192) Proof of the Armenian "Genocide" in Ninety Seconds

 

 Ross Vartian, Executive Director of the Armenian Assembly of America, was asked on March 22, 2005 by the Alhurra TV network (broadcast to the Arab world, compliments of the U.S. State Department):  "Armenians claim that the Turks
committed genocide — what proof is there?"

 

Mr. Vartian needed 90 seconds to provide an answer. In exactly that time frame, he provided his answer.

 

In April 2005, I have received reports that this answer was provided as a hand-out in a Fordham University "Armenian Genocide" conference featuring Dennis Papazian, Roger Smith, Annie Saltzman, and moderated by Ani Kalayjian. I understand the panel was positively gushing over the lobbyist's success. (Dr. Smith reportedly said with a wide smile, "He did that in ninety seconds"?)

 

Here was the response that caused such glowing pride:

 

The U.S. National Archives contain thousands of pages documenting the premeditated extermination of the Armenian people. The official records of many other countries corroborate the evidence gathered by U.S. diplomats, including Ottoman Turkey's WW I friends and foes. At the end of WW I, a Turkish Military Tribunal was convened. The Prime Minister, the Minister of War, the Minister of the Navy and the Minister of Education were declared guilty by unanimous vote of the Tribunal. Adolph Hitler understood the world's tendency to not act on its moral outrage and to move on when he said on the eve of his invasion of Poland, "Who, after all, speaks nowadays of the annihilation of the Armenians." Today a growing list of nations and intergovernmental bodies has affirmed the facts of the Armenian Genocide. Additionally, 126 Holocaust and Genocide scholars declared the Armenian Genocide an incontestable fact, urged all democracies to recognize this crime and called upon Turkey to do the same. The International Center for Transitional Justice was asked to study the applicability of the UN Genocide Convention to this crime against humanity. It found that "the events, viewed collectively, can thus be said to include all of the elements of the crime of genocide as defined in the Convention." Pope John Paul, Nobel Laureates Bishop Desmond Tutu and Elie Weisel, and most recently renowned Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk, all have affirmed the truth. To enhance its standing in the international community, to come to terms with its genocidal legacy, and for the sake of its evolving democracy, Turkey should face the facts of history."
  
At long last... PROOF of the Armenians' Genocide! 
 

 

But... not so fast, Mr. Garbajian!

 

Let's not forget what genocide scholar Henry Huttenbach requires: "A genocide cannot be written about in the absence of factual proof."

 

There's the magic word... not unlike "intent." What we need is factual proof. Not hearsay. Not opinions. Just the facts, ma'am.

 

I examined exactly where the proof of this statement was, in a letter to Alhurra.

 

 

I came across an Armenian news release (armeniandiaspora.com/archive/24731.html) referring to your question for Ross Vartian, Executive Director of the Armenian Assembly of America: "Armenians claim that the Turks committed genocide — what proof is there?"

 

The AAA is a lobby group that utilizes propaganda in major fashion. I am concerned that your organization may not have covered the other side of the coin. This is what usually happens in the United States, and if there is truth to Irene Marr's analysis of how the Muslim world has reacted to Alhurra, I guess it's not out of the question for your coverage to have been one-sided.

 

Many Armenians have tied their ethnic identity into this topic, some rather fanatically, and have the wealth and obsession to perpetuate it in the far corners of the world. That includes the Arab world, where many Armenian descendants (who were supposed to have been "exterminated") still live in the aftermath of their resettlement by the Ottoman government during WWI.

 

I am hoping your reporter did research and uncovered genuine historical facts that turns the best of what the AAA representative threw your way in view of "evidence." If not, I hope your organization will keep the following in mind, if the topic is covered anew.

 

The British, along with the Entente Powers, were anxious to dismember the Turkish nation at the end of the war, via the Sevres Treaty. Yet even the British, when they conducted a two-plus year investigation (i.e., they held a "Nuremberg," called the Malta Tribunal), had to throw out all the hogwash that forms the basis for "genocidal evidence" today... even their own war propaganda. In desperation, they solicited the aid of their ambassador in Washington, and nothing from the U.S. archives could be used — nothing! Every single Turk held for trial was released at the end.

 

There was no systematic plan for extermination of the Armenian people, conducted by the Ottoman government. This historic event has been politicized. Old prejudices die hard, and practically nobody in the West likes the Turks (and the same could also be said of most in the Arab world, since Turkey has been perceived as traitorously joining the West)... so nobody cares what the Turks have to say. The few Western historians who have learned the truth have been targeted by fanatics, via physical attacks (one professor's house was bombed in 1977) to smear campaigns. Objective academicians have learned not to step into this minefield, and the Armenians are once again enjoying a virtual "monologue."

 

A Christian scholar, Sam Weems, wrote the rare book uncovering Armenian falsehoods a couple of years ago ("Armenia -- Secrets of a 'Christian' Terrorist State"), and the AAA went on full frontal attack. They falsely spread rumors that Weems was a "convicted felon," trying to kill his reputation. The author died shortly afterwards, perhaps not helped by the countless hate mail he received, including many death threats.

 

As for Vartian's evidence:

 

"The U.S. National Archives contain thousands of pages documenting..."

 

These are all hearsay accounts of missionaries, sympathizing/bigoted foreign consuls and the Armenians themselves, none acceptable in a court of law. Even the British, Turkey's worst enemy at the time, agreed.

 

"At the end of WW I, a Turkish Military Tribunal was convened."

 

These were kangaroo courts set up under enemy occupation, which nobody would find valid, any more than courts in Vichy France under Nazi domination would be held legal.

 

"Adolph Hitler understood the world's tendency to not act on its moral outrage..."

 

This certainly does not constitute evidence, it is merely one man's opinion... and an infamously immoral man, at that. It has not been proven that Hitler uttered this statement. Even the rare Armenian historian, Robert John (Hovhanes), has supported its falsification, among others.

 

"Today a growing list of nations and intergovernmental bodies has affirmed the facts of the Armenian Genocide. "

 

These are mostly politicians who have not studied history, anxious to cater to the deep pockets of their Armenian flock, or who are moved by prejudice/ignorance. As Goebbels pointed out, repeat a lie often, and it will be believed. Today, the alleged genocide is mindlessly accepted as the common wisdom.

 

"Additionally, 126 Holocaust and Genocide scholars declared the Armenian Genocide an incontestable fact."

 

Those with an agenda and only present one side of the story can only be called false scholars. Many of these "genocide" institutions are supported with Armenian money, and practically none of the "scholars" themselves have a background in history.

 

"The International Center for Transitional Justice was asked to study the applicability of the UN Genocide Convention ..."

 

The ICTJ is a body of lawyers, not historians, who relied near-exclusively on the omnipresent Armenian material affirming this so-called genocide. Their definition of genocide is that only one person needs to be killed, which can describe any conflict. The 1948 Convention requires "intent" to be proven (and there is absolutely no evidence in support of that; the Armenians tried with forged telegrams, debunked today), and exempts groups who were politically allied (in this case, the betraying Ottoman-Armenians, allied with the Russians and other allies).

 

"Pope John Paul, Nobel Laureates Bishop Desmond Tutu and Elie Weisel..."

 

All opinions based on one-sided research of the near-unilaterally presented Armenian perspective. This is not "evidence."

 

The sad fact is that the Armenians conducted an ethnic cleansing policy killing more Turks/Muslims than the other way around. (Most of the Armenians who died did so from famine and disease, not massacres; although some were massacred by criminals, a few of whom were punished — some to the extent of death — by the Turks during the war.) British Col. Stokes estimated 300,000-400,000 Kurds were killed by the Armenians. There is much Russian and French officer testimony documenting the extent of Armenian savagery.

 

There is a lot to this story, but the important point to bear in mind is there is a voluminous body of pro-Armenian evidence turning this genocide tale on its ear. Almost all of the ones who support the genocide have conflicts-of-interest and don't make for credible sources.

 

Yours in responsible journalism,

 

Holdwater
tallarmeniantale.com

 

------------------------
Tall Armenian Tale is a site that has much to do regarding Armenia, and the genocide that is found so captivating by Armenians. This is known as the Armenian genocide. It involves massacre (or massacres), deportation, atrocities, and is a kind of holocaust. Turkey is not quick to embrace this view. During the days of the Ottoman Empire, in the region known as Anatolia, and before Ataturk came to power, the Young Turks ruled the land. In the curriculum of many schools, you won't learn much about this. What you might learn is that they were responsible for Armenian massacres, generally in the year 1915. The Near East Relief was there to help out, particularly after the Armenian deportations came into full force. This was during the years of World War One, but these events continued after World War I. Was this a genocide? Should the curriculum of schools have genocide studies? And what about human rights..? This Armenian question was one that weighed heavily in plenty of minds. For example, Henry Morgenthau. Man, did he love the Armenians. Perhaps not as much as President Woodrow Wilson, however. They painted Enver Pasha as a villain, but the real evil fellow was Talaat Pasha... so they say. Jemal Pasha didn't get much respect. Admiral Mark Bristol, had other ideas.... particularly after the Treaty of Sevres failed to get ratified, and the Lausanne treaty took its place. Karabakh is another troubled area involving Armenians, better known as Nagorno-Karabakh, where Ethnic Cleansing of Azeris took place within the Occupied Azerbajani Territories. Ararat can be seen from Armenia. Heath Lowry is a professor the Armenians hate, with Justin McCarthy following close behind. However, they love Richard Hovannasian, much more than they do Dennis Papazian... but maybe not as much as Vahakn Dadrian. Bernard Lewis won't win any popularity contests with the Armenians, and they positively hate Sam Weems. Armenians feel much more comfortable with lies and deceit, involving forged documentation by the likes of Aram Andonian, and books like The Forty Days of Musa Dagh, written by Franz Werfel. Forget about books from Erich Feigl, such as The Myth of Terror. Forget even testimony from Armenians like Boghos Nubar, if they don't affirm the Armenian Genocide. They much prefer to cuddle up to Turcophobes like Britain's Lloyd George.

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

tallarmeniantale.com/proof-90-seconds.htm

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