March 7, 2008
By all accounts, the 2008 presidential election is about "change," yet it is politics as usual when it comes to the ongoing Armenian dispute with Turkey. The quarrel over . . World War I history in Anatolia -- which many have difficulty even finding on a map -- has been turned into a special interest issue by the Armenian lobby. Political calculations prompted Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to release presidential campaign statements supporting a congressional resolution to mischaracterize tragic events which unfolded during the waning years of the Ottoman Empire as genocide. The two White House aspirants are aping the Armenian resolution initiative of the House of Representatives in the previous Congress, whereby Members would hijack the role of both historian and the World Court in deciding the genocide question; this resolution was derailed by the then House Speaker. The Obama-Clinton pandering to the Armenian lobby betrays the signature Washington habit of making promises now and thinking about them later. It speaks volumes that Senator John McCain, arch enemy of earmarks and sister special interest money, refrained from bowing to Armenian campaign contributions and votes.
For several decades, some outspoken Armenian-Americans have politicized the events of 1915 in lieu of seeking the full truth. By playing their game, Obama and Clinton wander from history, fan the flames of division, and stray ever farther from what they purport to be about: change from past myopia, folly, or pettiness.
Turkey opened the Ottoman archives for academic research many years ago. Armenian archives that remain closed, including those in the United States, should be opened for examination by scholars. Openness would foster constructive change by creating an impartial forum free from the influences of domestic electoral politics to establish a more comprehensive narrative of the events of 1915. Genocide questions are too important to be entrusted to amateurs. They should be addressed by objective experts in the proper forum un-distracted by political calculations.
Turkish President Abdullah Gul responded to the recent Armenian presidential election results by calling for "normalized relations" between Turkey and Armenia and urging increased cooperation. His remarks highlight Turkey's commitment to change from a political landscape reminiscent of a petrified forest. Our nation's leaders, both current and prospective, should follow President Gul's instruction.
Reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia is no pipedream. Who ever thought Germany and France would reconcile in the short decades after World War II? At issue are not only the grim events of 1915, where innocent life was tragically lost on both sides during the war, but also Armenia's occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh, territory belonging to Azerbaijan. Turkish-Armenian reconciliation may need the catalyst of leaders who care not only about geostrategic maneuvering, but the people whose lives would be directly implicated. To play the role of facilitator, a United States leader would need to harmonize the disparate voices of domestic constituencies, without neglecting strategic allies such as Turkey.
A leader who promotes reconciliation and peace among peoples and nations is the architect of change.
Want to a comment? Or reply to a Comment ?
Comments
Brian
The healing process of Armenians starts when they stop trying to get the best of two worlds. On the one hand, they glorify their revolution and independence wars where they fought against the Ottomans with their rebels even BEFORE 1915. On the other hand, they claim they are victims of a planned genocide.
The problem is, there are numerous telegram from Talat Pasha (The Ministry of Interior) who Armenians claim was the mastermind behind the genocide, ordering the end to the killings of Armenians. Many governors and local authorities tried to protect the Armenian citizens which they lived with for 600 years, but there were some who saw the Armenians as traitors seeking rebellion and the killings of Muslims. The reason for this paranoia was caused by the Dashnaks (Armenian Revolutionary Federation established in 1890) and the Hunchaks (Hunchak Socialist Party), both of which were revolutionary organizations whose motto was a free and pure Great Armenia which they fought for, way before 1915.
In Talat Pasha's memoirs we find that he felt guilty for being powerless to prevent the crimes committed against Armenians by the local Kurds and Muslims who took the law into their own hands. Sometimes gendarme (Turkish National Guard) would find stashes of weapons and explosives stored by Dashnak revolutionaries in Armenian homes and shops; this would provoke local Muslims to label Armenians of their city as traitors and perpetrate massacres. However, these were never encouraged or ordered by the Ottoman government. This is why the word massacre does not equate the word genocide.
Armenians want more sympathy by elevating their suffering to that of genocide and equating themselves to the Jews. They pretend their genocide resolutions that focus on the Armenian genocide thesis are a humanistic measure to condemn genocide all over the world, when they have no cares for the suffering of people in Darfur, Rwanda, or even the massacres committed by their own Armenian Armed Forces against the Azerbaijani citizens in 1994.
The culprits of the Armenian genocide as claimed by Armenian historians, are all dead or assassinated by Armenian nationalists. They were condemned to death sentences by the Turkish government in 1919-1920 trials to satisfy the Allies who were victorious and to punish these Ottoman leaders who led them to defeat (not for genocide). So, really, what is the goal of Armenian lobbyists today? The goal is simple, recognition of the Armenian Genocide, by political means rather than legal means, in order to create the legal basis to pressure the Turkish government to give them back Eastern Turkey which they see as "Western Armenia".
So what is this "Greater Armenia" concept that is so ingrained in the minds of Armenian children? It's the land that they believe they earned in their revolution during the Treaty of Sevres. The problem is, after the Turkish Independence War, the Lausanne Treaty was recognized by the European powers and signed by the Soviet Union FOR Armenia. In other words, the Armenians feel they were cheated out of their own lands by the Soviets who had taken over their government. However, instead of blaming Russia for their problems, they focus on blaming the Turks for their problems, because they are the ones that are sitting on their claimed lands today.
Their national symbol is Mount Ararat, a mountain in Turkey, but has religious and cultural importance to them. When Armenians go to the Armenian capital tears roll down their cheek that their most important symbol is across the border in Turkey, and many Armenians make it their goal to one day climb this mountain.
nevber
Those esteemed international human rights organization (some commentators are talking about ) are strangely silent when it comes to European and US genocides around world. Where are they when Australia just admitted Genocide!!! When France brutally killed hundreds if not millions of Algerians, when Spanish and Portages "conquerers" killed and tortured up to 4 million indigenous South Americans, When Americans killed and literally wiped out millions of Native Americans and are silent when it comes to Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Sudan, Kosova, Panama and Nicaragua. Why are they silent about the horrific genocidal behavior of the Belgium's towards the Congolese during king Leopold ruling for 200 years. How about what the Chinese are doing towards the Tibetans.... The list is very long!!!!
Why don't we ALL sit around the table of Genocide and except our past. When a Muslim country kills, it's Genocide. When Christians kill, it's collateral damage, just numbers, war on terror, war on drugs, just good old war or "sorry it was in the past"....
The hypocrisy is sicking.... Those esteemed international human rights organizations are just political pundits to Europe and USA.... Their hypocritical behavior takes away from their legitimacy....
03/18/2008
pianistxyz
Mr. Fein stoops down and casts doubt on the well-documented facts of the Armenian Genocide. His article is intentionally misleading at best, or an extension of Turkish propaganda, at worst.
He says, "Some outspoken Armenian-Americans have politicized the events of 1915 in lieu of seeking the full truth." The truth is simple and well established: there was a Genocide. I suggest Mr. Fein do some scholarly research on the subject (Taner Akcam's "A Shameful Act" will be a good starter). The "politicization" is only a response to the decades-long Turkish denial.
Is it not the right of Americans of Armenian descent - and for that matter, all Americans - to demand recognition of the truth from their own government? "The Armenian lobby" is a grass roots campaign by citizens of this country, who exercise their rights. Whereas "the Turkish lobby" means a campaign funded by a foreign government with vast resources. Is this not foreign intereference into America's domestic politics?
Mr. Fein says that America needs "a leader who promotes reconciliation and peace among peoples and nations." Yes. I could not agree more. But "reconciliation" and "peace" cannot be based on a lie. The Armenian Genocide did happen, and it is high time the President of the United States musters the the will to face the Turkish denialist machine! We need a leader who will promote reconciliation and peace, not by pushing painful facts of the past under the rug, but by acknowledging the truth and starting the healing process.
03/09/2008
Brian
I'm sorry sir, but these well-documented facts are only a figment of the Armenian propagandists' imagination. Doesn't anyone ask why Armenians (usually pretending to be unbiased Westerners) always talk about "Well-documented facts" yet they never tell you what these "Well-documented facts" are?
The answer is, there are no well-documented facts about the alleged Armenian genocide; some Armenians provided documents in the 1920s, but were found to be forgeries and dismissed from the academic community. Now the only reason why many people are tricked into believing in the Armenians' genocide label, is because there are so many of them who are literate in the United States, France, and other nations, where they have created an industry of spreading misinformation and writing literature on the subject. Sometimes even paying historians to write books for their thesis.
The Armenian propagandists are so intelligent, that they even created their own institute for genocide: The Zoryan Institute (An Armenian institute in Massachusetts). This institute is a factory for creating Western historians who fully believe in the "Armenian Genocide" label. They created sociologists like Taner Akcam, who escaped from prison in the 1970s and holds a tight grudge against the Turkish government.
If you say that Taner Akcam's book is scholarly research, then you are believing a fugitive who holds a 30 year grudge against his own government. Is he really that unbiased? No, this man, is obsessed with ruining the Turkish government's name around the globe, because he doesn't see himself as a Turk. His books are well appreciated by the Armenian community and organizations who fund his work.
03/18/2008
Scholarly research with Taner Akcam's book?!! Taner Akcam is a SOCIOLOGIST not a historian. I'm glad that some sociologist who was pissed at Turkish government wrote a book. A brief look at his biography would reveal his motives. And where are the well-documented facts of Armenian genocide? Why wouldn't the Armenian government open its archives for REAL scholarly research like Turkish government did? The truth is in the archives of the time NOT in Taner Akcam's book. If the Armenian community has a strong case based on well-documented facts why are they so scared of archives?
03/18/2008
Hyola
If anyone doesn"t believe it was genocide, check out: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/fisk/robert-fisk-the-forgotten-holocaust-463306.html
Now for my response to the Fein article:
I wonder if anyone out there knows that Churchill first used the word "holocaust" to refer to what happened to the Armenians before the Nazis were even in power " and also that Raphael Lemkin (who coined the word genocide) emphatically, publicly and explicitly stated that the very roots of the word sprang conceptually from the massacres of the Armenians in 1915 (there is TV footage of this, and it is also in print)� In fact he started coming up with the word even before World War II and in 1933 he made a presentation at the League of Nations on international law under the essay name of "Crime of Barbarity" " the concept of that crime which was to evolve into "genocide" (Based on the Assyrians, Armenians and Greek systematic massacres) " more surprisingly " the word genocide was not even used in the Nuremburg trials and is absent from the verdict " Lemkin called the court"s verdict the "blackest day of my life" as it failed to address crimes committed before the beginning of World War II.
Interesting strategy tying 1) the Armenian genocide recognition resolution to presidential politics and 2) the idea of change in domestic politics to the idea of calling out genocide when it happens. Such a universal objective, one to which globally almost all can easily ascribe (goal = stopping genocide when it happens, and working to prevent it from ever happening again, acknowledgement, etc.) is again, thanks to voices like Fein, tainted by the goal of protecting Turkey"s flawed policy of denial.
Notice Fein"s trivialization of the Armenian Genocide ("which many have difficulty even finding on a map�" and "quarrel over World War I history in Anatolia") followed by terming the need to stop the cycle of genocide as a special interest issue by the supposed Armenian lobby. Most observers can easily note that in October 2007, the only real lobby in Washington, DC was the well-oiled, highly-financed (millions of dollars per month to agents of a foreign government like the Livingston Group and DLA Piper and Gephardt) and governmentally-driven opposition that was the real "lobby" that opposed recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the US Congress. Vilifying politicians for working with constituencies on issues those constituents care about is a rather absurd accusation " this type of dynamic occurs all the time with the myriad issues that Americans care about based on their backgrounds, upbringing, and other factors. Alternatively, Fein should probably be focusing his concerns on the vast security and credibility/legitimacy issues that the US faces when a foreign government (i.e. Turkey) seriously interferes with internal domestic politics, not to mention threatening retribution against a senior/superior NATO ally in the US over a resolution that is not binding law and simply expresses a sense of the Congress. Let us not forget Turkey threatened the safety of our troops and also stated it would be forced to destabilize the area by going after the Kurdistan region in the alleged pursuit of the PKK. (Let us recall that Turkey actually did do this even after the resolution was not scheduled for a House floor vote, thereby proving it will do whatever it wants whenever it wants regardless of US interests). In fact, President Reagan has acknowledged the genocide (1981) and Congressional Resolutions have passed in 1975 and 1984 acknowledging same. Unfortunately, the US government, as seen from October 2007, assists in Turkey"s campaign of denial which plays a prominent role in resolutions coming to the fore.
The argument over Congress staying out of history is also not a very compelling one. Fein ignores the numerous other House resolutions on the Cambodian genocide, the Ukrainian famine-genocide, the Rwandan genocide, Darfur, the Jewish Holocaust and the issue of the Comfort Women from over 50 years ago. All of these resolutions may have in some cases irked allies or governments " but the US Congress was courageous enough to move forward and acknowledge historically major scourges such as genocide, without bowing to threats from a country that is supposed to be our friend and ally. Of course, with all that written I cannot help but remember when Turkey denied access through its land when the US was planning its operation in Iraq in 2003. This failure of cooperation by Turkey cost the US countless lives and a critical strategic advantage " as many military tacticians and officials have made abundantly clear.
Fein also does not mention that the historical record is in fact quite clear on the Armenian Genocide. The International Association of Genocide Scholars, the pre-eminent authority on genocide, has unanimously urged passage of resolutions to recognize this crime and deter denial. The Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem and the Institute for the Study of Genocide in New York City have also affirmed the historical fact of the Armenian Genocide. Not to stop there, numerous holocaust scholars, among them Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel, Yehuda Bauer and Israel Charny have stated that the Armenian Genocide is incontestable historical fact and have urged governments of the Western democracies to recognize it as such. In a 1999 statement, 150 scholars, writers and journalists urged Turkey to recognize the Armenian Genocide. It goes on and on " the record is quite clear with almost all neutral historians acknowledging the incontrovertible historical fact of the Armenian Genocide. This is not politicization " it is a matter of historical fact that has been conducted through investigations by historians globally " only Turkey and its paid hands deny the truth.
But what we saw recently was not even the argument of denial to oppose the resolution " we saw the national security arguments of threatening American troop safety and destabilization in Iraq as the denial argument is really not an effective one for Turkey to espouse anymore. The world knows the Armenian Genocide occurred� To state that the resolution somehow impacted stability in the middle-east bordered on complete insanity " as we saw clearly " Turkey conducted its military incursions and air strikes violating Iraqi sovereignty anyway�
Regarding opening archives and commissions, it is widely known that Turkey"s Article 301 strongly deters anyone from conducting honest research internally. Fein"s comments on this matter imply that Turkish archives have been open with scores of neutral scholars pouring through droves of nearly century-old documents " this is quite unbelievable. The assassination of Hrant Dink, who was preposterously charged with more crimes even after he was killed is a testament to this very sad state of affairs and the chilling effect that has occurred in Turkish society and academia over the Armenian Genocide. The potential "openness" that denialists, apologists and revisionist request is only meant to stave off the inevitability of acknowledging the Armenian Genocide. In fact, much has been made about historians " they do their work, it is peer reviewed and over time a narrative on a topic is created with various viewpoints " this has been going on for quite a long time. The Armenian Genocide has already passed the test of historically and academically rigorous study and has reached an overwhelming consensus. These were independent historians, many of which specialize in the very area under the microscope, and have reached a conclusion after decades of scholarship. Only a few scholars outside Turkey and those paid by Turkey say otherwise. This begs the question that Turkey does not truly seek resolution or an accurate finding regarding the Armenian genocide " it simply seeks to obfuscate the matter, delay addressing it at all costs and hope that the issue will somehow go away eventually. Erdogan has already publicly stated that Turkey could never accept the claim that its forefathers committed genocide " so much for even the twisted commission idea� Obviously this only exacerbates the situation. (Notice how Nagorno-Karabakh, reconciliation and Azerbaijan are mentioned but are not relevant to discussing the historical fact of the Armenian Genocide).
Regarding Turkey calling for normalized relations " Armenia has for years stated that there are no preconditions to the establishment of diplomatic ties. This is clearly documented on the public record. Instead, Turkey continues to blockade Armenia in solidarity with Azerbaijan over the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Turkish President Abdullah Gul is also the same leader who has been seen publicly meeting and smiling proudly with Omar al-Bashir (Sudanese President) which prompted the following sobering commentary from even Morton Abramowitz (former US Ambassador to Turkey and not exactly the biggest proponent of Armenian Genocide recognition):
"Turkey has been trying to persuade the world, not very successfully, that there was no Armenian genocide in 1915. The picture of President Abdullah Gul [with al-Bashir] smiling at a joint press conference is hardly going to convince skeptics that Turkey even knows what genocide means, and it will certainly raise doubts in supporters of Turkey." http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=1790
Fein instead asks "our nation"s leaders, both current and prospective [to] follow President Gul"s instruction" " this is a rather comical request on Fein"s part.
The bottom line in all this is that the strategy of trivializing the Armenian Genocide, denying it ever happened, mentioning national security or troop safety issues, etc. only stick around because Turkey pours ungodly amounts of money into its campaign to never acknowledge what occurred in 1915 (see Fein"s article). If you put enough money behind even the worst idea (i.e. denying historical reality of possibly the worst crime out there), it will persist even in a dilapidated and rather embarrassing state �
Reconciliation is an admirable goal " but only with the acknowledgement and clear affirmation of the historical record. There can be no real reconciliation without truth. I would also submit that the recent Kosovo situation sets a strong precedent for the autonomy and eventual independence of Nagorno-Karabakh " as most commentators, historians and political scientists easily quantify NK as having a better case for statehood than most semi-autonomous conflicts, let alone Kosovo�which just benefited from what seems to be a return to explicit manifestation of US v. Russian interests in Eastern Europe�but what exactly does that have to do with the historical reality of the Armenian Genocide? I would understand if Fein drew a connection between the fact the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a current problem " while the continued denial of the Armenian Genocide by the Turkish government is also a current problem in that it prolongs the original annihilation and extends it into the future without resolution�
We do deserve a good leader, one who promotes reconciliation and peace among peoples and nations and is the architect of change. But also the kind of leader who acknowledges the historically catastrophic consequences of not calling out and stopping genocide when it happens " and also stopping denial dead in its tracks so that Santayana"s ominous words ("Those that cannot learn from history are doomed/condemned to repeat it") do not play out yet again in another modern day Darfur, Rwanda or who-knows where else.
03/08/2008
Brian55 See Profile I'm a Fan of Brian55
Please do not act like you are not part of this Armenian lobby's objectives, since you too are an Armenian Hyola (Hye means Armenia).
Do not put words into Fein's mouth by implying that he was trivializing the suffering of Armenians, because he has never done something like this. The Armenians did suffer, but to call it genocide when it does NOT fit the United Nations definition of genocide is also wrong and can lead to a society of hate and primitiveness.
You said "Churchill first used the word 'holocaust'", Churchill also worked for the British government during World War I, which was when the British were enemies of the Ottomans. Propaganda during that time was rampant to condemn the Central Powers. They recruited people by talking about suffering of Armenians, even though the central government of the Ottomans never ordered or encouraged killings of Armenians.
Raphael Lemkin's coining of the genocide is irrelevant to the CURRENT definition of genocide according to the United Nations, which demands that proof of intent exists. In the Holocaust, gas chambers showed evidence that the government built these for the purpose of killing Jews, they also found thousands of archives that show that the Nazi government planned an extermination of the Jews, so please do not think for one minute that Raphael Lemkin is the authority on genocide, when he wasn't even a historian and since he never went to Turkey in his life.
03/18/2008
milo9
Mr Fein, I'm with you 100% on Constitutional issues, but to hold up McCain as a paragon of rectitude is beyond reason. McCain was an honorable man, but fell to the corruption of age and ambition.
03/08/2008
Want to a comment? Or reply to a Comment ?
Bruce Fein Explains the Turkey/Armenia Issue by Michael van der Galien
March 13, 2008
Bruce Fein wrote a great post for the Huffington Post (of all places) about ” the ongoing Armenian dispute with Turkey.” “The quarrel over World War I history in Anatolia — which many have difficulty even finding on a map — has been turned into a special interest issue by the Armenian lobby,” he writes, and American politicians seem all too willing to give in to Armenian pressure.
Political calculations prompted Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to release presidential campaign statements supporting a congressional resolution to mischaracterize tragic events which unfolded during the waning years of the Ottoman Empire as genocide. The two White House aspirants are aping the Armenian resolution initiative of the House of Representatives in the previous Congress, whereby Members would hijack the role of both historian and the World Court in deciding the genocide question; this resolution was derailed by the then House Speaker. The Obama-Clinton pandering to the Armenian lobby betrays the signature Washington habit of making promises now and thinking about them later. It speaks volumes that Senator John McCain, arch enemy of earmarks and sister special interest money, refrained from bowing to Armenian campaign contributions and votes.
For several decades, some outspoken Armenian-Americans have politicized the events of 1915 in lieu of seeking the full truth. By playing their game, Obama and Clinton wander from history, fan the flames of division, and stray ever farther from what they purport to be about: change from past myopia, folly, or pettiness.
He goes on to write that Turkey open its archives (for research) years ago. The Armenian archives, on the other hand, remain closed. Why don’t Armenians open their archives? Well, the reason is simple: Armenians misbehaved tremendously before, during and after the first World War. The world doesn’t have to know that, of course. Those who want to spend time investigating this matter know so nonetheless, but if the Armenian archives contradict the Armenian claims (and propaganda), well, they’ve got a problem.
So, that’s why many people who know a bit about this issue think the Armenians refuse to open their archives (interestingly enough, they continue to say that Turkey has to open its archives, even though Turkey has opened them; it’s all part of the propaganda war).
Fein also writes that if Armenians want reconciliation, they should open up the archives. The problem with this kind of reasoning is, of course, that Armenian lobbyists don’t want reconciliation. They want money and lands.
However; at the moment that Armenia understands that this isn’t going to happen, then - and only then - they might be willing to reconcile with Turkey. In order for that to happen, Fein writes, the US should stop functioning as a mouthpiece for Armenian propagandists. The US shouldn’t be an activist, it should play “the role of facilitator.”
The next president, he writes, should be a person who understands that. Not a person who’s willing to condemn Turkey for something that happened before Turkey existed and who doesn’t understand the difference between a tremendous tragedy with many deaths (on both sides) and genocide.
Well said Bruce.
Share and Enjoy:
Comments
1
Harb
March 13, 2008
The issue of whether or not a genocide was committed by the Ottoman Empire against their Armenian Citizens has been decided. The International Association of Genocide Scholars has determined it to be a genocide. It seems that Clinton and Obama are courageously standing against genocide denial despite the fallout with Turkey.
2
raffi
March 13, 2008
i don’t think that for obama and clinton, it’s an issue of courage, but rather of votes. either way, the content of this article is total bullox. it is true that the turkish archives are open, no one disputes this, however, it is a question of ‘what’ is open. though technically you may enter through the doors, the number of articles that one may read are quite restricted, mostly because turkish scholars must go over them first. now, about the armenian archives of 1915, i find it rather difficult to see how mr. fein wants them open. he must not have realised that in 1915, armenia did not exist, for it was under ottoman occupation for the last 400 years. records have been kept, however, and today’s modern republic of armenia’s archives are quite open. it is interesting to note that mr. fein places all armenians in the same boat, as if they were one thinking block. he seems to be sure that all armenians are sleeper agents, part of a global conspiracy to soil the ‘good name’ of the turkish state. it is unsafe to say that all armenians just want land and money. the land issue has nothing to do with the genocide, as it is related to the sevres treaty, and compensation is not such a bad thing to be sure, the jewish state was built on german money after all. how easy is it to say that armenians are some sort of money hungry creatures. many times over, armenian families of genocide victims have gone to court to retrieve their insurance money. however, after winning, they were only payed a tiny fraction of what was owed, but to the armenians it was not the monitary value that counted, but rather the symbolic value. thus it is my opinion that bruce fein is living in a kemalist fantasy world. also it must be noted that politics are what create history, so for turks to claim that armenians are trying to ‘politicise a historical issue’ is quite wrong.
3
Richard
March 13, 2008
Interesting piece from the "Resident Scholar for the Turkish Coalition of America. Prior to this position, Mr. Fein was also resident scholar at the Assembly of Turkish American Associations and a columnist for the Turkish Times".
He repeats a few inaccuracies though. Armenia’s archives are open and accessible. The various Ottoman and Turkish archives have been progressively opened in recent years although some still remain restricted and there is evidence of "cleansing".
The U.S.A. should be putting more pressure on Turkey to end its blockade of Armenia and re-establish diplomatic relations with this tiny country. Armenia has offered to do so without pre-conditions. This is the way forward to reconciliation.
4
Nihat
March 13, 2008
There wasn’t Armenia in those years, so there are no Armenian archives to speak of. That’s a good one…
5
Harut
March 13, 2008
When you have thousands upon thousands of Armenians who are living today all over the world, who did not see any grandparents, any aunts, any uncles, any cousins because all were massacred by the Turks, this are the Armenian archives. When you have both of your parents growing up after the 1915 Genocide with out any relatives, this is the Armenian archives. And also to mention that this archives have mouths and this archives do speak. And times this archives speak very loud. And even when there time is up and they have to pass on, their off springs in multiple numbers will be continuing to be the old and new archives.
The Bible says:
John
I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds.
6
Jason
March 13, 2008
Because so many (more than 60% of all comments on this thread) of those who disagree have shown themselves unwilling or unable to do so without using racial and ethnic slurs and baseless accusations of corruption, comments have been deleted and this comments thread has been closed.
Let this be a warning to those who would use racial, religious, and national slurs and baseless accusations in the future as well. If you do it, your comments will be deleted, threads closed, and you may be banned.
If you can disagree civilly, without name-calling, without bigotry, and without accusations of corruption, you are welcome and encouraged to comment.
