128) Armenian Forgeries and Falsifications

 

 

“ 'Statements' Falsely Attributed To Hitler And Atatürk," the first article on this page, was written by Dr. Türkkaya Ataöv... he has certainly devoted quite a bit of research in exposing Armenian forgeries. (See also his take on the Talat Pasha Telegrams, below.)  The following appeared in The Turkish Times, and was credited to the "Turkistan Newletter." The Hitler Quote is examined in detail elsewhere on this web site. I was particularly interested in what Dr. Ataöv had to say about false quotes attributed to Turkish government officials... in one special 1926 case, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Unfortunately, the article doesn't get into too many specifics... and I wanted very much to check out the booklets the professor refers to, where he provided the details. Fortunately, through the Internet, I managed to at least get some idea... which I've provided.

 

I realize the thrust of this web site if to provide reference mostly from non-Turkish sources, but it seems on the subject of Armenian Forgeries and Falsifications, it's the Turkish scholars who have gone to town in exposing these things. (And the champ is Dr. Türkkaya Ataöv.) Remember, Turks are on the defensive on this topic; they know the Western reader will typically have a built-in bias against them... so they had better back up what they're saying. I find many of these Turk-written essays, only a fraction of which I'm providing on the site, have been meticulously researched and documented. Check their sources and methods, before you jump to any knee-jerk conclusions.
 

 

Professor Türkkaya Ataöv

 

During my research and construction for this site, I encountered writings of Dr. Türkkaya Ataöv (well after this page had been prepared, the professor was featured on TAT in an exclusive interview) and put them up... only to discover afterwards they were part of larger articles. In at least one case, I've put up the larger article... so if you run into chunks written by this author you may have already run into, I feel your pain.

 

Let's start things off by an introductory excerpt written by Dr. Türkkaya Ataöv, from one of his long articles I haven't included (in its entirety; although I do recognize sections from it, as I'm in the last stage of constructing this site, and I just ran into this "long version") entitled, "AN ARMENIAN FALSIFICATION" (first printed July,1985):

 

---------------------

 

“Falsification� is a broad term for any form of misrepresentation about the authenticity of a piece of work, document, an object of art and the like. (8) “Forgery,� the production or conception of a fake, is a form of falsification. (9) It is a false creation, malo animo, for the purpose of fraud and deceit. The “usual� manner of forging is to prepare a piece of false writing and sign another’s name to it. A fraudulent application of a true signature to a false instrument or vice versa. (10) This is what a circle of Armenian falsifiers have done in the 1920’s. Its effects are still visible. They have certainly printed false “statements� and indulged in misrepresentations with the intent to defraud. Affixing a signature to a false instrument, for instance, is prejudicial to others. (11) According to S.G. Kling, it is not even necessary that one should be actually injured; it is sufficient if the instrument forged is prejudicial. (12) “Forgery� is mostly used in connection with a copy or an imitation of something genuine. One who adds words (not in the original) to the copy of a document and offers it in evidence on the ground that the original is lost, has forged the document. (13) Both terms, namely “falsification� and “forgery�, are inseparable from the intention of deceiving.

 

Falsification or forgery is ordinarily accepted as a state crime. The person or persons who alter or issue any writing, document or piece of art are guilty of the same. In the United States and England, these crimes are generally referred to as “felonies�. (14) According to Black’s Law Dictionary, crime includes both the act of forging and the act of uttering as true and genuine any forged entity prejudicing, damaging or defrauding any other person or persons. Crime is committed when one makes or passes a false instrument with intent to fraud. (15)

 

Under early English common law, the only kinds of forgery that were punishable were forgery of the king’s seal or money and reliance on a forged instrument in a court of law. An Act of Parliament in 1562 imposed severe civil and criminal penalties for forging certain writings. The scope of the crime was broadened still further by later statutes and by the common law courts. In 1830 the English law of forgery was first consolidated by an Act of Parliament.

 

Although forgery is generally regarded as a common law misdemeanor in the United States, most jurisdictions have statutes defining the offense and prescribing penalties for it. (16) For instance, whoever makes or prints, or authorizes to be made or printed any stamp, stamped envelope or postal card, forged or counterfeit in essence, is fined or imprisoned or both.�

 

A forgery is of course distinct from an imitation, which can be made by the master’s pupils. Dishonest endeavours referred to above are distinguished from honest copies not intended to deceive, such as reproductions...

 

Holdwater: Fascinating, isn't it? The professor goes on to give us wonderful examples of forgeries and falsifications through the ages, but we've got to get down to business here by examining the various Armenian attempts to pull the wool over the eyes of the unwary. I apologize for not providing the source for the footnotes indicated above, but scanning and correcting has already been too time-consuming an effort for me.

 

 
  
“Statementsâ€� Falsely Attributed To Hitler And Atatürk 

 

 Falsifications in respect to the “Armenian questionâ€� are not confined to the Andonian “telegramsâ€�. Another falsification concerns a “statementâ€� wrongly attributed to Adolf Hitler. While talking to his generals in Obersalzburg a week before (22 August 1939) the attack on Poland, the German dictator is supposed to have said: “I have given orders to my Death Units to exterminate without mercy or pity men, women and children belonging to the Polish-speaking race...After all, who remembers today the extermination of the Armenians?â€�

 

This quotation has appeared in hundreds of publications. Dadrian also asserts that Armenian-Turkish relations during the First World War "served to stimulate Hitler to embark upon his own initiatives of genocide�. Although even this forged statement makes reference to Poles, and not the Jews, Dadrian frequently uses terminology of the Jewish genocide. In Dadrian’s choice of words, even the “responsible secretary� of the ruling Ottoman party is comparable to the Nazi Gauleiter.

 

This is an attempt to link the planned extermination of European Jewry in the course of the Second World War to the events connected with Armenians. First of all, there is no historical basis for attributing such a statement to Hitler.

 

I have traced in a booklet that the Nuremberg Tribunal accepted two versions of this Hitler talk, initially numbered as USA-29 and USA-30, refusing to approve a third one. None of these texts contains such a statement....

 

The Nuremberg trials were inevitable. Hundreds of thousands of captured Nazi documents were assembled as evidence in the trial of the major Nazi war criminals. One cannot find the oft-repeated Hitler “statement� among these documents.

 

Even then, some Armenians and their like-minded colleagues cling to this so-called 'statement" because they wanted to set it into motion as a “connecting link� with the Jewish genocide. Reliable methodology in historiography contradicts such a pursuit. It is tremendous injustice to the Jews and the Turks alike. The Jews have gone through a genocide another example of which is very difficult to find. Moreover, apart from the extraordinarily good relations between the Jews and the Turks since the Middle Ages, Turkey’s role in helping European Jews during the Holocaust has been largely ignored. As Professor Shaw notes, the world does not realize the extent to which Turkey, and the Ottoman Empire which preceded it, over the centuries served as major places of refuge for people suffering from persecution, Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

 

Turkey was a haven, not only for those who escaped the Inquisition, but also hundreds of well-known intellectuals during the 1930s and thousands of other less well known persons were rescued.

 

Extreme right-wing political movements in Western Europe, previously fringe phenomena, have once again become much more significant. The Jews and the Turks are among the victims of present-day racism, xenophobia, and intolerance. Some Westerners, apparently, externalize and project their own unwanted “bad� parts onto the Jews, Turks and others to make themselves appear “good."

 

Still another falsification is a so-called “statement� attributed to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. This founder of the Turkish Republic is supposed to have confessed Ottoman state responsibility for the “Armenian genocide.� This statement is false, probably initially stemming from confusing the celebrated Turk with someone from the Istanbul military court bearing the same first name. This error, which might have started as an oversight, a mere misunderstanding or a simple lapsus linguae, is repeated in print and in word, with the hope of strengthening a case by “quoting� against the Turks no less an authority than the founder of their state. While fancy escalates, falsity itself develops from misapprehension to fraud and trickery. Some Armenian authors have already printed articles calling the story a “fiction�, and requesting that “this fable die.� I offered in a booklet a summary of the origins of this apocryphal episode, tracing its growth through some Armenian and foreign sources, quoting Atatürk as well as the Armenian writers who have established this fallacy. I reproduced three genuine Mustafa Kemal letters, among other evidence, to clarify several points surrounding the untruth in question.

 

Article written by James Tashjian and published by the Armenian Weekly in 1982, stating the fact that Ataturk never made such a statement. The author James Tashjian was reportedly forced to leave the publication shortly afterwards:

 

A separate booklet of mine aims to expose yet another Armenian falsification, which attempts to use the name of the same statesman. The Los Angeles Examiner published (1 August 1926) an article, announcing simultaneously that it was written “by� “Mustafa Kemal Pasha�, and that it was also “an interview with Emile Hilderbrand, a Swiss artist and journalist.� Some Armenian circles have been using this article, expecting others to believe that the words have fallen from the mouth of the Turkish leader. In view of the evidence I presented in the booklet, I conclude that no such interview has ever taken place with Turkey’s Mustafa Kemal. (Holdwater: Please see more below)

 

There are also a number of works by Turks, available in foreign Ianguages, which compare authentic documents with forged ones. Several forged “documents� were presented to the world public at a time when schemes to dismember Turkey had reached its climax. There are enough authentic documents in print now, whose numbers will increase, shedding light to the issue in conflict. These are all contributions to the study of Armenian-Turkish relations and not “muddling the waters of truth.�

 

Exposure of forgeries and falsifications, such as the one connected with a well-known Vereshchagin painting presented as a massacre photograph cannot be briskly described in a few phrases as “shoddy propaganda� or “inept or disingenuous scholarship.�

 

Groups need others to define themselves, in the process of which they learn how to hate out-groups. Vamyk D. Volkan introduced the subject of the human need for enemies and allies. He underlined that people sometimes have a psychological investment in the continuation of a given conflict, and that they actually use them as external stabilizers of their sense of identity and inner control. Not only they do have an investment in the continuation of this enmity, but their militancy partly marks their internal conflicts.

 

Since they need the enemy, they are afraid to lose it.

 

 

(Holdwater comments: This is the best description I have run into, psychologically explaining the irrational hatred en masse, of the Turks, by most Orthodox peoples. The full version of the foregoing essay may be accessed here, and you can visit this page to get other views on what lies behind Armenians' hatred in a psychological sense.)

 

Holdwater, again: Regarding The Los Angeles Herald Examiner article... I couldn't find the professor's booklet on the Internet, except in Turkish; let me give the gist of it (as far as I can grasp): "I haven't encountered Atatürk's having spoken with such a reporter on June 22, 1926." (The date the article claimed the interview took place, and not the August 1, 1926 publication date.) It appears the professor looked into Atatürk's schedule and found several activities that occupied the Turkish leader, but there was nothing on being interviewed by a Swiss reporter. The closest thing to newspaper-related business was on June 17th.

 

The Professor apparently has researched interviews? Atatürk conducted with many different publications, such as The Christian Science Monitor, Le Matin, The Chicago Tribune, Le Figaro and The New York Herald, but nothing on this. In his talks, Ataturk made reference to Harbourd, Ellison, Herriot, MacArthur, Antonescu, Pernot and others, but nothing on Emile Hilderbrand. No pictures with him, either, although there are plenty with the others. The professor also checked the relevant "Who's Who" types of reference books from the period in Switzerland, in different categories, but there was no mention of Emile Hilderbrand.

 

Before making his paper public, the professor contacted Switzerland's relevant sources and explored all conceivable options without getting a clue as to who the writer in question could have been. He consulted a friend who was part of the diplomatic mission to Switzerland for twelve years, having a good idea on Turkish-Swiss matters, but this turned into a dead-end, as well.
 

 

 

Holdwater ran a comprehensive Internet search on Emile Hilderbrand, and the only sources that came up were related to the Atatürk interview. Professor Ataöv gives an example of a real interview with Atatürk, from the March 27, 1921 issue of Pennsylvania's The Public Ledger, conducted by Clarence Streit. (From another of his papers, entitled, "A 'Statement' Wrongly Attributed to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.") Here, Atatürk focuses on the "conspiratorial nature of Armenian armed attacks, the bloodshed and massacre caused by them, endorsed by General Harbord as well." [Read More]

 

A far cry from what was said in the article in question, which had a smaller subtitle, " The Dictator of Turkey, in an interview with Emile Hilderbrand, a Swiss artist and journalist, on June 22." The "genocide" quote is: "These left-overs from the former Young Turkey Party, who should have been made to account for the lives of millions of our Christian subjects who were ruthlessly driven en masse, from their homes and massacred, have been restive under the Republican rule. They have hitherto lived on plunder, robbery and bribery and become inimical to any idea or suggestion to enlist in useful labor and earn their living by the honest sweat of their brow."

 

The definitive biographies on Ataturk (by Kinross and Mango) have ignored this sensational Hilderbrand interview, which provides supplementary evidence that it most likely never took place... and was built on the general anti-Turkish propaganda effort. In addition, the bombastic style sounds out of character. Ataturk was a very polite man who referred even to his enemies with reverence, and would not have referred to his compatriots in the manner he was quoted in the spurious interview.

 

A document stating neither father nor grandfather set foot in on Turkey in 1926:

(see:       tallarmeniantale.com/forgeries.htm)

 

 

  Deceitful Photographic Manipulation

 

The image below has been appropriated by Armenians as "evidence" of the Turks' cruelty, frequently along with the legend, "1915-1917." It has been published on the cover of a book/pamphlet, "Der Völkermord an den Armeniern vor Gericht" ("The Armenian Genocide on Trial"), accompanied by a picture of Talat Pasha, the Ottoman Minister of the Interior... who is accused by Armenians of having masterminded the Armenian "Genocide." The cover photograph is credited as showing "Turkish barbarism" within the book's inner pages. The same photograph was enlarged and shown to the Canadian public in the 1970's, in the Yerevan Pavillion at the annual Metro International Caravan festivities in Toronto, as proof of the Armenian "Genocide."

 

I guess it was Turkish Professor Türkkaya Ataöv who got to the bottom of this particular forgery... based on the other forgery-exposing articles featured on this site, such exposures seem to be a specialty of Dr. Ataöv's.

 

 Dr. Ataöv writes (in his paper entitled, "An Armenian Falsification"... I subsequently discovered the above article is from the "long version" of this same paper, as well; in fact, the professor says, the original title of 1980's "Der Völkermord an den Armenien vor Gericht" was "Der Prozess Talaat Pascha," offered to the German reader in 1921 [Berlin, Deutsche Verlagsgesallschaft für Politik und Geschichte] by none other than.... the "originally Armenian" ARMIN T. WEGNER! Armin T. Wegner was behind this FRAUD?) the "photo" below appeared also in 1352 copies of a "well published" book entitled The Massacre ofArmenians (Katliami Ermeniyan), by Ismail Ra'in, in 1979 Iran... supported by "some Armenian circles during the Shah's time." The Persian legend under the photograph says: Serha-yi eramene-ike katliam shudend der sal 1917 (or "the skulls of Armenians massacred in the year 1917"); in addition, in the professor's words:

 

A certain "Committee for Support to Max Hrair Kilnjian" (Comite de Soutien a Max Hrair Kilndjian), based in Marseille, France, printed cards for distribution, on one side of which the same picture appears. Such a drive for reproduction and posting shows that such falsifications reach the level of "industry" as a result of the zeal of certain Armenian quarters in France.

 

Further, the daily Nova-Svetlina, dated April 23, 1985, of Bulgaria, published an article entitled "Tragic Memories" (Tragichni Spomeni) and signed by an Armenian, M.Sofian (See Annex 9). It reproduces the same pictures with the following legend: "The terrifying traces of barbaric massacres of the Armenians in Turkey in the year 1915."

 

In reality, the photograph was prepared from the painting (shown above) created in 1872 (1871?)... forty-three years before the alleged massacres... by the Russian artist, Vassili Vereshchagin (1842-1904). The name of this painting  is "The Apotheosis of War," and it hangs in the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow.

 

Sure takes a lot of nerve to take an actual pre-existing painting for manipulation purposes, doesn't it? And then to milk it over the years in so many different nations. The Armenians have a lot of faith in their Western audiences' gullibility (not just Western either... Iran is not part of the West) to swallow whatever nonsense they can concoct. Unfortunately, this faith has proven reliable time and time again.
The Talat Pasha Telegrams 

 

 

Armenian Forger Aram Andonian got a lot of mileage from his fraudulent work. He came up with The Memoirs of Naim Bey: Turkish Official Documents Relating to the Deportations and Massacres of Armenians (London, 1920, reprinted Newton Square, Pa.: Armenians Historical Research Association, 1964)... and in three different languages, yet. 

 

The following has not been presented in its entirety... the full work may be read here. (Thanks to ataa.org.) The highlights were from the article.

 

-------------------------

 

The Andonian "Documents" Attributed to Talat Pasha Are Forgeries!

 

Prof. Türkkaya Ataöv

 

Andonian’s "documents" are full of various factual mistakes, omissions and contradictions that give him away. One of such blunders stems from his ignorance concerning the difference between the Rumi (Julian) and the Miladi (Gregorian) calendars. To change from the former to the latter, one adds 584 to the years and 13 to the days, so that Rumi September 3, 1331 becomes Miladi September 16, 1 915. (Up until 1316 or 1900 only 12 days were added). The Rumi year starts on the 1st of March. Since January and February are the last two months can only be found by adding 584+1 or 585, so that, for instance, January 5, 1331 becomes January 18, 1916. In the Ottoman Empire, New Year was the 1st of March -until 1917. A law, adopted on February 1917, did away with the 13 days of difference, but kept the difference between the years. The Miladi year system was adopted in 1925 during the Republican ear, and 1341 became 1925. Not knowing the intricacies of this system, Andonian committed serious errors in putting "appropriate" dates on the "documents". His first "document" bears the date of "February 18, 1331". But in the Miladi calendar, it is not February 18, 1915, the Rumi date needed to be February 18, 1330. The "document" with February 18 or March 2, 1916 as the date fails to serve Andonian’s purpose since he quotes this "document" to prove premeditation or a government pre-plan of the transfer of the Armenian population. To serve Andonian’s purpose, the letter ought to have been written before the transfer, but with the date it has on it, it looks as if it was written nine months after the transfer had begun. One is led to think that if Andonian or his helpers had known such complexities, they would have put a much earlier date.

 

The second "document" bears the date of March 25, 1331. But since the first "document" is dated February 18, 1331, it can only be March 25, 1332. While referring to the first "document", the date is "corrected" as February 18, 1330, but Andonian has already given himself away. This must be the reason why Andonian leaves out the "original" of the first "document" from the English edition of the book and mentions only November 15, 1915, as the date of the second "document". No Ottoman official ever commits such mistakes, especially in the higher echelons.

 

In an attempt to attribute pre-planning to the Ottoman Government, Andonian asserts that the Armenians never thought of insurrection. He emphasizes that such a thought never passed through their heads. But abundant genuine Turkish documents and many Armenian sources show the contrary. For instance, Bogos Nubar Pasha, the Head of the Armenian Delegation to the Paris Peace Conference, in a letter dated November 30, 1918 to the French Foreign Minister S. Pichon, simply states that the Armenian military detachments fought against the Ottomans as belligerents

 

In both documents, a besmele (in the name of Allah) sign appears on the top. This was customary in those days. But the first "document" misses the long letter of "sin" and the dot for the "b" ought to be on the right, not in the middle. Both signs are bigger than usual, and the sign depicting "Allah" is falsely written. It is of course not unusual for an Armenian, who is Christian, to write out such a clumsy besmele, not having written it before.

 

The English and the French texts of the same "documents" have conspicuous differences in wording, with several omissions or additions. For one, dates differ. A paragraph that starts with "Dr. Nazim Bey writes" in the French version cannot be found in the English publication. Some sentences change places, for instance, going from the sixth paragraph to the second. Omissions or additions are too many to be considered typographical errors. The "documents" are poor in Turkish grammar and language. They are full of expressions referring to the Turks as if they are blaming themselves. In some cases, the English of French version of a "document" is printed with no "original". The copies of these "telegrams" do not exist in the Prime Minister’s Archives in Istanbul. One may suggest that the copies might have been destroyed.

 

The matter is not as simple as that. Signatures on the "documents" are also fake. For instance, the genuine signature of Mustafa Abdülhalik Bey is different from his supposed signatures in the Andonian books. Further, the Cipher Books at the official archives disclose that no such telegrams were sent on such prescribed dates. In some cases, two fake "telegrams" bear the same number, which is impossible. In one of the French "documents" the number of the dead Armenians is quoted as 95,000; in its English translation, the number goes up to 100,000. Some of the "documents" could not be signed by Mustafa Abdülhalik as the Governor of Aleppo, simply because he was not the Governor then. The Governor was Bekir Sami Bey, the former starting duty on September 27, 1331 (or October 10, 1915). Not knowing this, Andonian apparently had Mustafa Abdülhalik "signing" many "documents" previous to his taking up duties in Aleppo. There are genuine documents, for instance the one dated September 22, 1331, in the Turkish archives signed by Bekir Sami as the Governor of Aleppo. Mustafa Abdülhalik could not have signed a fake document, dated September 3, 1331, as the Governor of the same city, 19 days prior to that date (that is, September 22, 1331). There are also cases, in which Andonian’s "documents" match the copies in the archives only in terms of dates, but not the number, nor the subject matter. For instance, the cipher telegram dated September 3, 1331 ought to have been numbered 78 and not 502. And its subject matter is the need to dig artesian wells in several places on the Sinai. Some of the writings are on the kind of paper used in foreign schools or easily available from the local P.T.T. offices; such papers were never used as official records. Andonian also forgets that with each 1st of March as the New Year, official correspondence began to be numbered from 1; Andonian’s numbering, however, continues, frequently adding to these further blunders of date. One of his common errors is that he never adds 13 to the days of the month to find the miladi dates. Not knowing the actual cipher used by the Ottoman Government, he frequently made up his own, which does not correspond to the cipher system available in the archives.

 

The two "telegrams" that are frequently referred to and attributed to Talat Pasha are the ones numbered 819 and 1181 in Andonian’s book. The former is dated March, 7, 1332 (or March 20, 1916). No such telegram was sent from the Ministry of Interior to the Governor ship of Aleppo on that day. The only telegraph which bears this date is nevertheless numbered 9, and its subject matter is the Armenians in Antep. Andonian has again erred, having forgotten that documents begin being numbered with 1 starting with the 1st of March. It is unreasonable to think that 819 telegrams might have been sent from Istanbul to Aleppo within a short span of 7 days. Moreover, on that very day, a different kind of cipher was being used for official correspondence than the one apparently made up by Andonian.

 

As to the second "notorious telegram" it is suspicious that number 1181 does not appear in the French and the English "texts". The Turkish and the English "texts" bear September 16, 1915 as the date while the French version is dated September 15, 1915. Here, Talat Pasha "refers" to the total destruction of all Armenians and "uses" a style of language that is meant to be a "confession". On that day, a telegram was indeed sent, but it was numbered 84, not 1181, and its subject was the postponement of the transfers of the Armenians working on the railroads. Andonian’s cipher system again fails to correspond with the system used then. Andonian was slanderously careless with the numbers of his "documents". The one we are dealing with now bears "1181", but his other "document" dated September 3, 1331 is numbered 502, and still a third dated September 29, 1331 is identified as 537. How can a document, squeezed in between these two dates, namely allegedly written on September 16, 1331 be registered as 1181?

 

Gérard Chaliand and Yves Ternon in their book entitled Le Génocide des Arméniens, state (on p. 136) that the Andonian "documents," if authentic, have particular importance. This is how authentic they are! Incidentally, the first photograph that these two French writers offer their readers (on p. 147) as depicting Enver Pasha is of course incorrect; the picture is of Djemal Pasha -just to give an idea how reliable some documentations may be!

 

The Governor of Aleppo, who seems to figure out prominently in Andonian’s book, was exiled to Malta by Britain on June 7, 1920; his exile number was 2800. The British searched the Ottoman archives, used the Armenian Church reports, resorted to witness accounts and finally applied to the Government of the United States requesting the latter to provide them with evidence, if any. Official replies on June 1, 1921 and July 23, 1921 expressed regret that they could not find proof to convict any of the detainees at Malta.

 

But these momentous developments did not prevent the Daily Telegraph for instance, from publishing in its May 29 1922, issue some of the Andonian "documents". After all, Turkey was then in the midst of a national liberation movement.
Had these "documents" not been concerned with the Turks and the Armenians, no historian, writer, correspondent, politician, or any commentator would have even touched them. It is obvious that, objectively speaking, there is enough doubt, to say the least, as to their authenticity. Authors Orel and Yuca have reproduced several authentic documents, which further destroy whatever remains of Andonian’s made-up telegrams.

 

The Roots of Armenian History Falsification, by Armenians

 

Armenian history has been studied and written almost entirely by Armenians. The same could be said, though perhaps not to the same degree, of many other peoples, such as the Georgians, Bulgarians, and Hungarians, who have tenaciously survived the vicissitudes of history. But Armenians seem to represent an extreme case, much more so than Jews, e.g. People who write their own history tend to glorify their past and avoid objective examination of controversial features of it. Armenians have been more prone to do this than most peoples and the trend has become accentuated during the latter half of the 20th century.

 

It has resulted in emotional dramatization of Armenians as a martyr nation unique in their virtues from time immemorial and unique in their sufferings in both ancient and modern times. This kind of process becomes self-reinforcing, especially so among peoples whose cultural life operates in the diaspora. Poles are prone to it, but Armenians are much more so. They have projected much of their modern history into their past—and have thus transformed it into mythology.

 

 

The excerpt above was from Foreign Affairs Consultant Paul Henze's “The Roots of Armenian Violence: How Far Back Do They Extend?�
Franz Werfel and “The Forty Days Of Musa Dagh“: A Bestseller Serves As A Fake Bible  

 

 

The following excerpt is written by Professor Mahmut Ozan, in an essay entitled, STEVEN SPIELBERG IS ABOUT TO RECEIVE ERIC FEIGL'S BOOK "A MYTH OF TERROR" (relating an effort to provide the film director with another viewpoint on the proposed movie. Spielberg got a copy of the book personally hand-delivered, thanks to the efforts of Professor Ozan.

 

---------------------------------------------

 

It is a well-known fact that the Austrian author Franz Werfel was duped into writing this novel. It became very controversial as soon 
 

 

"A true and thrilling novel..."
so wrote The N.Y. Times
as it hit the market. I was very young at the time, but I still remember the commotion it created in the Turkish press. If I am not mistaken, the project to make a motion  picture from the book was stopped with the diplomatic intervention by the Turkish government. (Holdwater's note: An Armenian web site confirms The Forty Days of Musa Dagh — which "was eventually translated into eighteen languages" — was never made by MGM "in response to a veiled threat to ban American-made films from Turkey." An obscure little 1982 Armenian-American version did see completion.) Later on Franz Werfel recanted the whole thing in great detail. At this juncture, instead of guessing the events which lead to this self-repudiation , I think it would be better for our readers to learn officially the clear-cut evidence the Turkish Forum obtained recently. It comes from a very reliable source.

 

Another writer like Franz Werfel whose name is Eric Feigl is the author of an explosive book entitled: A MYTH OF TERROR. The following paragraphs will be devoted to his explanation of how the duplicitous Armenians pulled the wool over the eyes of the whole world for eight decades, and convinced the unsuspecting, trusting people everywhere that Franz Werfel's story was real, even though every assertion it made was a forgery . The Armenians, as the masters of deceit and treachery, were able to put the world into a deep sleep. Here is then, in a nutshell, the true account of the Armenian 'hocus-pocus' or legerdemain which created the fakery and the fraud that the whole universe swallowed 'hook, line and sinker:

 

"FORTY DAYS OF MUSA DAGH"

 

This is a novel written by the Austrian writer, Franz Werfel who relied extensively on the work of the German Priest by the name of Johannes Lepsius. "Deutschland und Armenien" written by Priest Lepsius became his 'bible' so to speak. Franz Werfel wrote his "Forty Days of Musa Dagh" in German, but in its English-translated version published by Carroll & Graf Publishers, New York, many passages of Werfel's were dropped. A censor has crossed out all the paragraphs in Werfel's novel that approach objectivity, which could have been interpreted favoring Muslim Turks.

 

Feigl says: "The Armenian forces interested in the fight against Turkey know the weak points in Franz Werfel's novel all too well.. Franz Werfel was terribly careless in gathering his data and thus had the uprising of Van breaking out after the issuing of the Ottomans' relocation order. Franz Werfel tried to say that there was a cause and effect in this equation . He wanted to point out that the bad, but lazy conscience of the world , the press and the respective groups in power, and the minds of the readers, which the press had cut to, have always twisted the news favoring the Armenians.

 

Eric Feigl, the author of the "A MYTH OF TERROR" says that " it is as if the censor who eliminated this passage from the English translation must have meant to strike the next one, which is also missing. Feigl says: Franz Werfel, who relied exclusively on Armenian sources, and on Johannes Lepsius in writing his novel, "The Forty Days of Musa Dagh" was convinced of the truth of what he wrote — that the uprising of Van was a reaction of the relocation order, a sort of a desperate attempt of defense by the Armenians. In reality, the truth was just the opposite. The uprising was a prelude to a civil war in the eastern province of Van and began in February of 1915 — almost two months before the relocation order which was issued from the seat of the Ottoman Empire, Istanbul. This is truth really turned on its head!"

 

The Armenian sources, which mutilated Werfel's novel in its English edition knew exactly why they had to take these passages out.— In this particular case a whole page — out of the book. There is nowhere an explanation why the novel was altered this way. The stories which carried statements of Armenians bragging about their dirty war against the Ottomans are disappearing from all libraries around the world. You can no longer find a single issue of Lepsius' magazine called "Der Orient", they are all stolen and destroyed. one by one.

 

Franz Werfel's argumentation, rests solely on the forged documentation of Aram Andonian, the personal secretary of the U.S. Ambassador Henry Morgenthau who resided in Istanbul and never went out of the city to see for himself what was really going on . When Werfel finally realized that he had been taken in by the forgeries of Aram Andonian, he was not in a position to tell the truth he had discovered for fear of reprisals. However, not a single one of the documents reproduced by Andonian can be found today. They were all destroyed by him. When asked for the  originals, Andonian claimed they were lost also.

 

FRANZ WERFEL KNEW THAT HE HAD BEEN DUPED

 

A Turkish-born Sephardic Jew by the name of Abraham Sou Sever (a.k.a. Albert Amateau) says in his notarized Deposition and Testimonial that the 50 thousand armed Armenians had climbed to the summit of the mountain known as the Musa Dagh in Turkish. They attacked daily the rear of the Ottoman armies, causing great casualties to the Turks, and disappeared into the mountain. He adds by saying that when the Ottomans discovered the fortifications that the Armenians had set up, they could not do anything against them . They put siege to the mountain. This lasted forty days. But the Armenians, organized and supplied by the Czarist Russians had dug out an escape passage to flee the Ottomans . The thousands who had occupied the summit of the Musa Dagh were able to escape and saved their skin in this fashion.

 

Mr. Sou Sever lamented years later and said that his dear friend, the late Franz Werfel had never been in that region to conduct any investigation on what he wrote. So apparently the Armenians made him believe that all those Armenian armed forces were exterminated by the Turks. Mr. Franz Werfel discovered that he was fooled by the Armenians and wanted to correct his inadvertent lies, but he did not dare to do so in fear of reprisal to himself and to his immediate family members.

Fishy Fotos 

 

From an Armenian web site. The skeletons are said to be those of massacred Armenians. How did they get the skulls to stand up  like that? I get the sneaking suspicion the pile of bones originated from another image. It's hard to tell, because the photo is fuzzy... but aren't the foreground details different-looking than the people in the back?

 

And who ARE those people? If they're supposed to be Armenians, are we to believe they re-visited the killing fields so soon afterwards (judging by their costumes)..? Because the last thing I'd want to do is to relive the nightmares, if you listen to the unimaginable horror stories, where it would have been a miracle for anyone to have survived.  (This photo is straight from the Armenian web site... somebody has already "worked" on it, at least in terms of putting in the writing.)

 

By the way, what happened to at least some of the Armenians at Zor? According to Ambassador Henry Morgenthau himself (from an actual September 1915 diary entry, and not from his phony book — as researched by Dr. Heath Lowry, in "The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau's Story"):

 

Zenop Bezjian, Vekil (representative of the Armenian Protestants in the Ottoman Empire)... told me a great deal about conditions [in the interior). I was surprised to hear him report that Armenians at Zor were fairly well satisfied; that they have already settled down to business and are earning their livings; those were the first ones that were sent away and seem to have gotten there without being massacred...

 

(Holdwater, returning: And once they got there, there is no reliable evidence that says they did not happily continue with their lives; this is why the majority of Armenians survived.)

 

Ugh. Definitely an example of two heads not being better than one. (Sorry.)

 

From another Armenian web site. (This photo is very popular, featured in numerous Armenian sites.) The victims are said to be Armenians, naturally. However, this is the problem with such undocumented photographs. The victims could be anyone.

 

There is another story behind this "Two Heads" photo, from a Turkish web site. Turkish control over the Balkan territories were coming to an end at the time this photo was taken, in 1905. The Serbs and the Bulgarians were at each others' throats. The Serbs got the upper hand, and beheaded the leaders of the Bulgarian band. The Turkish gendarmes arrived too late to intervene; a photographer was present and suggested the gendarmes pose with the heads. The intended message? Good thing the "Law" arrived, preventing more violence from occurring.

 

If the Turkish story is true, it sounds like documentation should exist... especially since the given date is from a decade before the massacres had taken place. It sounds sensible;. besides, is it really believable for officials to pose with their victims, to gloat? Only psychotics would do such a thing. (Of course, hate-filled massacring murderers must have a quotient of madness, so posing with victims for gloating purposes isn't out of the realm of possibility. I'd just think a criminally-minded law officer would at least have the smarts not to provide photographic evidence... especially since the Ottoman Empire was under the European microscope, and already had a negative image regarding barbaric acts, such as Gladstone's wildly exaggerated Bulgarian atrocities.

 

None of us were there, so until either version is authenticated, we don't know which tale is truthful. However, that's just the point. Armenians play fast and loose with the facts, and don't hesitate to make use of any kind of support they can get their hands on... regardless of whether the evidence has anything to do with their actual suffering.

 

 

----------------------------------------------------------
© Holdwater 

tallarmeniantale.com/forgeries.htm

----------------------------------------------------------