17 July 2006
The Armenian "Curtain of Fear" was phrased by Prof. Heath Lowry, in his excellent "NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURY ARMENIAN TERRORISM: ‘Threads of Continuity’," which will be referred to extensively in this paper. (As well as an article by Prof. Justin McCarthy. So when you see references to these two professors and wish to consult the original sources, come on back to the top of the page for these links.) Dr. Lowry mainly applied the phrase to the fear instilled among fellow Armenians by the more fanatical among them. I have frequently borrowed the phrase and applied it to the fear the fanatical Armenians have instilled among non-Armenians, with the Armenians' well-known intimidation tactics. For this study, we'll be using Dr. Lowry's meaning, for the most part.
As much as hateful Armenian propagandists enjoy presenting the idea that the Armenians were a persecuted community within the Ottoman Empire, by throwing terms such as "dhimmi" and "slaves" to describe the always poor, innocent, martyred Armenians, the fact of the matter is the Armenians prospered as never before in their history, and were, in a manner of speaking, the masters of Ottoman society. The economy was in their hands, for the most part. (Sure, the not-as-well-off Armenians in Eastern Anatolia were victimized by lawless bands, mostly Kurds; but these were in areas where Ottoman control was weak, and the victims were everyone, not only Armenians.)
Until the mid-to-late 19th century, we have this situation of relative harmony and prosperity. As Jemal Pasha put it in his memoirs with evident sincerity (backed up by many Western sources, such as Sir Charles Eliot, Turkey in Europe, writing in 1900 that until the years succeeding the Turkish-Russian War of 1877-78, "The Turks and Armenians got on excellently together"): "...[U]ntil after the Crimean War of 1856 the Turks and Armenians lived together on the best of terms and the former were never guilty of any wrongs against their Armenian neighbours. When the Russians turned greedy eyes on the Ottoman Empire they began to think it would be politically effective if they could make the Christian elements in Rumelia tools in their designs."
The imperialists, ultimately also including Britain and France, all eyeing the rich geography of the ailing Ottoman Empire, began to gang up on the Turks. Their "Christian" prejudices helping to take out Ottoman possessions in Europe helped convince the Armenian extremists to get a piece of the pie. Knowing that the imperialists anxious to slice apart the Ottoman Empire would be on their side (but not always knowing the reason had little to do with caring for the Armenians; the imperialists were happy to use the Armenians as pawns), the Armenians set as their goal to create an Armenian state.
Who were these Armenians? For a good part, they were outsiders, hoping to stir up trouble within the Ottoman Empire. For example, the Dashnak Party was set up in Tiflis, in the Russian Caucasus. The Hunchaks got started by students in Geneva, Switzerland.
How were they going to go about achieving their goal? Other than by sending their "colonists" (as Richard Hovannisian accurately described them in "The Republic of Armenia") to bigoted Western nations to create and maintain "Terrible Turk" propaganda (which is continuing full-blast today), and by committing political violence in order to incite the wrath of the Muslims and commit counter-massacres (providing an excuse for the imperialists to come in), what the terrorists needed to do was
[A] Raise money, and
[B] Get the loyal Armenians to stop being loyal to their Ottoman nation
In order to achieve both of the above sub-goals, the terrorists needed to resort to the "Curtain of Fear." A Curtain of Fear still in operation today; this is why the Armenian Diaspora and (once the Dashnaks took over) the Republic of Armenia speak as one monolithic voice.
Pay attention to that dagger...important "Armenian" connection, coming up
The inspiration for this page comes from a Hollywood film from 1950, BLACK HAND, starring Gene Kelly.
How appropriate for the word "hand" to be in the title. This is what C. F. Dixon-Johnson wrote, referring to the expression of the "well-known hand" (borrowing from Sir Henry Layard, Ambassador to Istanbul, referring to forces having invented atrocity propaganda in Bulgaria):
"...it is indeed more than possible that some 'well-known hand' has been deceiving them. May not this hand have been that of the wealthy Armenian Committees which are spread over Europe and America, and who have never hesitated as to the means chosen for the attainment of their objects, because with them the end justifies the means?"
Dixon-Johnson was alluding to the powerful and wealthy hidden forces sneakily operating in the background, creating and maintaining anti-Turkish propaganda, utilizing their traditionally unscrupulous "end justifies the means" philosophy... no different than the ways of the genocide industry today.
The "Black Hand" of the movie's title refers to secret, criminal Italian groups in the New York City of a century ago. Their methods of violence and intimidation served to silence their fellow immigrants, allowing the criminals to extort money from the peaceful Italians. (Not unique among immigrant groups; Chinese immigrants also dealt with the Tongs.) This was exactly the way the Armenian terrorists operated, to rob money from the peaceful Armenians of the Ottoman Empire (and those of other nations; an example of keeping New York City Armenians in line will be forthcoming).
While Dixon-Johnson's "Well-Known Hand" alluded to unethical pro-Armenians purposely lying for their propagandistic cause, versus the cause of greedy gangsters regarding the "Black Hand," we can see the difference: the former were and are motivated by political reasons. (While others use politics as a front for their greed.) However, the Armenians operated no less in gangster fashion, and the gap is further narrowed when we consider those who spread vile, hateful propaganda (particularly in the knowledge that false information is purposely spread, because the "end justifies the means") are terrorists in their own right.
Gene Kelly, as Columbo, returns from Italy as a grown man...
to seek vengeance, a concept up the alley of some Armenians
BLACK HAND opens with a scroll, informing us "At the turn of the century, there were more Italians living in New York than in Rome." Quickly making certain that the viewer understands not all Italians are "bad," we are accurately told that those such as DiMaggio and LaGuardia went on to become true Americans. Yet it was the struggle of the other good Italians who were up against the "Old World terror of the Black Hand" that our story will focus upon... the story of how the "Black Hand" (really, the forerunner of the Mafia) would be "purged from their ranks" to give "bright dignity to their people and to this nation."
Already we've got a big difference between the Italian-Americans and the Armenian-Americans. The Italians knew the Mafia was evil, and worked toward cutting their ties to the criminal organization. Yet to most Armenians, the Dashnak "Mafia" has been regarded as Armenian heroes. (Please refer to Dr. Lowry's excellent article. The Armenian community has never condemned their terrorists, from the Tehlirians of yesteryear to the Sassounians [Hampig, not Harut; not to say the latter's pen is necessarily less lethal than the former's gun] of today, but even reveres them.)
(It must be said, however, that at the beginnings of the secret societies, most Ottoman-Armenians had good lives and wanted no part of the fanatical terrorists. Only over a period of time did the masses accept and approve, not helped by the terrorists' making sure to drive the Turks and Armenians apart. [Armenians who still wanted no part of the terrorists were forced to choose them, as the situation deteriorated to tribalism.])
Anti-Dashnak Armenian patriot Arthur Derounian made the distinction clear; he wrote that not all Americans were alike. Eleanor Roosevelt, for example, was "good," and Al Capone was "bad." But when it comes to Armenians, the "Nationalism First" feature of the Armenian community knows to keep a tight lid on the "bad":
"Unfortunately, some timid souls are horrified at the exposure of Armenian prototypes of the Smiths, Capones, Buchalters. This attitude is based on the premise that our faults should remain unpublicized to 'outsiders.' Why? Are we not at least as human as our native-born American brethren who themselves claim no monopoly on virtues? Are we Armenians 'superior’ to all other ethnic groups? Are we a 'race' apart, free of weakness? Denying that self-analysis is a virtue, the timid souls would even deny that our frailties are common to humanity everywhere."
(The reluctance of Dashnak-minded Armenians to expose their own criminals has served them well to perpetuate their "Myth of Innocence." Once in a great while there have been slip-ups, as in "Men Are Like That", but for the most part, Armenians have abided by an "oath of silence," so as not to rat themselves out. Another disturbing "Mafia" analogy..!)
Derounian truly spelled it out: "... the questionable Armenians are hard at work. We believe their political chicaneries should be exposed. The cause of justice is best served by truth, and the cause of truth by the merciless exposure of those who, under the guise of patriotism, seek to pervert both truth and patriotism."
But "Truth" and the Dashnak Armenian remain at polar opposites. Why have the sensible voices in the Armenian community been drowned out? Here it is, in a nutshell, courtesy of a TRUE Armenian patriot (don't worry, genocide-lovers, he was a genocide believer as well!), Arthur Derounian:
The ARF emblem, as with the Black Hand title card (see
above) features a dagger as well..!
"...[T]he ARF assumed the leadership by its more fanatic appeal, and its policy of liquidating by terror all opposition."
The ARF (Armenian Revolutionary Federation) is, of course, the Dashnaks. Derounian even made a case for the Dashnaks being little different from the Mafia:
"Another effected practice was the intimidation of prominent men in order to obtain financial support. Those who refused were 'put on the spot.' In fact, it was very similar to the underground methods of modern racketeering, except that its goal was noble."
And it is this parallel we will be observing. Whether that goal was "noble" remains highly debatable. Not when the greedy Armenian terrorist leaders didn't care about anyone but themselves, exposing the Armenian people to horrible danger and conditions (even after Armenia was established, through their corruption, creating a "land of death," verily, as Richard Hovannisian wrote in p. 133 of one of his books).
The movie opens in 1900 New York City with Roberto Columbo, a modest lawyer who decides to make a difference by going to the police.
"Last week it came; a letter bearing the mark of the Black Hand. A letter saying that I would die, if I did not give them money... or if I went to the police. Half of the little I earn... half!"
Columbo gives a description of the crooks, those that "have to have the earnings of such men as me. It must stop!" and reasons that it's time the immigrants learn to trust the police to put a stop to these "murderers... these extortionists." Of course, the signor's good intentions backfire, as the Black Hand turns out to be much too powerful.
Such were exactly the tactics of the Armenian terrorists; as Williams, The British vice-consul noted, writing from Van. (March 4, 1896, British Blue Book, Nr. 8 1896, p.108):
"The Dashnaks and Hunchaks have terrorized their own countrymen, they have stirred up the Muslim people with their thefts and insanities, and have paralyzed all efforts made to carry out reforms; all the events that have taken place in Anatolia are the responsibility of the crimes committed by the Armenian revolutionary committees."
Or as Lord Warkworth pointed out, after paying a visit to Van (referenced in William Langer's "The Diplomacy of Imperialism"), these were "the atrocious methods of terrorism and blackmail" of "a handful of desperados, as careful of their own safety as they are reckless of the lives of others," having "too successfully coerced their unwilling compatriots into complicity with an utterly hopeless conspiracy."
An excellent overview by Prof. Justin McCarthy:
The Dashnaks looked on the merchants as a source of money. The merchants would never donate to the revolution willingly. They had to be forced to do so. The first reported case of extortion from merchants came in Erzurum in 1895, soon after the Dashnak Party became active in the Ottoman domains. The campaign began in earnest in 1901. In that year the extortion of funds through threats and assassination became the official policy of the Dashnak Party. The campaign was carried out in Russia and the Balkans, as well as in the Ottoman Empire. One prominent Armenian merchant, Isahag Zhamharian, refused to pay and reported the Dashnaks to the police. He was assassinated in the courtyard of an Armenian church. Others who did not pay were also killed. The rest of the merchants then paid.
(Note the exact parallel to the movie's Columbo character! "Zhamharian, refused to pay and reported the Dashnaks to the police.")
Prof. McCarthy elaborates further:
From 1902 to 1904 the main extortion campaign brought in the equivalent, in today's money, of more than eight million dollars. And this was only the amount collected by the central Dashnak committee in a short period, almost all from outside the Ottoman Empire. It does not include the amounts extorted from 1895 to 1914 in many areas of the Ottoman Empire. Soon the merchants were paying their taxes to the revolutionaries, not to the government. When the government in Van demanded that the merchants pay their taxes, the merchants pleaded that they had indeed paid taxes, but to the revolutionaries. They said they could only pay the government if the government protected them from the rebels. The same condition prevailed all over Eastern Anatolia, in Izmir, in Cilicia, and elsewhere.
(We are often told "double taxation" was a cause for Armenian discontent. The culprits, we are told, were the Kurds... but perhaps there was another possibility.)
Johnny shows Isabella (Teresa Celli) that he's a cut above
As BLACK HAND progresses to the year 1908, the son of the lawyer (Johnny, played by Gene Kelly) — who has sworn vengeance — returns from Italy, from where his mother had moved to. Johnny encounters a childhood friend, Isabella, who tries to talk him out of taking on the Black Hand. "What's the matter... are you another one who wants to do nothing?" Johnny says. Isabella then explains her own family's fatal experience, where the Black Hand bombed a building, killing many. She cries, "You think I don't want to stop it? But one man, one man against the Black Hand... the old Italian way, swear vengeance, kill or be killed, brave and proud..."
Well! That sounds dangerously close to the Armenian mode, doesn't it? The slightest insult, and it is "I will KILL you" time. For example, when the USA decided to add Armenia to its list of suspect terrorist nations in the wake of 9/11, an Armenian-American truck driver got it into his head to kill President Bush. It doesn't even matter if the suspected villain is guilty, at times... for example, Jemal Pasha was a great friend and protector of the Armenians, but the crazed Dashnak hit man squad, Nemesis, assassinated Jemal anyway. In modern times, the more extremist Armenians know better than to fire their pistols; these days, character assassination serves as the preferred mode of the "hit." For example, another great friend of the Armenians, PBS' Jacoba Atlas, only one of the many PBS people who openly advocated the genocide myth and permitted PBS' latest genocide "documentary" travesty, was ripped open by the Courier's Harut Sassounian and his acolytes, simply because Atlas felt Sassounian's cause for existence was "not entirely analogous" to the Holocaust.
Let's provide a notorious example that is on a par with the Black Hand's style of indiscriminate killing, as related by Isabella. It's from "The Armenian Review," Vol. 10, No. 2-38, June 1957, an article entitled DRO, by James Mandalian.
Pertaining to, as the article tells us, "the Armeno-Tatar clashes of 1904-06, and interracial war instigated by the Tsar's government to liquidate the Armenians of the Caucasus" (This would be Russia, Armenia's great "friend," perpetrating — if we accept the "liquidation" charge — a forgotten "first genocide of the 20th century" upon the Armenians. The Tsar's agent during this period, Golitsyn, was said to have boasted ‘In a short time there will be no Armenians left in the Caucasus, save a few specimens for the museum’), Dro, "the avenging angel of the tormentors of the Armenian people, the executioner of justice," was assigned to take out "the infamous Prince Nakashidze, the Governor of Baku," in 1905. Dro had already gotten his feet wet with "the liquidation of Boghoslavski, the Armenophobe monster who was governor of Igdir."
Christopher Walker ("ARMENIA: The Survival of a Nation") described Prince Nakashidze as the "main executant" of Prince Golitsyn's "anti-Armenian policy." The "Armenian Review" article specifies Nakashidze's crime: "Blood was flowing freely on both sides and yet the government did not lift a finger to stop the carnage... Nakashidze silently stood by and watched the slaughter. Meanwhile, Nakashidze secretly aided the Tatars to destroy the Armenians." (This was hardly a conflict of equals. As Ohanus Appressian related in p. 23 of "Men Are Like That": "In the Armenian-Tartar War of 1905 the Armenians had much the better of the fighting. Many of our men had served in the Russian Army, and were trained soldiers. We Armenians were rich and possessed arms. The Tartars had never received military training. They were poor, and possessed few arms beyond knives." )
"The revolutionary court sentenced Nakashidze to death as the instigator and author of the Baku massacres." (A court Judge Roy Bean would have been proud of. Similar "courts" also decided the fates of innocent Ottoman officials such as Jemal Pasha.) "On May 11, at 3 P.M., as the Governor's carriage was racing along the central boulevard of thecity, a bomb shattered the carriage, instantly disfiguing the body of Nakashidze and mortally wounding the Turkish driver, Nakashidze's aide and a Turkish fruit vendor near by."
Nothing new there. One of Armenia's greatest heroes was one of the most successful murderers of all time. But here is the part I got a real kick out of; it turns out Dro, the "humble" hero as the article tells us elsewhere, gave his version of the assassination to Vahan Afrikian, as related in Hairenik Daily (April 22, 1956), "which throws a characteristic light on Dro's humanitarian trait."
Dro had a severe belly ache, and then saw the Turkish fruit vendor, seated nearby. He walked over to him, said something, then retraced his steps. The Governor in his carriage, escorted by mounted guards, approached. "Instantly I straightened up, forgot my pain, and as the carriage passed by me I threw the bomb. It was a bull's eye. At the terrific explosion and the ensuing panic I assumed my former pitiful appearance and silently got away."
Later, Dro leisurely made his way back and "saw the ravages of the bomb — the shattered bodies of the dead and the splinters of the carriage. My only regret was that the Turkish vendor had been blown to bits."
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this is an example of Dro, who thought of his path as "holy," showing what a great "humanitarian" he was. Can you believe the psychotic logic of the extremist Armenians?
Moriani (Maurice Samuels) is suspicious of the stranger
in the bar
Back to BLACK HAND: Johnny then visits the one eyewitness who might be able to finger the criminals who wronged his family. He pays a vist to the fellow (Mr. Moriani) who is now a bartender. But the walls have ears, and the criminals quickly make a stiff of the stiff drink server before his private meeting with Johnny comes to pass.
As Dr. Lowry wrote, citing Gerard Libaridian, "56 of the 105 individuals assassinated by Armenian terrorists between 1904-1906 were murdered as 'informers', the message which the terrorists intended to convey had clearly gotten through to them. Anyone who speaks up against one of their members will die."
(Two out of three victims of Armenian terrorism between 1904-1906 were fellow Armenians. "Its purpose, then as now, was nothing more or less than intimidation. The conscious attempt to frighten the overwhelming majority of peaceful Armenians into silence as regards the activities of the terrorists.")
One of the famous alleged informers was Harootyoun Mugurditchian (Artin Mugerditchian); Soghoman Tehlirian, the Dashnak assassin of Talat Pasha, simply on the word of a fellow terrorist (a Hunchak, Yeranouhi Danielian), decided to take out Mugurditchian; the latter was suspected of providing the list of two to three hundred Armenian cultural leaders to be arrested on April 24, in Istanbul. The author of an article about Tehlirian in The Armenian Review (Nov. 1960), Sarkis Atamian, described Mugurditchian as an "unconscionable traitor," and justified Tehlirian's murderous ways in the following fanatical manner: "without retribution, justice, is merely a word."
Johnny and Isabella next team up in order to combat the Black Hand. They try to round up a "citizen's league," realizing there is strength in numbers. They visit a tailor (Danetta) hoping to get him to join, but he and his wife give the cold shoulder. In short time, it becomes apparent their son, Francesco, has been kidnapped.
"If we tell anybody, they'd kill him... he's just a little child, ten years old," Danetta explains, adding the money demanded for Francesco's return is not ransom. "It's money they say I owe them... three, four months ago, they came around and they say, from then on, double. Double the amount every week. Double. I got mad and say no." That's what got them to take their child. "They win, Johnny, they always win."
Pantikyan, an Armenian famed for playing a great role in the armistice, is reported to have told M. Sifir: "The committeemen robbed the Istanbul Armenians... pitilessly. They put several wealthy persons into a penniless situation."
The sympathetic cop, Lt. Louis Lorelli (played by J. Carroll Naish), gets word that Johnny and Isabella managed to scrounge up six brave citizens to come to their first meeting of the citizen's league. With their wives, that would make twelve, the detective figures. He offers to jack up the numbers with fourteen new members, and their wives. He explains that he even managed to get the church to agree to set up the meeting place.
On the fateful night, the organizers wait for Johnny to appear, but he is delayed. The detective begins to bide time by explaining what the Black Hand is about. "Neighborhood gangs, that's all they are. They all have criminal records back in Italy. (Such as) the Mafia in Sicily. They come over here, nobody knows them."
(Just as with the beginnings of the Armenian secret societies in the Ottoman Empire, before they developed into a homegrown network. The criminals all came from outside, mainly from Russia and Iran. Prof. McCarthy explains: "Dashnaks from Russia were the leaders of rebellion. They were the organizers and the 'enforcers' who turned the Armenians of Anatolia into rebel soldiers. This was not an easy task, because at first most of the Ottoman Armenians had no wish to rebel. They preferred peace and security and disapproved of the atheistic, socialist revolutionaries. A feeling of separatism and even superiority among the Armenians helped the revolutionaries, but the main weapon that turned the Armenians of the East into rebels was terrorism. The prime cause that united the Armenians against their government was fear.")
Finally, the door opens and Johnny falls down, unconscious and with his leg mangled. The gathered people quickly and nervously filter out the door. The police chief who was also in attendance tells Louis that this spells the end of the league, and they didn't even go so far as a murder.
The Armenian terrorists also made an example of what they considered a threat, in plain view, inside a church. But they even out performed the murderous Black Hand, as the crime was committed in front of everyone. Dr. Lowry tells us (providing an example of terrorism performed in "Black Hand" territory, New York City):
"On September 24, 1933, the then primate of the Armenian Church of America, Archbishop Leon Touranian was assassinated by Armenian terrorists as he prepared to celebrate mass in the Armenian Cathedral of New York City. As he walked up the aisle in plain sight of several hundred waiting parishioners, a group of men blocked his path, knives flashed, and he fell dead on the floor."
Sabballera (Frank Puglia) is feisty with the D.A., at first
The across-the-neck gesture: KKK-KK!
One of the Black Hand hoods is finally hauled into the courtroom, thanks to a thin lead left behind from one of his bombing attacks. (The proprietor of the store, Sabballera, refused to give the thousand dollars the hood had demanded.) Sabballera is called to the witness stand and enthusiastically tells the story. Suddenly, he catches sight of someone in the courtroom who gestures the "sign of death" across the throat. That shuts the witness up immediately.
Det. Louis jumps up from his seat and tries to drum up the courage of the witness. He explains the immigrant psychology to the judge:
"Your honor, I can't prove he's been intimidated. I don't know who gave him the sign, but somebody did. Your honor, you said to Sabballera the protection of the law. But you have to understand how different it is for Sabballera, for all these people. He don't believe we can protect him. And that's why he can be intimidated. To lots of them, a cop means a tax collector, or being dragged into the army... they got used to policemen being foreigners, enemies, oppressors, you might say. What I mean, your honor, is that they don't know."
Sabballera is spooked
That sort of reasoning probably applied to the Armenians of New York City, as well. Dr. Lowry continues with the murdered priest story:
"Not one individual in the crowd was able to identify a single one of the assailants. The New York District Attorney who prosecuted the subsequent trial of the nine man Dashnak cell responsible for the assassination, had the following to say in regard to the failure of a single Armenian present in the Church to testify against the assailants:
'The detectives faced a wall of reticence which did not auger well for a solution of the mysterious killing. Either these Armenians wished to settle the feuds in their own way by murderous counterplots; or they were too much in fear for their own safety to disclose what they know.' [Spectator, December 7, 1983]"
Money changes hands under the sinister influence of the "Black Hand"
The roots of the Armenian clergy targeted and then recruited into the ranks of the terrorists is explained by Prof. McCarthy:
"Before the Armenians could be turned into rebels their traditional loyalty to their Church and their Community leaders had to be destroyed. The rebels realized that Armenians felt the most love and respect for their Church, not for the revolution. The Dashnak Party therefore resolved to take effective control of the Church. Most clergymen, however, did not support the atheistic Dashnaks. The Church could only be taken over through violence.
What happened to Armenian clergymen who opposed the Dashnaks? Priests were killed in villages and cities. Their crime? They were loyal Ottoman subjects. The Armenian bishop of Van, Boghos, was murdered by the revolutionaries in his cathedral on Christmas Eve. His crime? He was a loyal Ottoman subject. The Dashnaks attempted to kill the Armenian Patriarch in Istanbul, Malachia Ormanian. His crime? He opposed the revolutionaries. Arsen, the priest in charge of the important Akhtamar Church in Van, the religious center of the Armenians in the Ottoman East, was murdered by Ishkhan, one of the leaders of Van's Dashnaks. His crime? He opposed the Dashnaks. But there was an additional reason to kill him: The Dashnaks wanted to take over the Armenian education system that was based in Akhtamar. After Father Arsen was killed, the Dashnak Aram Manukian, a man without known religious belief, became head of the Armenian schools. He closed down religious education and began revolutionary education. So-called "religious teachers" spread throughout Van Province, teaching revolution, not religion.
The loyalty of the rebels was to the revolution. Not even their Church was safe from their attacks."
The Armenian Church today can too frequently be a "henchman" to the terrorists. Hatred of Turks is, at times, preached in churches, molding or reinforcing impressionable Armenian minds. "Genocide-speak" is never far away, presenting a danger that Dr. Robert John (Hovhanes) warned against in an Armenian Newspaper (The Reporter, August 2, 1984): "The Armenian, the Jew or the African should not damage their development with a continual conditioning of hate; neither should spurious guilt be vented upon others. These negative preoccupations and obsessions are obstructing our evolution.” It's pretty outrageous when Bishop Balakian (nicknamed the "Action Priest") blessed the terrorist and murderer, Soghoman Tehlirian, at the time of the assassin's 1921 trial. Equally reprehensible is the modern Catholicos, Karekin II, putting his stamp of holy approval on terrorists and murderers such as Dro and Antranik... when the remains of these Armenian "heroes" were shipped back to Armenia, in recent years.
Prof. McCarthy continues:
"The other group that most threatened the power of the rebels was the Armenian merchant class. As a group they favored the government. They wanted peace and order, so that they could do business. They were the traditional secular leaders of the Armenian Community; the rebels wanted to lead the Community themselves, so the merchants had to be silenced. Those who most publicly supported their government, such as Bedros Kapamaciyan, the Mayor of Van, and Armarak, the kaymakam of Gevas, were assassinated, as were numerous Armenian policemen, at least one Armenian Chief of Police, and Armenian advisors to the Government. Only a very brave Armenian would take the side of the Government."
Little by little, the Armenian community allowed these fanatical terrorists to rule their lives. It went beyond money, ultimately; during World War I, every Armenian over 13, based on confessions by Armenians (according to this internal army report), was forced to enroll in Armenian committees as functionaries or soldiers... in Van, Bitlis, Erzurum, Karahisar, and in Sivas, Kayseri, and Diyarbekir.
Prof. McCarthy informs us on how these criminals imposed their will on the common people:
The Armenian common people did not escape the extortions of the rebels. They were forced to feed and house the revolutionaries. British Consul Elliot reported, "They [the Dashnaks] quarter themselves on Christian villages, live on the best to be had, exact contributions to their funds, and make the younger women and girls submit to their will. Those who incur their displeasure are murdered in cold blood."[FO 424/196, Elliot to Currie, Tabreez, May 5, 1898]
The greatest cost to villagers was the forced purchase of guns. The villagers were turned into rebel "soldiers," whether they wished to be or not. If they were to fight the Turks, they needed weapons. The revolutionaries smuggled weapons from Russia and forced the Armenian villagers to buy. The methods used to force the villagers to buy were very effective, as British consul Seele reported:
An agent arrived in a certain village and informed a villager that he must buy a Mauser pistol. The villager replied that he had no money, whereupon the agent retorted, "You must sell your oxen." The wretched villager then proceeded to explain that the sowing season would soon arrive and asked how a Mauser pistol would enable him to plough his fields. For reply the agent proceeded to destroy the poor man's oxen with his pistol and then departed."[FO 195/2949, Molyneux-Seel to Lowther, Van, February 17, 1913]
The rebels had more than military organization in mind when they forced the villagers to buy weapons. The villagers were charged double the normal cost of the weapons. A rifle worth £5 was sold for £10. Both the rebel organization and the rebels themselves did very well from the sales.
It was the peasants who suffered most. The most basic policy of the revolutionaries was a callous exploitation of the lives of Armenians: Kurdish tribes and their villages were attacked by the rebels, knowing that the tribes would take their revenge on innocent Armenian villagers. The revolutionaries escaped and left their fellow Armenians to die.
Even Europeans, friends of the Armenians, could see that the revolutionaries were the cause of the curse that had descended on Eastern Anatolia. Consul Seele wrote in 1911:
From what I have seen in the parts of the country I have visited I have become more convinced than ever of the baneful influence of the Taschnak Committee on the welfare of the Armenians and generally of this part of Turkey. It is impossible to overlook the fact in that in all places where there are no Armenian political organisations or where such organisations are imperfectly developed, the Armenians live in comparative harmony with the Turks and Kurds.[FO 195/2375 Molyneux-Seele to Lowther, Van, 9 October 1911]
These terrorist criminals didn't care about their own people, as long as their own selfish and greedy needs were met. British consul (from Erzurum) Robert Graves shed light on the aims of the terrorists, in his 1933 memoirs ("Storm Centres of the Near East"):
"They were quite cynical when remonstrated with on the wickedness of deliberately provoking the massacre of their unfortunate fellow-countrymen, with all its attendant horrors, without any assurance that the lot of the survivors would be any happier, saying calmly that the sacrifice was a necessary one and the victims would be 'Martyrs to the National Cause.'"
Imagine the callous way in which these criminals turned their own people to the wolves! (George Hepworth elaborated in "Through Armenia on Horseback": "the revolutionists are doing what they can to make fresh outrages possible. That is their avowed purpose. They reason that if they can induce the Turks to kill more of the Armenians, themselves excepted, Europe will be forced to intervene.")
(Of course, these immoral killers, employing their typical "end justifies the means" tactics, in what Sir Mark Sykes termed their "disgraceful ruffianism," did not stop at massacring Muslims, in order to get the results they sought. On several occasions, they have actually targeted Western consuls or missionaries, so that the Turks would be blamed for the murders, in order to get the imperialists to come in, and do the Armenians' fighting for them. For example, Sir Mark Sykes, Dar-ul-Islam: "It is also a fact that the Armenians have an extraordinary habit of running into danger without possessing the courage to face it, and the revolutionists from abroad were always prepared to provoke a massacre in order to induce the Powers to assist them. I have good reason to know that these wretches actually schemed to murder American missionaries, hoping America would declare war on the supposition that the Turks were the criminals.")
If we may point to the "genocide" (the Armenians' synonym for "relocation"), no less an authority than Armenia's first Prime Minister, Hovhannes Katchaznouni reported as a terrible fact that if it weren't for the committees, the Armenians would not have suffered their fate.
The unscrupulous Dashnak mentality is exactly what is behind the Armenians' relentless genocide crusade. Armenian "scholars" are aware of the falsehoods they make, and they justify their immorality for reasons of patriotism. The sympathy-evoking genocide is big business. Armenia has many American politicians in their pockets; more than one-third of Congress makes up a Caucus on Armenian Issues (co-chaired by Frank Pallone [rhymes with "baloney"] and Joe Knollenberg), and over the last decade and more received over $1.5 billion from American taxpayers, and all Armenia had to offer the USA in turn was a $50 million unpaid loan from 1919, at 5% interest. Sam Weems wrote: "for every one dollar Armenian Americans 'invested', they got $100 back in US Aid to Armenia! 100 to 1 return! This is a better return than Las Vegas casinos!" (The Las Vegas casinos was an invention of the Mafia, and that was a pretty good comparison.)
After Armenia regained her freedom from the Soviet Union, the first leader did his best to steer the nation away from Dashnak influence (Ter-Petrossian banned the ARF, only to get death chants from the Dashnak-brainwashed diaspora), but as Danetta said in BLACK HAND, "They win, Johnny, they always win." Once the hysterical fanatics took over, note the gangster tactics in Armenia, as related by Christian Scholar Sam Weems ("Armenia - Secrets of a 'Christian' Terrorist State," p. 361):
There is little that can be called the free press in Armenia [a fact even Richard Hovannisian paid grudging respect to; he addressed the fact that he broke ranks with the rule that one must never say anything negative about Armenia or Armenians, and rationalized the reason why there is so little criticism: "Perhaps that is a consequence of the genocide."]... Any Christian denomination, other than the official state-church, is subjected to harassment and violence if they attempt to practice their individual-independent faiths in Armenia. The state constitution gives the 'official' church the absolute right to subject Armenians to its brand of Christianity and there is little room for any other view of Christ but theirs.
Political assassinations are common place in Armenia today. The mayor of Yerevan, the capital city, complained ahout the corruption within state government, and was murdered. Many individuals who have attempted to object and speak out about state government abuse have been assassinated.
The Prime Minister, Vashen Sarkisyan, and seven members of the Armenian Parliament were shot and killed right in front of the legislative chambers of the capital city.
The state prosecutor, the deputy defense minister, and the interior minister were all assassinated. (Weems then moves on to voter falsification records, a problem Hovannisian also paid note to in the above link.)
So were we being fair by comparing the Dashank Armenia and diaspora to the Mafia? No. The latter is only small potatoes compared to the crimes and lack of morals displayed by the terrorists among Armenians, and those they have coerced.
In BLACK HAND, the Italian-American community finally shows signs of breaking hold of the Black Hand's grip. Of course, this is a Hollywood film, and there needed to be a happy ending. The fact is, the parasites forming the Mafia (which became "big business" in the USA not long after the 1908 period of the film, with the rise of Lucky Luciano and company) maintained a grip not only with many fellow Italians, but with a good portion of American society, which was complacent and/or fearful. It is only in the last generation or so that the Mafia has become a shadow of its former self, thanks to strong anti-racketeering laws and a "We're not going to take this anymore" attitude from people who have been able to make a difference.
Yet the Armenian community throughout the world, either all too willingly or with their silence, are still allowing the Dashnaks to dishonor their people, representing a monolithic whole. Where are the brave Armenians who will finally break ranks... publicly... with these criminals who have brought so much violence, ruin and misery to so many people? Where are the courageous Armenians who, as with the Italians of BLACK HAND (and the handful of true Armenian patriots such as Arthur Derounian), who will make the effort to see the Dashnaks "purged from their ranks," in order to give "bright dignity to their people and to th[e] nation[s]" the Arnenians are living in?
"The Black Hand" is also the name of a Secret Society set up in the land of the Armenians' Otrthodox cousins who also enjoy mopping up Muslims: Serbia. Set up in 1911, the aim of this Black Hand was to attain a "Greater Serbia" through the use of Dashnak-style violence. Members had a hand in the assassination of Austria-Hungary's Franz Ferdinand, which sparked the Great War.
The source site of this article gets revised often, as better
information comes along. For the most up-to-date version, and
the related photos, the reader may consider reviewing
the direct link as follows: