The ambition of the Armenian Diaspora, has reached to a terrifying dimension. By politicizing the issue at the parliaments of the countries, which is none of their business, and turning it into a war of revenge, children are attempted to be directed for taking sides at an issue, which had remained in the pages of the history. . .
Insisting for organizing a course for the high school students on a controversial historical issues, while there are more definite and contemporary instances, with no doubt, possesses an evil-intended goal.
The attempt for organizing a course for the high school students of the Canada/ Toronto District School Board entitled “Genocide: Historical and Contemporary Implications” which includes the claims on the events of 1915, can be explained with nothing, but to brain wash effort directed at the children. If it was the contrary, then, the Canadian saints (!) would have opened a course on the role of Canada over removing the culture of the native population, not the stories of the far-off countries’. The Eskimos, native population of Canada, react to the confused move by saying: “Before the Armenian genocide, you should admit that you have massacred us by coming to our lands. First you admit your own genocide.”
The phase for determining the content of the course was also extremely interesting. It was reported that the content of the course which is entitled “Genocide: Historical and Contemporary Implications” was based on a book of a former nun, Barbara Coloroso, who is a writer on children books. Nadin Segal, one of the officials of the educational committee indicates that the contents of the course are driven from the book of the former nun.
Saying: “I have made a deep research into the history. I have read Taner Akçam and I based the book on those claims.” the author Coloroso claimed that UN have recognized the Armenian genocide. Basing their education on the writings of an ignorant former nun, who thinks that UN recognizes the Armenian genocide, the educational system in Canada does not seem to be very good condition.
One other interesting point of the question is that Taner Akçam, who is not scientifically trustworthy, was used as a reference. Taner Akçam, who was not able to find anything to support his claims at the Ottoman archives, which is open to everyone’s researches, as well as Diaspora “historian” Richard Hovanissian, compete over finding pretexts. It is no doubt that Akçam and Hovanissian have done researches at the Tashnak archives in the USA and the Armenian State Archives. It seems that they were not able to find any information or documents that would support their story also at the Armenian archives, and so they avoid mentioning these sources.
The more vociferous Armenian Diaspora historians like to claim that
`historians` support them but this is just not true. Quite the contrary:
on the whole, the people who know the subject at first-hand do not
accept the thesis of `genocide`. All the respected historians, who do not make any concessions from objectivity and scientific facts, including distinguished
scholars of Ottoman history such as Bernard Lewis, Roderic Davison, and
Andrew Mango, approach the Armenian claims with doubt.
When Bernard Lewis at Princeton told a French newspaper some years ago that there is no credible evidence proving the (genocidal) intentions of the Ottoman government, he was to be sued in the French courts by the Armenian Diaspora. the Armenians used as their lawyer one Maitre Verges, who previously defended Carlos the Jackal, a notorious Holocaust-denier, and other such unsavory characters; he volunteered to defend Saddam Hussein as well, which is an evidence that points out which circles is Diaspora are in relations with.
Guenther Lewy, who has recently retired from a Chair at the University of Massachusetts, has published an intriguing work that is clearly fair-minded (“The Armenian Massacres on Ottoman Turkey”) and does considerable damage to the scholarly reputation of a chief Diaspora historian, Vahkan Dadrian, whom he shows to have misused and made unwarranted extrapolations from translated documents.
There are other scholars who also question the one-sided genocide account, for instance professor at Princeton Michael Reynolds, who can handle both the Ottoman archives and the records of the Russian military administration, which took over eastern Anatolia in 1915. The Russian documents, I gather, support what the Turks have claimed about 1915 - that there was a tremendous Armenian-nationalist provocation, followed by a cruel deportation of the population.
Some documents allegedly proving the genocide are forgeries, particularly those purported to be orders to slay, as opposed to relocate, the Armenians, and the British law officers who were trying to find evidence over a four-year period of occupation in Constantinople refused to use them. With much regret, they said that they could not establish a case against some hundred men whom they were holding. The American State Department was unable to help. This has not stopped the Diaspora Armenians in France from using the most notorious of these forgeries (the `Naim-Andonian documents`) in their museum in the south of France.
On the other hand, some impartial scholars and authors are exposed to Armenian Diaspora’s evil intended assaults. In the case of one celebrated American historian, Stanford Shaw at UCLA, his car was booby-trapped and his house fire-bombed.
Following the threats directed at Samuel A. Weems, the author of the book entitled “Armenia/ The Secrets of a Terrorist Country” he had been a victim of a doubtful accident. The Armenian Patriarch was even prevented from speaking at Georgetown University in Washington on the subject of “The Dilemma among Turks and Armenians Should be Passed Over” on 20 September 2007 by the threats of Armenians with the reason of security. An Armenian businessman, who promised to donate 1, 2 million dollars to USA/ University of Utah, threatened to change his mind if the speech on 1915 incident of the retired Ambassador Gündüz Aktan that was planned to be held on 5 February 2008, would not be canceled. The instances on the Mafia methods of the Diaspora can be increased.
The Armenian Diaspora and Tashnaks do not posses any serious basis but the evil-intended claims of the ones, who were missionaries in Anatolia during the 1900’s and some of the Western diplomats, who acquire information from them. It is extremely expressive that this question is still kept at the axis of Christian religion officials, schools and slanders by the Armenian Diaspora and the Western countries at the present day.
www.soykirimgercegi.com
