3402) 1915 Events: Critique & Exposition Of How Facts & Falsifications Mixed Up, Stirred & Served On A Golden Platter

Buenos’ Review Of Üngör Article by Sadi Dinlenc

Tal Buenos’ review (15 Characteristics Of The Armenian Narrative by Tal Buenos of yet another historical falsification of the 1915 Events, by Ugur Ümit Üngör, titled ‘ The Armenian Genocide, 1915, is an excellent critique and exposition of how facts and falsifications mixed up, stirred and served on a golden platter, as happened many times before.

The review by Buenos clearly describes 15 points where Üngör manipulated previous writings, historical facts and ignored realities to suit his pre-determined purposes.

The important issue here is not how Buenos has literally destroyed Üngör’s article but Buenos’ 15 famous points about destortion, ignorance and falsifications common to all articles written earlier by Armenians and/or their sympathizers, including some Turkish Apologizers recently, regarding the false claims of genocide. These articles, books and brochures commonly : . . .

1. Totally ignored the sufferings of Turks preceding the ‘forced deportaion’,

2. Did not remember the Armenian Alliance with the Russian Army advancing on Turkey,

3. Forgot to mention the alliance of 22,000 Armenian soldiers collaborating with Hitler in mass killing of Jews during the WWII,

4. Did not show any remorse for killing of innocent Turkish Diplomats by ASALA,

5. Tried taking about CUP only without mentioning Armenian Revolutionary Committees,

6. Exploited the anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim sentiments prevailing in Europe,

7. Intended clearly to destroy the Turkey’s name in Europe,

8. Started telling their stories by mentioning first the Armenian sufferings inflicted by the Turks as if Armenians were drinking a cup of coffee when all these things happened,

9. Tried to draw whimsical parallels between Hitler and the CUP leaders,

10. Emphasized that only the Muslims killed the Christians while not talking about at all the killings of Turks in the hands of Christian Armenian bandits,

11. Always named the killings “ racial and religious” without mentioning the security concerns and political reasons behind them,

12. Never mentioned the promise given by the Great Powers to the Armenians to fight with them against Turkey in return for their own homeland – which later was totally forgotten- ,

13. Never mentioned the famous speech which is in itself ‘ A TOTAL ADMISSION OF GUILT’ by the President Kachaznouni of the Armenian Republic of 1918, made in Bucharest, Romania, and submitted to Paris Conference where he famously grouped the previous and recent Armenian activities into the following headings, within his 6 pages long speech: (*)

“ We have participated in military operations….”
“ We were cheated… we were made part of the Russia ..”
“ We were dreaming….”
“ Turks were forced to declare the Deportations ..”
“ We could not see the realities..”
“ We are the reason of all these events ..”
“ The National War was Turks’ right ..”
“ We uprose and fought against the Turks…”
“ The Sevres Agreement has blinded us ..”
“ The foundation of our uprising was the ‘Greater Armenia’ “
“ We never managed to be a ‘State’ “
“ There is no such thing as Turkish Armenia “
“ We have used terrorism…”
“ The remnant of the old days ‘Dashnak Party’ has to terminate itself .. “
“ Dashnak Party is against the peace…”

(*) The whole written body of the speech and its appendices may be downloaded from the website, free of charge, Armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2008/07/2540-free-e-book-scanned-copy.html

When one pulls himself/herself away from the details, emotions and fanatical addresses, he/she will clearly see the above pattern which is becoming so outdated and non-scholarly, after all.

---

Readers Comment

If Turks committed a genocide which is the greatest crime of humanity, and if Turkey really avoids of facing its history, and if the Armenians and their supporters sincerely want Turkey to do it, why do the Armenians persistently refuse Turkey’s suggestions to discuss these events together with historians from both sides and other countries? For example:

“Our objective is to have the matter investigated by historians and experts. We are ready to accept the decision of the joint historical commission. We agree for different professionals from various countries to be involved” Abdullah Gul recently said. If historians committee project could be realized, issue of so called Armenian genocide will not be discussed by politicians but by historians. Furthermore, other than Turkish and Armenian historians, historians from third countries will also be included.


The Turks who were eager for establishment of such an historical commission, were supported by the United Nations, European Parliament and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). http://www.tegenwicht.org/weblog_2006/67_armeens.... http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/bericht/77330, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/93374... and was very happy. While Turkey was eager and very happy, the Armenians were exceedingly unwilling and very angry.

http://www.keghart.com/content/dans-la-rue#english; http://www.hairenik.com/armenianweekly/august_2004/history001.html


In an interview with Armenian Reporter, Prof Richard Hovannisian from California University and the father of Raffi Hovannisian, the first Foreign Minister of Armenia, said: ‘It is very dangerous to establish such an historical commission…because according to 1948 United Nations’s Genocide Convention, a deliberate and planned massacre is mandatory. The Turks will accept that nearly 200-300 thousand Armenian died; but nobody can call them deliberate acts. In Turkish Archives the Turks have the telegrams sent from vilayets about the then Armenian upraisals and documents about the Armenians who fled from the Ottoman Army. So, the Turkish historians will accuse the Armenians and say that all these events were a reaction to what the Armenians did and were not deliberate’ http://www.kophaber.com/news_detail.php?id=4726

One of the supporters of so called Armenian genocide resolutions in U.S. Congress, Adam Schiff said “A committee about history is a struggle for distracting the truth. Turkey cannot rewrite history in exchange for good relations with Armenia.”


ANCA and other Armenian lobbying organizations stated that Armenia is forced to make dangerous concessions by Turkey and that Turkey’s moves towards establishing joint historians commission aims to call so called Armenian genocide into question and suspend its international recognition. ANCA’s aim is to provide recognition of so called Armenian genocide by U.S. Congress before establishment of a historians committee to discuss the events by keeping pressure.urging the Congress.

Let us go to a few years ago:

*In 2004, the Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform (VAT) was founded to exchange documents about the 1915 events by Austrian, Turkish and Armenian historians. After receiving 100 Turkish documents, the Armenians abandoned the project refusing to continue to fulfill their commitments and afterwards the Armenian foreign minister announced that they did not want to discuss the 1915 events with historians. (I. Press Release 11.1.2005 Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform – VAT

The Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform deeply regrets to announce that she will not carry through her starting initiative „The First Viennese Armenian-Turkish Round Table” (FVATR Vienna 2005) originally planned for spring 2005. The reason is that the Armenian partner has not provided us with the necessary confirmation as agreed in August 2004…….On the other hand, the Turkish partner accepted already to participate in the dialogue, in which each part was supposed to present 180 documents on the year 1915 showing their understanding of this delicate matter. http://www.turkishdigest.com/documents/VATpressrelase.pdf)

*Armenia refused the Turkish prime minister's and the Turkish Assembly's invitation announced on April 13, 2005 which suggested to establish a Joint Commission composed of historians from both sides and discuss the events which took place during the 1st World War.

*And the Turkish prime minister repeated the same invitation on February 2008 , in Munich at the 44th Security Conference where the Armenian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Oskanian also attended?

In neither of these invitations was there any precondition, unlike it is claimed by the Armenians.

***Why did the Armenian historian Sarafyan, who accepted the invitation of the then chief of Turkish History Foundation, Halacoglu, for cooperation to investigate Harput events, abandon the project, after talking the Armenian diaspora?

*The Ottoman and Turkish archives are open, unlike it is claimed by the diaspora. http://www.ankara.edu.tr/english/yazi.php?yad=36. http://www.tsk.mil.tr/ENGLISH/8_FRAGMENTS_FORM_HI... http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Documents... http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Documents... http://www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr/kitap/kitap.asp...

Even, Armenian historian Ara Sarafian from Gomitas Institute and Hilmar Kaiser searched the Ottoman archives (www.sarigelinbelgeseli.com

*In spite of this, why are the Armenian archives including the one in Zoryan Armenian Institute in Boston closed? Both Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation offered the Armenians to open these archives; but the directors of the Zoryan Institute replied that they did not have enough money to open the archives. Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation promised financial support.Why did the Armenians refuse this suggestion too? (Nüzhet Kandemir, http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/418517.asp). Note that Zoryan Institute has quite enough money to provide financial support for Taner Akçam who advocated the Armenian claims while working in Minnesota University until recently. Why have the Armenians always been terribly afraid of establishment of historical joint commissions?

Is it not striking that Sarafian, the head of the London-based Gomidas Institute, said Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s offer to Armenia to establish a commission of historians to resolve the Armenian issue was positive, but Armenia was the wrong address. He also said that freedom of expression for historians in Armenia is limited and the genocide issue has become a political tool. http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/10426...

If a genocide had really occurred, why did Brian Ardouny of the Armenian Assembly of America announce ‘We don’t need to prove the genocide historically, because it has already been accepted politically’? Why did the chief of the Armenian Archives in Armenia tell that they were not interested in the archives, but all they are interested is the world’s public opinion.

Or why have the Armenians not admitted to an international court yet?

In your life, have you ever seen a criminal who persistently calls the victim to bring his evidences? And, have you ever seen a victim who passionately accuses somebody of committing crime and giving him great harm but strictly avoids of bringing his proofs before the referees or going to court, and tells that he need not prove that person’s guilt, because the community has already accepted him as guilty?

In this situation would you not question the era you are living in? 5000 BC or 2000BC?

What else should the Turks do to face their history? Is it Turkey/Turks or Armenia and those who support them who are terribly afraid of facing their history?


Akasya Dogan

---

.