caused by the forcible repatriation of the Turkish Armenians, this was of less interest than the political aspirations of the Armenians (P 299).

In other words, if Armenians get killed in the process of repatriation, so be it, because Armenian "political and geographical grand designs" are more important than Armenian "lives». Some leader. Of course the self-appointed acting president of Armenia had little or no interest in any trouble caused by forcing Armenians on the Turks under the protection of U.S. troops. After all, the Armenians were demanding that a foreign government undertake this responsibility.

This is really shameful because what the Armenian dictator leader is saying to the allies is, “Take these Armenians and repatriate them to Ottoman lands, and if some get killed in the process, so be it, don’t you worry”.

Admiral Bristol called the Armenian claims "outrageous». In his official reports to the American Commission to negotiate peace, "Bristol fulminated against Armenian pretensions and insisted that there was no such thing as `Armenia` in the sense of a national entity. Emphasizing that Armenian leaders by their own admission were attempting to use the refugee issue for political ends, he denounced all plans to repatriate the Turkish Armenians without the consent of the proper Ottoman authorities. The only possible alternative to Turkish control and supervision of the operation, he insisted, would be total allied military occupation of the affected region, a most improbable eventuality» (P 299)

Admiral Mark Lambert Bristol served as the Commander of the U.S. Naval Detachment in Turkish waters and as the U.S. High Commissioner to Turkey during the years 1919 through!927. His reports are housed in the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress. Here is an excerpt from Bristol’s letter dated March 28, 1921, to Dr. James L. Barton, the Secretary of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions: This letter that is housed in the Manuscript Division of the Library of the Congress is not mentioned in Hovannissian’s four-volume history.

I see that reports are being freely circulated in the United States that the Turks massacred thousands of Armenians in the Caucasus. Such reports are repeated so many times it makes my blood boil. The Near East Relief have the reports from Yarrow and our own American people which show that such Armenian reports are absolutely false. The circulation of such false reports in the United States, without refutation, is an outrage and is certainly doing the Armenians more harm than good. I feel that we should discourage the Armenians in this kind of work, not only because it is wrong, but because they are injuring themselves. In addition to the reports from our own American Relief workers that were in Kars and Alexcandrople, and reports from such men as Yarrow, I have reports from my own Intelligence Officer and know that the Armenian reports are not true. Is there not something that you and the Near East Committee can do to stop the circulation of such false reports? (5)

On October 31,1918, the Mudras Armistice came into force. This document dealt with Turkey. There was to be a "sweeping demobilization of the Ottoman army, yet the allies took no effective measures to ensure compliance in the interior Asiatic provinces. Turkish Armenia did not lie along the waterways leading to Russia. This fundamental weakness in the Mudras Armistice was promptly recognized by supporters of Armenia. Members of Parliament shouted for immediate and total Ottoman demobilization in Turkish Armenia and even the military occupation of the region were it necessary to obtain this goal» (6).

Apparently he does not understand that the taxpayers in all the allied nations were paying the bills, not the Armenian panhandlers. They had every reason to want to end the war swiftly, bring their troops home safely, and cut expenses. The Armenians, to this very day, continue to criticize this allied attitude. After all, the Armenians want allied nation taxpayers not only to foot 100 percent of the bills to create their nation and give them everything they demanded, but also send their boys in harm’s way to do it.

Great Britain was the only Allied nation with a sizable force in the Near East. However, these troops were few in numbers and overextended. Sir Henry Wilson, chief of the Imperial General Staff, worked to bring his troops home. British, French, and American battleships were sent to waters in the area of Smyrna "where an Italian naval squadron had been espied and that a Greek military expedition be put ashore at Smyrna to defend the Christian population purportedly exposed to renewed Turkish atrocities» (P 308). The truth was the Greeks also had designs an Ottoman lands and used "Christian protection" as an excuse to invade Turkey. The Italians were also looking to exploit the decline of the Ottoman Empire and grab off land for themselves.

The one success story for the Armenians was the labor of their paid agents in Christian countries. The British Government was flooded with petitions instituted by Armenian special interest groups. One such petition to the heads of the Church of England stated: "With utmost horror, we hear sinister rumor of the possibility of a continuation of Turkish suzerainty over unhappy Armenia. Through your lordships we ask that the Anglican Churches do their utmost to prevent the repetition of so hideous a crime. The honor of our churches and the allied democracies demand that Armenia be unconditionally liberated from Turkish rule and restored to her own people» (P 309).

Armenian agents` work in the United States was equally successful. "On the initiative of the American Committee for the Independence of Armenia, a cardinal, 85 bishops, 20,000 clergymen, 40 state governors, and 250 college and university presidents petitioned [President] Wilson to aid in the establishment of an independent Armenia bordering the Black and Mediterranean Seas, to recognize the de facto Yerevan government, and bolster Armenia in every way possible» (P 309-310) In plain language, this was an organized and active campaign by a foreign country (Armenia) to influence American foreign policy within the United States. Such well-organized and orchestrated work by Armenia continues within the United States today.

Proof of this success is the fact the U.S. government gives perhaps more foreign aid per capita to Armenia than to any nation on earth. There should be an official investigation into each Armenian backed group in America to learn just how much funding these organizations receive from Armenia and what instructions come from this tiny state to influence U.S. foreign policy. It’s not right for any foreign government to organize and finance special interest groups in this country and such conduct must be ended.

In May 1919, "As Italian troops struck out along the southern coastline of Asia Minor, while in Paris a small but significant current of official opinion began to gel in favor of a lenient settlement with Turkey» (P 321). The Allied Peace Conference rejected the Armenian demand for a mandate nation to oversee the lands that the Armenians claimed. Rather, the officials of the Peace Conference appointed Colonel W. N. Haskell of the United States to act as high commissioner in Armenia.

Colonel Haskell had served as Herbert Hoover’s chief of relief operations in Rumania. Hovannissian expressed his, and the Armenian reaction, to the appointment in this way: "Thus the Peace Conference, instead of granting Armenia a mandatory power, a definite boundary, and a guaranteed future, had provided a resident commissioner to advise, supervise and console» (P 339). Hovannissian goes on to on to object to the Armenian claims` rejection:

... They had helplessly watched Armenia’s golden opportunity slip way. The Allied heads of government were never again to join together as a single official body, and no longer would it be possible for Armenian envoys to concentrate their efforts upon Paris alone. Rather, they would have to follow the world leaders over mountains, channels, and oceans. The Allied response to Armenian petitions had been disheartening. Armenia remained unrecognized as a belligerent state or as a de facto government, and she had been denied a formal place at the Paris Conference. None of the major powers had shown a willingness to occupy Turkish Armenia or even to provide the requisite cadre and material for the Armenian army to do so (P 339).

In other words, the Allies at the Paris Peace Conference and the later conferences studied the Armenian claims and rejected each and every one of them on the grounds they were without merit. The Armenian claim they were the victims of the first genocide of the twentieth century. Rather it must be said that this is the first "great con job" of the twentieth century.

The Allies reviewed the Armenian claims for alleged damages in 1915, which the Armenians started referring to as "genocide" after 1948 as a public relations ploy. Again, the Allies investigated and found such claims baseless. The Armenians` continued recklessness is a major reason why there is no peace in the part of the world where they are located. Armenia continues to be a poverty-stricken, land-locked, tiny, panhandling terrorist state, and a hateful aggressor, which mainly uses anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim propaganda to secure Christian help and uses that handout to finance Armenia’s ethnic cleansing campaign directed at Muslims (and sometimes, even other Christians, as in the case of neighboring Georgia).