Will You Continue To Be A Spectator or Support Secil Askoy with your Comments Here?
In last month's issue, the article 'Turkish Denial Drowns Out Sounds Of Genocidal Past' elicited a strong response. To that end, The Wright Times found it essential to share the other side of a very polarizing story. To view the article that inspired this piece view our back issues
During World War I, many began pointing fingers at the Ottoman . . Empire, accusing it of unspeakable horrors: genocide against the Armenian people. The modern Turkish state has been forced to bear the burden, but when examined from the viewpoint of the Genocide Convention, some events in history need to be recalled.
The Turkish traditions have justice and preservation, and the study of Turkish history shows no trace of genocide. The government has always coexisted with people of different cultures and origins. This is a feature acquired by living with different cultures for long periods throughout its history.
Armenian deaths were a tragedy in World War I, but they were not genocide. The Armenian population was in rebellion against Ottoman Turks. Armenian soldiers abandoned the Turkish army and sided with Russian invaders. There are more than 50 documents supporting the fact that Armenians massacred part of the Turkish population while the army moved away from the Russian invasion. When the Turks took the upper hand, almost 200,000 Armenians feared revenge from the progressing Turkish army; they fled to Caucasus with the Russians. In the region of Guba, thousands of Turkish Azeris and Jews were murdered.
The Ottomans were at war with an obligation to win and protect the local population simultaneously. Armenians collaborated with the invaders according to Armenians in Ottoman Documents (1915 - 1920), The Turkish Republic Prime Ministry General Directorate Of The State Archives Publication. That led to their evacuation from the areas that might have weakened the Ottomans' movement against Russia. Official documents show that the army was instructed to provide them with food and supplies on their forced march. Warnings were sent to the military commanders that neither the Kurds nor any other Muslims should use the situation to seek revenge. A special commission was established to safeguard the property of the banished population and to provide for their return when the crisis was over. But what happened was far from what was planned. The army, in almost total disarray, couldn't protect the expellees and food was almost nonexistent. The tragedy was horrific, but it was not planned by the government to wipe out the Armenian population. The fact that Polish and German Jews fled to Turkey in the late 1930's speaks volumes. 20 to 25 years after this so-called genocide, endangered people preferred Turkey for seeking asylum and finding safety?
The chief authority is Bernard Lewis at Princeton. He told a French newspaper that there is no document proving the genocidal intentions of the Ottoman government, and on the matter of definition, "It depends what you mean by genocide." His reward for this was being sued in the French courts. Every historian who tried to speak up has faced vicious attacks and attempts to stop their publications. French parliaments are passing a law to outlaw the research of these events at the cost of a year in prison and a heavy fine. This is a ridiculous and contemptible business, bad history, and worse politics.
The Turkish government is not in denial. In fact, the government actually proposed the establishment of a Joint Commission of Historians ensuring full access to all its archives. On March 28, 2007 the Turkish deputy prime minister and Foreign minister Abdullah Gul reaffirmed this offer. "We eagerly await a positive response from Armenia, agreeing to establish this joint commission and declaring its readiness to accept its conclusions...I hereby extend an invitation to any third country, including the United States, to contribute to this commission by appointing scholars who will earnestly work to shed light on these tragic events and open ways for us to come together." The Consul General Republic of Turkey, U. Kenan Ipek said, "Come and find the truth! Or we come to you, we'll discuss it." He also said, "We Turks feel very secure, we are proud of our history, we have nothing to be ashamed of and nothing to hide. There will be maybe more accusations, [but] we are here! And we try to encourage everybody to discuss historical facts openly. Judging about history is not the judge of politicians but the historians."
But the Turkish government is still waiting for Armenians to come forward and agree to a joint commission. Why does the world want to leave the accusations alone now, only after the Turkish government calls the world to look at their documents and facts? Everyone should unearth the truth about what happened in 1915 together. Truth about the past, present, and future can only come out when the world gets together.
By: Secil Askoy
Posted: 2/1/08 © Copyright 2008 The Wright Times
Comments (1 - 50 of 50)
simon manoyan
posted 2/15/08 @ 8:56 AM CST
Dear editors,
Being democratic country, we have no choice but offer equal opportunities to both the victims and victimizers and this is the way it should be! However Turkey does not reciprocate the notion . As shown in (as recent as ) January 19 2007 , when a journalist , Hrant Dink, a Turkish citizen of Armenian descent was assassinated for using the term "Genocide". It is a crime to use the word GENOCIDE in Turkey and it is punishable by imprisonment, fines and in some cases death! This case is being tried in Turkish courts these days and it seems that this journalist was assassinated by Deep Government or government within government ( I am using the Turkish terminology)groups with knowledge of the government.
The article published "Turkey is Haunted by Phantom History" was interesting to read. The author is unable to detach herself from her nationality and introduces her personal bias throughout the article.
She starts out to imply that the present day Turkish Republic is not an extension of the Ottoman Empire ( even though it is), then she she contradicts herself and goes on to defend the actions of the Ottoman Empire. She says that Armenians rebelled and massacred Turks even though numerically this is not possible( population of Armenians 3 Million, population of Turk 28 to 35 million). She should know that Armenians were never allowed to carry weapons and have never been trained as soldiers. They were mostly scientist, teachers , priests, doctors , engineers, businessman, tradespersons, craftsman and mostly peasant farmers. She says that Ottoman soldiers of Armenian descent rebelled against the Ottoman army, this was not possible simply because they were used as labor battalions and as pack animals i.e., carry equipment, digging ditches, trenches etc because in their eyes mules, horses were more valuable than Armenians.
Then she quotes Kenan Ipek who is a Turkish beauracrat who has been trained to deny the Armenian Genocide and even if he wants to admit that Armenian Genocide occurred ,he can not because it is a crime punishable at least by imprisonment. When interviewed by British newspaperman Kemal Ataturk (1919) stated that what happened to Armenians was a shame and crime against humanity and gave a total figure of 800,000 (Turkish habit of halving the value, total is estimated to be 1.6 million) Armenians were killed which included the old, young, women, men and children. She mentions Bernard Lewis of Princeton University although she neglects to mention that he works for the present day Turkish Government. Bernard Lewis in his 1962 book "the Emergence of Modern Turkey" , he describes the Armenian Genocide as " Armenian Holocaust" and gives a figure of 1.5 million to 2 million Armenians were killed by the so called Young Turks government (UPC:Union and Progress Committee) which was comprised of Enver, Talat and Cemal Pashas(generals). Later on the members of the UPC joined the government of Turkish Republic. After he was retained by Turkish Government, Bernard Lewis recanted his research and said that he made an error and "Armenian Holocaust " did not occur. He was tried by French Courts in late 1998-99 and found guilty of revisionism
and dening a historical fact and he was permanently banned from publishing books, and articles in France. He lost a lot of credibility among the academic circles as is Stanford Shaw(married to Turkish woman Ecel Kural Shaw), Justin McCarthy, Norman Stone and many more hired guns by Turkish Government.
Author also conveniently omits to mention that the Turkish Archives have been purged (burned, shredded and destroyed) at least three times and no longer contains any factual documents. She suggests that commission to study the Genocide and Turkey was waiting for a response from the Armenian Government. This is like German Goevernment suggesting that Holocaust be reconsideredand restudied. How many times a commission must be formed to study the Armenian Genocide? There are at least 126 scholars from International Association of Genocide Scholars ( some are Turkish) unequivocally stated that the events of 1915 is in fact was a Genocide and it was planned and executed by Ottoman Government/Young Turks. This is an undisputable fact and forming another commission to re-study will not serve any purpose since Turkey will not accept any conclusion other that its own or the one it likes.
In 2005, a small circle of Genocide scholars wanted to meet in Turkey's Bogazici University, the meeting was cancelled by Turkish Government and later on held a meeting comprised of unscruppled so called genocide researches. It is a shame the author who is of a Turkish descent neglects the journalistic ethics and introduces false information about internationally accepted historical fact. If nothing else, she should research some of the Turkish genocide scholars, who after reseaching the Turkish Archives and international archives came to the conclusion that the Armenian Genocide is an undeniable fact. These scholars are too numerous to mention, however one could start with Taner Akcam, Soner Yalcin, Murat Belge, Yasar Kendal, Ipek Calislar, Sevket Sureyya Aydemir, and General Kazim Karabekir etc...
In conclusion, Turkey should not be haunted by phantom history, afterall phantom means imaginary, fabricated and non-existent.... it should however be haunted by its own actual history. Even as we speak, Turkey oppressing its minorities(what is left of them). In environment, we need even the lowliest creatures ...let alone the humans. Respectfully
Simon Manoyan
L. Saryan
posted 2/15/08 @ 5:36 PM CST
This writer is confusing cause and effect. In 1914, the Turkish Ottoman leaders threw in their lot with the Kaiser, and proceeded to invade the Caucasus at the start of winter. Enver's army was decimated in the snow, losing close to 100,000 men, and Turks proceeded to blame the Armenians, rather than accept responsibility for their stupid blunder. In late 1914 Armenian men were drafted and then killed, in early 1915 Armenian intellectuals were rounded up and murdered. No sensible person would consider Armenian women, children, and the elderly a military threat, but nevertheless hundreds of thousands of peaceful Ottoman Armenian citizens, including women, children, and the infirm, were deported from their villages (some in war zones and some hundreds of miles away from the war zone) into the burning Syrian desert. It was a colossal crime, and we have mounds of documents and eyewitness accounts to prove that it actually happened.
The Armenians were victimized long before they fought back.
The real question is, why this continuing hatred for the Armenians? You destroyed the Armenian nation, 1.5 million defenseless people, and yet you are not satisfied? Are you humans, or as the Greek Archbishop described you, just eastern barbarians??
Suheyla
posted 2/23/08 @ 4:40 AM CST
Here is an Armenian source disproving lies that Armenians were innocent citizens. Their commander, Armen Garo boasts about how they beat up Turkish Army and number of volunteers that sided with Russians;
From "Why Armenia Should be Free, Armenia's Role in the Present War" by Dr. Garegin Pastermadjian - Armen Garo, Boston, Hairenik Publishing Company, 1918, Section 'Military Services Rendered [by the Armenians] on the Caucasian Front' - pp 20-23:
[After Russia declared war on Turkey] The first serious offensive took place in the beginning of December 1914 when Enver Pasha attempted to reach Tiflis by shattering the right wing of the Russian Army... The offensive was planned with great care, and had great chances of success if all the three wings of the Turkish army had reached their objectives on time... [one of the wings] The ninth army corps, in three days and without difficulty, reached Ardahan, where the local Muslim inhabitants assisted in every possible way. [HINT: minority Christian Armenian citizens sided with the invading Russian forces]. The tenth army corps, during its march from Olti to Sarikamish, suffered a delay of 24 hours in the Barduz Pass, due to the heroic resistance of the FOURTH BATTALION OF THE ARMENIAN VOLUNTEERS which made up the Russian reserve. This delay of 24 hours enabled the Russians to concentrate a sufficient force around Sarikamish (which had been left entirely undefended) and thereby force back the ninth corps of the Turkish Army... if the Turkish Army corps had reached Sarikamish 24 hours earlier, as was expected, it would have confronted only one battalion of Russian reserves, and that without artillery. This was the invaluable service rendered to the Russian Army by the fourth battalion of the Armenian volunteers under the command of the matchless Keri. Six hundred Armenian veterans fell in the Barduz Pass [causing demise of 30,000 Turkish soldiers] and at such a high price saved 60,000 Russians from being taken prisoners by the Turks. This great service of the Armenians to the Russian army was announced at the time by Enver Pasha himself, when he returned to Constantinople immediately after his defeat. From that time on the Government at Constantinople laid the blame of his defeat at the door of the Armenians [JUSTIFIABLY SO!].
There are three more such military interventions explicitely admitted to in this book. All before the order to deport all Armenian from the war front was taken by the Ottoman Government.
And yet their grand children claim to be innocent citizens. SHAMEFUL LIARS!..
Suheyla
posted 2/23/08 @ 4:59 AM CST
Continuing from the same source, p.19: "The Armenian reservists, about 160,000 in number, gladly responded to the call... Besides the regular soldiers, nearly, 20,000 volunteers expressed their readiness to take up arms against the Turks... The price of one rifle, which was 100 rubles ($50), rose to 1500 rubles ($750)... out of the 20,000 Armenian volunteers who responded the call, only 7,000 were given arms; the [Russian] authorities objected that they had no rifles ready, while a few months later the same administration distributed 24,000 rifles to the Kurds in Persia and in the district of Van... Under these trying conditions commenced the Russo-Turkish war and the Armenian-Russian co-operation on the Caucasian front in the Autumn of 1914."
These are not fabricated like the false evidence of Armenians. They are written by the Armenian Revolutionary leader, Garegin Pastermadjian who operated under the name Armen Garo [Garo means hero in Armenian] and published in Boston in 1918. How can Armenians of today shamelessly build fabricated evidence to claim they were innocent?
Suheyla
posted 2/23/08 @ 5:19 AM CST
Other sources, like Boghos Nubar Pasha as head of the Armenian Delegation during the peace conference said the same things;
"On August 3, 1914, i.e. three months before Turkey precipitated the war with Russia, all able-bodied Armenian men ... were conscripted in the Ottoman army," The ARMENIAN SOLDIERS DESERTED IN DROVES to the enemy, taking their weapons with them... which is what led to the disarming of the ones still remaining in the Ottoman army.
Most of these traitors went off to Russia to join the Czarist Armenian army of 150,000, the number Boghos Nubar presented in his 1919 Times of London letter, attempting to prove to the Peace Conference that the Armenians were "belligerents de facto." ("...Since they indignantly refused to side with Turkey," Nubar added. Of course he's referring to the Armenians within the Ottoman Empire.) Ottoman-Armenians also treacherously joined the other 50,000, according to Nubar, who largely fought as a "fifth column," "operating in Turkish Army's Rear," as the New York Times reported.
"I must emphasize the fact, unhappily known to few, that ever since the beginning of the war the Armenians fought by the side of the Allies on all fronts." Boghos Nubar, 1919 Times of London letter.
As World War I threatened and the Ottoman Army mobilized, Armenians who should have served their country instead took the side of the Russians. The Ottoman Army reported: "From Armenians with conscription obligations those in towns and villages East of the Hopa-Erzurum-Hinis-Van line did not comply with the call to enlist but have proceeded East to the border to join the organization in Russia." The effect of this is obvious: If the young Armenian males of the "zone of desertion" had served in the Army, they would have provided more than 50,000 troops. If they had served, there might never have been a Sarikamish defeat.
suheyla
posted 2/23/08 @ 5:48 AM CST
Hovhannes Katchaznouni, First Prime Minister of the short lived (1918-1920) Armenian Republic, presented to the Dashnaq Party Congress in 1923; "Historical events have their irrefutable logic. In the Fall of 19114 Armenia volunteer units organized themselves and fought against the Turks because they could not refrain themselves from organizing and refrain themselves form fighting. This was an inevitable result of a psychology on which the Armenian people had nourished themselves during an entire generation... It is useless, today, to question who is responsible for the WRONGS... Bishop Mesrop, A. Hatisov, Dr. Zhavriev, S. Artuniov, Dro and Andranic... At the present time it is important to register only the evidence that WE DID PARTICIPATE in that volunteer movement to the largest extent and we did that contrary to the decision and the will of the General Meeting of the Party... We had no doubt that the war would end with the complete victory of the Allies; Turkey would be defeated and dismembered, and its Armenian population would be liberated... We had embraced Russia whole-heartedly without any compunction. Without any positive basis of fact, we believed that the Tsarist government would grant us a more-or-less broad self-government in the Caucasus and in the cities liberated from Turkey as a reward for our loyalty, our efforts and assistance... We had created a dense atmosphere of illusion in our minds. We had implanted our own desires into the minds of others; we had lost our sense of reality and were carried away with our dreams. From mouth to mouth, from ear to ear passed mysterious words purported to have been spoken in the palace of the Viceroy; attention was called to some kind of a letter sent by Vorontzov-Dashkov to the Catholikos, as an important documents in our hands to be used in the presentation of our rights and claims – a cleverly composed letter with very indefinite sentences and generalities which might be interpreted in any manner, according to one's desire. We overestimated the ability of the Armenian people, their political and military power and overestimated the extent and importance of the services our people rendered to the Russians. And by overestimating our very modest worth and merit, we were naturally exaggerating our hopes and expectations."
Simon Manoyan
posted 2/26/08 @ 8:27 AM CST
Suheyla (without a last name)is defending the ottoman empire as if it was the victim of crimes against the humanity. In essence she defending the Turkish Government by quoting the Turkish Government sources mostly, fabriacted at that! US Archives are full of documents not in 50's but thousands of documents stating the opposite view of the turkish view. If we were to believe the the turkish fabrications , then the whole world is lying right Suheyla? Why don't you read what is left of your own archives and stop fabricating lies upon lies! In 1914, Enver who only became a general after marrying sultan's niece, Naciye and to feed his megolamaniacal ego, he attacked the Russian thinking this would be an easy kill. He did not have the tactical knowledge or planning capabilities to be succesfull at his inane attack at Sarikamis during a very harsh winter. He lost close to 100 to 120 thousand men because he was not prepaired. He was saved by his Armenian soldiers and he rewarded them by decapitating the whole of their nation . Again, during 1914 Young turks transported 2 to 3 Million converted turks from Balkans to replace the Armenians removed from Anotolia. Not one of them were killed , or died from the conditions whereas Armenian died in millions(1.5 million at least). Turkey is guilty of these crimes when it denies the genocide and genocide continues as denial continues. Sources: Robert Melson,Robert J. Lifton,Samantha Powers, Henry Morganthau( US Ambassodor to Turkey in 1915, Johannes Lepsius, General Liman Von Sanders, Hilmar Kaiser, Taner Akcam, Bernard Lewis (in his 1962 book)General Kazim Karabekir to list some of very long list.
S Manoyan
posted 2/28/08 @ 8:10 AM CST
Robert Melson calls Armenian Genocide was a prototype for holocaust and other Genocides and the turkish behavior of denying the Armenian Genocide is readyly being used by Rwandan, Sudanese and others. In many ways turkey invented the genocide and continues to this day. Upon Russian advice,the red sultan Abdulhamit committed the first genocide in 1894-1896 murdering at least 200,000 Armenians in eastern provinces this was considered as bloodletting. Germans commited their first genocide in 1904 by murdering 100,000 Harero's in Afrika.Then in 1909 they murdered 30,000 Armenians in Adana(Sevket Sureyya Aydemir Turkish historian says this number should be 17,000)to change economic hands, they looted Armenian and Greek businesses and burned christian sections of the town. Upon German Kaiser Wilhem III's advice (by the way, Wilhem was considered clinically mad and supported Hitler's plan exterminating the Jews. Source Margaret MacMillan)the leader of the young Turks government, Talat, Enver and Cemal Pashas to decided on final solution; Armenian Genocide of 1914 to 1923. Wilhem's goal was to empty the Armenian settlements in East in order replace it with his Jewish population. So when Suheyla and Aksoy write untruths about the Armenian genocide, they in fact perpetuating the genocide and in essence do not know their own history simply because they were not allowed to read their history. Do they know that Turkey murdered 750,000 Assyrians, and 2 million Greeks were deported in 1920s and chirstians were heavily taxed in 1942 (Varlik Vergisi), September 6-7 1955 events were christian businesses, churches cemeteries burned, looted and vandalized. Before you scream BIG LIARS!!! learn your history and learn it from other sources not from your governments false truths.
jude erk
posted 2/29/08 @ 2:47 AM CST
It seems that there is a lot of confusion and I think some people confuse the cause and effect, indeed. Of course, if you look only one side of a conflict and ognore the others side and worse, just censor it, by calling it "government propaganda" supposedly you discredit the speaker. Do these people think Armenians were not trying to fight to declare their independence? Did they not burn village after village of poor helpless women and children, just because they were moslems? Did they not wear Russian and French uniforms and killed civilians? Armenians (like other christian minorities) were exempt from military. That gave the Russians and French who were fighting the Ottomans a perfect opportunity to arm the Armenian gangs. I wonder how would we feel if our neighbor pciked up the gun and started killing us and our families because the Russian Army was here. WHat happens after the Russian Army leaves? Do you go back to your peaceful ways? That made me think that there is more to this than meets the eye. As far as I remember, Armenians have tried to attract attention to their version of events, yet have never wanted to hear the other side. I wondered, why?
Comparisons to the Holocaust makes me angry as Holocaust earned its place in history after a thorough investigation, even when there was clear physical and scientific evidence, in addition to un-disputed documentary evidence. What has the Armenian community done in this regard? All I have heard and seen is that they have censored the Turks and prevented them from any debate or inspection of the "evidence against them." WHY?
In America we are innocent until proven guilty. Why the double standard when it comes to Ottomans (and Turks)? They have never been proven guilty. Just condemned based on unproven Armenian claims! Moreover, there are plenty of historians around the world who disagree with the Armenian claims. Oh by the way< Ottoman Archives were taken over and combed by the British to find eveidence of war crimes (not even genocide claims), and British came back empty handed. Armenian story is nothing, but an invented event to keep Armenians from being assimilated in western cultures.
jude erk
posted 2/29/08 @ 2:59 AM CST
To Mr. Manoyan-
And who tempted the first tribal war? Ottomans?
And who tempted the Crusades? Ottomans?
And who tempted the Genocide of Azeris at the hands of Armenians as recently as 1992? Ottomans?
Who started the WWI? The Ottomans?
Who committed real genocide against the Native Americans, indigenous people of the New World? Ottomans?
Let's get real.
Regarding the Holocaust- while the Turkish Diplomats were giving false passports to protect the Jews and take the Jews to Turkey (as they have also done during the Spanish Inquisition), Armenians were busy killing and butchering the Jews with their 40,000 strong columns serving Hitler.
SMANOYAN
posted 2/29/08 @ 6:57 AM CST
Jude Erk,
Please use your turkish propaganda to those who do not know anything about the topic! Did your counselate write this for you? Are you getting a scholarship from turkish government if not you should be getting a hefty scholarship fro them soon. This tactic has been used by turk before and will be used by them again in the future. Azeries were nevered massacred, however they tried to do the samething as turks did throughout their history ethnic cleansing in Karabagh region where the population was 99 % was Armenian. They were not successful and did you thing we were going to die as we did in 1915? Why don't you read recent turkish papers and see what they do to minorities as we speak. Presently they killing off KURDs and so far they burned at least 3000 Kurdish villages and while you are at it, why don't you go back to 1974 and read about invasion of the Cyprus. By the way these cowards only attcak the weak, unarmed and infirmed. Turkey is guilty of committing many genocide and as long as we corrupt minds and people with no integrety like some the commenters we have seen here, they will get away with it. As for Crusades, why don't you blame those who actually did it!
As for gangs of Armenians protecting themselves, did you want them to do nothing as turks prefer...weak, infirm, old, woman, child because thats how they prefer their enemies(supposed). As for comparison of holocaust to Armenian Genocide, Armenians did not do this comparison but scholars of many nations did. Do you know who Yair Auron is or Robert Melson, Andrew Goldberg, Israel Charny, Linda Mlevern,Eric Weitz Stephen Feinstein,Marc I. Sherman or John Lifton...no? They are Israeli Scholars and yes they are Jewish and they are the ones who are comparing the Armenian Genocide to Jewish Holocaust! Why don't stop making inane and stupid comments and learn your history ! Turkey is now invading Iraq. Do you know why? it is not because of so called few Kurdish guerillas or terrorist. It is because it wants get its hands on Mosul Kerkuk where the oil is. They killing innocent civilians.
Let us assume that some sectors of the Armenains were rebeling against the mistreatment by Ottomans, di they have to kill all Armenians? Did they have kill the children? They were not killing anyone, the old and the sick and women did not kilk anyone, why were theykilled? What about German, American Archives and Ataturk's Grand Speech, did you read them? Ataturk mentions the genocide in his Grand speech. As per assertion, we should all believe that whole world came together conspire against the turks and Turkey? This is inane and you are denialist sir/madam and you have a good financial future ahead of you...as others have been awarded by Turkey you probably will also be awarded. Turkey IS GUILTY and HAVE been LYING to the world and they will continue to lie in the future.
caner
posted 2/29/08 @ 1:49 PM CST
secil harikas?n,süper bir ?ey yapm??s?n
Colin Schermerhorn
posted 3/01/08 @ 3:56 AM CST
Hi, I wrote the article that prompted Ms. Aksoy's response. While she and I don't see eye to eye on this particular subject, we've agreed to disagree and actually get along quite well. I think agreeing to disagree is the best way to go here. :-D
S Manoyan
posted 3/03/08 @ 6:53 AM CST
Originally posted by
Colin Schermerhorn
Hi, I wrote the article that prompted Ms. Aksoy's response. While she and I don't see eye to eye on this particular subject, we've agreed to disagree and actually get along quite well. I think agreeing to disagree is the best way to go here. :-D
Your article have educated some of the people and brought the blind prejudice of turkish governmenet and as seen in some of the turkish commenters in turkish that they ignorant to facts and blinded by their government's fabrications of so called facts. They not only not stopped committing crimes against Christian minorities even today, and they will continue to do so in the future. They have been killing Kurdish civilians and burning their villages andbragging about in their newspapers.They attacked the No-Fly Zone in Iraq created in 1991 by US Armed Forces and have many civilians on the pretense of hunting terrorists. The issue of Armenian GENOCIDE will not go away no matter how many fabricated articles written by turks, persons with many aliasses and congratulating each other in turkish. Because Armenian Genocide is a fact and Turkey is guilty of crimes against the whole humanity. I am glad that there are ethical journalist exist in the world although not in Turkey! I have suggested to each of the commenters to go out of the box created Turkey and actually research the facts. Turkey has a habit of hiring unscruppled so called researches by paying them enourmous amount of money, setting of chairs in various US universities and design the research for these departments. I have named some them and there more popping up every day. They do this by using US Aid and they are the one of the largest receipients of the US Foreign aid.
In the words of YOSSI SARID( former education minister of Israel and Yair Auron Professor in Teacher College in Israel, " Shame on you Turkey!" You are criminals and it shows in turkish comments.
caner
posted 3/01/08 @ 2:25 PM CST
you are perfect,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,caner
caner
posted 3/01/08 @ 2:26 PM CST
perfect
Fred Teifeld
posted 3/05/08 @ 8:02 PM CST
History should be left to historians. To blame Turkey and/or the Turkish people for what may or may not have happened is about as short sighted and ignorant as African Americans expecting you or I to apologize for slavery. The genocide that happened during WWII is documented and has been proven over and over. Where is the proof of the so-called Armenian Genocide?
I am not saying it did not happen- I am asking where is the proof?
SM
posted 3/12/08 @ 7:13 AM CST
Is there a proof offering that the Armenian Genocide did not occur? Answer is positively NO! That is waht Turkey is doing now...fabricating evidence! As for proof, yes there are tons of eveidence proving the Armenian Genocide.You can start by US State Archives, US Ambassador Henry Morganthau's official records and pick any country in the world and look at their archives. You may even read Zionism founder Theodore Herzle's condolence offering, read Golda Meir's memoir and most IMPORTANTLY read RAphael Lemkin's research of GENOCIDE of Armenians. He is the fellow who created the word GENOCIDE and he is the fellow who defined the word for UN and because of him we have laws on genocide. You see he was a Polish Jurist who attended the trial of SOghomon Terliryan (who killed talat pasha in brooad daylight in order avenge his family's murder by Turks in 1915)in Germany as a young law student. You can read Franz Werfel's Forty days in Musa Dagh which many ghetto inhabitants used to protect themselves from the Nazis in 1945's Germany, you go back to our president George W. Bush's canpaign promise of recognizing the Armenain Genocide in 1999 and you can president Reagan's and Michail Gorbachev's joint statment of recognizing the Armenian Genocide. You read at leat 30 to 35 US states goverments recognition of the Armenian Genocide. By the way Franz Werfel and Raphale Lemkin are both Jewish too. So if you are looking for proof, don't just take Armenians wordand most specifically Turkish word. Ask any criminal, they'll deny their crime. Turkish propaganda is no different than any common criminal's denial.
Just because you do not know about the Genocide, does not mean it did not happen! When you assume, you make an ... you complete the rest.
Originally posted by
Fred Teifeld
History should be left to historians. To blame Turkey and/or the Turkish people for what may or may not have happened is about as short sighted and ignorant as African Americans expecting you or I to apologize for slavery. The genocide that happened during WWII is documented and has been proven over and over. Where is the proof of the so-called Armenian Genocide?
I am not saying it did not happen- I am asking where is the proof?
Colin Schermerhorn
posted 3/05/08 @ 9:11 PM CST
Re: Fred Teifeld
In my experience with the matter, I don't think the big problem is that Turkey did something. For me, it's that they have no interest in even acknowledging what happened. If it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck, it's a duck.
suheyla
posted 3/06/08 @ 3:24 PM CST
The only duck which looks like 'genocide' that I saw in my life time is the Armenian atrocities carried on the Azeri Turks. It happened only 15 years ago. There was no World War, no imperialist attacks on either country, but the Armenians started an unprovoked attack on their neighboring Azerbaijan.
This happened, and the whole world followed it on their TV screens. Any takers?
suheyla
posted 3/06/08 @ 3:52 PM CST
Dear Simon (with a last name):
Which establishment are you defending is quite obvious to those of us who know relevant history. Here is another Armenian source telling the truth about the Dashnaqsutiun that you are blind sighted about.
From "Patriotism Perverted", written by: Kapriel Serope Papazian, Boston, Baikar Press, 1934. From the preface:
"An understanding of the background, past activities, the purposes and the methods of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation may be important, if we are going to try and rid the Armenian-American community life, of the predatory inclination of this society. Its mode of organization, its discordant mental make up as expressed in its publications, its belief in the use of violence rather than persuasionand free discussion to overcome opposition, its tendency to disregard and distort the will of the majority in dealing with public issues"...
So far, I have cited only Armenian sources, but you keep blabbering that I am writing on behalf of the Turkish or the long gone Ottoman government. Your method is similar to that of the Dashnaqsutiun. You are a mud slinger with no coherent arguments. You are name calling, but so far have not presented any evidence to prove that the said events fit the UN definition of geno-
SECIL AKSOY
posted 3/06/08 @ 5:26 PM CST
" DID THE TURKS TAKE THE LANDS OF THE ARMENIANS
BY FORCE ?
The territory in which the Armenians lived together for a time never was ruled by them as an independent, sovereign state. This territory was ruled by others from the earliest times from which there is evidence that Armenians lived there. From 521 to 344 B.C. it was a province of Persia. From 334 to 215 B.C. it was part of the Macedonian Empire. From 215 to 190 B.C. it was controlled by the Selephkites. From 190 until 220 A.D. it frequently changed hands between the Roman Empire and the Parthians. From 220 until the start of the fifth century it was a Sassanian province, and from then until the seventh century it belonged to Byzantium. From the seventh to the tenth centuries it was controlled by the Arabs. It returned again to Byzantine rule in the tenth century and, finally, it came under the domination of the Turks starting in the eleventh century.
The Armenians living in this territory who remained under the rule of these various empires, could not continuously maintain any sort of independent or unified Armenian state. At the most, a few Armenian noble families dominated certain districts as feudal vassals of the neighboring imperial suzerains, serving as buffers between the powerful empires that surrounded them. Most of these Armenian "principalities" were, thus, simply set up by local Armenian nobles within their own feudal dominions, or by the neighboring empires, who in this way secured their military services against their enemies. The best example of this was the Baghratid family, long brought forward by Armenian nationalist historians as an example of their historic independent existence, which was in fact put in charge of its territory by the Arab Caliphs. Some of the "Armenian" families which assumed the title of principality at this time were, moreover, really Persian rather than Armenian in origin. That they did not constitute any sort of independent nation is shown in the statement of the Armenian historian Kevork Asian: "The Armenians lived as local notables. They had no feeling of national unity. There were no political bonds or ties among them. Their only attachments were to the neighboring notables. Thus whatever national feelings they had were local.'\I} These Armenian principalities existed for centuries under the control of various great empires and states, often changing sides to secure maximum advantage, and thus earning for Armenians often caustic and critical remarks from contemporary historians, as for example the Roman historian Tacitus, who in his Annalium liber wrote:
"The Armenians change their position relating to Rome and the Persian Empire, sometimes supporting one and sometimes the other", concluding that they are "a strange people."
(2) ASLAN, Kevork, L'Armenie et les Armeniens, Istanbul, 1914. It was as a result of these conditions, and then, the Armenians' lack of unity and strength, their very failure to create a real state, their weakness in relation to their neighbors, the fact that the territory in which they lived was the scene of constant conflict among their more powerful suzerains from all sides, that they often were deported, or moved voluntarily, from the lands where they first lived when they appeared in history. Thus when they fled from the Persians they settled in the area ofKayseri, in Central Anatolia. They were deported by the Sassanians into central Iran, by the Arabs into Syria and the Arabian Peninsula, by the Byzantines into Central Anatolia and to Istanbul, Thrace, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungary, Transylvania and the Crimea. During the Crusades, they went to Cyprus, Crete and Italy. In flight from the Mongols they settled in Kazan and Astrakhan in Central Asia, and, finally, they were subsequently deported by the Russians from the Crimea and the Caucasus into the interior of Russia. As a result of these centuries-long deportations and migrations, then, the Armenians were widely scattered from Sicily to India and from the Crimea to Arabia, thus forming what they call "the Armenian diaspora" centuries before they were deported by the Ottomans in 1915.
The Armenians broke away from the Byzantine church in 451,150 years after they accepted Christianity, leading to long centuries of Armenian-Byzantine clashes which went on until the Turks settled in Anatolia starting in the late 11th century, with the Byzantines working to wipe out the Armenians and eliminate the Armenian principalities in order to maintain Greek Orthodoxy throughout their dominions. Contemporary Armenian historians report in great detail how the Byzantines deported Armenians as well as using them against enemy forces in the vanguard of the Byzantine armies. As a result of this, when the Seljuk Turks started flooding into Anatolia starting in the late llth century, they did not encounter any Armenian principalities; the only force remaining to resist them was that of Byzantium. The Seljuk ruler Alparslan captured the lands of the Armenian Principality ofAni in 1064, but it had previously been brought to an end by the Byzantine in 1045, nineteen years earlier, with Greeks being brought in to replace the Armenians who had been deported. It is therefore false to claim that the Seljuk Turks destroyed any Armenian principality, let alone a state. This already had been done by the Byzantines, and it was in fact the social and economic ferment that resulted which greatly facilitated the subsequent Turkish settlement. Contemporary Armenian historians interpret this Turkish conquest of Anatolia to have constituted their liberation from the long centuries of Byzantine misrule and oppression. The Armenian historian Asoghik thus reports that "Because of the Armenians' enmity toward Byzantium, they welcomed the Turkish entry into Anatolia and even helped them." The Armenian historian Mathias of Edessa likewise relates that the Armenians rejoiced and celebrated publicly when the Turks conquered his city, Edessa (today's Urfa).
An Armenian principality did arise in Cilicia starting in 1080 but it was the result, not of the Turkish settlement in Anatolia, as has been claimed, but, rather, of the Byzantine destruction of the last Armenian principalities in eastern Anatolia, which caused a flood of Armenians fleeing into Cilicia. This principality maintained good relations with the Turks even as it provided assistance to the Crusaders who passed through its territory on their way to the Holy Land, while accepting the suzerainty, first of Byzantium, and then after it declined, of the Crusader Kingdoms, the Mongols, and, finally, the Catholic Lusignan family which gained control of Cyprus. This sort of relationship with "unbelievers^, however, displeased the Gregorian Armenian church, with the resulting internal divisions playing a significant role in the Principality's conquest by the Mamluks of Syria and Egypt in 1375. In the end, the most significant consequence of this last Armenian principality was the establishment of a separate Armenian church from the one centered at Echmiadzin, which added to the internal divisions within Armenian Orthodoxy which remain important to the present day.
Thus when eastern Anatolia was conquered by Fatih Mehmet II and Yavuz Sultan Selim I, it was taken from the White Sheep Turkomans and from the Safavids of Iran, who had occupied it after the Byzantines had retired; while Yavuz Selim took Cilicia from the Mamluks. In no case, therefore, did the Ottoman Turks conquer or occupy an existing Armenian state or principality. In every case, these Armenians had previously been conquered by peoples other than the Turks."
Article source: ATATURK.COM
SECIL AKSOY
posted 3/06/08 @ 5:29 PM CST
HAVE THE TURKS ALWAYS ATTACKED AND MISRULED ARMENIANS THROUGHOUT HISTORY ?
Armenian propagandists have claimed that the Turks mistreated non-Muslims, and in particular Armenians, throughout history in order to provide support for their claims of "genocide" against the Ottoman Empire, since it would otherwise be difficult for them to explain how the Turks, who had lived side by side with the Armenians in peace for some 600 years, suddenly rose up to massacre them all. The Armenians moreover, have tried to interpret Turkish rule in terms of a constant struggle between Christianity and Islam, thus to assure belief in whatever they say about the Turks on the part of the modem Christian world. The evidence of history overwhelmingly denies these claims. We already have seen that the contemporary Armenian historians themselves related how the Armenians of Byzantium welcomed the Seljuk conquest with celebrations and thanksgivings to God for having rescued them from Byzantine oppression. The Seljuks gave protection to an Armenian church which the Byzantines had been trying to destroy. They abolished the oppressive taxes which the Byzantines had imposed on the Armenian churches, monasteries and priests, and in fact exempted such religious institutions from all taxes. The Armenian community was left free to conduct its internal affairs in its own way, including religious activities and deducation, and there never was any time at which Armenians or other non-Muslims were compelled to convert to Islam. The Armenian spiritual leaders in fact went to Seljuk Sultan Melikshah to thank him for this protection. The Armenian historian Mathias of Edessa relates that, ' 'Melikshah's heart is full of affection and goodwill for Christians; he has treated the sons of Jesus Christ very well, and he has given the Armenian people affluence, peace, and happiness.''(3)
After the death of the Seljuk Sultan Kilich Arslan, the same historian wrote, "Kilich Arslan's death has driven Christians into mourning since he was a charitable person of high character. "
How well the Seljuk Turks treated the Armenians is shown by the fact that some Armenian noble families like the Tashirk family accepted Islam of their own free will and joined the Turks in fighting Byzantium.
Turkish tradition and Muslim law dictated that non-Muslims should be well treated in Turkish and Muslim empires. The conquering Turks therefore made agreements with their non-OS) MATHIAS of EDESSA, Chronicles, ?.129.
Muslim subjects by which the latter accepted the status ofzhimmi, agreeing to keep order and pay taxes in return for protection of their rights and traditions. People from different religions were treated with an unprecedented tolerance which was reflected into the philosophies based on goodwill and human values cherished by great philosophers in this era such as Yunus Emre and Mevlana Celaleddin Rumi who are well-known in the Islamic world with their benevolent mottoes such as "having the same view for all 72 different nations" and "you will be welcome whoever you are, and whatever you believe in". This was in stark contrast to the terrible treatment which Christian rulers and conquerors often have meted out to Christians of other sects, let alone non-Christians such as Muslims and Jews, as for example the Byzantine persecution of the Armenian Gregorians, Venetian persecution of the Greek Orthodox inhabitants of the Morea and the Aegean islands, and Hungarian persecution of the Bogomils.
The establishment and expansion of the Ottoman Empire, and in particular the destruction of Byzantium following Fatih Mehmed's conquest of Istanbul in 1453 opened a new era of religious, political, social, economic and cultural prosperity for the Armenians as well as the other non-Muslim and Muslim peoples of the new state. The very first Ottoman ruler, Osman Bey (1300-1326), permitted the Armenians to establish their first religious center in western Anatolia, at Kutahya, to protect them from Byzantine oppression. This center subsequently was moved, along with the Ottoman capital, first to Bursa in 1326 and then to Istanbul in 1461, with Fatih Mehmet issuing a ferman definitively establishing the Armenian Patriarchate there under Patriarch Hovakim and his successors(4). As a result, thousands of Armenians emigrated to Istanbul from Iran, the Caucasus, eastern and central Anatolia, the Balkans and the Crimea, not because of force or persecution, but because the great Ottoman conqueror had made his empire into a true center of Armenian life. The Armenian community and church thus expanded and prospered as parts of the expansion and prosperity of the Ottoman Empire.
The Gregorian Armenians of the Ottoman Empire, like the other major religious groups, were organized into millet communities under their own religious leaders. Thus the ferman issued by Fatih Mehmet establishing the Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul specified that the Patriarch was not only the religious leader of the Armenians, but also their secular leader. The Armenians had the same rights as Muslims, but they also had certain special privileges, most important among which was exemption from military service. Armenians and other non-Muslims generally paid the same taxes as Muslims, with the exception of the Poll Tax (Harach or Jizye), which was imposed on them in place of the state taxes based particularly on Muslim religious law, the Alms Tax (Zakat) and the Tithe (Osur), from which non-Muslims were exempted. The Armenian millet religious leaders themselves assessed and collected the Poll Taxes from their followers and turned the collections over to the Treasury officials of the state. (4) URAS, Esat, Tarihte Ermeniler ve Ermeni Meselesi, 2nd Edition, Istanbul, 1976, p. 149. The Armenians were allowed to establish religious foundations (vakif) to provide financial support for their religious, cultural, educational and charity activities, and when needed the Ottoman state treasury gave additional financial assistance to the Armenian institutions which carried out these activities as well as to the Armenian Patriarchate itself. These Armenian foundations remain in operation to the present day in the Turkish Republic, providing substantial financial support to the operations of the Armenian church. By Ottoman law all Christian subjects who were not Greek Orthodox were included in the Armenian Gregorian millet. Thus the Paulicians and Yakubites in Anatolia as well as the Bogomils and Gypsies in the Balkans were counted as Armenians, leading to substantial disputes in later times as to the total number of Armenians actually living in the Empire. The Armenian community expanded and prospered as a result of the freedom granted by the sultans. At the same time Armenians shared, and contributed to, the Turkish-Ottoman culture and ways of life and government to such an extent that they earned the particular trust and confidence of the sultans over the centuries, gaining the attribute "the loyal millet".
Ottoman Armenians became extremely wealthy bankers, merchants, and industrialists, while many at the same time rose to high positions in governmental service. In the 19th century, for example, twenty-nine Armenians achieved the highest governmental rank of Pasha. There were twenty-two Armenian ministers, including the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Finance, Trade and Post, with other Armenians making major contributions to the departments concerned with agriculture, economic development, and the census. There also were thirty-three Armenian representatives appointed and elected to the Parliaments formed after 1826, seven ambassadors, eleven consul-generals and consuls, eleven university professors, and forty-one other officials of high rank.(5)
Over the centuries Armenians also made major contributions to Ottoman Turkish art, culture and music, producing many artists of first rank who are objects of praise and sources of pride for Turks as well as Armenians in Turkey. The first Armenian printing press was established in the Ottoman Empire in the 16th century.
Thus the Armenians and Turks, and all the various races of the Empire lived in peace and mutual trust over the centuries, with no serious complaints being made against the Ottoman system or administration which made such a situation possible. It is true that, from time to time, internal difficulties did arise within some of the individual millets. Within the Armenian millet disputes arose over the election of the patriarch between the "native" Armenians, who had come to Istanbul from Anatolia and the Crimea, and those called "eastern" or "foreign" Armenians, who came from Iran and the Caucasus. These groups often complained against (5) Facts from the Turkish Armeniens, Jamanak, Istanbul, 1980, p. 4 et KO^A§, Sadi; Tarih Boyunca Ermeniler ve Turk-Ermeni Ili§kileri, Ankara, 1967, pp. 92 -115.
each other to the Ottomans, trying to gain governmental support for their own candidates and interests, and at the same time complaining about the Ottomans whenever the decisions went against them, despite the long-standing Ottoman insistence on maintaining strict neutrality between the groups. The gradual triumph of the "easterners" led to the appointment of nonreligious individuals as Patriarchs, to corruption and misrule within the Armenian millet, and to bloody clashes among conflicting political groups, against which the Ottomans were forced to intervene to prevent the Armenians from annihilating each other.
These internal disputes, as well as the general decline of religious standards within the Gregorian millet led many Armenians to accept the teachings of foreign Catholic and Protestant missionaries sent into the Empire during the 19th century, causing the creation of separate millets for them later in the century. The Armenian Gregorian leaders asked the Ottoman government to intervene and prevent such conversions, but the Ottomans refrained from doing so on the grounds that it was an internal problem which had to be dealt with by the millet and not the state. Bloody clashes followed, with the Gregorian patriarchs Chuhajian and Tahtajian going so far to excommunicate and banish all Armenian protestants(6). Later on, serious clashes also emerged among the Armenian Catholics as to the nature of their relationship with the Pope, with the latter excommunicating all those who did not accept his supremacy, forcing the Ottomans finally to intervene and reconcile the two Catholic groups in 1888.
The freedom granted and the great tolerance shown by the Ottomans to non-Muslims was so well known throughout Europe that the empire of the sultans became a major place of refuge for those fleeing from religious and political persecution. Starting with the thousands of Jews who fled from persecution in Spain following its re-conquest in 1492, Jews fled to the Ottoman Empire from the regular pogroms to which they were subjected in Central and East Europe and Russia. Catholics and Protestants likewise fled to the Ottoman Empire, often entering the service of the sultans and making major contributions to Ottoman military and governmental life. Many of the political refugees from the reaction that followed the 1848 revolutions in Europe also fled for protection to the Ottoman Empire.
The claims that the Ottomans misruled non-Muslims in general and the Armenians in particular thus are disproved by history, as attested by major western historians, from the Armenians Asoghik and Mathias to Voltaire, Lamartine, Claude Farrere, Pierre Loti, Nogueres Hone Caetani, Philip Marshall Brown, Michelet, Sir Charles Wilson, Politis, Arnold, Bronsart, Roux, Grousset Edgar Granville Gamier, Toynbee, Bernard Lewis, Shaw, Price, Lewis Thomas, Bombaci and others, some of whom could certainly not be labelled as pro-turkish. To cite but a few of them:
(6) SCHEMSI, Kara, Turcs et Armeniens devant 1'Histoire, Geneve, Imprimerie Nationale, 1919, p. 19. Voltaire:
"The great Turk is governing in peace twenty nations from different religions. Turks have taught to Christians how to be moderate in peace and gentle in victory"
Philip Marshall Brown: "Despite the great victory they won, Turks have generously granted to the people in the conquered regions the right to administer themselves according to their own rules and traditions."
Politis who was the Foreign Minister in the Greek Government led by Prime Minister Venizelos:
"The rights and interests of the Greeks in Turkey could not be better protected by any other power but the Turks."
J. W. Arnold:
" I t is an undeniable historic fact that the Turkish armies have never interfered in the religious and cultural affairs in the areas they conquered."
German General Bronsart: "Unless they are forced, Turks are the world's most tolerant people towards those of other religions."
Even when Napoleon Bonaparte sought to stir a revolt among the Armenian Catholics of Palestine and Syria to support his invasion in 1798-1799, his Ambassador in Istanbul General Sebastian! replied that "The Armenians are so content with their lives here that this is impossible."
Article source: ATATURK.COM
SECIL AKSOY
posted 3/06/08 @ 5:35 PM CST
DID THE TURKS UNDERTAKE A PLANNED AND SYSTEMATIC MASSACRE OF THE ARMENIANS IN 1915 ?
The beginning of World War I and the Ottoman entry into the war on November 1, 1914 on the side of Germany and Austria - Hungary against the Entente powers was considered as a great opportunity by the Armenian nationalists. Louise Nalbandian relates that "The Armenian revolutionary committees considered that the most opportune time to begin a general uprising to achieve their goals was when the Ottoman Empire was in a state of war", (24) and thus less able to resist an internal attack.
Even before the war began, in August 1914, the Ottoman leaders met with the Dashnaks at Erzurum in the hope of getting them to support the Ottoman war effort when it came. The Dashnaks promised that if the Ottomans entered the war, they would do their duty as loyal countrymen in the Ottoman armies. However they failed to live up to this promise, since even before this meeting took place, a secret Dashnak Congress held at Erzurum in June 1914 had already decided to use the oncoming war to undertake a general attack against the Ottoman state(25). The Russian Armenians joined the Russian army in preparing an attack on the Ottomans as soon as war was declared. The Catholicos of Echmiadzin assured the Russian General Governor of the Caucasus, Vranzof-Dashkof, that "in return for Russia's forcing the Ottomans to make reforms for the Armenians, all the Russian Armenians would support the Russian war effort without conditions.''(26). The Catholicos subsequently was received at Tiflis by the Czar, whom he told that "The liberation of the Armenians in Anatolia would lead to the establishment of an autonomous Armenia separated from Turkish suzerainty and that this Armenia could be made possible with the protection of Russia. "(27). Of course the Russians really intended to use the Armenians to annex Eastern Anatolia, but the Catholicos was told nothing about that.
As soon as Russia declared war on the Ottoman Empire, the Dashnak Society's official organ Horizon declared:
"The Armenians have taken their place on the side of the Entente states without showing any hesitation whatsoever; they have placed all their forces at the disposition of Russia; and they also are forming volunteer battalions."(28)
(24) NALBANDIAN, Louise, op. cit., p.l 1 1.
(25) Aspirations et Agissements Revolutionnaires des Comites Armeniens avant et apres la Proclamation de la
Constitution Ottomane, Istanbul, 1917, pp.144 -146.
(26) TCHALKOUCHIAN, Gr., Le Livre Rouge, Paris, 1919, p. 12.
(27) TCHALKOUCHIAN, Gr., op. cit.
(28) URAS, Esat, op. cit, p. 594.
The Dashnak Committee also ordered its cells that had been preparing to revolt within the Ottoman Empire:
"As soon as the Russians have crossed the borders and the Ottoman armies have started to retreat, you should revolt everywhere. The Ottoman armies thus will be placed between two fires: of the Ottoman armies advance against the Russians, on the other hand, their Armenian soldiers should leave their units with their weapons, form bandit forces, and unite with the Russians.''(29)
The Hunchak Committee instructions to its organizations in the Ottoman territory were: "The Hunchak Committee will use all means to assist the Entente states, devoting all its forces to the struggle to assure victory in Armenia, Cilicia, the Caucasus and Azerbaijan as the ally of the Entente states, and in particular ofRussia."'(30)
And even the Armenian representative in the Ottoman Parliament for Van, Papazyan, soon turned out to be a leading guerilla fighter against the Ottomans, publishing a proclamation that:
"The volunteer Armenian regiments in the Caucasus should prepare themselves for battle, serve as advance units for the Russian armies to help them capture the key positions in the districts where the Armenians live, and advance into Anatolia, joining the Armenian units already there.'\?>\)
As the Russian forces advanced into Ottoman territory in eastern Anatolia, they were led by advanced units composed of volunteer Ottoman and Russian Armenians, who were joined by the Armenians who deserted the Ottoman armies and went over to the Russians. Many of these also formed bandit forces with weapons and ammunition which they had for years been stocking in Armenian and missionary churches and schools, going on to raid Ottoman supply depots both to increase their own arms and to deny them to the Ottoman army as it moved to meet this massive Russian invasion. Within a few months after the war began, these Armenian guerilla forces, operating in close coordination with the Russians, were savagely attacking Turkish cities, towns and villages in the East; massacring their inhabitants without mercy, while at the same time working to sabotage the Ottoman army's war effort by destroying roads and bridges, raiding caravans, and doing whatever else they could to ease the Russian occupation. The atrocities committed by the Armenian volunteer forces accompanying (29) HOCAOGLU, Mehmed, Tarihte Ermeni Mezalimi ve Ermeniler, Istanbul, 1976, pp. 570-571 (30) Aspirations et Agissements revolutionnaires des Comites Armeniens, pp. 151 -153. (31) URAS, Esat, op. cit., pp. 5% - 600.
the Russian army were so severe that the Russian commanders themselves were compelled to withdraw them from the fighting fronts and send them to rear guard duties. The memoirs of all too many Russian officers who served in the East at this time are filled with accounts of the revolting atrocities committed by these Armenian guerillas, which were savage even by the relatively primitive standards of war then observed in such areas.(32)
Nor did these Armenian atrocities affect only Turks and other Muslims. The Armenian guerillas had never been happy with the failure of the Greeks and Jews to fully support their revolutionary programs. As a result in Trabzon and vicinity they massacred thousands of Greeks, while in the area of Hakkari it was the Jews who were rounded up and massacred by the Armenian guerillas(33). Basically the aim of these atrocities was to leave only Armenians in the territories being claimed for the new Armenian state; all others therefore were massacred or forced to flee for their lives so as to secure the desired Armenian majority of the population in preparation for the peace settlement.
Leading the first Armenian units who crossed the Ottoman border in the company of the Russian invaders was the former Ottoman Parliamentary representative for Erzurum, Karckin Pastirmaciyan, who now assumed the revolutionary name Armen Garo. Another former Ottoman parliamentarian, Hamparsum Boyaciyan, led the Armenian guerilla forces who ravaged Turkish villages behind the lines under the nickname "Murad" specifically ordering that "Turkish children also should be killed as they form a danger to the Armenian nation." Another former Member of Parliament, Papazyan, led the Armenian guerilla forces that ravaged the areas of Van, Bitlis and Mush.
In March 1915 the Russian forces began to move toward Van. Immediately, on April 11,1915 the Armenians of Van began a general revolt, massacring all the Turks in the vicinity so as to make possible its quick and easy conquest by the Russians. Little wonder that Czar Nicholas II sent a telegram of thanks to the Armenian Revolutionary Committee of Van on April 21,1915, "thanking it for its se^ices to Russia." The Armenian newspaper Gochnak, published in the United States, also proudly reported on May 24,1915 that "only, 1,500 lurks remain in Vun'\ the rest having been slaughtered.
The Dashnak representative told the Armenian National Congress assembled at Tiflis in February 1915 that "Russia provided 242,000 rubles before the war even began to arm and prepare the Ottoman Armenians to undertake revolts", giving some idea of how the Russian-Armenian alliance had long prepared to undermine the Ottoman war effort(34). Under these circumstances, with the Russians advancing along a wide front in the East, with the Armenian (32 ) Journal de Guerre du Deii-xieme Regiment d'Artillerie de Forteresse Russe d'Erzeroum, 1919.
(33) SCHEMSL Kara, op. cit., p. 41 and p. 49.
(34) URAS, Esat, op. cit.. p. 604.
guerillas spreading death and destruction while at the same time attacking the Ottoman armies from the rear, with the Allies also invading the Empire along a wide front from Galicia to Iraq, the Ottoman decision to deport Armenians from the war areas was a moderate and entirely legitimate measure of self defense.
Even after the revolt and massacres at Van, the Ottoman government made one final effort to secure general Armenian support for the war effort, summoning the Patriarch, some Armenian Members of Parliament, and other delegates to a meeting where they were warned that drastic measures would be taken unless Armenians stopped slaughtering Muslims and working to undermine the war effort. When there was no evident lessening of the Armenian attacks, the government finally acted. On April 24, 1915 the Armenian revolutionary committees were closed and 235 of their leaders were arrested for activities against the state. It is the date of these arrests that in recent years has been annually commemorated by Armenian nationalist groups throughout the world in commemoration of the "massacre" that they claim took place at this time. No such massacre, however, took place, at this or any other time during the war: In the face of the great dangers which the Empire faced at that time, great care was taken to make certain that the Armenians were treated carefully and compassionately as they were deported, generally to Syria and Palestine when they came from southern Anatolia, and to Iraq if they came from the north. The Ottoman Council of Ministers thus ordered: "When those of the Armenians resident in the aforementioned towns and villages who have to be moved are transferred to their places of settlement and are on the road, their comfort must be assured and their lives and property protected; after their arrival their food should be paid for out of Refugees' Appropriations until they are definitively settled in their new homes. Property and land should be distributed to them in accordance with their previous financial situation as well as their current needs; and for those among them needing further help, the government should build houses, provide cultivators and artisans with seed, tools, and equipment." (3 5)
And it went on to specify:
"This order is entirely intended against the extension of the Armenian Revolutionary Committees; therefore do not execute it in such a manner that might cause the mutual massacre of Muslims and Armenians."
"Make arrangements for special officials to accompany the groups of Armenians who are being relocated, and make sure they are provided with food and other needed things, paying the cost out of the allotments set aside for emigrants. "(36)
(35) Council of Ministers Decrees, Prime Ministry's Archives, Istanbul, Volume 198, Decree 1331/163, May 1915.
(36) British Foreign Office Archives, Public Record Office, 371/9158/E 5523.
"The food needed by the emigrants while travelling until they reach their destinations must be provided ... for poor emigrants by credit for the installation of the emigrants. The camps provided for transported persons should be kept under regular supervision; necessary steps for their well being should be taken, and order and security assured. Make certain that indigent emigrants are given enough food and that their health is assured by daily visits by a doctor... Sick people, poor people, women and children should be sent by rail, and others on mules, in carts or on foot according to their power of endurance. Each convoy should be accompanied by a detachment of guards, and the food supply for each convoy should be guarded until the destination is reached... In cases where the emigrants are attacked, either in the camps or during the journeys, all efforts should be taken to repel the attacks immediately...^^)
Out of the some 700,000 Armenians who were transported in this way until early 1917, certainly some lives were lost, as the result both of large scale military and bandit activities then going on in the areas through which they passed, as well as the general insecurity and blood feuds which some tribal forces sought to carry out as the caravans passed through their territories. In addition, the deportations and settlement of the deported Armenians took place at a time when the Empire was suffering from severe shortages of fuel, food, medicine and other supplies as well as large-scale plague and famine. It should not be forgotten that, at the same time, an entire Ottoman army of 90,000 men was lost in the East as a result of severe shortages, or that through the remainder of the war as many as three or four million Ottoman subjects of all religions died as a result of the same conditions that afflicted the deportees. How tragic and unfeeling it is, therefore, for Armenian nationalists to blame the undoubted suffering of the Armenians during the war to something more than the same anarchical conditions which afflicted all the Sultan's subjects. This is the truth behind the false claims distorting historical facts by ill-devised mottoes such as the "first genocide of the twentieth century" which Armenian propagandists and terror groups try to revive to justify the same tactics of terror today which brought such horrors to the Ottoman Empire during the last century.
(37) British Foreign Office Archives, 371 /9158/E 5523.
ARTICLE SOURCE:ATATURK.COM
SECIL AKSOY
posted 3/06/08 @ 5:38 PM CST
DID 1,5 MILLION ARMENIANS DIE DURING WORLD WAR 1 ?
Armenian propagandists claim that as many as 1, 5 to 2 million Armenians died as the result of "massacres". Like the rest of their claims, this also is imaginary, with the number claimed being increased over time. At first, immediately following the war the Armenians claimed that as many as 600,000 had been killed. Later they raised it to 800,000 and now they talk about 1,5 million and tomorrow they may talk even about three million. The 1918 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica said that 600,000 Armenians had been killed; in its 1968 edition this was raised to 1,5 million.
How many Armenians did die? It is impossible to determine the number exactly, since no complete death records of statistics were kept during those years. The only basis on which even an estimate can be made is the actual Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire at the time. Even here figures vary widely, with the Armenians claiming far more than other sources:
Claimed Armenian
Population
1. The Armenian author Leart, based on figures
Provided by the Patriarchate of Istanbul
2. The Armenian historian Basmajian
3. The Armenian National Committee at the
. Paris Peace Conference
4. The Armenian historian Kevork Asian
5. The French Yellow Book
6. Encyclopedia Britannica
7. Constenson
8. Lynch
9. Official Ottoman census statistics for 1914
10. Annual Register (London)
2,560,000
2,380,000
2,250,000
1,800,000
1,555,000
1,500,000
1 400,000
1,345,000
1,295,000
1,056,000
Leaving aside the Armenian figures, which are evidently exaggerated, the western estimates vary between 1,056,000 and 1,555,000 which more or less correspond with the official Ottoman census report of 1,295,000. How, then, could 1,5 million Armenians have been massacred even had every Armenian in the Empire been killed, which of course did not happen?
Therefore, what are the real Armenian losses? Talat Pasha, in a report presented to the last congress of the Union and Progress Party, stated that this number was estimated at around 300.000. Monseigneur Touchet, a French clergyman, informed the congress of "Oeuevre d'Orient" in February 1916, that the number of dead is thought to be 500.000, but added that this figure might have been exaggerated.
Toynbee estimates the number of the Armenian losses as 600.000.The same figun appears in the Encyclopedia Britannica's 1918 edition. Armenians had also claimed the same number before. Bogos Noubar, head of the Armenian delegation at the Paris Peace Conference, declared that after the war 280.000 Armenians were living in Turkey and 700.000 Armenians have emigrated to other countries. According to the estimation of Bogos Noubar, the total number of the Armenian population before the war was 1.300.000. Therefore, it can be concluded that the number of the Armenian losses was around 300.000. This figure reflects the same proportion, according to their total population, of the 3 million loss of Turkish lives during the same period. Once more, facts do not correspond with the Armenian claims.
ARTICLE SOURCE:ATATURK.COM
Sam
posted 3/07/08 @ 11:55 AM CST
The sensationalism present in both sides of this case is, quite honestly, mind-boggling. We can all agree that genocide is not the best thing, and furthermore that genocide is what the majority of scholars [not all, but a vast majority: you will never find every scholar agreeing on a fact] terms the events as.
However, the terms by which people attack or defend this viewpoint are so contrived as to be entirely ludicrous. @Suheyla: So the Turkish Government suppressed rebellion with systematic murder of a population? I note that instead of actually saying the genocide didn't happen, you just accuse the Armenians of deserting Turkey. Yet Armenians, it is widely held, were treated as second-class citizens, inferior to their neighbors and others. This would lead to them possibly not being so happy about their place in Turkish society, and maybe, even, taking action against it. [Shock!] Just because some Armenians deserted, understandably, doesn't resolve Turkey of killing a whole swath of them if it was their policies in the first place that led to the event. Adolf Hitler used your little massacre as an example for how he thought the Holocaust could be covered up: and now that it's starting to not work as well, people arguing that it never happened are starting to panic. At this point, people are just looking for an apology for a widely accepted tragedy. It doesn't seem like a horrible thing, to acknowledge past crimes and move on, does it? If they apologize, then Turkey can perhaps actually resolve problems. Or perhaps you just want to remain self-deluded into inaction, letting hate fester on and on. That's helpful.
@S Maholan: You're arguing that the Armenians didn't rise up because they were used, practically, as slaves. This immediately invalidates anything you could say on the issue, and perhaps any issue. Slavery is a ready cause of rebellions: obviously you need something to rebel from, and slavery is having one group lord over the other.
It happened: it was a mistake: you can learn from it instead of denying it to death. When arguing it it would be nice if your points were coherent, and made sense.
I notice Colin said 'if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it's a duck.' This is, succinctly, my argument here. It's a duck. We all know. Stop trying to hide it.
Refik Evliyaoglu
posted 3/11/08 @ 3:25 AM CST
Dear Girl,
How wonderful to read something that reflects the views of an open minded person.
It is very interesting to read the comments of other people too, who are surprisingly !!!! armenian descandants. wowwww...
I can only tell you all who are dreaming of armenian genoside, even if its happened, just think why...????
No body in the world goes out and hits someone unles being provoked... Therefore you armenian friends before supporting your dream, think twice...
Look forward to hearing your comments
REFIK EVLIYAOGLU
Historian
Ali Bora
posted 3/11/08 @ 3:52 AM CST
The so-called Armenian genocide thesis does not comply with historical facts. If one examines the history of the Turkish nation, it is observed that Turks have always welcomed and protected not only those distinct communities which were sheltered on its own territories but also people who were driven from their own lands. Turks have never had any feelings of enmity towards any nation just as they have never been hostile towards Armenians. Armenians were accorded the privileged status of being a "nation" during the Ottoman era and even held high-ranking positions in the Ottoman administrative system. Citizens of Armenian origin today live in an atmosphere of peace and tranquility in Turkey. In addition, Turkey has no problems with the people of the Armenian Republic.
As it is known, during World War I, certain armed Armenian groups were provoked by foreign powers, and collaborated with the enemy in Eastern Anatolia. They revolted against their own state, ambushed the Ottoman army while on the battlefield and also murdered many innocent civilians. As a result of these incidents, the Ottoman State had no choice but to relocate the Armenian population from battle zones in Eastern Anatolia to safe havens in other parts of the Empire. This decision was taken resulting from difficult war conditions as a measure to overcome the grave threat posed to security and also to protect the unity and well-being of the Ottoman State.
It is distressing to observe that Armenia and the Armenian Diaspora desperately need the so-called Armenian genocide allegations in order to maintain their national identity and to keep their relationships intact. It is obvious that sowing seeds of hatred for the next generation will serve no one and no country's interests.
With the Ottoman archives available to the public, the number of impartial and objective studies which will shed light on the era will increase in time and evaluation of the issue will be left to history which will put an end to efforts exerted by certain circles who hope to gain political influence by poisoning their own nation's intellectual and emotional atmospheres.
Ali Bora
posted 3/11/08 @ 3:55 AM CST
It is unjustified to label as "genocide", the events that took place within the Ottoman State of 1915, which caused great loss of life for both the Turkish and Armenian communities and resulted with the forced relocation of the majority of the Armenian people to other provinces of the Empire. Moreover, to base this allegation on falsified documents, faked pictures and exaggerated figures only distorts history and the definition of 'genocide'.
With a view to weakening and dismembering the Ottoman State, Russia and Great Britain instigated one of the main ethnic groups of the Ottoman State, the Armenians to uprise in the eastern parts of the Empire. The Armenian gangs, which were created earlier, intensified their actions, and as a result, sporadic clashes were seen between the Muslim and Armenian settlements. When the Russian army invaded Eastern Anatolia in 1915, the Armenian terrorist gangs, side by side with the Russian army, started launching systematic attacks against not only Ottoman troops, but also their civilian Muslim fellow countrymen. In addition to these attacks, the Armenian gangs also assisted the Russians by cutting supply lines of the Ottoman army, which was fighting with an invading force. Under the circumstances, the Ottoman Government decided to relocate the Armenians that were living in the war theatre to the other provinces in the Empire. The rationale for this decision was twofold: to prevent the inter-communal massacres, and cut the support extended by the Armenian towns to the Russians. During the period in discussion, hostilities, famine, ailments and brigandage heavily affected all of the communities living in Eastern Anatolia.
Innocent civilians lost their lives during this migration, which took place under difficult winter conditions and in a general environment of hostility.
These are the consequences of a war of unprecedented magnitude. Neither the distress of the Turks nor of the Armenians can be singled out. These painful experiences were only part of the tragedy to which the whole Anatolian population was subjected.
Indeed, the fact that the same events did not affect tens of thousands of Armenian subjects of the Ottoman Empire, living in Istanbul is the strongest evidence why this incident cannot be labeled as 'genocide'. It is also worth mentioning, in order to underline the falseness of the allegations, that 22 ethnic Armenians served as Ministers in Ottoman Governments during the 19th century, and that in the time frame subject to those claims, an Armenian, Noradounghian Efendi, served as the Ottoman Foreign Minister.
SManoyan
posted 3/11/08 @ 6:52 AM CST
To Secil Aksoy, Suheyla, Jude Erk and rest of the Turkish denialist,
Answer to all of your questions, If Turkey perpetuates the the crimes against the humanity they are jsut as guilty as if they are committing the crimes now! Yes Secil Turkey did take lands of Armenians by force, they emptied Anatolia by force, and they killed Armenians by 1,5 million and Assyrians by at least half a million and if they are dead , they no longer can defend their land and it was taken from them by force of Murder!!! You could use all the capital letters you want, or exclamation points, It will always be considered GENOCIDE and your government committed the First Genocide of the 20th century and it is still commiting GENOCIDE by denying it.
Turkey is GUITY of commiting genocide against the KURDS now! So nothing has changed in the last 93 years.By the way, congratulations...you have solid and rosy future ahead of you now, your government may end up giving you a medal of kemal Ataturk.
Live your conscience if you can, because now you as guilty as your government!!!!
SECIL AKSOY
posted 3/11/08 @ 9:19 AM CST
Originally posted by
SManoyan
To Secil Aksoy, Suheyla, Jude Erk and rest of the Turkish denialist,
Answer to all of your questions, If Turkey perpetuates the the crimes against the humanity they are jsut as guilty as if they are committing the crimes now! Yes Secil Turkey did take lands of Armenians by force, they emptied Anatolia by force, and they killed Armenians by 1,5 million and Assyrians by at least half a million and if they are dead , they no longer can defend their land and it was taken from them by force of Murder!!! You could use all the capital letters you want, or exclamation points, It will always be considered GENOCIDE and your government committed the First Genocide of the 20th century and it is still commiting GENOCIDE by denying it.
Turkey is GUITY of commiting genocide against the KURDS now! So nothing has changed in the last 93 years.By the way, congratulations...you have solid and rosy future ahead of you now, your government may end up giving you a medal of kemal Ataturk.
Live your conscience if you can, because now you as guilty as your government!!!!
Dear Smanoyan,
First of all thank you for reading and commenting my article. My article was totally about Armenian issues, not today's politics in Turkey. It is wonderful to have opposite comments because there are always two sides of everything. Secondly, I am not expecting any metals for writing an article about Armenian issues. I will matter of fact will get my metals in the future from United States and from Turkey because of my passionate and strong work and reviews as a journalist. I have long way to go as a journalist I learn every time when I receive positive or negative comments to my work. What a place world would be if everybody was one side, and close minded? Lastly, United States is currently in the other side of the world in a war of terrorism. Why Turkey who been attacked not once but for years by terrorism goes to war to is all of a sudden "murdering"? I personally know many successful Kurdish people in my country. But there are mothers and husbands, students being killed in the villages by terrorist and by you calling it "murder" is an insult to fighting Turkish soldiers and to every single soldier including Americans who gives lives to bring peace and fight against terrorism. Turkey is not killing Kurdish people in Turkey; we want to fight with those who are hidden and armed in mountains. Please read the Turkish news, matter of fact go to Turkish villages where there are terrorism, sleep at night with fear, interview them, research day and night than come back and comment about Turkey's action about terrorism today. To let everybody know my family being personally effective by PKK, even though I do have Kurdish background in my family. So to let you know my dear readers, When It comes to government's actions, and war. Do not just write to be written, but actually learn from it. I am matter of fact against any war, but I lived in that world, in those villages, I have read those books, I went though what you think is not terrorism. Tell me who learns more; an intelligent reader who reads books and watches news or somebody whose family went through and personally going though the terrorism? I do have a lot more way to go and learn. My ideas and thoughts will change by time goes. And the world now is very hard place to live and It will get harder, I will always point out my views on difficult issues and I will always read, respect, comment and think it though of other writers and reader's thoughts. By judging me guilty you are matter of fact disrespecting freedom of thought and every journalist for that matter. An article is not a good article only when it agrees with you.
Love and respect;
Secil Aksoy
Kelebek Y?lmaz
posted 3/11/08 @ 2:32 PM CST
Dear Secil,
Every body knows that it is a very big 'emperyalist lie.' They are killing babies and people at our neighbours.
(all over the world)
At 1920, their granfathers divided Turkey 4 pieces,but they did'nt succed.One day emperyalist and globalizm lies will be ended by revolution in the USA.
Go Home-Go Home-Your Mothers Are Cry?Ng Every Day !!! I Promise You That I Will Give Petrolium And Energy From Turkey!!!!Don't Kill Babies !!!
Ulku
posted 3/11/08 @ 10:52 PM CST
This is a great write-up that presents the issue in a non-immotional way.
SM
posted 3/12/08 @ 5:41 AM CST
Perhaps if you keep perpetuating what is fabricated by turkey its government, you may convince yourselves that you convinced others also. One good thing came out of this article is that turkey is the continuation of the Ittihat and Terrakki Union(Young turks of Ottaman Empire) and it will perpetuate its lies til kingdom come. Secondly those who are interested will be able to find evidences that are in existince in US Archives will continue to look for the truth which will haunt turkey forever. Third is that blog writers of turkish nationality have convinced this small circle that turkey's offer of forming a new commission to study a historical fact known to world over is useless and it is just a denial tactic. Fourth is that turks are racists and will never assimilate into any culture. With this said I will say do continue to search for the truth. As for myself, I will continue also since my relatives were murdeered by turks in 1915 Genocide .Ethics and principles defines a human being and it is obvious it does not always exist in everybody.
SECIL AKSOY
posted 3/12/08 @ 12:06 PM CST
Originally posted by
SM
Perhaps if you keep perpetuating what is fabricated by turkey its government, you may convince yourselves that you convinced others also. One good thing came out of this article is that turkey is the continuation of the Ittihat and Terrakki Union(Young turks of Ottaman Empire) and it will perpetuate its lies til kingdom come. Secondly those who are interested will be able to find evidences that are in existince in US Archives will continue to look for the truth which will haunt turkey forever. Third is that blog writers of turkish nationality have convinced this small circle that turkey's offer of forming a new commission to study a historical fact known to world over is useless and it is just a denial tactic. Fourth is that turks are racists and will never assimilate into any culture. With this said I will say do continue to search for the truth. As for myself, I will continue also since my relatives were murdeered by turks in 1915 Genocide .Ethics and principles defines a human being and it is obvious it does not always exist in everybody.
Dear SM,
Thinking every Turks are racist is an act of racism. There are racists everywhere in every country including United States. I do not have any problem with Kurdish, Armenian, or any culture for that matter and my article never reflected any sight of racism. My dear editor wrote the other side, and I wrote the other.
Sincerely;
Secil Aksoy
aylin ata
posted 3/12/08 @ 8:15 AM CST
Armenia's attitude towards Turkey's land integrity: Article 11 of the Armenian Declaration of Independence of August 23, 1990; refers to Eastern Anatolia of Turkey as Western Armenia and as such beholds that this area is part of Armenia. Since the Armenian constitution recognizes as a basis "the fundamental principles of the Armenian statehood and national aspirations engraved in the Declaration of Independence of Armenia", it likewise accepts the characterization of Eastern Anatolia as Western Armenia and this, albeit indirectly, translates into the advancement of territorial claims. The Armenian politicians and school books call Eastern Anatolia of Turkey, 'invaded mother land of Armenia' and in Armenia the school children are being grown up being conditioned to be patriots to rescue their invaded land. Even the marches they sing are about this condition. The Armenians who write comments in blogs like this one, mention that the Eastern Anatolia cities do not belong to Turkey, as if the present Eastern boundaries of Turkey was not determined by Treaties of Gumru (1920), Moscow (1921) and the whole boundaries by Lausanne (1923) Treaties; after the Turkish Freedom War.
Additionally Armenia refused Turkey's recurrent offers to commit an agreement declaring that each country recognizes the other country's land integrity, in 1992 and later.
Why do the Armenians force Turkey to accept a genocide? The answer is hidden in a speech of the chief of Dashnak Party Hrant Markaryan who told that their efforts for the recognition of Armenian (so-called) genocide was not an isolated purpose but it was a part of the struggle for rescue of the Western Armenia (Armenian Forum Vol2 No 4; Armenian Weekly On-line, 18 June, 4 July 2003). The Armenian then prime minister Andranik Markaryan told that the internationally recognition of (so called) Armenian genocide and demanding land from Ankara as 'compensation' was possible only after Armenia had strengthened and the Armenians should not have told that they demanded land from Ankara loudly and everywhere (Arminfo 26 May 2004). On one occasion President Kocharian stated that since today's Armenia does not have the clout to advance such demands, doing so should be left to future generations at a time when conditions would hopefully be better suited to this end'.
The world should not forget that Germany's claim on Zudetland and Gdansk just because they were its historical lands caused burst of World War II! History is full of wars which broke up because of claims of states on their historical lands. If an item like the aforementioned Armenian item were present in the lawbook of Mexico claiming that Texas, Arizonna, New Mexico and California which were historical lands of Mexico, belonged to Mexico but invaded, would the American tolerate it?
Therefore the world, should not overlook Armenia's aggressivity, which is hidden behind their role of victim and should think about the price of their support to the Armenians very well.
mustafa ka
posted 3/12/08 @ 8:19 AM CST
The documents the Armenians present to prove that genocide occurred consists of many forgeries. For example:
1) The number of Armenians who were relocated:
The number of the Armenians who were relocated was reported as 600-700 thousand by Bo?os Nubar Pasha who attended to the talks of Sevres Treaty as a chief of Armenians. However the number of relocated Armenians is given as 1.5 million by some Armenian sources and 2 and even 2.5 million by some others. However, the total number of Ottoman Armenians including those who live in the West Anatolia (therefore who were not relocated) was reported as 1.5 million in Encyclopedia Britannica's 1910 edition which was edited by an English editor. Surprisingly, the total number of Ottoman Armenians was increased to 2.5 million in 1953 edition of the same encyclopedia which was edited by an Armenian editor .
2) Aram Andonian's book (The telegrams which were claimed to have been sent by Talat Pasha to order the massacre of the Armenians which were pressed in the book of Aram Andonian in 1920, in three languages): It was proven by both the Turkish and foreign historians that these telegrams were fake too.
After these telegrams were published in Daily Telegraph in England, in 1922, the English Foreign Ministry made a scrutiny and denounced that they were prepared by an Armenian association.
3) Diary of American Ambassador Morgenthau published in 1918. Professor Heath Lowry, an American historian from Princeton University displayed that the events depicted in the book depended on lies or half true events, by comparing the information Ambassador Morgenthau sent to American Foreign Ministry, with those written in the diary, in his book entitled 'The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau's Story', in 1990 .
4) The cover photograph of the book of Tessa Hoffmann: Tessa Hoffmann printed the painting of Russian artist Vasili Vereshchagin depicting a mass of skulls which was painted in 1871, as if it were the photograph of 1915 Armenian genocide, in the cover of his book and had to admit his forgery during the trial of Do?u Perinçek held in Switzerland in March 2007, in which he was listened as a wittness.
akasya
posted 3/12/08 @ 10:06 AM CST
The Armenians are sure that these events were Armenian genocide and claim that Turkey does not want to face with her history and so she does not scrap article 301 which restricts freedom of speech. However, Turkish articles obviously do not have any power of sanction on Armenians. So, what is the reason of Armenians' insistent refusal of Turkey's suggestions to discuss these events together with historians from both sides? For example:
*In 2004, the Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform (VAT) was founded to exchange documents about the 1915 events by Austrian, Turkish and Armenian historians. After receiving 100 Turkish documents, the Armenians refused to send their documents which they promised, to the Turkish historians and afterwards the Armenian foreign minister announced that they did not want to discuss the 1915 events with historians.
*Armenia refused the Turkish prime minister's and the Turkish Assembly's invitation announced on 13th April 2005 which suggested to establish a Joint Commission composed of historians from both sides and discuss the events which took place during the 1st World War.
*At last, Turkey sent full page ads to five popular newspapers of the United States (US) calling on Armenia to 'bring light the events of 1915 together with Turkey and to establish a joint commission composed of historians from both sides in addition to historians from other nations', in April 2007.
*Why did the Armenian historian Sarafyan, who accepted the recent invitation of the chief of Turkish History Foundation, Halaço?lu, for cooperation to investigate Harput events, abandon the project, after talking the Armenian diaspora?
*Why are the Armenian archives still closed? The archives of Ta?nak (Dashnak) Party is present in Zoryan Armenian Institute in Boston. Both Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation offered the Armenians to open these archives; but the directors of the Zoryan Institute replied that they did not have enough money to open the archives. Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation promised financial support.Why did the Armenians refuse this suggestion too? (Nüzhet Kandemir, http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/418517.asp). Note that Zoryan Institute has quite enough money to provide financial support for Taner Akçam who advocates the Armenian claims in Minnesota University.
If a genocide had really occured, why did Brian Ardouny of the Armenian Assembly of America announce 'We don't need to prove the genocide historically, because it has already been accepted politically'? Why did the chief of the Armenian Archives in Armenia tell that they were not interested in the achives, but all they are interested is the world's public opinion.
In your life, have you ever seen a criminal who persistently calls the victim to bring his evidences? And, have you ever seen a victim who passionately accuses somebody of committing crime and giving him great harm but strictly avoids of bringing his proofs before the referees or going to court, and tells that he need not prove that this person's guilt, because the community has already accepted this person as guilty?
In this situation would you not ask the question of which era you are living in? 5000 BC or 7000 BC?
And what else should Turkey do, to FACE WITH HER HISTORY? Who is afraid of facing with her history? Turkey or Armenia and those who support them?
Zekiye
posted 3/12/08 @ 10:21 AM CST
I wonder how easily people forgot all the following: Did the Armenians not establish outlawed terrorist organizations ASALA, JCAG (Justice Commandos for Armenian Genocide) and ARA (Armenian Revolutionary Army) and did they not perform dozens of murders and hundreds of terrorist activities. Because of these Armenian terrorist organization activities, did 70 people not die (39 of whom being innocent Turkish diplomats); were 524 people not wounded; were 105 not pledged? Additionally did these organizations not perform 208 bombing activities during 1975-1986? Then, they did not stop; they only passed on their trade to kill Turkish people to the PKK.
What did the American Armenians do when Armenian Yan?kyan, who murdered the Turkish diplomats Mehmet Baydar and Bahad?r Demir in Santa Barbara, California and surrendered the police (and inspired the formation of ASALA afterwards?) ? The Armenians gathered around the district and SALUTED the murderer!!
The Armenian criminal of Orly Airport massacre, Karapetyan, a member of ASALA, who was imprisoned for 18 years but set free by France, Armenians' ally in crime, returned to Armenia in May 2001, he was welcomed by the then Armenian prime minister A.Margaryan, the Armenian folk and journalists who applauded him as if he were a national hero. A. Margaryan told that he appreciated this hero's service for his country. Armenian Yerivan municipality provided work and house for the MURDERER.
Note how huge the hatred they nurtured against the Turks was (so that they approved violence that much). The reason of the new Turkish massacres during their invasion of the Azerbaijani territory in 1992 committed by the Armenians is the same hatred: The genocide of the Azarbaijani Turks by the Armenians in Hocal? was witnessed by the European journalists: One woman's fingers were plucked and two men's skins were flayed. (The Economist March 7,1992, p.48), some were burned, some of the bodies were destroyed (New Republic Vol 206, No 14, April 6, 1992, p.11); more than 1000 Azarbaijani Turks were massacred ('Faces of Massacre' Newsweek, March 16,1992; 'Massacre by Armenians Being Reported'. The New York Times, March 3, 1992)].
Here are other examples showing that the Armenians have adopted the language of violence as a life style:
The Armenians committed sabotage upon the house of American historian Stanford J Shaw just because he declared that Armenian genocide did not occur in 1977. They also murdered their own chairman of assembly Karen Demirciyan and prime minister Vazgen Sarkisyan in the Armenian Parliament building, in 1999.
Turkish historians, Turkish prime minister and Turkish Assembly several times suggested Armenia to discuss these events together with historians from both sides and even historians from other countries. Armenia persistently refused. Turkey is ready to face with its history but Armenia is not. By making the parliaments pressure to pass genocide resolutions, Armenia aims to bypass historical and scientific realities and wants to escape from facing with its own history and its own faults.
Therefore, people and countries who support Armenia in its policy, foster and approve violence which had become Armenian national language, instead of supporting dialogue and peace for other countries.
suheyla
posted 3/12/08 @ 1:13 PM CST
Obviously, there are two sides to this conflict.
However, the Armenians are making the following false claims:
1) Turks who passionately defend their history are agents of Turkish Government. But, Armenians who defend Dashnaq views are not agents of Dashnaqs or ANCA, or any other Armenian affiliation. Please explain me why Turks cannot have heard stories form their grandmothers let alone examine historic facts and documents?
2) Turks are called racist when they defend themselves, but Armenians are free to hurl all kinds of insults and make slanders regarding anything Turkish without any proof. Mr. Morgenthau's or any one's grandmother's opinion is no proof for genocide. The duck has a United Nations definition, and the 1915 event does not walk, look, or talk like a duck.
3) As if they have a court proven case, they claim any opposite view is denialist. How can I deny something that you fail to prove?
4) No one attempted to explain the false Armenian evidence, like the number of Armenian dead increasing in number, the triangle of skulls, fake Hitler quotation, etc. etc. Armenian nationalists are inventing fake evidence, because they obviously know real evidence is inexistant.
5) By the way why are the ARF archives located in Boston closed to academic research? Has anyone explained that or were they busy trying to assimilate Hitler with Turks?
6) Someone even claimed that Turks are incapable to adjust to American or any other society without providing any back-up. Why do these people not look at themselves. Why do they explain their efforts to remain Armenian Nationalists as if it was a fault of the Turks.
Those who throw stones should not be living in glass houses!. This will haunt everyone who passed wrong judgement on this subject based on one sided say so.
Ugur Kilic
posted 3/12/08 @ 2:26 PM CST
This writer made a good point. There is no evidence of a decision to (Armenian) massacre. It is time for historians to come together to research on this and let Armenian propagandists and their puppets stop if there is nothing to hide.
Here is the question to answer !
As you probably might know according to article 2 of the UN Convention on Genocide of 1948 "there has to be an intension to exterminate a race, ethnic group.." While there is a clear international law for the term genocide, why don't you take this case to an international court.
Hakan ?cten
posted 3/13/08 @ 6:50 AM CST
To Manoyan; Did your first Prime Minister,Hovhannes Katchaznonuni,lie in his book called "Dashnagzoutiun anelik chuni aileus"which was published in New York on 1955 too,while you were telling truths ? I wonder why the Armenians try to hide their prime minister's book which denies the Armenians genocide claims(lies).
Charlie
posted 3/14/08 @ 12:28 AM CST
It was not a "Genocide" regardless of the Armenian Propaganda Machine. There is no Conviction of any Turk for the offence of "Genocide" by a properly convened International Tribunal. If Armenia believed it to be "Genocide" and had the requisite evidence they would take Turkey to the International Court of Justice at the Hague. The Republic of Turkey has stated that they would waive any defence in relation to standing and stand in sted of the former Ottoman Empire as the successor State. They would also waive any defence under the reptrospective application of the "Genocide" Convention. Turkey has been calling on the Armenian Government in order to set up a joint historical commission and the Armenian Government to this day refuse. The Armenian thesis is based primarily on forgeries such as the Andonian Telegrams, the fallacious Hitler Quote and other material such as the notorious "Blue Book". These have all been shown to be forgeries and or propaganda material yet they continue to use these sources as the basis of their claims of "Genocide".
They fail to mention any evidence which is exculpatory for the Ottomans such as letters and documents by Admiral Mark Bristol held in the US Congress Library and much much more material too volumious to re produce here.
Check out my blogspot for certain documents and evidence as well as the Turkish Armenian Web Site at http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/ as well as http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/
All these sites have innumerable documents and sources independent of the Republic of Turkey and Turks which have had to PROVE THEMSELVES INNOCENT against all odds and racism by the West.
Brian Arbryan
posted 3/14/08 @ 10:11 AM CST
The Armenian Genocide is a label fabricated by Armenian nationalists to describe the deaths of Armenians in 1915. These same authors forget to mention that the government never ordered any killings and that there was never any intent to destroy the Armenian ethnicity.
There is proof of Armenian massacres and sufferings, though many deaths during 1915 were due to food shortages, lack of water, exhaustion from travel, and diseases like Typhoid, Malt fever, influenza, and diabetes. However, we must not CONFUSE MASSACRES WITH GENOCIDE, because genocide requires the PROOF OF INTENT of the CUP government, which just hasn't been proven by anyone.
There are thousands of stories of Armenian suffering and deaths; however, there are just as many of Turks suffering under the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaks) who were established in 1890 to rebel against the Ottoman Empire and sabotage their War effort.
Dashnak rebellions in provinces like Van and Bitlis pressured the Ottoman government to protect their war effort and exile suspected rebelling villages down to their own territory of Aleppo Syria.
Armenians created the genocide label because the exiles suffered greatly during their journey, and they blame the Ottoman government for the deaths of thousands, even though none of them were caused by orders or encouragement from the Ottoman government.
Armenian scholars forget to mention the good deeds done by Talat Pasha and Djemal Pasha who they blame for the genocide, even though they have ordered soldiers to stop massacres on Armenians, and quickly stopped the relocation orders once they found out that local authorities were not conducting them as perfectly as they imagined. In their memoirs they right about the guilt they felt for not being powerless to help the Armenians.
If the Dashnaks and Hunchaks had never been created in the 1880s, tensions between locals would not have occurred and relocation orders would not have been issued and thousands of Armenians would still be alive.
So if you're Armenian, please reconsider who you should blame, a government protecting its empire in war-time with the most humane way as possible for the times? Or rebel organizations committed to violence and atrocities on others who do not agree with their ideology, even Armenians.
Brian Arbryan
posted 3/14/08 @ 11:16 AM CST
Questions for Armenian nationalists:
- Why are Armenian archives closed even from Armenian historians who support the genocide?
- Why are Armenian rebels of the 1890s idolized when they were the ONLY reason that convinced the government to relocate Armenians (which caused suffering of Armenians)?
- What were thousands of Armenian civilians in martial-law searches conducted in the 1900s with caches of weapons and explosives?
- Why do Armenians avoid Courts and the U.N. when discussing the authenticity of their genocide? Why do they persuade politicians and parliaments instead?
- Why haven't the Armenians provided solid proof of intent, if there is proof, what is it?
- Why are Armenian nationalists censoring and patrolling against opposing views in the media, books, and publications, even in Wikipedia?
- Why do Armenian historians refuse to cooperate in joint studies on the Armenian sufferings? Perhaps they don't want reconciliation and truth?
- Why do Armenians label anyone who opposes the Armenian Genocide label as "denialists" or "revisionists" and consistently equates them to Nazi denialists (who deny truth of Jewish deaths, not accusations)?
- Why are opposing views always magical Turkish agents of the Turkish government according to Armenians?
- Why do you discredit historians who disprove the Armenian Genocide thesis? If the Armenian Genocide is the truth, then they can't disprove it anyway right? Holocaust historians do not care for opposing views because they know the Holocaust can stand on it's own, why can't your claims stand at all?
ODOMAN
posted 3/14/08 @ 12:30 PM CST
The Turkish government has made numerous attempts on establishing a peaceful normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey.
The fact these diplomatic offers are not even heard, makes it difficult for any progression of the Armenian economy and society. Human slavery not an uncommon when it comes down to Armenian young women and children being sold.
Knowing this fact the Armenian government continues it's budget on an illegal occupation of Azeri territory. Purchasing with funds that could be used to invest into the economy which is almost Russian owned. Armenia's railway an eyed asset by Russian investors. The country is slowly becoming a part of Russia because of it's war with Azerbaijan.
According to the Turkish government, Armenia can still accuse Turkey with no proof of it's allegations on genocide. It was never an item on the negotiation process for Armenia and Turkey to reconcile.
Withdrawal of Armenian troops from Karabag, will the re-opening of the borders to Turkey and Azerbaijan. This change immidiately will change Armenia's economy towards a prosperopous capitalistic future. Unemployment will drop as new jobs will be created from the sky rocketing Turkish economy. A mutual beneficial outcome, as it was like in the glorious golden age for Armenians in the Ottoman Empire.
Where Armenians were called "loyal nation" above all other ethnicities that were part of the Ottoman Empire. A people that built many beautiful establishments in Istanbul. The Turks are willing to have Armenia part of the family that was once glorious.. Is Armenia ready to move back in? Is the question.
Brian Arbryan
posted 3/14/08 @ 1:48 PM CST
"As shown in (as recent as ) January 19 2007 , when a journalist , Hrant Dink, a Turkish citizen of Armenian descent was assassinated for using the term "Genocide". It is a crime to use the word GENOCIDE in Turkey and it is punishable by imprisonment, fines and in some cases death!" ---
Dear Armenian propagandist,
please do not fabricate propaganda and claim that it is illegal to talk about genocide in Turkey. It is perfectly legal, and in my last visit to Armenia and Turkey, I was able to speak about the Armenian Genocide and the idea of whether it is true or not, to many people and no one even got angry. I was not able to speak freely in Armenia. Armenia doesn't allow minorities to hold office. The Armenian government censors it's journalists from speaking freely about the Armenian genocide thesis unless it is to accept and recognize it, they are not allowed to debate it.
It is PERFECTLY LEGAL TO DISCUSS HISTORY IN TURKEY, there is 100% Freedom of Speech there.
ABDULLAH
posted 3/16/08 @ 9:04 AM CST
First of all countries must look their own history...
Than some people can speak or not, ok ?
Ermanies-USA-France and the others...look your past and then come and speak or don't speak.
Last,you all must be very objktive,because your history
is very very bad,begining with burning women!..killing
american indian,algerian people,etc..ec..
One day history will punish you imperialist countries !!..
First of all,we Turks will ask you your brutality in our
parlement,don'forget it!!!!!!!!!!.............
Post a reply to this comment
Matthias trallenburg
posted 3/16/08 @ 9:10 AM CST
Apart from all the historical debate that definetly requiresa lot of knowladge and time invesment these basict facts lead me to think that Armenian claims of genocide is not founded on reality.
1. there are international courts to solve these issues. If armenian genocide is proven (as Armenians claim to be) why dont they just applythe international court and end this once an for all?
2. It is said that 1.5 milion Armenians were killed. Why dont we see a single Armenian mass grave? The lands that the events occoured are no longer Turkish teritory. there should be hundreds of mass graves. Where are they?
3. As far as I know Turkey has offered to create a joint international historical commission to investigate the events. Why does Armenians refuse the offer. Also Turkey declared her archives are open to all parties. But Armenian archives are still close to research. If Armenians are right why dont they open their archives?
Post a reply to this comment
Yavuz Ozturk
posted 3/16/08 @ 2:37 PM CST
Hi all,
First of all I must mention that I am not a professional journalist or a historian. I am just a computer scientist who loves his country (Turkey) and proud of Turkish Armed Forces.
I have read all of the comments beginning from the first to the last and noted some interesting points (at least they sound interesting for me) to share with you.
First of all, in one of the first comments, suddenly a person called Saryan (with an interesting name L.) used the word "eastern barbarians" for the Turkish people. I want to answer his polite (!) adjective with a Turkish saying: "Dinsizin hakkindan imansiz gelir". Dear Turkish friends, if you can translate it to English for me, I will be very happy. (I apologize because my English is not good enough to translate sayings.)
Secondly, Simon Manoyan used the word "coward" for the glorious and honourable Turkish Army for the military operation to Cyprus. I am very sensitive for this subject because my father served there as a military medical doctor and now he is a veteran. I want to ask Simon if he visited the houses (they are museums now) of innocent Turkish families who are slaughtered. There is no more obvious thing than if a country is attacking your people, you have an international right to answer it with a counter-attack. So, what I want to say is, Turkey did not attack Cyprus without a reason. Our army landed there to protect Turkish people. So as a result, instead of closing eyes while Turkish people were being killed in Cyprus and sitting as a "coward", glorious and honourable Turkish Army went to Cyprus and defended our people there.
Thirdly, Simon thinks that Turkey is invading Iraq. I want to ask Simon two questions:
a. If Turkey invaded Iraq in 8 days, what is America doing there for 4 years?
b. How can you call a military operation as "invasion" on a "no mans land"? Talabani says that Northern Iraq is under control by Barzani. Barzani says that he does not have the control over the border. So? So, it is simply "no mans land".
Fourthly, Simon blaims us as "Turkish denialists". I noticed that it is the first time he is using a capital "T" while writing the word "Turkish" after writing "Turkish", "Turkey" an "Turks" with a lower case "t" numerous times, while we are always writing "Armenia" with an upper case "A". I want to congratulate him because he learned writing at last (!)
I wonder why and how he is using bad words ("coward", "denialists" and "racist") frequently in an open society area. He can use them in his private life, he can use these words while talking about his friends or talking about his family but who he thinks himself judging people that he doesn' t know?
Fiftly, Sam told that "people are just looking for an apology for a widely accepted tragedy". I want to ask: Can we call every "widely accepted" things "really true"? For example, it was once widely accepted that the earth is flat until Galileo told it was not. After some time, it was proven that the earth is a sphere. So, what I want to say is:
a. All widely accepted things are not really true.
b. Why people are looking for an apology if it is not in fact true (due to (a.))?
-Best regards.
-Saglicakla kalin.
-Yavuz
Post a reply to this comment
SECIL AKSOY
posted 3/16/08 @ 8:26 PM CST
Originally posted by
Yavuz Ozturk
Hi all,
First of all I must mention that I am not a professional journalist or a historian. I am just a computer scientist who loves his country (Turkey) and proud of Turkish Armed Forces.
I have read all of the comments beginning from the first to the last and noted some interesting points (at least they sound interesting for me) to share with you.
First of all, in one of the first comments, suddenly a person called Saryan (with an interesting name L.) used the word "eastern barbarians" for the Turkish people. I want to answer his polite (!) adjective with a Turkish saying: "Dinsizin hakkindan imansiz gelir". Dear Turkish friends, if you can translate it to English for me, I will be very happy. (I apologize because my English is not good enough to translate sayings.)
Secondly, Simon Manoyan used the word "coward" for the glorious and honourable Turkish Army for the military operation to Cyprus. I am very sensitive for this subject because my father served there as a military medical doctor and now he is a veteran. I want to ask Simon if he visited the houses (they are museums now) of innocent Turkish families who are slaughtered. There is no more obvious thing than if a country is attacking your people, you have an international right to answer it with a counter-attack. So, what I want to say is, Turkey did not attack Cyprus without a reason. Our army landed there to protect Turkish people. So as a result, instead of closing eyes while Turkish people were being killed in Cyprus and sitting as a "coward", glorious and honourable Turkish Army went to Cyprus and defended our people there.
Thirdly, Simon thinks that Turkey is invading Iraq. I want to ask Simon two questions:
a. If Turkey invaded Iraq in 8 days, what is America doing there for 4 years?
b. How can you call a military operation as "invasion" on a "no mans land"? Talabani says that Northern Iraq is under control by Barzani. Barzani says that he does not have the control over the border. So? So, it is simply "no mans land".
Fourthly, Simon blaims us as "Turkish denialists". I noticed that it is the first time he is using a capital "T" while writing the word "Turkish" after writing "Turkish", "Turkey" an "Turks" with a lower case "t" numerous times, while we are always writing "Armenia" with an upper case "A". I want to congratulate him because he learned writing at last (!)
I wonder why and how he is using bad words ("coward", "denialists" and "racist") frequently in an open society area. He can use them in his private life, he can use these words while talking about his friends or talking about his family but who he thinks himself judging people that he doesn' t know?
Fiftly, Sam told that "people are just looking for an apology for a widely accepted tragedy". I want to ask: Can we call every "widely accepted" things "really true"? For example, it was once widely accepted that the earth is flat until Galileo told it was not. After some time, it was proven that the earth is a sphere. So, what I want to say is:
a. All widely accepted things are not really true.
b. Why people are looking for an apology if it is not in fact true (due to (a.))?
-Best regards.
-Saglicakla kalin.
-Yavuz
Dear Yavuz Ozturk,
I would like to thank you for reading and commenting also for your intelligent points. You do not have to be a journalist or a historian to write a polite respectful comment. You have mention that Saryan used the word "eastern barbarians" for the Turkish people. And you answered his polite (!) adjective with a Turkish saying: "Dinsizin hakkindan imansiz gelir". I would like to translate that The Turkish saying is "Diamond cut diamond." The meaning of the saying basically explains only barbarians could handle barbarians.
Sincerely;
Secil Aksoy
Post a reply to this comment
SERHAN
posted 3/17/08 @ 1:40 PM CST
There have always been two groups of people. One group works for their living. The other group doesn't. Naturally, as no one feeds parasites willingly, the parasites have to take their income by force. Elaborate schemes, carefully crafted lies, control of education, well practiced methods to create chaos have been used throughout history. People do not change so these events will continue. It is up to the working group that has to wake up and protect themselves. Today Armenians are fed horrible lies with hopes of building up hatred, stoking fires of conflict. The liars will not enter any conflict. They will only reap the benefits. The usual gains.... selling arms, taking land, or strengthening their religious power which translates into money. People who are pushed into conflicts have to kill or be killed. The fear and anger that comes from all the killing turns normal people into monsters. Listen carefully to veterans that turn back from conflicts. The ones left behind have to bury their loved ones, often their children with an unquenchable pain till they die. People there is still oil to steal, land to grab, resources to be ripped out of the hands of the people who have them. So the warmongering will continue. If we don't analyze each situation carefully, if we do not ask "Who is going to benefit from this and what price am I going to pay", guess who the victims will be?
There is oil in the south part of Turkiye. There is a desire to break the area up into smaller groups creating a Kurdistan on this area, controlled by leaders who serve as puppets. The vast income that will be controlled by a small group will then easily be siphoned away. The Kurdish people in turn will not be free either. They will be forced into conflict with the now starving Sunnis so they will have to buy guns, and sell the oil as raw oil while fighting their neighbors. Nice conflict which will make many a parasite quite rich (richer). Armenians are used as tools to label Turks as killers so when the time comes to "save" the Kurds from the Turks, the world will have overwhelming support. The maps of carved out Turkiye is displayed in many international meetings. Writers are bought to write lies to brainwash people.
I ask this question, is the average Armenian happy with what they are doing in Azerbaijan? Azerbaijan is an oil rich country that has separated from Russia. If Russia overtakes them it will raise protests. But if Armenia does it for them, it will be two small countries fighting it out. Also a great market for arms merchants. Wake up people!
If everyone stays in their borders as they are now, love their neighbors as their own family, helps each other and trade peacefully, justly, and if the Ten Commandments are obeyed strictly, what conflict will there be? People listen to your hearts carefully. Do not feed the parasites!
Post a reply to this comment
onder
posted 3/22/08 @ 12:34 PM CST
A Yale University history professor F. Kazemzadeh, in one of the first comprehensive scholarly studies of the region in the US, wrote: "This three-day massacre by Armenians is recorded in history as the "March Events" and thousands of Muslims, old people, women and children lost their lives" ("The Struggle for Transcaucasia", New York, 1951, p. 69).
Another distinguished professor of history at the University of Louisville, was even more blunt: "From 30 March to 1 April 1918, the Tatars [as Azerbaijanis were sometimes called] were attacked. Almost half of the Muslim population of Baku was compelled to flee the city.... Between 8,000 and 12,000 Muslims were killed in Baku alone...."
Post a reply to this comment
SK
posted 3/27/08 @ 7:17 AM CST
The Enemy of My Friend is My Enemy?
With all due respect to the numerous Jewish-born humanists, historians, writers, individual personalities, Chief Rabbi, Yona Metzger and many other that have had the courage to take a stand for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide and justice for this crime, it is none the less obvious that the official representatives of Judaism and above all Jewish/Israeli politicians still have a lot to catch up on.
Turkish Prime Minster, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, called upon Turkish migrant workers in a very controversial and emotional speech, on Feb 10 in Germany city of Cologne, to resist assimilation and remain Turkish. Erdogan confused in his above mentioned speech "integration" with "assimilation". According to Turkish Prime Minister: "Assimilation is a crime against humanity"! Erdogan´s nationalistic views on needed intergration of Turks in German society cuased an outcry in Germany. One should just bring to the attention of Turkish authorities that the Australian government apologized Wednesday (Feb 13) for years of "mistreatment" and decades of racist policies that inflicted "profound grief, suffering and loss" on the country's Aboriginal people. When is Turkey - an "allay and friend" of Israel and Us - going to end its racist policies and apologize for the systematic destruction of Armenians as other Christian folks and forced turcifications in Turkey? According to Turkish palace historians all Non Turks living in Ottoman Turkey were "foreign spies and infidels..."
Even though the internationally recognized and respected Jewish jurist and human rights activist Rafael Lemkin already concerned himself with and recognized the systematic destruction of the Armenians as a "murder of race" at the start of the 1930s, the fact remains that justice for the Armenian Genocide is still being aggressively denied by influential organizations of the Jewish Diaspora as well as by the State of Israel itself.
Genocide - extermination of a race - is a political crime. Genocides are not committed by private individuals, but by the state itself. The reference to historians and historical science in regard to the Armenian Genocide is a tactical and spurious argument to relieve the world governments from the responsibility to act while simultaneously giving the perpetrators carte blanche. The proper reaction to political crimes is therefore only possible through political response - from the parliamentary houses, the politicians and the governments.
Now more than ever the denial of genocide must be responded to, for denial is intrinsic to the methodology of genocide. Genocide is denied even as it is practiced.
From the beginning, the perpetrator seeks pretexts and justifications to conceal the real intentions. Thus, the extermination is referred to as "transporting," as "deportation" or "resettlement" - "moving to secure places" or even as the "final solution." A verbal code is used to camouflage and thus deny the annihilation, even as it is being committed. No wonder after the "deportation (i.e. Annihilation) of Armenians in Turkey everything become „Turkish".
Genocide without simultaneous denial is unthinkable - yes, even impossible. The first thing that must be done is to consider what the perpetrators want to attain through denial. Denial is not just the simple negation of an act; it is much more the consequent continuation of the very act itself. Genocide should not only physically destroy a community; it should likewise dictate the prerogative of interpretation in regard to history, culture, territory and memory. As the victims- Armenians - "never exists".
The Turkish have not only murdered humans , destroyed an ancient culture/civilization and rewritten history, but they continue to legitimize the act as well as the racist ideology that led to the act. This includes the legitimization of any and all stereotyping of the Armenian people as a dangerous enemy, as a deadly bogeyman in the closet.
Denial is the final step in the completion of a mass extermination - and the first step towards the next genocide. If genocide is committed in Ruanda or Sudan, it is done with the knowledge that the rest of the world will only watch and then forget.
They look to Turkey and think themselves safe in the assumption that their actions will likewise remain unpunished! Whether in Sudan or Ruanda or any other potential hotspot of mass murder the accountable powers-that-be rhetorically ask - as Hitler supposedly did just before invading Poland - "Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?"
The Republic of Turkey has denied the Armenian Genocide for the past 84 years, and politicians in Israel and a vast majority of officials of Jewish Diaspora are aboard their boat now. In the USA, for example, the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL) not only denied the Armenian Genocide in the past but also actively fought against the Congressional Resolution for the Recognition of the Armenian Genocide. At the end of August 2007, the ADL finally recognized the Armenian Genocide through gritted teeth. The acknowledgment given, however, was qualified to such an extent that one could have done without it. A similar statement of recognition was also simultaneously supplied by the American Jewish Committee.
Presently, the AIPAC totally denies to have ever fought against the official recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the US government and now presents itself as being neutral in regard to the subject. (And apparently "neutral" is just what they are.)
Pierre Besnainou, the acting president of the European Jewish Congress (EJC) until early 2007, stated in 2006 that the Armenian people should stop making fools of themselves: there has been only one genocide in modern times and as everyone knows it was that of the Jews - an Armenian Genocide never happened. (We have yet to see what the attitude of Moshe Kantor, the current president of the EJC, is in this regard.)
In 2001, while he was the Israeli Foreign Minister, Nobel Prize winner and current President of Israel Shimon Peres described the Armenians as "meaningless" ("Armenian allegations") Moreover, this year President Shimon Peres and the current Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni did a heroic act that in no way pales to the statements regarding the Holocaust expressed by the President Ahmadinejad: Peres affirmed Israel's attitude to the "Armenian Question" and promised the Turkish Prime Minster Erdogan to lobby against the Armenians, while Minster Livni prevented the Knesset from officially recognizing the Armenian Genocide.
The statement given: "Genocide never happened. There was a "tragedy" with victims on both sides. Please reconcile yourselves now and start a dialog." Once again, a replay of the Turkish argument of shameless denial by a Israeli official: "There were mutual killings and No mass Killings."
Just recently Israeli President Shimon Peres let himself be vocally celebrated by hundreds of Genocide deniers in the Turkish Parliament, including numerous Turkish fascists, racists, ultra-nationalists and fundamentalists In Ankara, President Shimon Peres reiterated his support for the denial of the Armenian Genocide and conveyed his full acceptance of the Turkish politics of lies and denial. But it cannot escape the notice of an experienced politician like President Shimon Peres that the Genocide deniers in Ankara are no longer simply satisfied with the repudiation of the Armenian Genocide.
Turkish Prime Minster Erdogan and the other Turkish nationalists have long since joined forces to create Pan Turanic - "Pan Turkish"- institutions with the specific aim of try(ing) to prove the 'illegality' of the existence of the Armenian people to the world.
When the French Ambassador to Great Britain, Daniel Bernard, referred to Israel as "this shitty little country" in 2001, there was a storm of protest and he was quickly labeled an Anti-Semite. But what should an Armenian call someone that denies the Armenian Genocide and refers to Armenians as "meaningless"? If that were even just all that is being done: Above and beyond this, Turkey has demanded that Israel instruct the "Jewish Lobby" to agitate against the Armenians. Of course the reference to the "Jewish Lobby" is an allusion to the Jewish Diaspora and - as is the case when talking of Diasporas - carries a whiff of world conspiracy and global domination.
Thus, the "Jewish Conspiracy" should follow Ankara's tune and eliminate, obliterate, purge (whatever you choose to call it) the "Armenian Conspiracy." Under normal circumstances the concept would be laughable, but laughter is not advisable as it could result in asphyxiation.
Why Do Jewish Organizations and their Functionaries Deny the Armenian Genocide as Turkey Does Deny recognition and Justice for this Crime? How can this act of denial be harmonious with the Jewish moral concepts and identity in light of the xenophobia, racism, Anti-Semitism, hostility and intolerance that the sorely tested Jewish People are themselves confronted with on a daily basis? Genocide is racism: it is the most paramount and aggressive form of racial discrimination, and is aimed at the obliteration of the existence and life of a people only because they belong to a specific community or collective - a community that is defined by the aggressors as "the others," as "the alien."
Two reasons are commonly given for the "placating" activities of the international Jewish community in regard to Turkey's denial policies: Israel needs Turkey, and the Holocaust is unique. On occasion a third reason is also offered: to do otherwise would result in repercussions against the Jewish community in Istanbul. (Although if this were true, the US Congress and Senate could never pass any resolutions against Iran: as is well known, numerous Jewish people also live in Tehran, Yazd, and Isfahan for centuries!) Statements such as those are, in the end, nothing but hollow attempts to justify denial.
The attitude of Jewish Organizations and their functionaries in regard to the Armenian Genocide not only results in their involvement in the guilt of the perpetrators but also produces a culpability of their own as well.
An attitude such as theirs supports and perpetuates the bogeyman image of the Armenians that has long been cherished by the Turkish while simultaneously strengthening the Turkish nationalistic self-image. Above and beyond this, when Jewish functionaries describe the Ottoman Turkey as a paradise of earth, they both distort history and negate the inhumanities experienced by the Armenian as other Non Turkish People; instead, an unmerited image of a heroic and pro-Judaic Turkey is propagated throughout Jewish communities and private homes.
Thus, in turn, within the sphere of the Jewish Diaspora and even Israel itself, a new generation grows that is spoon-fed the misconceptions of the valiant Turk and perfidious Armenian. In regard to this current situation, is oddly ironic that the modern usage of the word "Holocaust" - used so often by international communities to describe the Shoah - was first introduced to describe the Turkish bloodbath suffered by the Armenians in Adana in 1909. (Ferriman, Z.D.: The Young Turks and the Truth about the Holocaust at Adana in Asia Minor during April 1909; London, 1913.)
The Enemy of My Friend is also My Enemy. Is the demonization of the Armenian Community within the Jewish Diaspora done with this concept in mind? Some examples among others: In July 2007 an article was published in the "Juedische Zeitung" ("Jewish Newspaper") in Germany which totally supported and serviced the policies of genocide denial and victim-perpetrator-reversal as practiced alla Turca.
The "Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs" published in November this year in its webpage an article written by Ms. Aydan Kodaloglu, an advisor to the former Turkish President Turgut Özal; in her article, Kodaoglu attempted to make the denial of the Armenian Genocide (even more) palatable for the Jewish and Israeli population. (Ironically enough, according to Nüzhet Kandemir, the former Turkish ambassador to the USA, President Turgut Ozal was himself on the brink of recognizing the Armenian Genocide.)
In turn, in the Jerusalem Post Joel J. Sprayregen (the former National Vice-Chair of the ADL and a member of the Executive Committee of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA)) took the Armenian resistance during the Genocide to justify denial alla Turca - "There was no genocide" - he was referring to history fakers - despite the fact that he must be fully aware that one could easily reinterpret reality and deny the Jewish Holocaust through the misrepresentation of the Warsaw Uprising, the Theresienstadt- deportation camp, the "sale" and departure of the Jews to Switzerland during the Holocaust , existence of Jewish units in the British Army (traditional foe of Germany during WW) ,struggle of Jewish for a "Jewish State", and survival of millions of Jews people ...
And in the US, one could easily come to assume that Washington Times - which often reads as a copy of the Turkish press - aims at leading a war against the Armenian Genocide Resolution (HR 106) in the US Congress.
Holocaust-denier, David Irving, is serving more and more as example as a paradigm for the denial of Armenian Genocide. Mr. Lenny Ben-David, former undersecretary at the Israeli Embassy in the US and A adviser for five years to the Turkish embassy in Washington, until earlier this summer, In his article published in the Oct. 5 issue of the Jerusalem Post, titled "Turkey and Armenia: What Jews should do," Not only denied the Armenian Genocide and creates hysteria and Armenophobe but in his article he gives a lot of credit to the fabrication of Turkish and Azeri nationalists and fascists. This is again not a hidden fact even for this politician that the aim of Turkish fabrications against Armenians in the next step includes: suggesting removing Armenia from the maps, as a people and country which doesn't exist...
If you assume A Armenian student from Jerusalem will be allow in an official ceremony in Israel to refer to the Armenian Genocide, you are mistaken. This shouldn't come to you as a surprise either; in Istanbul the remaining Armenian children from "Western Armenia" (After Genocide renamed to "Eastern Anatolia") are forced to write essays how their ancestors committed "genocide against Turks" (This is just distressful, nauseating, sadistic and perverse.)
Denial is known as a second killing (a "bloodless-killing"). There is an aggressive denial of Armenian Genocide on going by Turkey. Unfortunately, a big part of officials of Jewish Diaspora and Israel are involved in the denial of Armenian Genocide and this act - their involvement in denial - doesn't differ much from the involvement of German military officer in Armenian Genocide in 1915 (This reference should make clearer - to help to reach a better understanding- what really the denial of Armenian Genocide by Jewish politicians means for Armenian people and other Christian people who were subject of genocide by Turkish!)
If politically allies do it, it's not genocide but "Tragedy". "Only the Turkish Nation has the right to put an ethnically and racial claim on this land (e.g. "Anatolia" including ears where Armenians were deported and killed en mass by Turkish)." Ismet Inonu 1939, President and successor of Ataturk. Presdient Isemt Inonu was one of the chief architects of Turkish denial and justification of Armenian Genocide. Today, there are Turkish "palace historians" that aim to erase all references to "Armenia" and "Armenian people" in the libraries of the world. This is a fact that is easily documented. Professor Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu, the racially motivated President of the Turkish Historical Society with the assistance of Turkish fascists, extends great effort on proving the non-existence of the Armenian People and, in turn, the state of "Armenia." The statements of many Jewish Diaspora and Israeli officials that "there was no Armenian Genocide" play directly into the hands of the official policy Turkey and the Turkish Nationalists and fascists. Justification of Armenian Genocide and a narrow-minded ethnic foreign politics of Turkey in the region leads us to the conclusion that Turkey has no problems with the fact of Armenian Genocide. Turkish problem seems to be the existence of Armenian State and the struggle of Armenian Diaspora for justice. Denial of Armenian Genocide by Turkey, Turkish hostile attitudes regarding Armenian State and the statement of Recep Tayyip Erdogan in 2004 that "Even if the Kurds establish a Kurdish State in Argentina Turkey would fight this", are the policies of a failed State rather than the policy of a civilized and democratic country!
A nation that has been the victim of genocide should not be forced to prove the fact of genocide. For a nation to support the perpetrators of genocide by placating the world with official statements supporting the Turkish government's shameless policies of denial is disgraceful and appalling; for a nation that itself has likewise suffered an attempted obliteration to do so is incomprehensible. The "placating" efforts by Jewish officials and functionaries are doomed to backfire: the denial of the Armenian Genocide in no way helps to make Israel stronger or to increase the security of the Jewish People.
Turkey and Turkish nationalists have always used other people for the implementation of their inhuman policies against "non-Turks" in order to achieve their own final goals, if not their own "final solution"
Words such as dialogue, reconciliation, and rapprochement are terms that awaken fundamentally positive associations, but they are being used without any reflection upon or reference to historical fact or fairness, let alone justice. It is beyond understanding that the newspapers of the Jewish Diaspora present the Armenians as the "irreconcilable" or "troublemaker", as the "true" disruptor in international relations, when it is the Turkish that continually attempt to illegalize or negate the discussion. (What dialogue would the Jewish Nation have with Germany had Germany demanded and been permitted to forbid the acknowledgment of the holocaust and justice?)
Is the Jewish community the "troublemaker" when the Iranian President Ahmadinejad denies the Shoah? A crime that happened 60 years ago and that he himself did not participate in?
The statement that the genocide happened 90 years ago or the insinuation that the Armenian Diaspora - the "Armenian Conspiracy" - are endangering world peace because they are motivated by self-swerving interests serve again nothing else than to protect the perpetrator. But is it not the purpose and duty of international criminal law to protect the victim? Should criminal law protect the rapist or killer because the victim supposedly "asked for it"? Is international law only a "law for the stronger" and thus only there to protect the state and not the individual?
Are terms such as "crimes against humanity," "genocide," "war crimes" and "war of aggression" only there to protect the aggressors and not the victims? The Armenian Diaspora - the masses of people forced to disperse throughout the world - is a result of the genocide executed by the Turkish; the Diaspora Armenians are not pursuing an arbitrary and unfounded interest, they have a justified demand for justice and recognition. At the same time, this demand is also a concern of the international community of states which created and approved the legislation known as "public international law" or "international criminal law."
It is not just a matter of morality to condemn genocide; it is a premise for peaceful coexistence. It is a cornerstone of international peace, and the looming threat of this very crime is a principal reason behind military intervention and self-defense.
A question that might arise when reading this text is why do I only write about the Jewish Community and Israeli politicians? Well, this is due to the following fact: aside from the Turkish themselves, Israeli politicians and the Jewish Diaspora are the only ones that go beyond the "simple" denial of the Armenian Genocide (and denial of Turkish genocides against other Christian people, e.g. The Assyrian Genocide) to both aggressively practice a virulent policy of denial and likewise try to inspire others to do the same. For example, the unprecedented dedication with which Shimon Peres supported the "fight" against the Armenian Resolution in the US Congress while Bill Clinton was still president.
The relationship between the Jewish People and the Turkish is based on lies and the denial of the Armenian Genocide - the denial of the 1.5 million Armenians that died by the hands of the Ottoman Turkey from 1915-1923. It is a relationship that is based on criminal complicity in hushing up a horrific transgression against humanity and that totally disregards all concepts of moral and justice.
Namik Tan, the Turkish Ambassador to Israel, described this relationship in September 2007: "The Turkish People make no differentiation between Israel and the Jews of the world. To us, you are all one. We have no pact with Israel, but rather with the whole Jewish world. If the Jewish lobby disappears, Israel loses its importance to us. Therefore, Israel takes the responsibility when a Jewish organization speaks of Genocide." (Jerusalem Post, 2007)
The truth shall set Turkish and Jewish officials free. Implementation of international agreed reforms for "Western Armenia/ Turkish Armenian" and eliminating - "getting rid" - of a nation/people by Turkey are not the same. Only the fact of genocide can keep alive disinformation policy, the genocide denial industry and the nationally authorized and aggressive Turkish politics of denial. Israeli/Jewish officials should advice their "friends/allies" in Ankara to stop making fools of themselves. Armenian Genocide was proved as Armenian Genocide was happening.
The whole world was witness of this genocide. Besides this: Armenian Genocide is well documented above all by Turkish war time ally Germany (even though a part of this documents being destroyed in1919 and 1940s.) According to Taner Akcam, a nonconformist Turkish historian, "The denial of the Armenian Genocide is the basis of Turkey's existence." At the latest, Amb. Namik Tan's statements above and the aggressive denial of Armenian Genocide by President Shimon Peres also reveal and proves that the relationship between Israel and Turkey is also based the denial of the Armenian Genocide (raison d'État instead of right to truth and justice.)
One cannot help but wonder how long a relationship built on boundless dishonesty, immorality, denial and lies is capable or destined to last... Indeed, it is truly incomprehensible that the Jewish Diaspora denies the Armenian Genocide for the "good" of Israel. What lasting "good" has ever come from the denial of genocide, from the denial of truth, from the denial of the justice?
Post a reply to this comment
SK
posted 3/27/08 @ 7:46 AM CST
Lévy: 'The Jewish code taught me that you have to take care of both the living and the dead. And when it comes to the dead without graves, the demands are even greater.
Article tools
This past fall, despite objections from both the White House and some in the organized Jewish world, the House Foreign Affairs Committee voted to allow a resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide to go before the House of Representatives. When the move led to mass protests in Turkey and threats from Ankara to disrupt the American war effort in Iraq, however, House leaders decided to table the measure.
French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy recently sat down with the Forward's Gabriel Sanders to discuss the question of Jews and the recognition of the Armenian genocide -- one of the topics the thinker plans to cover in an upcoming lecture on the "state of world Jewry."
GABRIEL SANDERS: What is it that prompted you to turn your attention to the question of the Armenian genocide?
BERNARD-HENRI LEVY: I was shocked by the withdrawal of the resolution and was shocked that some Jews, because of fears connected to the wellbeing of the State of Israel, were unwilling to endorse it. This unwillingness on a matter where we Jews should be on the front lines is for me a real heartbreaker. In my upcoming lecture, I will speak about the meaning of the message of Judaism, which implies that we are not only open to, but forced to be helpful to those like the children of the survivors of the Armenian Genocide.
GS: As we reported in the paper last fall, the French public is not unaware of the difficulties surrounding the question of genocide recognition. In 2006, the French parliament passed a bill criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide, and Turkey then too threatened to sever military ties. How did the French Jewish community react at the time?
BHL: As with the American Jews, there was a concern for Israel. Turkey is an ally and Israel does not have many allies. There is also the tendency to believe in the singularity of the Holocaust. But singularity does not mean that it was the only genocide, and precisely because we -- our parents -- had to suffer the worst, we are obligated to pay attention to the suffering of those in Rwanda and Armenia.
GS: When it comes to Israel, would you say that the French Jewish community is universally supportive?
BHL: We may have our Noam Chomskys, but there is a real support -- a support that is as strong as in America, with perhaps a greater sense of freedom when it comes to criticizing this or that government. I myself am the greatest supporter of Israel you can imagine. Since '67, when as an 18-year-old I signed up as a parachutist, I have gone to Israel during every one of its wars. And yet, 10 years ago, I felt free to write, in a newspaper article that made some waves when it appeared in France, that Israel's two worst enemies were Arafat and Netanyahu.
GS: It seems to me that Jewish opinion on the genocide question falls into two schools: those who feel that, when it comes to moral questions, Jews are answerable to a higher standard than the world at large and those who argue that Jews should be held to standard no more high than the rest. Those belonging to this second group will say that when Armenian allies -- like, say, Iran -- deny the truth of the Holocaust, no one calls on the Armenians to speak up in the Jews' name. And yet, when the roles are reversed, the Armenians expect the Jews to support them. What do you make of this tension?
BHL: I don't care what the Armenians expect. What I expect from myself is faithfulness to the Jewish message, which is a message of universality, and my neighbor's lack of faithfulness in the idea of universality does not give me the right not to be faithful myself. It is the truth to say that there was a genocide in Armenia. It is the truth to say that the denial of the Armenian Genocide by Turkey is a reason for despair. It is the truth to say that I feel a kinship with the sons and grandsons of the survivors of the Armenian Genocide. I'm not engaging in politics; I'm just trying to be faithful to the message of my ancestors and the books in which I believe.
GS: There is an Armenian community in the United States. It is, to a large extent, they who pushed for the genocide recognition bill. Among the Armenians in America there is significant antisemitic sentiment. What are we to make of that?
BHL: The black community in America can sometimes be antisemitic. Does this mean that we Jews have to become anti-black? Does this mean we have to regret the part we played in the civil rights movement? The sense of my life, personally, is to refuse the clash of memories, the clash of victimhoods. 'I am a victim. You are not a victim. I am more a victim. You are less a victim.' I hate that. First of all, we must break the competition of victimhoods. Number two, you criticize the fascists wherever they are and fight them, whether in the black community, the Armenian community or anywhere. They are my enemies. But we must refuse the perverse theory that because we are victims, they cannot be. Compassion is not a cake, from which nothing is left for others if you take too big a piece.
GS: To a certain degree, one could say that the Anti-Defamation League's Abraham Foxman, the Jewish figure who most vociferously opposed the congressional resolution, found vindication. Though many were surprised by the ferocity of Turkey's response, he was not. Now, is it your position that Turkey's denial of the genocide is such an affront that we need to challenge it regardless of the consequences? Let's say the resolution had gone forward, what is the worst that could have happened?
BHL: The worst that would have happened would have been a cure, a therapy of truth for the Turks. We have to explain to the Turks, who are a great people, who are our friends, that they are not guilty of the crimes of their great-grandfathers, that recognizing the crimes would not weaken them but reinforce them. What would Germany be if it were to deny the Holocaust?
GS: This is the great mystery. Why is it that the Germans have reckoned with their past so differently than the Turks have -- even as Turkey is looking, in some ways, to draw closer to the European realm?
BHL: What Turkey lacks are the kinds of friends who are willing to explain that the best way to enter into Europe, the best way to enter into modernity, is to recognize the genocide.
GS: And who would such a friend be?
BHL: America. That's why it was a mistake to withdraw the resolution. Turkey's American friends should have said, 'Wait a minute. It's a win-win. You don't lose anything; you win credibility, you win nobility, you win honor.'
GS: One of the arguments that the Anti-Defamation League used in its fight against the genocide resolution was that Turkey's Jews were pleading with them to keep the American government from passing the bill.
BHL: It's not true. They are a minuscule minority in a country sliding toward Islamism. Every word they utter is chosen carefully. They are like hostages. Have you ever seen a hostage speaking freely?
GS: Another of the Anti-Defamation League's arguments was that this is a 90-year-old tragedy and no lives will be saved through its recognition. Israel, on the other hand, is very much at risk. On this basis, Israel's needs trump those of the Armenian fallen.
BHL: The Jewish code taught me that you have to take care of both the living and the dead. And when it comes to the dead without graves, the demands are even greater. We -- not us Jews, but we human beings -- are the protectors of the graveless, and the Armenians are such dead. This is not an either/or. The Talmudic wisdom teaches us to oppose just this sort of false choice. I will make one other point: If we don't stand very firmly on this question, we will be disarmed and weak in the face of a most urgent issue. Holocaust denial is today not just a political stance, but a world religion. We cannot afford to be anything but rigorous on the general topic of genocide. For the sake of the Jewish people, for the sake of Israel and for the sake of the fight against antisemitism, this is a crucial question.
Bernard-Henri Lévy will deliver the annual Francine and Abdallah Simon State of World Jewry Lecture at New York's 92nd Street Y on March 5 at 8 p.m.
Post a reply to this comment
SK
posted 3/28/08 @ 6:45 AM CST
Turkish writer calling to Armenian Genocide recognition stands trial in Ankara
On March 6, Turkish writer Temel Demirer will stand before the Ankara Penal Court N2.
As independent French journalist Jean Eckian told PanARMENIAN.Net, on January 20, 2007, a day after Hrant Dink's murder Temel Demirer read a declaration to the press in Ankara saying that the journalist was killed only because he was Armenian but also because he dared to speak about the Armenian Genocide.
Addressing a meeting of protest, Temel Demirer said, "We live in a country where murders and silence on the truth are associates. Hrant was assassinated not only because he was Armenian, but because he said that a genocide took place in this country. If intellectual Turks do not commit crimes under article 301, they will be also guilty Hrant's assassination."
"There was a genocide in our history, it is called the Armenian Genocide. At the expense of its life, Hrant made it clear to all of us.
"Those which slaughtered Armenians yesterday attack our Kurdish brothers and sisters today. Those which want fraternity of peoples need to face this history. We must prevent crimes, since what happened to the Armenians may happen to the Kurds. Yes, there was Armenian Genocide in this country.
"We know very well who the perpetrators were! It is not a secret for us. Neither is it a secret for those who supports article 301. We cannot keep silent," the declaration says.
This declaration had been signed by more than 45 Turkish personalities and organizations.
Post a reply to this comment
SK
posted 3/28/08 @ 6:48 AM CST
ISRAELI GENOCIDE SCHOLARS RESPOND TO REPORTED STATEMENTS OF AMBASSADOR GABY LEVY DENYING THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE."
OPEN LETTER TO MK TZIPI LIVNI, MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, ISRAEL
MK Tzipi Livni, Minister of Foreign Affairs Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem
We are writing to express our shock, disbelief and horror at the statements attributed to Ambassador to Turkey Gaby Levy by the website of Sabah News (Turkey) that "what we [Israel] did in Gaza is not genocide just like there is no Armenian genocide." These statements were reportedly in response to comments made by Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey criticizing Israel's response to the terror attacks from Gaza. We would like to believe that he was misquoted.
Ambassador Levy is insultingly wrong in denying the Armenian genocide.
There is an overwhelming body of historical evidence from many separate and independent bodies of information to show that the mass atrocities experienced by the Armenians were a result of an intentional policy on the part of the Turkish government at the time. It is precisely this evidence of intent to kill and destroy, in whole or in part, as defined by the UN Convention on Genocide, which is why these atrocities constitute genocide. They were adjudged genocide by Raphael Lemkin, the person who gave the world the word-concept of genocide, and have been so adjudged by any number of impartial commissions and professional authorities, including the International Association of Genocide Scholars.
Israel's ambassador is humiliatingly further misdirected on Gaza, where it is Hamas, an organization with a genocidal agenda, which is carrying out terror attacks aimed at killing, destroying and expelling the entire population. Israel is defending itself against the perpetrators of this genocidal agenda. The Grad rockets Hamas is now firing at population centers in Israel come from Iran which has expressed a sworn determination to wipe out the State of Israel.
Clearly Israel has never embarked on a genocidal program or action in Gaza, but for the ambassador to prove his point as it were by comparing Israel's actions today in Gaza to the known genocidal activities of the Ottoman Turks against the Armenians and other non-Moslem minorities in 1915 and on is self-defeating in the extreme. The aim of Israel's military actions in Gaza is to stop the genocidal terror aimed at the Israeli public. To link proof that Israel is not the aggressor in Gaza with a denial of the validity of the Armenian Genocide is seriously harmful to Israel. Ambassador Levy's mission is not to revise historical truth, but to represent Israel with honor, self-respect, competence and integrity. He has failed the test on all counts. By publicly declaring his denial of the Armenian genocide, he paves the way for denial of all other genocidal threats, foremost of which are those now facing Israel.
Israel's relationship with Turkey is a matter of vital importance to the two countries,. But this relationship does not require public displays of obsequiousness and participation in genocide denial. It does require Ambassador Levy to advise Turkey of the genocidal threats from Hamas, and from Iran, its paymaster.
We call upon the Government to repudiate the remarks attributed to him.
Sincerely,
Prof. Yair Auron, PhD, Dept. of Sociology, Open University of Israel yairau@oumail.openu.ac.il
Prof. Israel W. Charny, PhD (retired Tel Aviv University and Hebrew University), Executive Director, Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide, Jerusalem, Editor, Encyclopedia of Genocide encygeno@mail.com
Prof. Elihu D. Richter, MD, MPH, Genocide Prevention Program, Hebrew University-Hadassah School of Public Health and Community Medicine, elir@cc.huji.ac.il
Post a reply to this comment
Sahin Karakaya
posted 3/28/08 @ 6:50 AM CST
TURKISH SECURITY OFFICIALS ADMIT COVER-UP IN DINK MURDER CASE
By Gareth Jenkins
Friday, March 21, 2008
On March 20, two members of the Turkish Gendarmerie admitted receiving detailed intelligence regarding a plot to assassinate Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink and then, after Dink's murder, trying to cover up their knowledge by lying to investigators.
The confessions came as two Gendarmerie officers, known by their initials as O. S. and V. S., went on trial for dereliction of duty after evidence emerged that the security forces in the eastern Black Sea city of Trabzon had been informed of the plot to assassinate Dink months in advance but had failed either to apprehend the plotters or attempt to protect Dink (Anadolu Ajans, CNNTurk, NTV, March 20).
On January 19, 2007, the 52 year-old Dink was shot dead outside the Istanbul office of the Agos newspaper where he worked as editor-in-chief and which serves Turkey's dwindling Armenian community. Dink was killed by Ogun Samast, an unemployed, poorly-educated 17 year-old who had traveled from Trabzon to carry out the assassination. Minors are often used to carry out murders in Turkey as, under Turkish law, anyone under 18 they can only be sentenced to a maximum of a few years in jail. It later emerged that Samast had been a member of a ultranationalist gang with strong Islamist sympathies led by the then 24 year-old Yasin Hayal. Hayal and his associates were well known to the security forces in Trabzon and some of them worked as police informants. On March 20, the gendarmerie officers admitted that, in August 2006, one of Hayal's relatives had warned them that Hayal was planning to kill Dink and had given him YTL 500 (around $400) to buy a gun for the assassination. The officers were also told that someone linked to the gang had carried out surveillance of Dink in Istanbul and even drawn up diagrams showing the route taken by Dink as he traveled from his home to the Agos office (Radikal, Milliyet, Sabah, Hurriyet, Cumhuriyet, March 21).
A soft-spoken advocate of reconciliation between Turks and Armenians, in February 2004 Dink wrote a series of articles in Agos calling for dialogue without any preconditions. He maintained that an insistence that Turkey should first recognize the tragic events of 1915 as a genocide was an obstacle to reconciliation. In an article he wrote in Agos, Dink called on Armenians to "cleanse their blood of the poison of genocide" and engage in dialogue with Turks.
However, the mere mention of the word genocide resulted in Dink being prosecuted under the notorious Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, which makes it a criminal offence to denigrate the concept of "Turkishness." In October 2005, Dink was convicted and given a suspended prison sentence of six months. Even though he never served time in jail, the publicity surrounding his trial made Dink a hated figure for many Turkish ultranationalists. Extraordinarily, given the numerous calls for him to be killed in the Turkish ultranationalist press and Internet chat rooms and the telephoned death threats that Dink himself reported to the Istanbul police, and unlike almost any prominent Turkish Muslim who receives similar threats from extremists, Dink was not given police protection. When he was killed by Samast as he left the Agos office to pay some bills at his local bank, Dink was completely alone.
In their statements to the court, both O. S. and V. S. insisted that they had forwarded the intelligence of the plot to kill Dink to their commanding officer, Colonel Ali Oz, the head of the Gendarmerie in Trabzon. They claimed that Oz had not only failed to take action but, during the investigation that followed Dink's murder, had instructed them to deny any prior knowledge of the plot to kill Dink.
When taken in isolation, it would be possible to attribute the cover-up simply as an attempt to hide incompetence. But, when combined with other evidence that has emerged since Dink's murder, the conclusions are more disturbing. When Samast was captured, some of the arresting officers took photographs of him posed heroically in front of the Turkish flag. Ultranationalist publications and chat rooms buzzed with praise for the killing. There were even songs written in Samast's honor and posted on YouTube.
There is little doubt that the majority of Turks, even many Turkish nationalists, were appalled by Dink's murder. Indeed, one of the most moving tributes to him appeared in Yeni Cag, the main ultranationalist daily newspaper. On the evening of January 19, 2007, thousands of Muslim Turks joined with Armenians to march through the center of Istanbul chanting "We are all Dink" and "We are all Armenians." On January 19, 2008, Muslim Turks also dominated the numerous ceremonies held to remember Dink on the first anniversary of his murder.
Nevertheless, the confessions by the two gendarmerie officers will reinforce suspicions that racial and religious prejudice remains a serious problem both in Turkish society as a whole and in the country's security forces. Earlier this year, it emerged that, at the time of his death, Andrea Santoro, a Roman Catholic priest who was shot by Oguzhan Akdin, a 16 year-old youth with ultranationalist and Islamist sympathies, was under surveillance by the police on the ludicrous suspicion that he was plotting to facilitate the annexation of Turkey's eastern Black Sea coast by Greece. On April 18, 2007, three Christian missionaries in the southeastern city of Mardin were tortured and then had their throats cut by a group of students from a hostel run by an Islamic foundation. During their trial, evidence has emerged that these students too were in contact with members of the local security forces. Lawyers acting for the families of the victims claim that they have been receiving numerous death threats, are being harassed by security officials and that key evidence – such as tape recordings of confessions detailing links between the accused and security officials – that was present at the beginning of the trial, has now disappeared.
There is no suggestion that any high-ranking members of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) were involved either in any of the killings or in the subsequent cover-ups. But neither does the government appear to understand the extent of religious and racial prejudice in Turkey or the need to amend legislation that fuels it. The effective protection of minorities is a prerequisite for Turkish accession to the EU, which has long pressed for the abolition of legislation such as Article 301 of the Penal Code (see EDM, January 8). However, since the beginning of the year, the AKP has preferred to focus almost exclusively on trying to push through legislation to lift the headscarf ban that prevents pious Sunni women from attending university (see EDM, February 11, February 25) and, most recently, on legislative changes to circumvent the party itself being outlawed following the public prosecutor's application for its closure on March 14 (see EDM, March 17).
Post a reply to this comment
wtf
posted 3/28/08 @ 1:12 PM CST
GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS WILL NEVER BE SETTLED AND YOU ARE ONLY CONTRIBUTING BY ARGUING ABOUT IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN. GOD DAMN.
Post a reply to this comment
wtf
posted 3/28/08 @ 1:12 PM CST
GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS WILL NEVER BE SETTLED AND YOU ARE ONLY CONTRIBUTING BY ARGUING ABOUT IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN. GOD DAMN.
atay
posted 4/06/08 @ 8:39 AM CST
Very well written article. People who are not afraid of the truth coming out will support the formation of the joint commission that the government of Turkey is proposing, and will let historians to put to rest historical facts in lieu of pressing the politicians to rewrite history through lobbying.
In the mean time anyone interested in learning more should go to www.tallarmeniantale.com and find out what historians say about these allegations.
Sahin Karakaya
posted 7/03/08 @ 8:49 AM CST
TANER AKCAM'S RESPONSE TO YUSUF HALACOGLU ARTICLE - TARAF,Sunday,June 15, 2008 TIME TO EXPOSE LIES It is time to put an end to the primitive and deceitful policy ofthe Turkish Historical Society, based on lies and propaganda forinternal public opinion and a cause for embarrassment for Turkey andTurkish historians First, I would like to thank Ayse Hur for providing a summary ofthe Ottoman Archives research covered in my book titled The ArmenianProblem Is Solved - Armenian Related Policies During Wartime AccordingTo Ottoman Archives (Iletisim Publishers, January 2008). Ayse Huralso included sections from my book criticizing Halacoglu, in anarticle titled "Akcam Asks Questions, Halacoglu Remains Silent." Before I respond to Halacoglu's article, I would like to provide somecontext in order not to be drowned in minute details back and forth. THE FALSIFICATION ABOUT 1397 Those claiming that there was no genocidal intent or mass destructionin the 1915 Armenian Deportations often use the argument that allcivil servants who maltreated the Armenians, attacked the convoysor murdered the deportees were arrested and prosecuted. Accordingly,some government officials who exploited the situation were investigatedand sent to courts, a total of 1397 people were tried, a majority ofthem were convicted and given various sentences, including capitalpunishment. I have demonstrated in my book that based on the Ottoman Archives,this argument is not correct. There are no documents in the OttomanArchives related to prosecution and punishment of government officialsaccused of Armenians' murders. The Ittihat Terakki party in powerhad no such policy; on the contrary, I have documented that if anygovernment officials were by chance accused of any such crimes, thegovernment took steps to have them discharged immediately. I have alsodocumented on several occasions how the Ittihat Terakki governmenteliminated a few of their own officials who could potentially causefuture allegations related to the Armenian case. ATTENTION AND CARE ABOUT PROPERTY NOT HUMAN BEINGS One of the facts that is clearly evident in the Ottoman Archivesis that the Ittihat Terakki government, which had shown no caretoward the Armenians as human beings, did show extra care andattention toward the possessions and properties left behind by theArmenians. The government took extraordinary precautions to ensurethat all these possessions were converted to state ownership. Thespecial commissions or trials set up to investigate the wrongdoingsrelated to the Armenians were all about the government officials whoattempted to personally plunder, steal or take over ownership of theArmenians' properties. There has been absolutely no investigationor trial by the Ittihat Terakki government about those who committedcrimes against the Armenians or who organized the massacres. I had explained in my book how Yusuf Halacoglu leads the campaignof lies in this subject, by giving an example from his book titledThe Armenian Deportations and Truths (1914-1918) (Turkish HistoricalSociety, Ankara, 2001). I had accused him of revising the OttomanArchives and by deliberately providing misinformation. Halacoglu inhis responding article merely repeats and confirms that I am right. In his book, in the chapter titled "Attacks on the Armenian Convoysand Preventive Measures Taken by the Government," Halacoglu writesthat "special investigative commissions were formed in order toprosecute the officials accused of neglect of duty or illegalactivities." He further claims that "government officials who wereaccused of wrongdoings and maltreating the Armenians were prosecuted,"and that "they were taken to the Military Tribunals for severepunishment." Halacoglu bases these words on the following ArchivalDocument No. 12 (Internal Ciphers Directory 54-A/236; 55-A/146:55-A/157: 58-A/141; 58-A/278; 61/165; 57/105; 57/116; 57/143; 57/416;59/196; 59/235) . In fact, Yusuf Halacoglu is lying, as none of these archivaldocuments relate to Military Tribunals and punishment of officialsfor maltreatment of Armenians. As I have shown in my book, one byone for each document, these are all related to personal enrichmentcrimes of officials plundering, stealing or converting ownership ofthe properties and possessions left behind by the Armenians. In these documents, Talat Pasha directs officials to comment (59/196),to investigate (55-A/156), to fire from duty the accused persons(57/143). Two other documents are related to seeking authority totake the personal enrichment cases to the Military Tribunal (57/146,61/165). Halacoglu not only dared to present these documents as "trial andpunishment of government officials at Military Tribunals chargedwith maltreating the Armenians," but he also used documents "praisinggovernment officials for successful deportation activities" for thesame purpose. For example, the document no. 58-A/141, dated November28, 1915, is a telegram from Talat Pasha to Cemal Pasha, remindingCemal that he has no right to fire a local governor for maltreatment,praising the fired official and instructing Cemal to reinstate him. I have asked in my book and pose the same question again: Isn't itshameful, isn't it criminal in the name of scientific research to usethese documents as evidence that "government officials maltreating theArmenians were prosecuted and punished, including capital punishment?" NEW DOCUMENT NO. 13 OUT OF A HAT What could be expected from Yusuf Halacoglu as a response to myallegations? Shouldn't he use my documents, one by one, to prove or disprovethat I have told the truth? Instead, in his article he responds byreferring to another book of his and writes: "Akcam's questions areanswered with the necessary documents." In his book titled ArmenianAllegations from Deportation to Genocide, in the Section titled"Guilty Deportation Officials" (Pages 91-96), the same information,same documents exist as in his 2001 book that I criticized. Thereare also 12 new documents unrelated to my criticism. That is, there is absolutely no change. My criticism was that none of the new 12 documents shed light on thepunishment of government officials charged with the maltreatment ofArmenians. Halacoglu does not and cannot say "These documents showthat there is information about punishment of government officials formaltreating the Armenians." Instead, he produces a new Document No. 13. But funnily enough, this new document further reinforces my criticism. As can be seen, this new document, dated March 12, 1916, relates tosixteen trials of the Syria Military Tribunal. Of the sixteen trials,fourteen are related to the personal plunder and stealing of propertiesand possessions left behind by the Armenians. The last two are aboutCircassian Ahmet (Halacoglu erroneously writes Recep, son of Ahmet,whereas the correct names are Ahmet, son of Recep). Nine cases weredischarged outright and the accused released. Five cases resulted inguilty verdicts but punishments were deferred (Please see Appendixfor the translation). The aforementioned Circassian Ahmet was amember of the Teskilat-i Mahsusa (Special Organization), executed onSeptember 17, 1915. Talat Pasha had sent a telegram to Cemal Pasha,authorizing the execution, saying that: "His death is immediatelyrequired, otherwise, he can cause us harm in the future." The execution of a few undesirable Teskilat-i Mahsusa members isfurther covered in my book (pages 247-252). THERE ARE NO NEW FACTS I will repeat my questions, again and again: Are there any trialsand prosecutions against anyone for maltreating the Armenians, FORHARMING THE ARMENIANS AS HUMAN BEINGS? The answer is NO. Are thereany officials arrested by chance for other crimes, but released bythe Central government? YES. The Ittihat Terakki government has never organized any trialsrelated to the massacres but if any accused officials were to bearrested, it did everything possible to have them released. Arethere any trials and prosecutions of government officials forpersonal plunder of the property and possessions left behind by theArmenians? YES. Have these been successful? NO. This is evident fromany and all documents. Property and possessions plundered personallyhave remained in the ownership of these persons. We do not need anydocuments for these. Anatolia is still full of these stories. My second criticism of Halacoglu's book, Armenian Deportations andTruths, relates to another deceitful thesis. Halacoglu states that"The Abandoned Properties Commissions paid funds from the proceedsof the sold properties to the deportees. The resettled refugees usedthese payments to start new businesses and quickly adapted to their newenvironment." Halacoglu uses three documents to support this argument(DH. SFR. 57/348; 57/349; 57/350). As can be seen, there is a great thesis and three documents. The thesisis that the Armenians were paid monies in lieu of their propertiesleft behind. This is completely untrue, and Halacoglu is deliberately lying. It isin vain to find any documents in the Ottoman Archives related to fundspaid to the Armenians; such documents do not exist and therefore,the supporters of this thesis can lie indiscriminately. WhenHalacoglu referred to three archival documents about "monies paidto the Armenians and about Armenians using these monies to set upbusinesses in their new settlements," he perhaps thought that no onewould investigate these three documents. These three documents are allfrom Eskishehir, and they refer to monies to be sent to the Governorof Aleppo, not to be given to the Armenians, but to cover the expensesof the local government during the Armenian deportation activities. WHY ARE THOUSANDS OF ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS MISSING? It is impossible to have only three puny documents to support theargument of considerable transfer of funds to the Armenians. Thereshould have been hundreds of thousands of documents about the Armeniansdeported to Syria and Iraq. These documents simply do not exist. Thereis a simple argument to refute this deceitful thesis. If we considerthe official government declaration dated March 11, 1919, it statesthat 101,747 Armenians did return to their homes after the war. Didany government official ask these Armenians: "Brother, we paid youfor your sold possessions when you resettled elsewhere, now, you haveto pay back..." THE LIE ABOUT AID When one reads Halacoglu's response, it becomes apparent that hisargument changes from financial payment to the resettled Armenians tofinancial aid to Armenians during the deportations. He refers to somedocuments about government fund transfers to cover the deportationexpenses. While doing this, he brazenly falsifies the archivaldocuments. As an example, he refers to a report by Dr. W. M. Post,a doctor at the American Hospital in Konya. The doctor states that "Armenians are paid 1 kurus (piastre)per adult and 20 para per child." It is obvious that Halacogluhas not researched this subject, as he states that he got thisinformation from his colleague Kemal Cicek. Kemal Cicek is an expertin document falsification. He has published the said falsifieddocument of Dr. Post in his book titled, Armenians' Forced Emigration1915-1917. Readers interested in the original complete reports canrefer to Ara Sarafyan (ed.), United States Official Record on theArmenian Genocide 1915-1917, Princeton, London: Gomidas Institute,2004, pages 245-257. Dr. Post explains the Konya deportation campwhere "there are absolutely no sanitary conditions, average 30 to 40people die daily, rape, murder, bribe and kidnapping is rampant." KemalCicek's version does not refer to these facts. The payment of 1 kurusper adult and 20 para per child is a limited arrangement for a fewdays. But Halacoglu applies this with a magical trick to all theArmenian convoys, throughout the entire duration of the deportations. There is no limit to the document falsification and revisionismin Halacoglu's world. In his response, he writes that "foreign aidorganizations received permission to help the Armenians with TalatPasha's signature." I refer the reader to my book, pages 306-320,which explains how the Ottoman government refused any help to theArmenians from the foreign aid organizations. In fact, Ottoman archivaldocuments clearly show that not only was the foreign aid refused,but any foreigners trying to aid the Armenians were threatened,arrested and imprisoned.
ABDULLAH
posted 3/16/08 @ 9:04 AM CST
First of all countries must look their own history...
Than some people can speak or not, ok ?
Ermanies-USA-France and the others...look your past and then come and speak or don't speak.
Last,you all must be very objktive,because your history
is very very bad,begining with burning women!..killing
american indian,algerian people,etc..ec..
One day history will punish you imperialist countries !!..
First of all,we Turks will ask you your brutality in our
parlement,don'forget it!!!!!!!!!!.............
Post a reply to this comment
Matthias trallenburg
posted 3/16/08 @ 9:10 AM CST
Apart from all the historical debate that definetly requiresa lot of knowladge and time invesment these basict facts lead me to think that Armenian claims of genocide is not founded on reality.
1. there are international courts to solve these issues. If armenian genocide is proven (as Armenians claim to be) why dont they just applythe international court and end this once an for all?
2. It is said that 1.5 milion Armenians were killed. Why dont we see a single Armenian mass grave? The lands that the events occoured are no longer Turkish teritory. there should be hundreds of mass graves. Where are they?
3. As far as I know Turkey has offered to create a joint international historical commission to investigate the events. Why does Armenians refuse the offer. Also Turkey declared her archives are open to all parties. But Armenian archives are still close to research. If Armenians are right why dont they open their archives?
Yavuz Ozturk
posted 3/16/08 @ 2:37 PM CST
Hi all,
First of all I must mention that I am not a professional journalist or a historian. I am just a computer scientist who loves his country (Turkey) and proud of Turkish Armed Forces.
I have read all of the comments beginning from the first to the last and noted some interesting points (at least they sound interesting for me) to share with you.
First of all, in one of the first comments, suddenly a person called Saryan (with an interesting name L.) used the word "eastern barbarians" for the Turkish people. I want to answer his polite (!) adjective with a Turkish saying: "Dinsizin hakkindan imansiz gelir". Dear Turkish friends, if you can translate it to English for me, I will be very happy. (I apologize because my English is not good enough to translate sayings.)
Secondly, Simon Manoyan used the word "coward" for the glorious and honourable Turkish Army for the military operation to Cyprus. I am very sensitive for this subject because my father served there as a military medical doctor and now he is a veteran. I want to ask Simon if he visited the houses (they are museums now) of innocent Turkish families who are slaughtered. There is no more obvious thing than if a country is attacking your people, you have an international right to answer it with a counter-attack. So, what I want to say is, Turkey did not attack Cyprus without a reason. Our army landed there to protect Turkish people. So as a result, instead of closing eyes while Turkish people were being killed in Cyprus and sitting as a "coward", glorious and honourable Turkish Army went to Cyprus and defended our people there.
Thirdly, Simon thinks that Turkey is invading Iraq. I want to ask Simon two questions:
a. If Turkey invaded Iraq in 8 days, what is America doing there for 4 years?
b. How can you call a military operation as "invasion" on a "no mans land"? Talabani says that Northern Iraq is under control by Barzani. Barzani says that he does not have the control over the border. So? So, it is simply "no mans land".
Fourthly, Simon blaims us as "Turkish denialists". I noticed that it is the first time he is using a capital "T" while writing the word "Turkish" after writing "Turkish", "Turkey" an "Turks" with a lower case "t" numerous times, while we are always writing "Armenia" with an upper case "A". I want to congratulate him because he learned writing at last (!)
I wonder why and how he is using bad words ("coward", "denialists" and "racist") frequently in an open society area. He can use them in his private life, he can use these words while talking about his friends or talking about his family but who he thinks himself judging people that he doesn' t know?
Fiftly, Sam told that "people are just looking for an apology for a widely accepted tragedy". I want to ask: Can we call every "widely accepted" things "really true"? For example, it was once widely accepted that the earth is flat until Galileo told it was not. After some time, it was proven that the earth is a sphere. So, what I want to say is:
a. All widely accepted things are not really true.
b. Why people are looking for an apology if it is not in fact true (due to (a.))?
-Best regards.
-Saglicakla kalin.
-Yavuz
SECIL AKSOY
posted 3/16/08 @ 8:26 PM CST
Originally posted by
Yavuz Ozturk
Hi all,
First of all I must mention that I am not a professional journalist or a historian. I am just a computer scientist who loves his country (Turkey) and proud of Turkish Armed Forces.
I have read all of the comments beginning from the first to the last and noted some interesting points (at least they sound interesting for me) to share with you.
First of all, in one of the first comments, suddenly a person called Saryan (with an interesting name L.) used the word "eastern barbarians" for the Turkish people. I want to answer his polite (!) adjective with a Turkish saying: "Dinsizin hakkindan imansiz gelir". Dear Turkish friends, if you can translate it to English for me, I will be very happy. (I apologize because my English is not good enough to translate sayings.)
Secondly, Simon Manoyan used the word "coward" for the glorious and honourable Turkish Army for the military operation to Cyprus. I am very sensitive for this subject because my father served there as a military medical doctor and now he is a veteran. I want to ask Simon if he visited the houses (they are museums now) of innocent Turkish families who are slaughtered. There is no more obvious thing than if a country is attacking your people, you have an international right to answer it with a counter-attack. So, what I want to say is, Turkey did not attack Cyprus without a reason. Our army landed there to protect Turkish people. So as a result, instead of closing eyes while Turkish people were being killed in Cyprus and sitting as a "coward", glorious and honourable Turkish Army went to Cyprus and defended our people there.
Thirdly, Simon thinks that Turkey is invading Iraq. I want to ask Simon two questions:
a. If Turkey invaded Iraq in 8 days, what is America doing there for 4 years?
b. How can you call a military operation as "invasion" on a "no mans land"? Talabani says that Northern Iraq is under control by Barzani. Barzani says that he does not have the control over the border. So? So, it is simply "no mans land".
Fourthly, Simon blaims us as "Turkish denialists". I noticed that it is the first time he is using a capital "T" while writing the word "Turkish" after writing "Turkish", "Turkey" an "Turks" with a lower case "t" numerous times, while we are always writing "Armenia" with an upper case "A". I want to congratulate him because he learned writing at last (!)
I wonder why and how he is using bad words ("coward", "denialists" and "racist") frequently in an open society area. He can use them in his private life, he can use these words while talking about his friends or talking about his family but who he thinks himself judging people that he doesn' t know?
Fiftly, Sam told that "people are just looking for an apology for a widely accepted tragedy". I want to ask: Can we call every "widely accepted" things "really true"? For example, it was once widely accepted that the earth is flat until Galileo told it was not. After some time, it was proven that the earth is a sphere. So, what I want to say is:
a. All widely accepted things are not really true.
b. Why people are looking for an apology if it is not in fact true (due to (a.))?
-Best regards.
-Saglicakla kalin.
-Yavuz
Dear Yavuz Ozturk,
I would like to thank you for reading and commenting also for your intelligent points. You do not have to be a journalist or a historian to write a polite respectful comment. You have mention that Saryan used the word "eastern barbarians" for the Turkish people. And you answered his polite (!) adjective with a Turkish saying: "Dinsizin hakkindan imansiz gelir". I would like to translate that The Turkish saying is "Diamond cut diamond." The meaning of the saying basically explains only barbarians could handle barbarians.
Sincerely;
Secil Aksoy
SERHAN
posted 3/17/08 @ 1:40 PM CST
There have always been two groups of people. One group works for their living. The other group doesn't. Naturally, as no one feeds parasites willingly, the parasites have to take their income by force. Elaborate schemes, carefully crafted lies, control of education, well practiced methods to create chaos have been used throughout history. People do not change so these events will continue. It is up to the working group that has to wake up and protect themselves. Today Armenians are fed horrible lies with hopes of building up hatred, stoking fires of conflict. The liars will not enter any conflict. They will only reap the benefits. The usual gains.... selling arms, taking land, or strengthening their religious power which translates into money. People who are pushed into conflicts have to kill or be killed. The fear and anger that comes from all the killing turns normal people into monsters. Listen carefully to veterans that turn back from conflicts. The ones left behind have to bury their loved ones, often their children with an unquenchable pain till they die. People there is still oil to steal, land to grab, resources to be ripped out of the hands of the people who have them. So the warmongering will continue. If we don't analyze each situation carefully, if we do not ask "Who is going to benefit from this and what price am I going to pay", guess who the victims will be?
There is oil in the south part of Turkiye. There is a desire to break the area up into smaller groups creating a Kurdistan on this area, controlled by leaders who serve as puppets. The vast income that will be controlled by a small group will then easily be siphoned away. The Kurdish people in turn will not be free either. They will be forced into conflict with the now starving Sunnis so they will have to buy guns, and sell the oil as raw oil while fighting their neighbors. Nice conflict which will make many a parasite quite rich (richer). Armenians are used as tools to label Turks as killers so when the time comes to "save" the Kurds from the Turks, the world will have overwhelming support. The maps of carved out Turkiye is displayed in many international meetings. Writers are bought to write lies to brainwash people.
I ask this question, is the average Armenian happy with what they are doing in Azerbaijan? Azerbaijan is an oil rich country that has separated from Russia. If Russia overtakes them it will raise protests. But if Armenia does it for them, it will be two small countries fighting it out. Also a great market for arms merchants. Wake up people!
If everyone stays in their borders as they are now, love their neighbors as their own family, helps each other and trade peacefully, justly, and if the Ten Commandments are obeyed strictly, what conflict will there be? People listen to your hearts carefully. Do not feed the parasites!
onder
posted 3/22/08 @ 12:34 PM CST
A Yale University history professor F. Kazemzadeh, in one of the first comprehensive scholarly studies of the region in the US, wrote: "This three-day massacre by Armenians is recorded in history as the "March Events" and thousands of Muslims, old people, women and children lost their lives" ("The Struggle for Transcaucasia", New York, 1951, p. 69).
Another distinguished professor of history at the University of Louisville, was even more blunt: "From 30 March to 1 April 1918, the Tatars [as Azerbaijanis were sometimes called] were attacked. Almost half of the Muslim population of Baku was compelled to flee the city.... Between 8,000 and 12,000 Muslims were killed in Baku alone...."
SK
posted 3/27/08 @ 7:17 AM CST
The Enemy of My Friend is My Enemy?
With all due respect to the numerous Jewish-born humanists, historians, writers, individual personalities, Chief Rabbi, Yona Metzger and many other that have had the courage to take a stand for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide and justice for this crime, it is none the less obvious that the official representatives of Judaism and above all Jewish/Israeli politicians still have a lot to catch up on.
Turkish Prime Minster, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, called upon Turkish migrant workers in a very controversial and emotional speech, on Feb 10 in Germany city of Cologne, to resist assimilation and remain Turkish. Erdogan confused in his above mentioned speech "integration" with "assimilation". According to Turkish Prime Minister: "Assimilation is a crime against humanity"! Erdogan´s nationalistic views on needed intergration of Turks in German society cuased an outcry in Germany. One should just bring to the attention of Turkish authorities that the Australian government apologized Wednesday (Feb 13) for years of "mistreatment" and decades of racist policies that inflicted "profound grief, suffering and loss" on the country's Aboriginal people. When is Turkey - an "allay and friend" of Israel and Us - going to end its racist policies and apologize for the systematic destruction of Armenians as other Christian folks and forced turcifications in Turkey? According to Turkish palace historians all Non Turks living in Ottoman Turkey were "foreign spies and infidels..."
Even though the internationally recognized and respected Jewish jurist and human rights activist Rafael Lemkin already concerned himself with and recognized the systematic destruction of the Armenians as a "murder of race" at the start of the 1930s, the fact remains that justice for the Armenian Genocide is still being aggressively denied by influential organizations of the Jewish Diaspora as well as by the State of Israel itself.
Genocide - extermination of a race - is a political crime. Genocides are not committed by private individuals, but by the state itself. The reference to historians and historical science in regard to the Armenian Genocide is a tactical and spurious argument to relieve the world governments from the responsibility to act while simultaneously giving the perpetrators carte blanche. The proper reaction to political crimes is therefore only possible through political response - from the parliamentary houses, the politicians and the governments.
Now more than ever the denial of genocide must be responded to, for denial is intrinsic to the methodology of genocide. Genocide is denied even as it is practiced.
From the beginning, the perpetrator seeks pretexts and justifications to conceal the real intentions. Thus, the extermination is referred to as "transporting," as "deportation" or "resettlement" - "moving to secure places" or even as the "final solution." A verbal code is used to camouflage and thus deny the annihilation, even as it is being committed. No wonder after the "deportation (i.e. Annihilation) of Armenians in Turkey everything become „Turkish".
Genocide without simultaneous denial is unthinkable - yes, even impossible. The first thing that must be done is to consider what the perpetrators want to attain through denial. Denial is not just the simple negation of an act; it is much more the consequent continuation of the very act itself. Genocide should not only physically destroy a community; it should likewise dictate the prerogative of interpretation in regard to history, culture, territory and memory. As the victims- Armenians - "never exists".
The Turkish have not only murdered humans , destroyed an ancient culture/civilization and rewritten history, but they continue to legitimize the act as well as the racist ideology that led to the act. This includes the legitimization of any and all stereotyping of the Armenian people as a dangerous enemy, as a deadly bogeyman in the closet.
Denial is the final step in the completion of a mass extermination - and the first step towards the next genocide. If genocide is committed in Ruanda or Sudan, it is done with the knowledge that the rest of the world will only watch and then forget.
They look to Turkey and think themselves safe in the assumption that their actions will likewise remain unpunished! Whether in Sudan or Ruanda or any other potential hotspot of mass murder the accountable powers-that-be rhetorically ask - as Hitler supposedly did just before invading Poland - "Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?"
The Republic of Turkey has denied the Armenian Genocide for the past 84 years, and politicians in Israel and a vast majority of officials of Jewish Diaspora are aboard their boat now. In the USA, for example, the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL) not only denied the Armenian Genocide in the past but also actively fought against the Congressional Resolution for the Recognition of the Armenian Genocide. At the end of August 2007, the ADL finally recognized the Armenian Genocide through gritted teeth. The acknowledgment given, however, was qualified to such an extent that one could have done without it. A similar statement of recognition was also simultaneously supplied by the American Jewish Committee.
Presently, the AIPAC totally denies to have ever fought against the official recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the US government and now presents itself as being neutral in regard to the subject. (And apparently "neutral" is just what they are.)
Pierre Besnainou, the acting president of the European Jewish Congress (EJC) until early 2007, stated in 2006 that the Armenian people should stop making fools of themselves: there has been only one genocide in modern times and as everyone knows it was that of the Jews - an Armenian Genocide never happened. (We have yet to see what the attitude of Moshe Kantor, the current president of the EJC, is in this regard.)
In 2001, while he was the Israeli Foreign Minister, Nobel Prize winner and current President of Israel Shimon Peres described the Armenians as "meaningless" ("Armenian allegations") Moreover, this year President Shimon Peres and the current Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni did a heroic act that in no way pales to the statements regarding the Holocaust expressed by the President Ahmadinejad: Peres affirmed Israel's attitude to the "Armenian Question" and promised the Turkish Prime Minster Erdogan to lobby against the Armenians, while Minster Livni prevented the Knesset from officially recognizing the Armenian Genocide.
The statement given: "Genocide never happened. There was a "tragedy" with victims on both sides. Please reconcile yourselves now and start a dialog." Once again, a replay of the Turkish argument of shameless denial by a Israeli official: "There were mutual killings and No mass Killings."
Just recently Israeli President Shimon Peres let himself be vocally celebrated by hundreds of Genocide deniers in the Turkish Parliament, including numerous Turkish fascists, racists, ultra-nationalists and fundamentalists In Ankara, President Shimon Peres reiterated his support for the denial of the Armenian Genocide and conveyed his full acceptance of the Turkish politics of lies and denial. But it cannot escape the notice of an experienced politician like President Shimon Peres that the Genocide deniers in Ankara are no longer simply satisfied with the repudiation of the Armenian Genocide.
Turkish Prime Minster Erdogan and the other Turkish nationalists have long since joined forces to create Pan Turanic - "Pan Turkish"- institutions with the specific aim of try(ing) to prove the 'illegality' of the existence of the Armenian people to the world.
When the French Ambassador to Great Britain, Daniel Bernard, referred to Israel as "this shitty little country" in 2001, there was a storm of protest and he was quickly labeled an Anti-Semite. But what should an Armenian call someone that denies the Armenian Genocide and refers to Armenians as "meaningless"? If that were even just all that is being done: Above and beyond this, Turkey has demanded that Israel instruct the "Jewish Lobby" to agitate against the Armenians. Of course the reference to the "Jewish Lobby" is an allusion to the Jewish Diaspora and - as is the case when talking of Diasporas - carries a whiff of world conspiracy and global domination.
Thus, the "Jewish Conspiracy" should follow Ankara's tune and eliminate, obliterate, purge (whatever you choose to call it) the "Armenian Conspiracy." Under normal circumstances the concept would be laughable, but laughter is not advisable as it could result in asphyxiation.
Why Do Jewish Organizations and their Functionaries Deny the Armenian Genocide as Turkey Does Deny recognition and Justice for this Crime? How can this act of denial be harmonious with the Jewish moral concepts and identity in light of the xenophobia, racism, Anti-Semitism, hostility and intolerance that the sorely tested Jewish People are themselves confronted with on a daily basis? Genocide is racism: it is the most paramount and aggressive form of racial discrimination, and is aimed at the obliteration of the existence and life of a people only because they belong to a specific community or collective - a community that is defined by the aggressors as "the others," as "the alien."
Two reasons are commonly given for the "placating" activities of the international Jewish community in regard to Turkey's denial policies: Israel needs Turkey, and the Holocaust is unique. On occasion a third reason is also offered: to do otherwise would result in repercussions against the Jewish community in Istanbul. (Although if this were true, the US Congress and Senate could never pass any resolutions against Iran: as is well known, numerous Jewish people also live in Tehran, Yazd, and Isfahan for centuries!) Statements such as those are, in the end, nothing but hollow attempts to justify denial.
The attitude of Jewish Organizations and their functionaries in regard to the Armenian Genocide not only results in their involvement in the guilt of the perpetrators but also produces a culpability of their own as well.
An attitude such as theirs supports and perpetuates the bogeyman image of the Armenians that has long been cherished by the Turkish while simultaneously strengthening the Turkish nationalistic self-image. Above and beyond this, when Jewish functionaries describe the Ottoman Turkey as a paradise of earth, they both distort history and negate the inhumanities experienced by the Armenian as other Non Turkish People; instead, an unmerited image of a heroic and pro-Judaic Turkey is propagated throughout Jewish communities and private homes.
Thus, in turn, within the sphere of the Jewish Diaspora and even Israel itself, a new generation grows that is spoon-fed the misconceptions of the valiant Turk and perfidious Armenian. In regard to this current situation, is oddly ironic that the modern usage of the word "Holocaust" - used so often by international communities to describe the Shoah - was first introduced to describe the Turkish bloodbath suffered by the Armenians in Adana in 1909. (Ferriman, Z.D.: The Young Turks and the Truth about the Holocaust at Adana in Asia Minor during April 1909; London, 1913.)
The Enemy of My Friend is also My Enemy. Is the demonization of the Armenian Community within the Jewish Diaspora done with this concept in mind? Some examples among others: In July 2007 an article was published in the "Juedische Zeitung" ("Jewish Newspaper") in Germany which totally supported and serviced the policies of genocide denial and victim-perpetrator-reversal as practiced alla Turca.
The "Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs" published in November this year in its webpage an article written by Ms. Aydan Kodaloglu, an advisor to the former Turkish President Turgut Özal; in her article, Kodaoglu attempted to make the denial of the Armenian Genocide (even more) palatable for the Jewish and Israeli population. (Ironically enough, according to Nüzhet Kandemir, the former Turkish ambassador to the USA, President Turgut Ozal was himself on the brink of recognizing the Armenian Genocide.)
In turn, in the Jerusalem Post Joel J. Sprayregen (the former National Vice-Chair of the ADL and a member of the Executive Committee of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA)) took the Armenian resistance during the Genocide to justify denial alla Turca - "There was no genocide" - he was referring to history fakers - despite the fact that he must be fully aware that one could easily reinterpret reality and deny the Jewish Holocaust through the misrepresentation of the Warsaw Uprising, the Theresienstadt- deportation camp, the "sale" and departure of the Jews to Switzerland during the Holocaust , existence of Jewish units in the British Army (traditional foe of Germany during WW) ,struggle of Jewish for a "Jewish State", and survival of millions of Jews people ...
And in the US, one could easily come to assume that Washington Times - which often reads as a copy of the Turkish press - aims at leading a war against the Armenian Genocide Resolution (HR 106) in the US Congress.
Holocaust-denier, David Irving, is serving more and more as example as a paradigm for the denial of Armenian Genocide. Mr. Lenny Ben-David, former undersecretary at the Israeli Embassy in the US and A adviser for five years to the Turkish embassy in Washington, until earlier this summer, In his article published in the Oct. 5 issue of the Jerusalem Post, titled "Turkey and Armenia: What Jews should do," Not only denied the Armenian Genocide and creates hysteria and Armenophobe but in his article he gives a lot of credit to the fabrication of Turkish and Azeri nationalists and fascists. This is again not a hidden fact even for this politician that the aim of Turkish fabrications against Armenians in the next step includes: suggesting removing Armenia from the maps, as a people and country which doesn't exist...
If you assume A Armenian student from Jerusalem will be allow in an official ceremony in Israel to refer to the Armenian Genocide, you are mistaken. This shouldn't come to you as a surprise either; in Istanbul the remaining Armenian children from "Western Armenia" (After Genocide renamed to "Eastern Anatolia") are forced to write essays how their ancestors committed "genocide against Turks" (This is just distressful, nauseating, sadistic and perverse.)
Denial is known as a second killing (a "bloodless-killing"). There is an aggressive denial of Armenian Genocide on going by Turkey. Unfortunately, a big part of officials of Jewish Diaspora and Israel are involved in the denial of Armenian Genocide and this act - their involvement in denial - doesn't differ much from the involvement of German military officer in Armenian Genocide in 1915 (This reference should make clearer - to help to reach a better understanding- what really the denial of Armenian Genocide by Jewish politicians means for Armenian people and other Christian people who were subject of genocide by Turkish!)
If politically allies do it, it's not genocide but "Tragedy". "Only the Turkish Nation has the right to put an ethnically and racial claim on this land (e.g. "Anatolia" including ears where Armenians were deported and killed en mass by Turkish)." Ismet Inonu 1939, President and successor of Ataturk. Presdient Isemt Inonu was one of the chief architects of Turkish denial and justification of Armenian Genocide. Today, there are Turkish "palace historians" that aim to erase all references to "Armenia" and "Armenian people" in the libraries of the world. This is a fact that is easily documented. Professor Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu, the racially motivated President of the Turkish Historical Society with the assistance of Turkish fascists, extends great effort on proving the non-existence of the Armenian People and, in turn, the state of "Armenia." The statements of many Jewish Diaspora and Israeli officials that "there was no Armenian Genocide" play directly into the hands of the official policy Turkey and the Turkish Nationalists and fascists. Justification of Armenian Genocide and a narrow-minded ethnic foreign politics of Turkey in the region leads us to the conclusion that Turkey has no problems with the fact of Armenian Genocide. Turkish problem seems to be the existence of Armenian State and the struggle of Armenian Diaspora for justice. Denial of Armenian Genocide by Turkey, Turkish hostile attitudes regarding Armenian State and the statement of Recep Tayyip Erdogan in 2004 that "Even if the Kurds establish a Kurdish State in Argentina Turkey would fight this", are the policies of a failed State rather than the policy of a civilized and democratic country!
A nation that has been the victim of genocide should not be forced to prove the fact of genocide. For a nation to support the perpetrators of genocide by placating the world with official statements supporting the Turkish government's shameless policies of denial is disgraceful and appalling; for a nation that itself has likewise suffered an attempted obliteration to do so is incomprehensible. The "placating" efforts by Jewish officials and functionaries are doomed to backfire: the denial of the Armenian Genocide in no way helps to make Israel stronger or to increase the security of the Jewish People.
Turkey and Turkish nationalists have always used other people for the implementation of their inhuman policies against "non-Turks" in order to achieve their own final goals, if not their own "final solution"
Words such as dialogue, reconciliation, and rapprochement are terms that awaken fundamentally positive associations, but they are being used without any reflection upon or reference to historical fact or fairness, let alone justice. It is beyond understanding that the newspapers of the Jewish Diaspora present the Armenians as the "irreconcilable" or "troublemaker", as the "true" disruptor in international relations, when it is the Turkish that continually attempt to illegalize or negate the discussion. (What dialogue would the Jewish Nation have with Germany had Germany demanded and been permitted to forbid the acknowledgment of the holocaust and justice?)
Is the Jewish community the "troublemaker" when the Iranian President Ahmadinejad denies the Shoah? A crime that happened 60 years ago and that he himself did not participate in?
The statement that the genocide happened 90 years ago or the insinuation that the Armenian Diaspora - the "Armenian Conspiracy" - are endangering world peace because they are motivated by self-swerving interests serve again nothing else than to protect the perpetrator. But is it not the purpose and duty of international criminal law to protect the victim? Should criminal law protect the rapist or killer because the victim supposedly "asked for it"? Is international law only a "law for the stronger" and thus only there to protect the state and not the individual?
Are terms such as "crimes against humanity," "genocide," "war crimes" and "war of aggression" only there to protect the aggressors and not the victims? The Armenian Diaspora - the masses of people forced to disperse throughout the world - is a result of the genocide executed by the Turkish; the Diaspora Armenians are not pursuing an arbitrary and unfounded interest, they have a justified demand for justice and recognition. At the same time, this demand is also a concern of the international community of states which created and approved the legislation known as "public international law" or "international criminal law."
It is not just a matter of morality to condemn genocide; it is a premise for peaceful coexistence. It is a cornerstone of international peace, and the looming threat of this very crime is a principal reason behind military intervention and self-defense.
A question that might arise when reading this text is why do I only write about the Jewish Community and Israeli politicians? Well, this is due to the following fact: aside from the Turkish themselves, Israeli politicians and the Jewish Diaspora are the only ones that go beyond the "simple" denial of the Armenian Genocide (and denial of Turkish genocides against other Christian people, e.g. The Assyrian Genocide) to both aggressively practice a virulent policy of denial and likewise try to inspire others to do the same. For example, the unprecedented dedication with which Shimon Peres supported the "fight" against the Armenian Resolution in the US Congress while Bill Clinton was still president.
The relationship between the Jewish People and the Turkish is based on lies and the denial of the Armenian Genocide - the denial of the 1.5 million Armenians that died by the hands of the Ottoman Turkey from 1915-1923. It is a relationship that is based on criminal complicity in hushing up a horrific transgression against humanity and that totally disregards all concepts of moral and justice.
Namik Tan, the Turkish Ambassador to Israel, described this relationship in September 2007: "The Turkish People make no differentiation between Israel and the Jews of the world. To us, you are all one. We have no pact with Israel, but rather with the whole Jewish world. If the Jewish lobby disappears, Israel loses its importance to us. Therefore, Israel takes the responsibility when a Jewish organization speaks of Genocide." (Jerusalem Post, 2007)
The truth shall set Turkish and Jewish officials free. Implementation of international agreed reforms for "Western Armenia/ Turkish Armenian" and eliminating - "getting rid" - of a nation/people by Turkey are not the same. Only the fact of genocide can keep alive disinformation policy, the genocide denial industry and the nationally authorized and aggressive Turkish politics of denial. Israeli/Jewish officials should advice their "friends/allies" in Ankara to stop making fools of themselves. Armenian Genocide was proved as Armenian Genocide was happening.
The whole world was witness of this genocide. Besides this: Armenian Genocide is well documented above all by Turkish war time ally Germany (even though a part of this documents being destroyed in1919 and 1940s.) According to Taner Akcam, a nonconformist Turkish historian, "The denial of the Armenian Genocide is the basis of Turkey's existence." At the latest, Amb. Namik Tan's statements above and the aggressive denial of Armenian Genocide by President Shimon Peres also reveal and proves that the relationship between Israel and Turkey is also based the denial of the Armenian Genocide (raison d'État instead of right to truth and justice.)
One cannot help but wonder how long a relationship built on boundless dishonesty, immorality, denial and lies is capable or destined to last... Indeed, it is truly incomprehensible that the Jewish Diaspora denies the Armenian Genocide for the "good" of Israel. What lasting "good" has ever come from the denial of genocide, from the denial of truth, from the denial of the justice?
SK
posted 3/27/08 @ 7:46 AM CST
Lévy: 'The Jewish code taught me that you have to take care of both the living and the dead. And when it comes to the dead without graves, the demands are even greater.
Article tools
This past fall, despite objections from both the White House and some in the organized Jewish world, the House Foreign Affairs Committee voted to allow a resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide to go before the House of Representatives. When the move led to mass protests in Turkey and threats from Ankara to disrupt the American war effort in Iraq, however, House leaders decided to table the measure.
French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy recently sat down with the Forward's Gabriel Sanders to discuss the question of Jews and the recognition of the Armenian genocide -- one of the topics the thinker plans to cover in an upcoming lecture on the "state of world Jewry."
GABRIEL SANDERS: What is it that prompted you to turn your attention to the question of the Armenian genocide?
BERNARD-HENRI LEVY: I was shocked by the withdrawal of the resolution and was shocked that some Jews, because of fears connected to the wellbeing of the State of Israel, were unwilling to endorse it. This unwillingness on a matter where we Jews should be on the front lines is for me a real heartbreaker. In my upcoming lecture, I will speak about the meaning of the message of Judaism, which implies that we are not only open to, but forced to be helpful to those like the children of the survivors of the Armenian Genocide.
GS: As we reported in the paper last fall, the French public is not unaware of the difficulties surrounding the question of genocide recognition. In 2006, the French parliament passed a bill criminalizing the denial of the Armenian Genocide, and Turkey then too threatened to sever military ties. How did the French Jewish community react at the time?
BHL: As with the American Jews, there was a concern for Israel. Turkey is an ally and Israel does not have many allies. There is also the tendency to believe in the singularity of the Holocaust. But singularity does not mean that it was the only genocide, and precisely because we -- our parents -- had to suffer the worst, we are obligated to pay attention to the suffering of those in Rwanda and Armenia.
GS: When it comes to Israel, would you say that the French Jewish community is universally supportive?
BHL: We may have our Noam Chomskys, but there is a real support -- a support that is as strong as in America, with perhaps a greater sense of freedom when it comes to criticizing this or that government. I myself am the greatest supporter of Israel you can imagine. Since '67, when as an 18-year-old I signed up as a parachutist, I have gone to Israel during every one of its wars. And yet, 10 years ago, I felt free to write, in a newspaper article that made some waves when it appeared in France, that Israel's two worst enemies were Arafat and Netanyahu.
GS: It seems to me that Jewish opinion on the genocide question falls into two schools: those who feel that, when it comes to moral questions, Jews are answerable to a higher standard than the world at large and those who argue that Jews should be held to standard no more high than the rest. Those belonging to this second group will say that when Armenian allies -- like, say, Iran -- deny the truth of the Holocaust, no one calls on the Armenians to speak up in the Jews' name. And yet, when the roles are reversed, the Armenians expect the Jews to support them. What do you make of this tension?
BHL: I don't care what the Armenians expect. What I expect from myself is faithfulness to the Jewish message, which is a message of universality, and my neighbor's lack of faithfulness in the idea of universality does not give me the right not to be faithful myself. It is the truth to say that there was a genocide in Armenia. It is the truth to say that the denial of the Armenian Genocide by Turkey is a reason for despair. It is the truth to say that I feel a kinship with the sons and grandsons of the survivors of the Armenian Genocide. I'm not engaging in politics; I'm just trying to be faithful to the message of my ancestors and the books in which I believe.
GS: There is an Armenian community in the United States. It is, to a large extent, they who pushed for the genocide recognition bill. Among the Armenians in America there is significant antisemitic sentiment. What are we to make of that?
BHL: The black community in America can sometimes be antisemitic. Does this mean that we Jews have to become anti-black? Does this mean we have to regret the part we played in the civil rights movement? The sense of my life, personally, is to refuse the clash of memories, the clash of victimhoods. 'I am a victim. You are not a victim. I am more a victim. You are less a victim.' I hate that. First of all, we must break the competition of victimhoods. Number two, you criticize the fascists wherever they are and fight them, whether in the black community, the Armenian community or anywhere. They are my enemies. But we must refuse the perverse theory that because we are victims, they cannot be. Compassion is not a cake, from which nothing is left for others if you take too big a piece.
GS: To a certain degree, one could say that the Anti-Defamation League's Abraham Foxman, the Jewish figure who most vociferously opposed the congressional resolution, found vindication. Though many were surprised by the ferocity of Turkey's response, he was not. Now, is it your position that Turkey's denial of the genocide is such an affront that we need to challenge it regardless of the consequences? Let's say the resolution had gone forward, what is the worst that could have happened?
BHL: The worst that would have happened would have been a cure, a therapy of truth for the Turks. We have to explain to the Turks, who are a great people, who are our friends, that they are not guilty of the crimes of their great-grandfathers, that recognizing the crimes would not weaken them but reinforce them. What would Germany be if it were to deny the Holocaust?
GS: This is the great mystery. Why is it that the Germans have reckoned with their past so differently than the Turks have -- even as Turkey is looking, in some ways, to draw closer to the European realm?
BHL: What Turkey lacks are the kinds of friends who are willing to explain that the best way to enter into Europe, the best way to enter into modernity, is to recognize the genocide.
GS: And who would such a friend be?
BHL: America. That's why it was a mistake to withdraw the resolution. Turkey's American friends should have said, 'Wait a minute. It's a win-win. You don't lose anything; you win credibility, you win nobility, you win honor.'
GS: One of the arguments that the Anti-Defamation League used in its fight against the genocide resolution was that Turkey's Jews were pleading with them to keep the American government from passing the bill.
BHL: It's not true. They are a minuscule minority in a country sliding toward Islamism. Every word they utter is chosen carefully. They are like hostages. Have you ever seen a hostage speaking freely?
GS: Another of the Anti-Defamation League's arguments was that this is a 90-year-old tragedy and no lives will be saved through its recognition. Israel, on the other hand, is very much at risk. On this basis, Israel's needs trump those of the Armenian fallen.
BHL: The Jewish code taught me that you have to take care of both the living and the dead. And when it comes to the dead without graves, the demands are even greater. We -- not us Jews, but we human beings -- are the protectors of the graveless, and the Armenians are such dead. This is not an either/or. The Talmudic wisdom teaches us to oppose just this sort of false choice. I will make one other point: If we don't stand very firmly on this question, we will be disarmed and weak in the face of a most urgent issue. Holocaust denial is today not just a political stance, but a world religion. We cannot afford to be anything but rigorous on the general topic of genocide. For the sake of the Jewish people, for the sake of Israel and for the sake of the fight against antisemitism, this is a crucial question.
Bernard-Henri Lévy will deliver the annual Francine and Abdallah Simon State of World Jewry Lecture at New York's 92nd Street Y on March 5 at 8 p.m.
SK
posted 3/28/08 @ 6:45 AM CST
Turkish writer calling to Armenian Genocide recognition stands trial in Ankara
On March 6, Turkish writer Temel Demirer will stand before the Ankara Penal Court N2.
As independent French journalist Jean Eckian told PanARMENIAN.Net, on January 20, 2007, a day after Hrant Dink's murder Temel Demirer read a declaration to the press in Ankara saying that the journalist was killed only because he was Armenian but also because he dared to speak about the Armenian Genocide.
Addressing a meeting of protest, Temel Demirer said, "We live in a country where murders and silence on the truth are associates. Hrant was assassinated not only because he was Armenian, but because he said that a genocide took place in this country. If intellectual Turks do not commit crimes under article 301, they will be also guilty Hrant's assassination."
"There was a genocide in our history, it is called the Armenian Genocide. At the expense of its life, Hrant made it clear to all of us.
"Those which slaughtered Armenians yesterday attack our Kurdish brothers and sisters today. Those which want fraternity of peoples need to face this history. We must prevent crimes, since what happened to the Armenians may happen to the Kurds. Yes, there was Armenian Genocide in this country.
"We know very well who the perpetrators were! It is not a secret for us. Neither is it a secret for those who supports article 301. We cannot keep silent," the declaration says.
This declaration had been signed by more than 45 Turkish personalities and organizations.
SK
posted 3/28/08 @ 6:48 AM CST
ISRAELI GENOCIDE SCHOLARS RESPOND TO REPORTED STATEMENTS OF AMBASSADOR GABY LEVY DENYING THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE."
OPEN LETTER TO MK TZIPI LIVNI, MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, ISRAEL
MK Tzipi Livni, Minister of Foreign Affairs Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem
We are writing to express our shock, disbelief and horror at the statements attributed to Ambassador to Turkey Gaby Levy by the website of Sabah News (Turkey) that "what we [Israel] did in Gaza is not genocide just like there is no Armenian genocide." These statements were reportedly in response to comments made by Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey criticizing Israel's response to the terror attacks from Gaza. We would like to believe that he was misquoted.
Ambassador Levy is insultingly wrong in denying the Armenian genocide.
There is an overwhelming body of historical evidence from many separate and independent bodies of information to show that the mass atrocities experienced by the Armenians were a result of an intentional policy on the part of the Turkish government at the time. It is precisely this evidence of intent to kill and destroy, in whole or in part, as defined by the UN Convention on Genocide, which is why these atrocities constitute genocide. They were adjudged genocide by Raphael Lemkin, the person who gave the world the word-concept of genocide, and have been so adjudged by any number of impartial commissions and professional authorities, including the International Association of Genocide Scholars.
Israel's ambassador is humiliatingly further misdirected on Gaza, where it is Hamas, an organization with a genocidal agenda, which is carrying out terror attacks aimed at killing, destroying and expelling the entire population. Israel is defending itself against the perpetrators of this genocidal agenda. The Grad rockets Hamas is now firing at population centers in Israel come from Iran which has expressed a sworn determination to wipe out the State of Israel.
Clearly Israel has never embarked on a genocidal program or action in Gaza, but for the ambassador to prove his point as it were by comparing Israel's actions today in Gaza to the known genocidal activities of the Ottoman Turks against the Armenians and other non-Moslem minorities in 1915 and on is self-defeating in the extreme. The aim of Israel's military actions in Gaza is to stop the genocidal terror aimed at the Israeli public. To link proof that Israel is not the aggressor in Gaza with a denial of the validity of the Armenian Genocide is seriously harmful to Israel. Ambassador Levy's mission is not to revise historical truth, but to represent Israel with honor, self-respect, competence and integrity. He has failed the test on all counts. By publicly declaring his denial of the Armenian genocide, he paves the way for denial of all other genocidal threats, foremost of which are those now facing Israel.
Israel's relationship with Turkey is a matter of vital importance to the two countries,. But this relationship does not require public displays of obsequiousness and participation in genocide denial. It does require Ambassador Levy to advise Turkey of the genocidal threats from Hamas, and from Iran, its paymaster.
We call upon the Government to repudiate the remarks attributed to him.
Sincerely,
Prof. Yair Auron, PhD, Dept. of Sociology, Open University of Israel yairau@oumail.openu.ac.il
Prof. Israel W. Charny, PhD (retired Tel Aviv University and Hebrew University), Executive Director, Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide, Jerusalem, Editor, Encyclopedia of Genocide encygeno@mail.com
Prof. Elihu D. Richter, MD, MPH, Genocide Prevention Program, Hebrew University-Hadassah School of Public Health and Community Medicine, elir@cc.huji.ac.il
Sahin Karakaya
posted 3/28/08 @ 6:50 AM CST
TURKISH SECURITY OFFICIALS ADMIT COVER-UP IN DINK MURDER CASE
By Gareth Jenkins
Friday, March 21, 2008
On March 20, two members of the Turkish Gendarmerie admitted receiving detailed intelligence regarding a plot to assassinate Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink and then, after Dink's murder, trying to cover up their knowledge by lying to investigators.
The confessions came as two Gendarmerie officers, known by their initials as O. S. and V. S., went on trial for dereliction of duty after evidence emerged that the security forces in the eastern Black Sea city of Trabzon had been informed of the plot to assassinate Dink months in advance but had failed either to apprehend the plotters or attempt to protect Dink (Anadolu Ajans, CNNTurk, NTV, March 20).
On January 19, 2007, the 52 year-old Dink was shot dead outside the Istanbul office of the Agos newspaper where he worked as editor-in-chief and which serves Turkey's dwindling Armenian community. Dink was killed by Ogun Samast, an unemployed, poorly-educated 17 year-old who had traveled from Trabzon to carry out the assassination. Minors are often used to carry out murders in Turkey as, under Turkish law, anyone under 18 they can only be sentenced to a maximum of a few years in jail. It later emerged that Samast had been a member of a ultranationalist gang with strong Islamist sympathies led by the then 24 year-old Yasin Hayal. Hayal and his associates were well known to the security forces in Trabzon and some of them worked as police informants. On March 20, the gendarmerie officers admitted that, in August 2006, one of Hayal's relatives had warned them that Hayal was planning to kill Dink and had given him YTL 500 (around $400) to buy a gun for the assassination. The officers were also told that someone linked to the gang had carried out surveillance of Dink in Istanbul and even drawn up diagrams showing the route taken by Dink as he traveled from his home to the Agos office (Radikal, Milliyet, Sabah, Hurriyet, Cumhuriyet, March 21).
A soft-spoken advocate of reconciliation between Turks and Armenians, in February 2004 Dink wrote a series of articles in Agos calling for dialogue without any preconditions. He maintained that an insistence that Turkey should first recognize the tragic events of 1915 as a genocide was an obstacle to reconciliation. In an article he wrote in Agos, Dink called on Armenians to "cleanse their blood of the poison of genocide" and engage in dialogue with Turks.
However, the mere mention of the word genocide resulted in Dink being prosecuted under the notorious Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, which makes it a criminal offence to denigrate the concept of "Turkishness." In October 2005, Dink was convicted and given a suspended prison sentence of six months. Even though he never served time in jail, the publicity surrounding his trial made Dink a hated figure for many Turkish ultranationalists. Extraordinarily, given the numerous calls for him to be killed in the Turkish ultranationalist press and Internet chat rooms and the telephoned death threats that Dink himself reported to the Istanbul police, and unlike almost any prominent Turkish Muslim who receives similar threats from extremists, Dink was not given police protection. When he was killed by Samast as he left the Agos office to pay some bills at his local bank, Dink was completely alone.
In their statements to the court, both O. S. and V. S. insisted that they had forwarded the intelligence of the plot to kill Dink to their commanding officer, Colonel Ali Oz, the head of the Gendarmerie in Trabzon. They claimed that Oz had not only failed to take action but, during the investigation that followed Dink's murder, had instructed them to deny any prior knowledge of the plot to kill Dink.
When taken in isolation, it would be possible to attribute the cover-up simply as an attempt to hide incompetence. But, when combined with other evidence that has emerged since Dink's murder, the conclusions are more disturbing. When Samast was captured, some of the arresting officers took photographs of him posed heroically in front of the Turkish flag. Ultranationalist publications and chat rooms buzzed with praise for the killing. There were even songs written in Samast's honor and posted on YouTube.
There is little doubt that the majority of Turks, even many Turkish nationalists, were appalled by Dink's murder. Indeed, one of the most moving tributes to him appeared in Yeni Cag, the main ultranationalist daily newspaper. On the evening of January 19, 2007, thousands of Muslim Turks joined with Armenians to march through the center of Istanbul chanting "We are all Dink" and "We are all Armenians." On January 19, 2008, Muslim Turks also dominated the numerous ceremonies held to remember Dink on the first anniversary of his murder.
Nevertheless, the confessions by the two gendarmerie officers will reinforce suspicions that racial and religious prejudice remains a serious problem both in Turkish society as a whole and in the country's security forces. Earlier this year, it emerged that, at the time of his death, Andrea Santoro, a Roman Catholic priest who was shot by Oguzhan Akdin, a 16 year-old youth with ultranationalist and Islamist sympathies, was under surveillance by the police on the ludicrous suspicion that he was plotting to facilitate the annexation of Turkey's eastern Black Sea coast by Greece. On April 18, 2007, three Christian missionaries in the southeastern city of Mardin were tortured and then had their throats cut by a group of students from a hostel run by an Islamic foundation. During their trial, evidence has emerged that these students too were in contact with members of the local security forces. Lawyers acting for the families of the victims claim that they have been receiving numerous death threats, are being harassed by security officials and that key evidence – such as tape recordings of confessions detailing links between the accused and security officials – that was present at the beginning of the trial, has now disappeared.
There is no suggestion that any high-ranking members of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) were involved either in any of the killings or in the subsequent cover-ups. But neither does the government appear to understand the extent of religious and racial prejudice in Turkey or the need to amend legislation that fuels it. The effective protection of minorities is a prerequisite for Turkish accession to the EU, which has long pressed for the abolition of legislation such as Article 301 of the Penal Code (see EDM, January 8). However, since the beginning of the year, the AKP has preferred to focus almost exclusively on trying to push through legislation to lift the headscarf ban that prevents pious Sunni women from attending university (see EDM, February 11, February 25) and, most recently, on legislative changes to circumvent the party itself being outlawed following the public prosecutor's application for its closure on March 14 (see EDM, March 17).
wtf
posted 3/28/08 @ 1:12 PM CST
GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS WILL NEVER BE SETTLED AND YOU ARE ONLY CONTRIBUTING BY ARGUING ABOUT IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN. GOD DAMN.
wtf
posted 3/28/08 @ 1:12 PM CST
GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS WILL NEVER BE SETTLED AND YOU ARE ONLY CONTRIBUTING BY ARGUING ABOUT IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN. GOD DAMN.
atay
posted 4/06/08 @ 8:39 AM CST
Very well written article. People who are not afraid of the truth coming out will support the formation of the joint commission that the government of Turkey is proposing, and will let historians to put to rest historical facts in lieu of pressing the politicians to rewrite history through lobbying.
In the mean time anyone interested in learning more should go to www.tallarmeniantale.com and find out what historians say about these allegations.
Sahin Karakaya
posted 7/03/08 @ 8:49 AM CST
TANER AKCAM'S RESPONSE TO YUSUF HALACOGLU ARTICLE - TARAF,Sunday,June 15, 2008 TIME TO EXPOSE LIES It is time to put an end to the primitive and deceitful policy ofthe Turkish Historical Society, based on lies and propaganda forinternal public opinion and a cause for embarrassment for Turkey andTurkish historians First, I would like to thank Ayse Hur for providing a summary ofthe Ottoman Archives research covered in my book titled The ArmenianProblem Is Solved - Armenian Related Policies During Wartime AccordingTo Ottoman Archives (Iletisim Publishers, January 2008). Ayse Huralso included sections from my book criticizing Halacoglu, in anarticle titled "Akcam Asks Questions, Halacoglu Remains Silent." Before I respond to Halacoglu's article, I would like to provide somecontext in order not to be drowned in minute details back and forth. THE FALSIFICATION ABOUT 1397 Those claiming that there was no genocidal intent or mass destructionin the 1915 Armenian Deportations often use the argument that allcivil servants who maltreated the Armenians, attacked the convoysor murdered the deportees were arrested and prosecuted. Accordingly,some government officials who exploited the situation were investigatedand sent to courts, a total of 1397 people were tried, a majority ofthem were convicted and given various sentences, including capitalpunishment. I have demonstrated in my book that based on the Ottoman Archives,this argument is not correct. There are no documents in the OttomanArchives related to prosecution and punishment of government officialsaccused of Armenians' murders. The Ittihat Terakki party in powerhad no such policy; on the contrary, I have documented that if anygovernment officials were by chance accused of any such crimes, thegovernment took steps to have them discharged immediately. I have alsodocumented on several occasions how the Ittihat Terakki governmenteliminated a few of their own officials who could potentially causefuture allegations related to the Armenian case. ATTENTION AND CARE ABOUT PROPERTY NOT HUMAN BEINGS One of the facts that is clearly evident in the Ottoman Archivesis that the Ittihat Terakki government, which had shown no caretoward the Armenians as human beings, did show extra care andattention toward the possessions and properties left behind by theArmenians. The government took extraordinary precautions to ensurethat all these possessions were converted to state ownership. Thespecial commissions or trials set up to investigate the wrongdoingsrelated to the Armenians were all about the government officials whoattempted to personally plunder, steal or take over ownership of theArmenians' properties. There has been absolutely no investigationor trial by the Ittihat Terakki government about those who committedcrimes against the Armenians or who organized the massacres. I had explained in my book how Yusuf Halacoglu leads the campaignof lies in this subject, by giving an example from his book titledThe Armenian Deportations and Truths (1914-1918) (Turkish HistoricalSociety, Ankara, 2001). I had accused him of revising the OttomanArchives and by deliberately providing misinformation. Halacoglu inhis responding article merely repeats and confirms that I am right. In his book, in the chapter titled "Attacks on the Armenian Convoysand Preventive Measures Taken by the Government," Halacoglu writesthat "special investigative commissions were formed in order toprosecute the officials accused of neglect of duty or illegalactivities." He further claims that "government officials who wereaccused of wrongdoings and maltreating the Armenians were prosecuted,"and that "they were taken to the Military Tribunals for severepunishment." Halacoglu bases these words on the following ArchivalDocument No. 12 (Internal Ciphers Directory 54-A/236; 55-A/146:55-A/157: 58-A/141; 58-A/278; 61/165; 57/105; 57/116; 57/143; 57/416;59/196; 59/235) . In fact, Yusuf Halacoglu is lying, as none of these archivaldocuments relate to Military Tribunals and punishment of officialsfor maltreatment of Armenians. As I have shown in my book, one byone for each document, these are all related to personal enrichmentcrimes of officials plundering, stealing or converting ownership ofthe properties and possessions left behind by the Armenians. In these documents, Talat Pasha directs officials to comment (59/196),to investigate (55-A/156), to fire from duty the accused persons(57/143). Two other documents are related to seeking authority totake the personal enrichment cases to the Military Tribunal (57/146,61/165). Halacoglu not only dared to present these documents as "trial andpunishment of government officials at Military Tribunals chargedwith maltreating the Armenians," but he also used documents "praisinggovernment officials for successful deportation activities" for thesame purpose. For example, the document no. 58-A/141, dated November28, 1915, is a telegram from Talat Pasha to Cemal Pasha, remindingCemal that he has no right to fire a local governor for maltreatment,praising the fired official and instructing Cemal to reinstate him. I have asked in my book and pose the same question again: Isn't itshameful, isn't it criminal in the name of scientific research to usethese documents as evidence that "government officials maltreating theArmenians were prosecuted and punished, including capital punishment?" NEW DOCUMENT NO. 13 OUT OF A HAT What could be expected from Yusuf Halacoglu as a response to myallegations? Shouldn't he use my documents, one by one, to prove or disprovethat I have told the truth? Instead, in his article he responds byreferring to another book of his and writes: "Akcam's questions areanswered with the necessary documents." In his book titled ArmenianAllegations from Deportation to Genocide, in the Section titled"Guilty Deportation Officials" (Pages 91-96), the same information,same documents exist as in his 2001 book that I criticized. Thereare also 12 new documents unrelated to my criticism. That is, there is absolutely no change. My criticism was that none of the new 12 documents shed light on thepunishment of government officials charged with the maltreatment ofArmenians. Halacoglu does not and cannot say "These documents showthat there is information about punishment of government officials formaltreating the Armenians." Instead, he produces a new Document No. 13. But funnily enough, this new document further reinforces my criticism. As can be seen, this new document, dated March 12, 1916, relates tosixteen trials of the Syria Military Tribunal. Of the sixteen trials,fourteen are related to the personal plunder and stealing of propertiesand possessions left behind by the Armenians. The last two are aboutCircassian Ahmet (Halacoglu erroneously writes Recep, son of Ahmet,whereas the correct names are Ahmet, son of Recep). Nine cases weredischarged outright and the accused released. Five cases resulted inguilty verdicts but punishments were deferred (Please see Appendixfor the translation). The aforementioned Circassian Ahmet was amember of the Teskilat-i Mahsusa (Special Organization), executed onSeptember 17, 1915. Talat Pasha had sent a telegram to Cemal Pasha,authorizing the execution, saying that: "His death is immediatelyrequired, otherwise, he can cause us harm in the future." The execution of a few undesirable Teskilat-i Mahsusa members isfurther covered in my book (pages 247-252). THERE ARE NO NEW FACTS I will repeat my questions, again and again: Are there any trialsand prosecutions against anyone for maltreating the Armenians, FORHARMING THE ARMENIANS AS HUMAN BEINGS? The answer is NO. Are thereany officials arrested by chance for other crimes, but released bythe Central government? YES. The Ittihat Terakki government has never organized any trialsrelated to the massacres but if any accused officials were to bearrested, it did everything possible to have them released. Arethere any trials and prosecutions of government officials forpersonal plunder of the property and possessions left behind by theArmenians? YES. Have these been successful? NO. This is evident fromany and all documents. Property and possessions plundered personallyhave remained in the ownership of these persons. We do not need anydocuments for these. Anatolia is still full of these stories. My second criticism of Halacoglu's book, Armenian Deportations andTruths, relates to another deceitful thesis. Halacoglu states that"The Abandoned Properties Commissions paid funds from the proceedsof the sold properties to the deportees. The resettled refugees usedthese payments to start new businesses and quickly adapted to their newenvironment." Halacoglu uses three documents to support this argument(DH. SFR. 57/348; 57/349; 57/350). As can be seen, there is a great thesis and three documents. The thesisis that the Armenians were paid monies in lieu of their propertiesleft behind. This is completely untrue, and Halacoglu is deliberately lying. It isin vain to find any documents in the Ottoman Archives related to fundspaid to the Armenians; such documents do not exist and therefore,the supporters of this thesis can lie indiscriminately. WhenHalacoglu referred to three archival documents about "monies paidto the Armenians and about Armenians using these monies to set upbusinesses in their new settlements," he perhaps thought that no onewould investigate these three documents. These three documents are allfrom Eskishehir, and they refer to monies to be sent to the Governorof Aleppo, not to be given to the Armenians, but to cover the expensesof the local government during the Armenian deportation activities. WHY ARE THOUSANDS OF ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS MISSING? It is impossible to have only three puny documents to support theargument of considerable transfer of funds to the Armenians. Thereshould have been hundreds of thousands of documents about the Armeniansdeported to Syria and Iraq. These documents simply do not exist. Thereis a simple argument to refute this deceitful thesis. If we considerthe official government declaration dated March 11, 1919, it statesthat 101,747 Armenians did return to their homes after the war. Didany government official ask these Armenians: "Brother, we paid youfor your sold possessions when you resettled elsewhere, now, you haveto pay back..." THE LIE ABOUT AID When one reads Halacoglu's response, it becomes apparent that hisargument changes from financial payment to the resettled Armenians tofinancial aid to Armenians during the deportations. He refers to somedocuments about government fund transfers to cover the deportationexpenses. While doing this, he brazenly falsifies the archivaldocuments. As an example, he refers to a report by Dr. W. M. Post,a doctor at the American Hospital in Konya. The doctor states that "Armenians are paid 1 kurus (piastre)per adult and 20 para per child." It is obvious that Halacogluhas not researched this subject, as he states that he got thisinformation from his colleague Kemal Cicek. Kemal Cicek is an expertin document falsification. He has published the said falsifieddocument of Dr. Post in his book titled, Armenians' Forced Emigration1915-1917. Readers interested in the original complete reports canrefer to Ara Sarafyan (ed.), United States Official Record on theArmenian Genocide 1915-1917, Princeton, London: Gomidas Institute,2004, pages 245-257. Dr. Post explains the Konya deportation campwhere "there are absolutely no sanitary conditions, average 30 to 40people die daily, rape, murder, bribe and kidnapping is rampant." KemalCicek's version does not refer to these facts. The payment of 1 kurusper adult and 20 para per child is a limited arrangement for a fewdays. But Halacoglu applies this with a magical trick to all theArmenian convoys, throughout the entire duration of the deportations. There is no limit to the document falsification and revisionismin Halacoglu's world. In his response, he writes that "foreign aidorganizations received permission to help the Armenians with TalatPasha's signature." I refer the reader to my book, pages 306-320,which explains how the Ottoman government refused any help to theArmenians from the foreign aid organizations. In fact, Ottoman archivaldocuments clearly show that not only was the foreign aid refused,but any foreigners trying to aid the Armenians were threatened,arrested and imprisoned.
Will You Continue To Be A Spectator or Support Secil Askoy with your Comments Here?
