Read Full Post !
31.1.09
2730) London Turkish–Armenian Relations Conference Notes, 30Jan2009
Read Full Post !
2729) Armenian Thuggery & Intimidation Silenced A Politician Jack Lang
Latest Update 
Editors
In a video tour on 11 October 2008 at Blois, the Socialist member of the Pas-de-Calais, Jack Lang, questions the law passed in January 2001, which recognized the Armenian genocide of 1915. "I passed the first resolution of the National Assembly - in quotes, can we say, because it takes too that historians do their work - the Armenian genocide. I voted because I believe that It was an act of moral, repair history. I do not know if I react the same way today. "
Jack Lang spoke to the association Freedom for history, chaired by the historian Pierre Nora. "At that time [the vote], takes Jack Lang, was chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly, so I am doubly guilty, if I may say so, because Committee Chairman and member .
by galileoz
In a letter to nouvelobs.com, the former minister of culture that he has not changed its position and continues to fight for that worldwide genocide of the Armenian people is recognized, and especially in Turkey. " He said that these remarks were made in the framework of a scientific debate among historians about the competence of arliament P enact laws to memory. "
PS because the member was one of the main defenders of the law of January 2001. In 2000, Jack Lang had signed an article in the New Armenia. "Recognize the existence of genocide applies to all, because such a plan involves humanity as a whole. The denial of the Armenian genocide and some of our complacency vis-à-vis a heinous negationism must be combated tirelessly, "wrote then Jack Lang. In 1999, Jack Lang had even signed the preface of a book entitled The News of the genocide of Armenians, signed by the Defense Committee of the Armenian cause.
But nothing happens: viewed thousands of times on Dailymotion, the Nouvel Obs or other sites, this video has to react. The Armenian and Turkish communities in France are mobilizing over the Internet to challenge or defend the member. Turkey News calls "to support Jack Lang, the target of Armenian nationalists." Gamkonline, a site of the Armenian community, says that the elected Pas-de-Calais "insulting France and its humanistic values."
Thibaud Vuitton
Michelle B. 04.02.09 |
The Turks today have even less of repentance - sincere or not - that for a century "on" has never talked about this genocide, it was denied (it still is) by the leaders , so by the manuals and therefore scolairss Turkish public opinion. Are not asked Turkey today to repent of what we're doing their grandparents (or great grand parents), but to recognize the historical truth - simply.
Champignac 04.02.09 |
Abolition of all laws blocking the historical research and debate: a necessity in France.
JL 04.02.09 |
Hop hop, I return my jacket and I appeal to the French, and those easy to fool, to take them to witness my new conversion. Hop hop, I return my jacket!
Marie Claude R. 04.02.09 |
I have no sympathy for Jack Lang, but there are fools who never change their minds. It was not for the law to rule on the history and they are all known as the "memorial" to be abolished. Gradually, freedom of expression is reduced in Europe as a shrinking. Enough!
Philippe B. 04.02.09 |
Building the story is good, the political recognition is better. The millions of deaths in Armenia deserve better than a few lines in a history book, and recognize that genocide is a good way to put pressure on some instances of extremist Turkish power.
Julot 04.02.09 |
The memorial laws are laws freak who terrorize all historians and all supporters of free opinion. Their abolition is an emergency. This is not the legislature to build the history is for historians.
Gerard B. 04.02.09 |
Make judgments about the facts of nearly a century with the current morality is absurd. None of the authors or makers of genocide is alive today to answer for his crimes. How the Turks of today could they have a sincere repentance (otherwise it's tartufferie) acts they did not commit? No, children are neither responsible, nor judges the actions of their fathers. Let the historians decide. And wake up after 85 years is neither glorious nor courageous.
yetto 04.02.09 |
Pitiful contortions of Jack Lang facing a aeropage historians to whom he wished to shine so he returns his jacket. He falls immediately in politics cheap citing concerns for the electoral vote of the law when it comes to facts for a long time. Yes, but the man was invited to Turkey and it seems to have the greatest respect for the official Turkish historians we understand everything!
G. MICHEL 03.02.09 |
What credit granted to a man whose political career will resume at the fete de la musique and for which the history will only return her brushing
michel o. 03.02.09 |
It is true that the laws are a great memorial stupidity. But this man can not exist. Unless the fish pilot dispatched to make the turkey the lever of a negotiation in palestine against an entry in the EU.
rastaman 03.02.09 |
quotation marks! more than a million Armenians died genocide under a process that has served as an example or model to Hitler, saying the same of him. What this politician is able to say or do me hurt.
ROBERT A. 03.02.09 |
Good people are distinguished also by their courage to seek, teach and defend the truth. Especially for crimes against humanity, their prevention, their conviction and penalty. It is a matter that concerns us all. The Jewish Polish lawyer Rafael Lemkin and Turkish historian Taner Akçam have understood. Please read their biographies and their work on genocide. Exercise your freedom to act like them.
JACQUES S. 03.02.09 |
Let's be optimistic, perhaps Jack Lang he understood the futility of laws memorial. If only we had stopped with the law Gayssot instead of open competition memories ... An example: if I say that there were no more deaths among blacks that led to slavery in marine, I may fall on the Law Taubira. But it is true and understandable: the poor slaves had a market value.
Jacquesleborgne 03.02.09 |
But my god what a hypocrite, he returned to his jacket whenever he spoke. What poor politician!
gus 03.02.09 |
let everyone have a free opinion and take a free trial on the facts. Otherwise, tomorrow and the train which advance our jurisprudence, you will be condemned simply for an event called the "great evil", while the standard described as "very very great misfortune."
Collectif VAN + 03.02.09 |
Lang argues: "It was as part of a scientific debate among historians. His beliefs are variable according to the public he addresses? The former Minister of Culture does it not the meaning of the quotes he used in a sentence worthy of the worst deniers: "I voted for the resolution on the recognition, in quotes, can we say (because it is also necessary that historians do their work), the Armenian genocide. "Lamentable!
Occam 03.02.09 |
It's the genocide in quotes ", which ticks. There is a consensus of historians (not Turkish) on the qualification of genocide, then, whether for or against the law, put quotation marks at the term genocide is rather awkward, if not shocking. But perhaps I should put quotation marks at the end of evolution, since some scientists believe not illuminated? There is a threshold when doubt becomes the denial to the obvious.
Thomas W. 03.02.09 |
Oh, overnight, the Turkish power is returned to non grata and the Armenian genocide a forgery, since the misdemeanor Erdogan against Shimon Peres in Davos. Ficelle a large gentlemen.
Aesop! Aesop! 03.02.09 |
Freedom for history, more than ever. Jack Lang came to demonstrate in a statement and a retraction flash that history suffers when politicians take it hostage, whether French, Turkish and Armenian.
lannig 03.02.09 |
Jack Lang does not disagree with his position on the Armenian genocide but rather on the determination by the law of history. I am only because our laws, and is happy, condemn the Nazi Holocaust denial an Act Scho then why not on the Armenian genocide? But eminent historians are fighting the idea of "freeze" the history and what they say must be heard. The article could be read as I quote: "this video has to react." There is a paucity of words in that sentence.
jlecynique 03.02.09 |
I find this kind of legislation shameful for democracy and those who vote should review the meaning of their mandate. and more when it is an event that has nothing to do with our history, what we melons we? it is simply a reflection of the political pressure of some political groups and lobbies who know them and use blackmail. is proper shame, despicable and outrageous.
ALAIN M. 03.02.09 |
The truth does not s'edicte by law even if it's hard for victims.
amf 03.02.09 |
Jack Lang does not question the existence of the Armenian genocide, as cerains Turkish pretend to believe, but the fact that "politics", politicians, mingle in the history and memory by legislating on these issues . There is no official story, there is a duty to remember him as a "historical duty" incumbent on researchers and citizens, not law. I do not like Jack Lang, but then I think his memorial in the debate going in the right direction.
vxnnhmfxd 03.02.09 |
I am not surprised by the reversal of J. LANG on this issue as on others, but here is very serious because the former minister "socialist" seullemnt will not deny but denies the obvious. I weigh that, given his age, Mr. Lang, I appreciated that as Minister of Culture, should be a lack of power, recognition, and I'm amazed that point-like supports and KOUCHNER BESSON clan-SARKOZY. Not everyone can call Lilian Thuram ...
Wily S. 03.02.09 |
The debate is not posed by the extremists on 2 sides. Everything indicates that there really was genocide of Armenians and Turkey is moving slowly to the reconnaisaance thereof. But it does neither a parliament nor a government to tell the story. The criminalization of the denial of Armenian genocide is silly and politically biased (against Turkey's accession to the EU).
EVENING VISITOR 03.02.09 |
This is not the first, it will not last! As Dutronc singing "I return my jacket still on their good side!
gus 03.02.09 |
Any act of memory is a crime against history. Do not let the church care of all religions to define scientific truth does not leave the task to legislators of all stripes to define historical truth as they face political pressure too great, and thus proclaimed Truth becomes highly suspect.
DOM.B. 03.02.09 |
A Tartufferie more the JL as many elephants PS anxious to have a posture that is ds air du Temps passed these laws dictated parl'emotion andthe compassion. Aujourdhui they seem useless because without much impact ( see the reaction of Turkey) without translation practice, but as his fellow amenée hinder historical research or freedom of expression which his apostasy, it seems that there is more joy ds le ciel ... ETC. for many believers on
Called "Judas" [1] person "revealing the face of Holocaust denial in all its cowardice" [2] (sic), compared to Bishop Williamson [3] (Bishop integrist and denial): nothing has been spared Jack Lang, former Dean of the Law Faculty of Nancy, a former Minister of Culture and Education, currently Socialist deputy from Pas-de-Calais.
So what Mr. Lang? He just attended the launch of the appeal of Blois. With great historians such as Pierre Nora, Henry Rousso (the inventor of the word "denial") or Gilles Veinstein - the list is too long - he courageously defended freedom of expression, this freedom that Much of threatening politicians, for electioneering by blindness or ignorance, these monsters with legal, unconstitutional, as the memorial laws (Law on the "Armenian genocide" Taubira law, law Mékachéra proposed mass).
In addition, Mr. Lang said, in the case of Armenian "genocide in quotation marks. Mr. Lang did and the existence of strong arguments put forward by major historians who worked on Ottoman history, against the concept of genocide in this case [4].
So why this verbal intemperance, this indignity, this virulence defamatory? The answer is in the identity of those who launched these attacks vipérines.
1) Ara Toranian was the beginning of 1976 to July 1983, spokesman for the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA), then, a splinter group, the ASALA-Revolutionary Movement, dismantled by the French police in the fall of 1985. From 1976 to 1988, Mr. Toranian was also editor of a newspaper, Hay Baykar ( "Armenian Combat"), supporting terrorism in terms of particularly aggressive [5].
On 11 June 1981, at the head of a group of armed men, Mr. Toranian occupied for several hours the offices of Turkish Airlines at Orly, demanding the release of the ASALA terrorists imprisoned at the time. The band of thugs was finally evacuated by the police, after protests from the Turkish Embassy [6].
At the time Mr. Toranian is spokesman of the ASALA, the group is guilty, inter alia, the following crimes [7]:
- The murder of Oktar CIRIT, first secretary of the Turkish Embassy in Beirut on 16 February 1976 (see photo).
- The placement of a bomb at the home of the Shaw family, on the night of 4 October 1977, while they slept. Considering the damage caused, the intention is likely homicide.
- A series of bomb attacks, against Turkish targets, not Turkish, Switzerland, Italy and Iran, 22 August 1979 to 18 February 1980, including the El Al offices in Rome, by hatred of "Zionism" ( read: Jews).
- The bomb the offices of Turkish Airlines, the Turkish Tourist Office in Rome on 10 March 1980 that killed two bystanders and injured Italian fourteen.
- The assassination of Galip Ozmen, attached to the Turkish Embassy in Greece, and his 14 year old daughter, Neslihan, 31 July 1980 (see photos).
- The shooting at the Turkish Consulate in Lyon, which left two people dead on 5 August 1980.
- The assassination attempt against Selçuk BakaIbasi, head of the press at the Turkish Embassy in Paris on 26 September 1980. Mr. Bakalbasi, shot in the head, is paralyzed since.
- A probable involvement in the attack against the synagogue in the rue Copernic in Paris (requires anti-Semitism), 4 October 1980. The attack was also claimed by ASALA.
- A second series of bomb attacks, against targets in Turkey and Switzerland, 12 October 1980 to 5 February 1981.
- The assassination of work attached to the Turkish Embassy in France, Resat Morali and Ari Tecelli, Advisor for Religious Affairs, on 4 March 1981.
- The assassination of Mehmet Yergüz, secretary of the Turkish consulate in Geneva on 9 June 1981 (see photo).
- The taking of hostages at the Turkish Consulate General in Paris on 24 September 1981, where a security guard, Cemal Ozen, is killed.
- A third series of bomb attacks, against French targets of 25 October 1981 to 19 February 1982.
- The bomb in a cinema Armenian from Beirut, 26 March 1982, killing two people seriously injured and sixteen, all of Armenia. Reason: the owner of the cinema refused to pay money to ASALA, and grew up provocation Turkish distribute films.
- The shooting of 7 August 1982, at Ankara airport, which is ten dead and 82 wounded (see photo).
- The bomb the Paris office of the travel agency Marmara, 28 February 1983, which killed the Secretary Renée Morin and injured four other French.
By its position, Mr. Toranian was taken, if not to inspire all those crimes, at least to claim to them. The ASALA-MR did not have time to carry out an attack before being destroyed by a police operation, but not envy it missing, given the arsenal found at the home of Monte Melkonian [8].
Mr. Toranian has sincerely renounced encourage murder and laying bombs to make a maximum of victims, but for one reason: he did these crimes occur more in the current circumstances, relevant to the spread of his ideas. To mark the admiration paid to terrorists of the time, armenews.com, Mr. Toranian site is web master, has a page to the glory of the terrorist Monte Melkonian, leader of the ASALA until 1983, then Chief the ASALA-MR [9].
2) The Armenian Revolutionary Federation - Dachnaktsoutioune (FRA-Dashnak) is an ultranationalist party, founded in 1890. The VAN is a group of subsidiaries of the FRA. Summarize in a few lines the crimes of the FRA and its political hypocrisy is the challenge.
For the period 1890-1945 were:
- A series of provocations in the 1890s, including the first hostage-taking in contemporary times, the Ottoman Bank (Istanbul) on 26 August 1896, which provoked the stated purpose (and succeeded, unfortunately, in beyond all hope) is to provoke violence anti pretext for intervention even more of the major powers in the Ottoman Empire [10];
- Two missed attacks against Sultan Abdulhamid II in 1905, the one that killed the founder of the FRA, Christapor Mikaelian, who died in manipulating the bomb he was preparing, which kills the other twenty-six people and injured fifty-eight [11];
- A series of political assassinations, from 1891 to 1912, which concluded with the assassination of Bedros Kapamaciyan, Armenian mayor of Van, 10 December 1912 [12];
- The massacre of civilians Muslims and Jews, between 1914 and 1922 [13];
- A second series of political assassinations between 1918 and 1933, culminating with the murder of Archbishop Tourian Leon, leader of the Armenian Church for the Americas, New York, 24 December 1933 [14];
- The participation of many of the FRA, with the authorization of the international management, the army of the Third Reich, especially in the Armenian 812th Battalion of the Wehrmacht and the Waffen-SS [15].
In short, says Mikael Varandian, leader and ideologist of the USA during its first decades of existence, "maybe is there never been a revolutionary party - even by the Russians or the Narodovoletz Italian Carbonari - with a rich experience of terrorist acts that the FRA. In a difficult environment, she has trained hundreds of teachers of the pistol, the dagger and the bomb [...] [16]. "
From 1972 to 1986, the FRA has its own terrorist branch, the Commandos of the Armenian genocide justiciers (CJGA, renamed the Armenian Revolutionary Army in 1983), separate from the ASALA, which is a mixture of dissidents and activists FRA d another ultranationalist party, the Hintchak [17]. From 1975 to 1984, CJGA / ARA twenty kill Turkish diplomats or members of their staff or their immediate family [18].
In October 1982, the FBI arrested five terrorists CJGA, who participated in a dozen attacks, and planned to blow up the Turkish Consulate building in Philadlephie with an explosive device so powerful it could kill up 3 to 000 (you read), provided that the attack takes place at a busy hour [19].
The FRA has occasionally reactivated its terrorist network, particularly to assassinate Viktor Polianitchko (senior Russian) and General Ossetian Safonov in 1993 [20], then most likely to commit the massacre in the Armenian Parliament, in 1999 [21].
FRA never misses an opportunity to celebrate its terrorists, and ask for the release of a few who are still imprisoned. These are the kinds of posters were put up in the middle of Paris, by militants of FRA in July 2008:
The five are the five Lisbon crazy who entered, 25 July 1983 in the Turkish Embassy in Portugal, after killing a policeman Portuguese. They have blown up. The bomb also ripped the wife of the ambassador.
Note that the FRA expressed Socialist in France, which prevents the hate Philippe Kizirian, Socialist mayor of Saint-Chamond, and descendant of Armenian immigrants, as Mr. Kizirian beat a puppet of the FRA, the member François Rochebloine new Center, and wants to maintain good relations with Turkey from living in his city. In the United States, the FRA is an openly right-wing movement, which does not prevent its political arm, the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), to finance all politicians plenty ready to relay its claims, the right wing of the Republican Party to the left wing of the Democratic Party. Lebanon and Armenia, the FRA is almost extreme right.
The militants of FRA love burning Turkish flags [22]. They did it to Marseille until 2003:
And Salonica until 2007, when the prosecutor continued contempt for these fanatics to foreign flag [23] (a crime in Greece):
Look at the heads.
The Dashnak still burning Turkish flags in Yerevan and Tbilisi.
Both CJGA / ARA ASALA that have used drug trafficking to finance. Nathan Adams, an editor at Reader's Digest, which has conducted a thorough investigation on the links between drug trafficking and international terrorism ", said before the subcommittee of the U.S. Senate in charge of the fight against the alcoholism and drug addiction, that "the Armenian terrorist groups, both left [ASALA] that right [CJGA] fired 90% of their income from drug trafficking during the past year [1982]." Mr. Adams states that a famous drug trafficker, the Armenian-Lebanese Noubar Soufoyon, capable of carrying on the U.S. '100 kg of heroin at one time "had" participated in the financing of the two Armenian terrorist groups with the result of its sale of drugs. " Mr. Soufoyon is indicted by the U.S. justice system in June 1981, then arrested by Greek police, but Athens, very friendly with ASALA, refuses to extradite him, in violation of the Interpol. Francis L. Mullen, head of the Drug Enforcement Administration to the U.S. Department of Justice, confirmed the investigation of Mr. Adams: "trafficker of heroin and hashish Noubar Soufoyon, whose activities are well known, was linked with the justices of the Commandos Armenian genocide [24]. "
Similarly, the French connection should have been called, more accurately, the "Armenian connection", the majority of traffickers this track, disbanded in 1972, being the descendants of Armenian immigrants, traffickers linked to Armenian-Lebanese and Armenian-Cypriot. In Switzerland, Noubar Soufiane, organizer of a double bombing on May 28, 1976, arrested by the police, appears to be a major smuggler of hashish. In Sweden, four traffickers of Armenian origin, related to ASALA, are sentenced for drug trafficking in 1982 [25].
Can we be completely sure that this activity has ceased?
3) As to the Coordinating Committee of Armenian de France (CCAF), the situation is easy to summarize. The FRA, directly and through its pseudopods (Defense Committee of the Armenian cause, collective VAN, Properties of Armenian culture, Blue Cross, etc..) Is by far the most influential force of the CFC. The President of CFC Lyon, Jules Mardirossian is a Dashnak. From 2003 to 2007, Mr. Toranian was president of CFC, and remains one of its strong men. Other trends of CFC include Hintchak the party, already mentioned above (the president of CFC Marseille, Pascal Chamassian is a hintchakiste), as well as the Armenian Medical Union of France (UMAF) [26], close to the Front National [27], which is very good with the FRA.
Speech by Mr Jack Lang in Blois Speech by Mr Jack Lang in Blois for historians, freedom of expression and research.
See online: Turkey News, Wednesday 4 February 2009
Notes:
[1] http://www.armenews.com/article.php3?Id_article=48602
[2] http://www.armenews.com/article.php3?Id_article=48686
[3] http://www.collectifvan.org/article.php?R=5&&id=26609
[4] Among them: Edward J. Erickson, "Armenian Massacres: New Records Undercut Old Blame," The Middle East Quarterly, Summer 2006, pp. 67-75 (English translation); Halaçoğlu Yusuf, The Story of 1915. What Happened to the Ottoman Armenians?, Ankara, TTK, 2008, "explains Bernard Lewis," Le Monde, January 1, 1994; Guenter Lewy, The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey. A Disputed Genocide, Salt Lake City, University of Utah Press, 2005, Justin McCarthy, Muslims and Minorities. The Population of Ottoman Anatolia and the End of Empire, NY, New York University Press, 1983, Justin McCarthy and Carolyn McCarthy, Turks and Armenians. A Manual on the Armenian Question, Washington, ATAA, 1989, Andrew Mango, "Some recent books about the Armenians and the next stage of historiography about Turkish-Armenian Relations", XI. Türk Tarih Kongresi, Ankara, 1994, pp. 1945-1950; Mantran Robert (dir.), Histoire de l'Empire Ottoman, Paris, Fayard, 1989, pp. 623-625; Stanford J. Shaw and Ezel Kural Shaw, History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, New York-London-Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, Volume II, ed. revised and corrected, 1978, pp. 314-317; Veinstein Gilles, "Three questions about a massacre," The History, April 1995, and Malcolm E. Yapp, The Making of the Modern Near East. 1792-1923, London, Longman, 1987.
[5] Gaïdz Minassian, Armenian War and Terrorism, Paris, PUF, 2002, p. 46 Michael M. Gunter, "Pursuing the Just Cause of Their People." A Study of Contemporary Armenian Terrorism, Westport-New York-London, Greenwood Press, 1986 105. See also: http://www.armenews.com/article.php3?Id_article=28016
[6] Heath Lowry, "Breakdonwn of Armenian Terrorist Incidents, 1973-1987", in ATAA, Armenian Allegations: Myth and Reality, A Handbook of Facts and Documents, Washington, 1987.
[7] Heath Lowry, art. cit. Michael Gunter, op. cit., pp. 68-69; ATAA, A Chronicle of Armenian Terrorism in America and Elsewhere, paper presented American justice in 2000, and Françoise Thierry Vareilles Rudetzki, Encyclopedia of international terrorism, Paris, l'Harmattan, 2001, pp. 91 and 293.
[8] Heath Lowry, art. cit.
[9] http://www.armenews.com/article.php3?Id_article=31647
[10] William L. Langer, The Diplomacy of Imperialism, New York, Alfred A. Knopf, pp. 157-160, 322-325 and 349-350; General Mayewski, The Massacres of Armenia. Photographic fragments and translation, Istanbul, 1916, pp. 11 et seq. (original edition in Russian: Statistics of the provinces of Van and Bitlis, Saint Petersburg, military Printing, 1916).
[11] Gaïdz Minassian, Armenian War and Terrorism, op. , pp. 2; Kapriel S. Papazian, Patriotism Perverted, Boston, Baikar Press, 1934, p. 24; Guenter Lewy, op. , pp. 32.
[12] S. Kapriel Papazian, op. cit., pp. 13-18 and 68-69; Heath Lowry, "Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Armenian Terrorism: 'Threads of Continuity', in International Terrorism and the Drug Connection, Ankara University Press, 1984 74; Hasan Oktay, "On the assassination of Van Mayor Kapamacyian by the Dasnak Committee, Review of Armenian Studies, I-1, 2002.
[13] See, inter alia: Turkish National Congress, Documents relating to atrocities committed by Armenians on the Muslim population, Istanbul, 1919 Hüseyin Çelik, Görenlerin Gözüyle Van'da Ermeni Mezalimi, Ankara, Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Yayınları, 1993, Enver Konukçu , Ermenilerin Yeflilyayla'daki Türk Soyka> r> m>, Ankara, Atatürk Üniversitesi Yayınları Rektörlüğü, 1990, Justin McCarthy, Justin McCarthy, "The Report of Niles and Sutherland," XI. Congresses Türk Tarih, Ankara 1994; Tarafindan Ermeniler yapılan katliam belgeleri, Ankara, 2001; Kara Schemsi, Turks and Armenians to history, Geneva, Imprimerie nationale, 1919, Azmi Süslü, Van, Bitlis, Mus, ve Ermeni Kars'taki Katliamlar, Ankara, Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Rektörlüğü Yayını, 1994.
[14] S. Kapriel Papazian, op. cit., pp. 58-62, and 69-73; Ben Alexander, "Contested Memories, Divided Diaspora," Journal of American Ethnic History, Fall 2007.
[15] John Roy Carlson (Arthur A. Derounian), "The Armenian Displaced Persons", Armenian Affairs, Winter 1949-1950, "Dro, became pro-Nazi hero," L'Humanité, 19 April 1999; Erich Feigl, A myth of terror, Salzburg, Zeitgeschichte, 1991, pp. 224-230; Gaïdz Minassian, op. , pp. 10; Ayan Ozer, "The Armenian-Nazi Collaboration," The Turkish Times, 15 July 1996.
[16] Mikael Varandian, History of the FRA, Paris, Imprimerie de Navarre, 1932, pp. 212-213, cited in S. Kapriel Papazian, op. , pp. 18.
[17] Gaïdz Minassian, op. cit., pp. 28-29, 33-34 and 106 - 114 Michael M. Gunter, op. cit., pp. 55 et seq.
[18] Michael M. Gunter, op. cit., pp. 68-69, see also Gaïdz Minassian, op. cit., pp. 44-45 and 82-86.
[19] http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/terror-case-study.htm
[20] A representative of Boris Yeltsin killed in the North Caucasus ", Le Monde, 3 August 1993; Gaïdz Minassian, Armenian War and Terrorism, op. , pp. 262.
[21] Le Monde, 29 October 1999.
[22] http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2009/01/2728-photos-nationalist-armenian.html
[23] Today's Zaman, 25 May 2007.
[24] Michael M. Gunter, op. cit., pp. 75-76.
[25] Nathalie Cetina, Terrorism: the history of globalization, Paris, L'Harmattan, 2001, pp. 267-268; Tarık Somer, "Armenian Terrorism and the Narcotic Traffic," in International Terrorism and the Drug Connection, op. cit., pp. 19-27.
[26] See in particular the composition of the CFC: http://www.ccaf.info/item.php?R=1&id=364
[27] Daniel Bermond, "L'affaire Bernard Lewis," History, October 1995.
Following the article published yesterday by the Nouvel Obs, from the pen of Usul Gauthier, titled "Jack Lang puts quotes in the genocide of Armenians (see below), the reactions of many readers have upset the former minister of culture, explained in a reply sent to the online journal in the following hours, said he was "saddened by the unfair and dishonest campaign orchestrated against me about Armenia. My position is clear. "
Sir,
Did you just think a second that the descendants of victims could themselves be saddened to hear of your statements?
Bernard-Henri Lévy has said and insisted: "History is written".
Jean Eckian
www.inhomage.com
"Jack Lang puts quotes in the genocide of Armenians" by Ursula Gauthier
NOUVELOBS.COM | 03.02.2009 | 12:05
PS He expresses regret for having voted for the resolution recognizing what he describes today as "Armenian genocide in quotation marks. Unanimous indignation of the Armenians in France.
What fly has stung So Jack Lang? A video circulating on the Internet shows the former Minister of Culture to his mea culpa for having passed the law recognizing the Armenian genocide of 1915 - adopted unanimously on 18 January 2001. This is the video of the symposium held in Blois, 11 October 2008 by the Association for Freedom of the story that is campaigning against what are known as memory. Jack Lang first reaffirms its support for the law that penalizes Gayssot the denial of Jewish and Gypsy genocides. However, with a visible contrition, he acknowledged being "doubly guilty of having voted for the resolution recognizing what he describes today as" Armenian genocide in quotation marks.
A "monstrous"
Why "doubling"? Because he was both "member and chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly."
Why "in quotes? Because, he said, "We need that historians too do their work."
The tone hardens when it refers to the law criminalizing denial of Armenian Genocide, passed in 2006 by the National Assembly and waiting to be ratified by the Senate. In "offense against the instructions of his own group, Jack Lang said he" refused to vote as a monster "that he" lets the criminal proceedings against historians, people, journalists undertake to discuss for examining the extent, the reality on the forms of the massacres of Armenians. " Because yes, he admits, "there was massacre."
As for the members who voted this text, they were animated by Lang or "commiseration moral" nor a "commitment to a story" but simply "electoral concerns.
"Cynicism"
Jack Lang is he aware that each of these arguments is ressés ad nauseam negationist sites in Turkey, which each other today of its alignment with their speech? This volte-face in any case has caused outrage in the Armenian community of France, committed to the recognition of a genocide that continues to be actively denied by the Turkish state. The Coordination Council of Armenian Organizations of France (CCAF) said in an open letter that Jack Lang had not only voted for this law, but he had been one of the main defenders. He denounced the use of quotation marks, a "cast doubt on its reality." The Socialist Party condemns Armenian turn to the "cynicism" of the member of the Pas-de-Calais who "dishonor and shame on the institutions of the Republic". Finally, the news magazine of Armenia reiterates the forum that Jack Lang had published in its columns on 1 March 2000. He wrote with great conviction: "The denial of the Armenian genocide and some of our complacency vis-à-vis a heinous negationism must be fought relentlessly." At a time when 30 000 Turkish citizens have signed a petition moving to the Armenians asking forgiveness for the "Great Disaster" of 1915 and its denial, the time seems to editions Denoel "shameful act", major work of the courageous Turkish historian Taner Akçam, which demonstrates full responsibility Turkish in genocide (without quotation marks) of the Armenians, the mea culpa countdown Jack Lang made stain.
Ursula Gauthier
Journalist for foreign
Armenian Genocide: Jack Lang made amends
NOUVELOBS.COM | 03.02.2009 | 17:25
In response to the article by Ursula Gauthier published on Tuesday nouvelobs.com, Jack Lang sent us this text. He says he will continue to fight for that worldwide genocide of the Armenian people is recognized, particularly in Turkey. "Here is the response to Jack Lang's article Ursula Gauthier: Jack Lang is inverted on the genocide of Armenians.
"I am saddened by the unfair and dishonest campaign orchestrated against me about Armenia. My position is clear.
1. Minister of Culture, I have ceased to encourage and support the culture and the Armenian language.
2. My, in my capacity as Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly, have passed by the Assembly's statement on Armenian genocide. I then broke it was not simply that the Senate adopted in identical terms.
3. I am not in a favorable effect to the laws of criminalization on the challenge of historical facts. It is better to convince them that constrain. I have encouraged in Turkey seminars and meetings between Armenian and Turkish historians. Gradually, the important sections of Turkish opinion evolve positively. I am surprised that my contempteur today do not fight more for the adoption by the Senate of the law criminalizing the Armenian genocide to which they both appear to hold.
4. I still believe that a condition for Turkey's accession to the EU is the recognition by Turkey of the Armenian genocide. "
A final word: We must remember the context of what I have lent. It was in the context of a scientific debate among historians about the competence of parliaments to enact legislation memorial. It is not the invectives that will change one iota my convictions. I will continue to fight for that worldwide genocide of the Armenian people is recognized, including in Turkey.
Sincerely,
Jack Lang
In a video tour on 11 October 2008 at Blois, the Socialist member of the Pas-de-Calais, Jack Lang, questions the law passed in January 2001, which recognized the Armenian genocide of 1915. "I passed the first resolution of the National Assembly - in quotes, can we say, because it takes too that historians do their work - the Armenian genocide. I voted because I believe that It was an act of moral, repair history. I do not know if I react the same way today. "
Jack Lang was speaking before the Association for the History Freedom, chaired by the historian Pierre Nora. "At that time [the vote], takes Jack Lang, was chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly, so I am doubly guilty, if I may say so, because Committee Chairman and member .
In a letter to nouvelobs.com, the former minister of culture that he has not changed its position and continues to fight for that worldwide genocide of the Armenian people is recognized, and especially in Turkey. " He said that these remarks were made in the framework of a scientific debate among historians about the competence of Parliament to enact laws memorial.
PS because the member was one of the main defenders of the law of January 2001. In 2000, Jack Lang had signed an article in the New Armenia. "Recognize the existence of genocide applies to all, because such a plan involves humanity as a whole. The denial of the Armenian genocide and some of our complacency vis-à-vis a heinous negationism must be combated tirelessly, "wrote then Jack Lang. In 1999, Jack Lang had even signed the preface of a book entitled The News of the genocide of Armenians, signed by the Defense Committee of the Armenian cause.
But nothing happens: viewed thousands of times on Dailymotion, the Nouvel Obs or other sites, this video has to react. The Armenian and Turkish communities in France are mobilizing over the Internet to challenge or defend the member. Turkey News calls "to support Jack Lang, the target of Armenian nationalists." Gamkonline, a site of the Armenian community, said that the election in the Pas-de-Calais "insulting France and its humanistic values."
Thibaud Vuitton
LeMonde.fr | 03.02.09 | 18h36 • Mis à jour le 03.02.09 | 20h48
Revisionism: The Incredible Lang Blois, 27 January 2009, Stéphane / armenews
It was believed to have seen everything and heard in matters of treason, but the reversal of Jack Lang on the law on the recognition of the genocide of Armenians left completely stunned. The socialist leader, who was one of the architects of this resolution, which participated for the conference to defend the Committee of Defense of the Armenian Cause organized at the Sorbonne in 1998 and has increased at the time the speeches and position in its favor, is now on its commitments. Under pressure from a certain conception of political correctness (in the most benevolent of assumptions), it now says in effect that he does not know if revoterait such a resolution.
In a statement made on 11 October 2008 at Blois in the debate "Freedom for history" led by President Pierre Nora eponym of the association, former Minister of Culture is an amazing book "mea culpa". It proclaims in effect, as a member, but also as chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly, twice voted guilty of this Act "in quotes Armenian genocide."
Palinodie This calls into question the reality of the extermination was taken in early January by the site "European Turkey" which defends the revisionist theories on this crime against humanity. In addition, Jack Lang does not have enough words to condemn the hard grounds "electioneering" that he would have pushed the parliamentarians, led yet it was, to pass this law. Finally, he denounced with unusual virulence of the vote by 12 October 2006 which the National Assembly charged the denial of genocide.
That meet the face of such denial, such a felony with the victims of the first genocide of the twentieth century such inconsistency and self-indulgence? Probably not much if it is contained within a certain restraint. Except perhaps Judas refer to its mirror and remind Jack Lang "free opinion" he had written to the issue of 51 Magazine News Armenia on 1 March 2000 on the question:
Video: http://www.dailymotion.com Here or Here
If not accessible from your country please use proxy access.
Please clik on "Menu", then "Sous-titres" for the English subtitles.
Blois - Freedom for history - Statement by Jack Lang
The Victory Of The Duty Of Memory On Realpolitik
The View Of Jack Lang In Armenia News:
Forget the victims of the Armenian genocide of 1915, it would be the "murder a second time" under the strong expression of Elie Wiesel. To avoid this serious misconduct, the National Assembly unanimously adopted on 29 May 1998, a law copy: "France recognizes publicly the Armenian genocide of 1915." The simplicity and clarity of this formulation is heavy with meaning. It was not that day to settle a historical problem. It was to fill a gap in political question of courage and justice. The duty of memory needed to Realpolitik.
The decision of the National Assembly took several meanings. First, it rendered justice to the Armenians of France, models of integration remarkable in their adopted home since the disaster of 1915. It was also a gesture of sympathy for the entire Armenian people, most recently with a state. She had a moral and a rule of law: certain crimes. Genocide is one of those. Recognize that a genocide is needed at all, because such a plan involves humanity as a whole. The denial of the Armenian genocide and some of our complacency vis-à-vis a heinous negationism must be fought relentlessly.
We now know that it is impossible to begin a grief without justice and that perpetrators are, at least, appointed when it is too late to punish. Turks and Armenians should gather around a common historical memory, to finally settle the accounts of the past and establish a trusting relationship oriented towards the future. Devoir policy then. Intellectual, too, no less difficult. The decision of the National Assembly is a double act: recognition of past event, message for future generations. Do not let time, the wrong reasons, low intentions, black make up a page unreadable too obscure in the history of mankind.
Seek to fill the enormous between reflection and experience that makes the vastness unspeakable. Elie Wiesel admits that the task is difficult but very necessary, "which has not experienced the event never know, and who has lived, never did reveal. Not really. No way.. "
The duty of memory is a moral standing. President François Mitterrand and reaffirmed in January 1984, the Armenians of France: "It is not possible to erase the traces of the genocide that you hit. This must be enshrined in the memories of people and the sacrifice to serve as teaching young people at the same time as the will to survive so that we can, over time, that this people does not belong to the past, that it is present and it has a future. "
It is a truth valid yesterday, today, tomorrow, here, there, everywhere. That is why the Senate can not continue to shirk their duty and should formally recognize the Armenian genocide. This is the best way for France's contribution to the establishment of a peaceful and lasting relationship between Turks and Armenians have to engage in their work on historical memory. And what is needed between Turks and Armenians is equally between Turks and Kurds.
Jack Lang
Jack Lang Insult France And Its Values Of Humanism Under The Fra Dachnaktsoutioun, 29 January 2009, Stéphane / armenews
It is with dismay that the FRA Dachnaktsoutioun has taken note of the scandalous About Jack Lang at the opening of the debate "Freedom for history", held in Blois on 11 October.
Jack Lang, who in the recent past has supported and voted for the law of the French Republic affirming the reality of the Armenian genocide of 1915, holds about openly deniers. Remember also that Jack Lang had signed the preface to the book "the news of the genocide of Armenians" published by the CDCA in October 1999.
He talks about the Armenian genocide in quotation marks. He was convicted of having participated in the vote on the law on the genocide of Armenians, and says he refused to vote in the National Assembly, the draft law criminalizing denial of Armenian genocide, calling it the "monstrous ". This legislation is stalled in the Senate for two and a half years, pending a on the agenda. Jack Lang, in his words, took the new rhetoric of denial of the Armenian genocide.
It grows cynicism reaffirming its support for the Gayssot law, criminal law punishing France in the denial of Jewish and Gypsy genocides, and at the same time eliminates the need for a law protecting the memory of the Armenian genocide in France.
It takes an argument of the new flagship deniers is to bring the reality of the genocide of Armenians in endless discussions.
Jack Lang is shame and dishonor the institutions of the republic.
Jack Lang reveals the face of Holocaust denial in all its cowardice.
Jack Lang insult France and its values of humanism.
Republicans in this country can not accept this statement and this attitude outrageous.
We ask you to report Mr. Jack Lang.
DACHNAKTSOUTIOUN FRA / Western Europe
Paris, 28 January 2009
The CFC is responding to what Jack Lang
Mr Jack LANG, Former Minister
Member of the Pas de Calais, 74 rue du Chemin Vert, 62200 BOULOGNE SUR MER
Ref. : 2009/CCAF/Pst-008 PJ. : 1, Paris, 28 January 2009
Mr,
We are extremely surprised and shocked by what you said during the debate "Freedom for history" led by Pierre Nora in Blois, taken recently by the website "European Turkey" (see text attached).
Indeed, you seem to be delivered to a mea culpa incredible, so casual, on a matter as serious as the Armenian genocide of 1915, recognized by France with a law promulgated on 29 January 2001 by the President of the Republic, Jacques Chirac and Prime Minister Lionel Jospin.
While you were one of the architects of this law, you have participated in seminars and meetings in its favor, you have increased interventions and statements to the vote on this text and criticized the Senate seemed to delay vote, you turn around and tell Blois quite the opposite of your positions and commitments that we previously believed sincere. Thus, "you look twice voted guilty of this law on the Armenian genocide in quotes because you were a member and chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly."
What a pity that you have not added it was as a human being in love with justice and truth as you also say a few years ago.
About your current positions and are unacceptable and are pure denial of genocide, a crime against humanity. What if a politician were to say that he regretted having voted for the Gayssot Act of 1990 regarding the criminalization of the denial of the Holocaust?
What would you respond to this person who looks like a law "allows the prosecution of historians, against persons, against citizens, against journalists, who would undertake to discuss, question the extent, on the Actually, in the form of massacres? You would, like us, outraged by such remarks and attitudes, convictions and wondering as racism and anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial is considered a crime in our Republic, which has its values and principles of both universal and humanistic.
In your words, not only will you make the Holocaust a special case, stating that his denial should be condemned, but you get your reservation, or even your opposition to everything related to the denial of the Armenian genocide that you qualify for second Armenia Act "which is a law that affects society as a whole and the fight against Holocaust denial.
I would like to draw your attention to the inadmissibility of your comments and stressed their total contravention with the law previously cited and passed unanimously by the national representation when you were Minister of Education and promulgated in the official for eight years.
The words and phrases you use are a real insult to the memory of the 1,500,000 victims of the genocide recognized by including the international and European bodies like the UN, the European Parliament and an affront to their descendants that we are. They are also an insult to the memory of humanity. The French-Armenian thought that a law of the French Republic and all the provisions in Europe or elsewhere, the memory and historical truth will triumph over decades of silence and complicity with a state still denial. We must note that you seem to guide you now on a different path, that of realpolitik and cynicism that can be characterized.
Therefore, it seems highly advisable that you bring a clear and precise on your positions, and that can stop the current offensive and contrary to reality, objectivity and more importantly to the morality that you invoke often in your speeches.
When there's talk of a genocide that took place, there can be no doubt exist, put the word in quotation marks or talk casually. We can not accept such a situation.
Finally, I inform you that this letter is also sent for information to Ms. Martine Aubry and Mr. François Hollande, respectively current and past first secretary of the Socialist Party to Jean-Marc Ayrault, President of the Socialist Group in the National Assembly and that Catherine Génisson, First Secretary of the Federation PS Pas de Calais. The contents of this letter will be made public and the response that you make.
In the meantime, please believe me, Mr, expression of my distinguished sentiments.
Alexis GOVCIYAN
Speech by Mr Jack Lang, 11 October 2008, Blois
"I turn a word about who we meet, I do not at all exhausted in a few words, and I am surrounded at the moment of eminent specialists who have worked, and then in the room Similarly there are great historians intervene. Some words in bulk, I am not prepared to talk, a few words to say in bulk at the heart of this discussion is freedom, freedom of thought, freedom to seek freedom to discover the freedom to ask questions. Freedom ... and it is both a conviction and a temperament. I believe that in all matters relating to intelligence, art, creation, freedom must be the principle, sometimes even absolute, and we can not make exceptions or conditions may, in certain circumstances perfectly defined, freedom of thought, including forgiveness may be politically incorrect, including think evil. If we do not recognize the right to think, think evil, then the point is freedom.
I will not think badly of course, everyone has their beliefs, values, but at the same time it should, except within certain limits, and unfortunately to propose a topic or question you are going to discuss, what we believe that by reasoning or by intuition or emotion or because we are citizens of that time, the law on the Holocaust and the denial of the Holocaust must be respected as such? Why, how? And why are we reserved, if not hostile to other acts of proclamation and especially to other criminal laws related to historical facts?
I take a concrete example to move forward, so I do not answer the question that I ask, it will be in the debates. To move forward a little in my question, I take the example of Armenia. It is that myself, so I have to say the truth as it should, I passed the first resolution of the National Assembly on the recognition, in quotes, can we say, because it is also necessary that historians do their work, the Armenian genocide. I voted because I thought it was an act of moral and repair history, and given the absolute refusal of the Turkish government to accept any discussion, any debate on this subject, it seemed to me the French National Assembly could perform this act. I do not know if I react the same way today, but in any case I have voted. And at the time, I was chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly, so I am doubly guilty, if I may say, MP and chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee. However, I am prepared with force against the second law on Armenia, already at that time I committed a crime, vis a vis the instructions of my own group, I refused to vote as a text monstrous.
It allows the prosecution against historians, against persons, against citizens, against journalists, who would undertake to discuss, reflect on the magnitude, the reality on the forms of killing (there were massacres ) of Armenians committed by the Turkish armed. Yes, he must speak clearly, those who voted it did not at all a kind of moral commiseration, not at all a kind of attachment to a story. They did so simply by electoral concerns, thinking and raise the voice of the Armenian community of France, who deserves our respect. But at the same time, the duty of a senior politician, a member of Parliament, a minister, is to carry out its mandate with courage and conviction, and to resist any pressure whatsoever . And the consequence of this vote absurd, unacceptable to the National Assembly, was in Turkey itself, I participated as a guest professor of the Bilgi University in Istanbul, we were able to convene a committee of Historians mixed Turkish and Armenian, was a first, which had agreed to meet, discuss, think to compare their views, discuss their assessments. And this vote was such that it echoes blocked temporarily, this work is essential to understand, to know the historical reality in the region.
Read Full Post !
30.1.09
2727) History And The Law By René Rémond
The relationship between history and politics has for some time been tempestuous and troubled. This is not a new development: in politics we choose the long view when referencing past events, whether it be to disassociate ourselves from them or to seek arguments and reinforcement from them. Our willingness to be shaped by history is inevitably somewhat ambivalent, as history is both the mortar cementing the people.s unity and the seed of discord engendering its divergences and dissent. This is why the authorities . . cannot distance themselves from the recording of history or its transmission, and why they must consider themselves somewhat responsible for it. We are therefore not surprised that politicians are sometimes tempted to intervene in the fabrication and the instrumentalisation of history. Totalitarian regimes often openly rewrite history to their advantage, maintaining strict control over those who are tasked with the verification of historical truths. In fact nothing is more banal than the instrumentalisation and the agencing of the past. Qualifying it is sometimes controversial, and the historical significance of various events has ignited bitter ideological debates and political face-offs.
For some time now in France there has been a major debate about the role of the legislator in defining history, which normally would neither interest nor be within the purview of the normal civilian, except that new information with multiple implications has recently been brought to our attention. It involves the philosophically significant problem of searching for the truth in history, as well as the role of the State, the responsibilities of the legislators and the historians. It is about the role of the Law and the availability of access to an objective cognizance of the past, the very idea and application of democracy.
In listing all these challenges, are we not exaggerating slightly the scope of the affair? It will be up to the reader to decide, but in any case the question has not only been omnipresent in recent newspaper headlines, it has stirred the entire country and in particular elicited statements of position from both the President of France and his Prime Minister. The larger political parties have been obliged to examine its questions, a lawsuit was filed at the Conseil Constitutionnel (the Constitutional Council, the highest constitutional authority in France) and a judgment delivered in that case. Most importantly, the incident reveals the existence of a mechanism which could threaten the objectivity of the historical process and allow history to be manipulated for political reasons.
The Pétré-Grenouilleau Case
Let us examine the elements of this case. On Saturday, June 10, 2005, the jury awarding the French Senate.s History Prize, which is given to distinguish a book which both satisfies strictly scientific criteria and also contributes significantly to the education of the French people - announced its choice after extensive deliberations: a book dealing with the African slave trade, published in the prestigious Gallimard series .Bibliothèque des histoires. (.Library of History.), by Olivier Pétré- Grenouilleau. At the time the Prize was awarded, the Journal du Dimanche published an interview with the author in which he underlined the global nature of his research, expressing his interest in the phenomenon in its totality, i.e. not just in the .Atlantic. portion of the slave trade linked to the triangle of commerce originating in Western Europe. When asked about the qualification he would give to this historical fact, he said he considered the slave trade a crime against humanity but would not go so far as to call it genocide, since for him that would imply a systematic will to exterminate those of a different ethnicity. Moreover, the traders, whose motivations were mostly mercantile, certainly did not want their .merchandise,. their slaves, to die out and cease to provide revenue on their .investments.. This response, which seemed entirely reasonable, did not go down well with everyone, in particular those who are still haunted by memories of the slave trade tragedy.
A collective of people from the Antilles, Guyana and La Réunion, citing legislation which authorised groups to bring class action suits against those denying these specific crimes, sued the author of the book. A ranking, historian whose work was recognised and supported by his peers, and who had done nothing to contravene the historian.s responsibility or that of a simple civilian of France . was thus dragged into court by plaintiffs who had no particular competence in his area of expertise, exposing him to possible criminal sanctions. Other historians suddenly realised the danger threatening research involving socalled.controversial. subjects, and the genesis of the mechanism of public opinion being allowed to compromise the independence and the dissemination of their results. The complexity of this situation triggered a series of legislative initiatives, and an awareness of the consequences of this new mindset.
International Jurisdiction and the responsibility of memory
One of the causes of this entirely unexpected problem was the fact that the world will no longer let those who commit collective crimes go unpunished. The obvious precedent would be the Nuremberg trials, which we had hoped would be a one-time event, linked solely to the second World War and to the exceptionally heinous crimes perpetrated by the Third Reich. Nuremberg left us a strong historical heritage, including concepts and definitions which have unfortunately again become current. International jurisdictions have been established to try war crimes committed in the enforced destruction of the Yugoslavian Federation and during the bloody massacres in Rwanda. The resulting initiative, whose far-reaching consequences constituted a caesura (a pause or break) in the history of the world, was the decision reached by the signatories of the Rome Treaty of 1999, which has been ratified by more than one hundred sovereign states, establishing a permanent International Criminal Court (ICC) with the authority over war crimes committed in both international and internal armed conflicts, reflecting the reality of contemporary armed conflict and crimes against humanity.
The establishment of these new jurisdictions implied that political acts would now have to be justified by our sense of morality, our collective conscience, positing the development of human responsibility on a planetary scale. And there was another .break. which affected our relationship to the past: the introduction of the Convention on the imprescriptibility of war crimes and crimes against humanity, the dissolving of the statute of limitations on certain crimes, and directly contradicting the universal practice of not allowing the prosecution or even the mentioning of specific crimes. Our century decided to abolish this linking of time and memory for a specific category of crimes. To forget would be forbidden, a sin, and to remember would be both an ethical and legal duty. We created this duty.
Remembering is not only desirable in the search for knowledge, it is now more than ever a moral imperative, and it is not being able to remember which becomes unacceptable. The responsibility is selective and it applies only to these crimes. It is justified by the respect we owe to the victims, and it is right that they survive in our memories. It is also in another sense a reparation, in that memory asks for forgiveness for that which could neither be prevented nor stopped. By recognising its faults, a people attains a certain stature. This attitude in our civil and political society is spiritually echoed by recent developments in the Catholic Church dealing with repentance. The final consideration affecting the responsibility of memory would be the enormity of the crimes, and the scope and nature of the actions committed. In reminding us of them we are solemnly warned that these crimes could happen again and equally, that they must never happen again,
The introduction of laws on memory
These dignified and laudable considerations have profoundly altered our relationship to the past, reflecting history.s changing position in society. They justify the intervention of politics into the equation. Now that remembering has become a civic responsibility, how can the legislator accept anything publically contradicting opinions that Justice or our collective conscience has previously adjudicated? This would evince a lack of respect for the victims and for their suffering, in effect condemning them a second time. This would allow doubt to enter the minds of those who did not or could not decide for themselves, contradicting the principles of civil education. Doesn.t political responsibility mean to take measures, to legislate?
These, then, are the origins of the .memorial. laws dealing with the establishment of truth in history. They were strongest against the so-called revisionists, those who flatly deny the criminal activities of the Third Reich, using the defense of historical method to constitute their case. Of course, the Holocaust, the Shoah, is a historical fact, and there are seemingly only two explanations for the negationist position and the minds that have invented it: deliberate, contrarian bad faith (why?), or that idiosyncrasy beloved of the epistemologists, the total disruption of the critical functions of the mind, called Zoilism or hypercriticism. In 1990 the former Communist Minister Jean-Claude Gayssot submitted a bill making the denial of crimes against humanity a crime, punishable with sanctions, and it was generally well-received, the perception being that a crime of this magnitude demanded an exceptional response. Who would oppose this bill, wouldn.t that mean joining the negationists or supporting Jean-Marie Le Pen, who famously called the Holocaust a mere .detail of history.? A few historians whose vision extended beyond the sentiment showed concerns about the consequences of this bill: the late Pierre Vidal-Naquet1, and Madeleine Rebérioux2. Neither of them showed any sympathy for the negationists, and they asked judicious questions about the loi Gayssot. Unfortunately they were proved correct . the Law was meant to apply to one particular period of time, but instead has engendered a further series of memorial laws which are neither justified nor legitimate.
Raising the stakes
1 The eminent French historian who documented the systematic use of torture by the French during the Algerian war for independence in the 1950.s and early 60.s.
2 The French Marxist historian and former president of the Human Rights League.
After being lobbied by several Armenian associations, supported by senators and deputies representing large Armenian constituencies, in 2001 the Parliament adopted a law, which is unequalled and unique. It consists of one sentence: .France publicly recognizes the Armenian genocide of 1915.. Period. Added was, .as of today, this is in effect as a law of the Republic.. And what did it mean? It meant that anyone who professed to have doubts about an ethnocide3 or massacre whose existence is unquestioned . would be in violation of the law and open to prosecution.
Before that law went into effect, the eminent scholar Bernard Lewis4 was sanctioned by a French court after an Armenian association sued him using the loi Gayssot (the .Gayssot. law) about denying crimes against humanity. Suddenly that law was being used to refer to the Armenian genocide. But there was a difference: the loi Gayssot technically referred to French men or women who were World War II victims or collaborators; it was not unusual that the representatives of France pass a law about them. However, in the Armenian massacre, the victims were subjects of the Ottoman Empire, not of France. And contextually, could we not in theory also prosecute the Spanish conquerors for the massacre of the American Indians? In addition, the period of time referenced by the loi Gayssot was 1945; the Armenian massacre took place in 1915. And the legislature was also being asked to decide something the specialists could not agree on: no one denies that the Turks left hundreds of thousands of Armenian men and women to die, in appalling conditions, but was it the execution of a decision which expressly ordered the extermination of each and every Armenian?
This is the dilemma facing historical researchers. If we qualify an event, a crime, as genocide, we effectively banalise that concept as it applies to the Holocaust, diluting it, rendering it less specific and unique. In fact, the existence of the second .memorial. law set up a sort of competition between victims, as what the laws had in common was their citing of the persecutions suffered by the victims, risking that the memories of specific groups or.communities,. be used as substitutions for collective memory.
The third of this family of .memorial. laws is known as the .Madame Taubira. law, bearing the name of the Senator from Guyana. It was adopted on May 21, 2001, and fortunately does not cite historical facts not involving France, since it condemns the slavery treaties and the slave trade in the colonies. But it does go back farther, the slave trade having been excoriated for over two hundred years and slavery itself having been abolished in 1848. Those who suffered have been dead for years and their surviving descendants are separated five or six generations from them. The law nonetheless gives them the right to defend the slaves. memory, to honor their descendants, and to prosecute anyone who dares to deny or minimize the fact of their existence. This was the reason for the Pétré-Grenouilleau case. So how far are we willing to go back in time? Back as far as the Crusades, or the Albigensian Crusade5? Perhaps the Reformists (the Protestants) should ask for reparations for the persecutions they suffered because of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685. Juxtaposing these particular memories would no doubt undermine the national memory and set the various traditions of thought against each other. Why legislate only on crimes? The loi Taubira implicitly targeted the whole colonial system, depicting it in negative terms. It is true that under the Ancien 3 As opposed to genocide, which has international implications, ethnocide or ethnic genocide, is the province of ethnologists, who have not yet determined an exact meaning for the word.
4 The Cleveland E. Dodge Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University.
5 Albigensian or Cathar Crusade of 1181.
Régime and over several centuries it was accompanied by slavery and the slave trade, but it was that same system which, beginning in the 19th century, ordered the French colonies to cut off the slave trade and to abolish slavery. Crossing the line judiciously drawn by the Constitution of the Fifth Republic between the legislative and executive branches of the government, which limits the former in defining the general principles of education, the loi Taubira decreed that .school curricula and programmes dealing with history or the humanities must situate the slave trade and slavery in their rightful places in history.. Beyond the fact that we don.t know exactly what is their rightful place . how many class hours, how many pages in the books should be devoted to them? . we need to ask how we can presume to legislate something which requires specific professional and scientific knowledge . is to open the door leading to confusion about roles and responsibilities.
Confiscating history
The loi Taubira shot colonialism down, the following loi rehabilitated it. The first law gave teachers quantitative instructions and obligations; the second told them how to .appreciate. them: .School curricula should recognise in particular the positive effects of the French presence overseas, notably in North Africa, and should also honor the courage and sacrifice of soldiers from these countries in the French Army.. That step, once taken, cannot be untaken if a legislator dictates his interpretation of history to the teacher, substituting himself for the real historian. If this law goes further than the one preceding it, the two laws are interdependent: the second law would not have been proposed if the first had not expressly targeted colonialism. It is perfect dualism: the two laws evoke, if disassociated, the two faces of this historical fact. They also call for consistent, concerted judgment. Asking for the repeal of the first loi Taubira would mean a political choice dictated by ideology; exonerating colonisation of its crimes, while asking for the repeal of the second law would give the impression that colonisation had had only negative effects on the countries involved. And to lobby for both laws to be repealed simultaneously would mean conclusions would be drawn and decisions would be made from a purely scientific position on the independence of history, which is technically supposed to illustrate the complexity of social reality and its innate ambivalence.
The genealogy of these .memorial. laws, which as far as we know may continue to proliferate, has created an unexpected and worrisome situation for both research and education, and . I affirm this without hesitation . for civil rights and democratic process. Will the fear of legal action steer us away from delicate subjects? What researcher would take on a subject which potentially could expose him to a lawsuit? What research director would be willing to hire young investigators in sensitive or dangerous cases, as Olivier Pétré-Grenouilleau did? Entire pages of history will remain blank, unless someone fills those blanks with State-proclaimed .truths.. The intrusion of politics into the definition of programmes and the establishment of historical truths would mean the outright confiscation of history by those in power, and a terrible loss to ordinary men and women.
A group of historians, worried by this turn of events, took the initiative of addressing the major politicians directly, intending not only to plead for the rights of the historians to do their work freely, without pressure from the State, but also in the name of each French man and woman to know and understand history. Contrary to popular opinion, the historians did not claim to have a monopoly on the truth, merely the professional qualifications to speak about it, since by delegation they work for US. They do not .own. History, inasmuch as judges do not .own. the law, nor do doctors .own. our health. They answer to us. This is why some of them responded without question when they were asked to testify in the great trials dealing with the Occupation, with the single condition that they be asked only to verify facts, not to judge nor take part in the confusion between legal truth and historical truth. They were asked for their perspectives on the facts in evidence, sometimes also for explanations. They were not prohibited from juridically or morally qualifying these same facts, i.e. .is this genocide or not?. Does the historian overstep his bounds when he allows himself to morally disapprove of an act or a crime?
The role of the politicians
The politicians also want to have their say. They certainly have the right to publicly express their feelings in these situations, they may speak in our behalf -- but they must follow two rules: unless they have personally investigated a case as any historian might, and developed their positions or convictions based upon purely historical considerations, their positions as representatives of the nation do not give them the right to decree what is true and what is not, nor to adjudicate conflicts of interpretation.
This may seem obvious, but it is probably not a bad idea to set it down in black and white: in the debate on the .memorial. laws, we heard legislators abusing their positions, ignoring the fact that they only hold office because they are elected by the people, in fact conferring on themselves the rights to, the jurisdiction over historical truth, which confuses political legitimacy with that acquired through the scientific process. No senator, minister or deputy would dare to make pronouncements about the forces of nature, about hydraulics or the secrets of the genome. It is because of this definition of roles that there are now established institutions whose job it is to clarify the scope of the legislators. actions and those of the authorities. Why should it be any different for history?
By opposing the principle of the .memorial. laws, the historians are reminding us to respect this separation of roles, reaffirming that history, our collective memory, belongs to us all. The list of the .memorial. laws shows us what the factors were in passing them, essentially electoral and political (not in itself a bad thing). They were clearly more influenced by emotion than by reason, they were without scientific foundation, confusing memory and history. They all begin in the same way, through lobbying by religious or ethnic constituencies, in the hope that their memories will be given consideration on the national stage, using history as both hostage and intermediary. The historians are taking a stand against this instrumentalisation which chips our collective memory into fragments.
The second condition which the politicians need to accept when they are planning to speak about history concerns form: experience and the current controversy have shown us that they should not speak when their intent is to submit a law. Of course, politicians have every right to speak about history but not as part of the process that is specifically theirs: their votes. And by passing a law they are not .taking a position,. not the way the intellectuals did when they signed those long petitions. The law sets the rules, the standard, the limits. When it is amended with a clause allowing lobbyists to file lawsuits, it sets in motion an incredibly efficient and innately destructive mechanism. It was to neutralise this process that the historians advocated the abolition of the .memorial. laws, although they had certain qualms about extending the rule to the loi Gayssot because of its uniqueness. Of course it was also this same law which began the whole disastrous sequence of events.
In any case, something needed to be done.
The answer was a grand gesture worthy of all the hoopla. Both the French President and his Prime Minister proclaimed that the legislator does not have the power to dictate history. And the Constitutional Council downgraded the subparagraph of the last law which had intervened in the definition of school programmes while effectively disregarding constitutional law. The collective which had sued Olivier Pétré-Grenouilleau withdrew its complaint, with interesting grounds: its process neither embodied public opinion nor included petitions from intellectuals. Was this a sign of the price we must pay for independent research, the establishment of a history which will be neither weapon nor pawn in the controversies which continue to divide us? History needs to belong to all of us.*
- René Rémond*
* P.S. Of course we have just learned that the Socialist minority in the Assemblée Nationale was planning to submit a law saying that those who deny the Armenian genocide may be prosecuted and sentenced to five years in prison. Which then would align it with the Holocaust and give it the same weight as the loi Gayssot. Politicians are apparently incorrigible; emotion has again triumphed over reason.
Translated by Sara Sugihara
René Rémond* (1918-2007) was professor emeritus of contemporary history at Paris Institute of Political Studies, chairman of Nanterre university (1971-1976), of the Institute of Current History (1979-1990), of the National Association for Political Sciences (1981-2007), and of Liberté pour l'histoire (2005-2007). He was also member of the French Academy, and an administrator of the French public TV (1965-1972; 1982-1989). Among his numerous books: Histoire des États-Unis ("History of the United States", 1959); Les Droites en France ("The Rigt wing in France", 1964; new edition, 1982); Le Siècle dernier ("The Last Century", 2003); and Quand l'État se mêle d'histoire ("When the States meddles with History", 2006).
Études, June 2006
http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/IMG/pdf/0703-REMOND-EN.pdf
Read Full Post !
29.1.09
2726) Terrorism as Bloody Real Fantasy-War
Terrorism is the manner of fighting used in fantasy-war. Terrorism and fantasy-war are phenomena that induce some people to behave as if there really were a "war", with all the license to kill that comes with it. The "enemy" on the other hand (usually a country), almost always tends to deny what is happening, to suppress it, to act as if the fantasy declaration of war did not exist. . .
Read Full Post !
2725) Armenian Terrorism-Topalian-Affidavits (Pdf) (ATAA.org)
We are sorry that we don't have a better copy of this image, yet.
Editors
Armenians defend their murderers and assassins . . . at first they force a 20 year-old lad into a capital offense. Then they pretend to 'defend' the poor youth who sacrificed his life for a lifeless bloody myth!
The Affidavits (Pdf):
| Karahan Mete | Bonnie Joy Kaslan | Koray Incki | Erdal Atrek | Belig Berkoz | Sema Karaoglu Flew | Husamettin Ovunc | .
Read Full Post !
2724) Turco-Armenian Relations And British Propaganda During The WWI by Dr. Salahi Sonyel
In this paper I intend to trace cursorily the background of the incidents that took place in the Ottoman Empire, mainly in 1915, that caused a great tragedy to the people of Anatolia, especially to the Turks, other Muslims, and Armenians. I also intend to examine that tragedy, its instigators, causes, effects, and how it was exploited by Britain's wartime propagandists, in the light of new documents that have come to my notice during recent studies. I hope that my conclusions may contribute to a better understanding of the Turco-Armenian relations, and of how those amicable relations were disrupted and exploited by external and extremist forces immediately before and during . . the fateful years of the First World War.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Following the upsurge of the Young Turk Movement in the latter part of the nineteenth century, Armenian extremists and revolutionaries, who had been creating havoc in the Ottoman Empire since the early 1880s ', joined forces with the Young Turks and helped them in their revolution. In exchange for this help, they hoped that their Turkish comrades-in-revolution would grant the Armenians some kind of geographical autonomy. Hence, after the restoration of the constitution, both of the Armenian extremist organisations, the Hintchak and the Dashnak2, promised to give up their revolutionary activities and to cooperate with the Young Turk organisation, the Committee of Union and Progress3, to implement the constitution.
At first the relations between the Young Turks and the Dashnakists were cordial. This is confirmed by Cemal Pasha, who recalls that Maloumian (Aknouni), one of the Armenian leaders he met in Istanbul in 1908, frequently spoke to him of the Russian danger which hang over the Armenians' head. The Hintchakists and the Reformed Hintchakists, however, 'most of whose leaders', according to Cemal Pasha, 'had been bought by the Russians, sought no rapprochement with the Turkish committees, and aimed at an Armenian state under Russian protection'. The representatives of these 'Russian committees', who received money from the Russian consulates which 'took an active part in the revolutionary organisations', and even the ecclesiastical party, had begun to declare that the protection of the Tsar was preferable to that of the Caliph, observes Cemal Pasha *¦
Soon the Dashnakists began to increase their power, especially in the Province of Van. Its chiefs - Aram, Papazian, Sarkis and Ishkhan - were Russian Armenians whose ideas, according to British Vice-Consul Captain Dickson, were those of 'advanced socialism, amounting to anarchy', current among certain classes in the Caucasus who used terrorism as a means of attaining this end. These men, Dickson believed, 'with their uppishness and insolence' and their habit of dictating to all and sundry', were not likely, by their leadership, to make the Armenians more popular among the Muslims, under the new regime. The insolent way in which these Dashnak leaders were trying to dictate to the Government, and to Muslim tribal chiefs, with threats to get them punished if their orders were not obeyed, had further irritated all the Muslims. Captain Dickson, too, deplored this attitude of the Armenians. He wrote to British Ambassador Sir Gerard Lowther on 30 September 1908:
'...The Armenian in subjection, such as I have seen him, is an unsympathetic, mean, cringing, unscrupulous, lying, thieving curd; given his freedom, he loses none of these bad qualities, but in addition becomes insolent, domineering, despotic. He is endowed with a sort of sneak-thief sharpness, which among ignorant people in these parts passes for intelligence' 5.
Armenian extremists were still bringing arms and ammunition surreptitiously into the country, and intriguing with the Russian authorities. Dickson reported that Armenian terrorists called Fedai' (fedayi - self - sacrificing), were coming to Van from Russia and Persia, and many of them were going to those countries from Van.
'Supposing the new regime continues', declared Dickson, 'then the Turkish Armenians will enjoy an unheard-of liberty, while the Russian Armenians have only a half freedom... Thus Russia will be placed in an awkward predicament with her Caucasian subjects. It appears to me that she may have the choice of two ways of remedying this: she may grant the Caucasus a more liberal constitution, or she may make the Turkish Armenians discontented with the Turks and their new regime by intriguing and stirring up dissension in Turkey. It is too early to say if Russia intends to take either of the two courses, but the fact that the Armenians here are entirely controlled by these Russian "fedai", who have socialistic ideas very unpalatable to the Moslems, may be worth bearing in mind'.
With these pertinent remarks the British vice-consul on the spot was only prophesying about the plans which Russia was preparing for the Ottoman Empire in order to destabilise its eastern provinces, and this indicates that a handful of Armenian extremist leaders were ready to help Russia put this plan into execution, without giving much thought to its consequences. Yet, despite the economic situation in some parts of the Empire, the restoration of the constitution had greatly ameliorated the position of the Armenians, as confirmed by Vice-Consul Captain Dickson.
The Dashnakists had cooperated with the Young Turks with the hope that, in return, they would obtain some measure of decentralization that would go far to establish one or two 'purely Armenian provinces', but as the regenerated Ottoman Government was aiming at the establishment of a united Ottoman nationality without distinction of race or religion, their disappointment was great. Even Vice-Consul Dickson believed that the aims of the Dashnak Society were 'preposterously ambitious', and that they hoped for the establishment of an Armenian republic, formed out of the portions of Turkish, Russian, and Persian provinces, from which the non-Armenian elements would gradually be excluded. Dickson informed . .
Read Full Post !
2723) Armenian Claims And Historical Facts Questions And Answers 2007
C O N T E N T S
Questions And Answers
1: Was Eastern Anatolia The Original Homeland Of The Armenians?
2: Did The Turks Take The Lands Of The Armenians By Force?
3: Have The Turks Always Attacked And Misruled Armenians Throughout History ?
4: Did The Turks Really Try To Massacre The Armenians Starting In The 1890's ?
5: What Is Meant By The Term "Genocide" ?
6: Did The Turks Undertake A Planned And Systematic Massacre Of The Armenians In 1915 ?
7: Did Talat Pasha Send Secret Telegrams Ordering Massacres?
8: Did 1,5 Million Armenians Die During World War I
9: Is The Sevres Agreement Still In Force ?
10: What Are The Circumstances Under Which The Armenians Of Turkey Live?
11: How Do You Describe The Current State Of Affairs Between Turkey And Armenia?
Armenian Terrorism A Chronological List
Declaration Made By American Academicians
Was Eastern Anatolia The Original Homeland Of The Armenians?
Bibliography . .
Download The Full Document Here
.
Center for Strategic Research – 2007 ANKARA
Read Full Post !
28.1.09
2722) Free E-Book: Ottoman Archives Yildiz Collection The Armenian Question I -Talori Incidents
CONTENTS
1) Introduction
2) Armenian Terrorism , Cengiz KÜRSAD
3) 19. and 20. Century Armenian Terrorism, Heath W. LOWRY
4) Armenian Terrorism History as Posion and Antidode, Justin MCCARTHY
5)Ottoman Archives Yildiz Collection The Armenian Question-Talori Incidents
6) Documents Concerning The Incidents in Talori. .
Read Full Post !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
