Would Speaker Pelosi recognize Armenian genocide?

I would like to thank the Fresno Bee for posting this press release.

Documented Third party eyewitness accounts, as well as survivors of the Armenian genocide make it impossible to question the facts of history.

Outside forces continue to pressure many of those in authority in Washington. We must not forget not forget that Hastert is suppose to represent the will of the people who elected them. Every day Hastert holds the proposed Armenian genocide bill from a full Congressional vote is an abomination to our democracy.

The House of Representatives needs a House Speaker like Nancy Pelosi with principles on this issue.

Pelosi will do the right thing, for human rights, recognizing the Armenian genocide, and moving our democracy forward.

Thanks again Fresno Bee.

Shouldn't Armenians first PROVE that a "genocide" took place? Sanford Shaw, Bernard Lewis, Norman Stone, Justin McCarthy, Heath Lowry, Guenter Lewy...the list of HISTORIAN (the experts) dispute Armenian claims of a so-called genocide. It appears that Pelosi needs to be better informed of the historical truth. Armenians: Open up your archives!!

It's regrettable that such a large number of Armenians died during the Armenian tragedy of WW1, but calling it something it's not, does not make it so. Passing bills in France which limit free speech does not make it so. Passing recognition bills in the United States does not make it so. It will continue to be meaningless one-sided propaganda until Turkey recognizes it, which will never happen, not on my watch. The systematic slaughter of Turks in Anatolia during WW1 needs to be accounted for. How many countries assaulted, invaded, conspired and attempted to dis-member Turkey? How many countries tried to exploit Turkey during this time of weakness? How many countries are complicit in the death of nearly 500,000 Turkish soldiers and at least as many civilians who died defending their homeland? Most importantly, what role did Armenians play in each of the above? When Armenians are done white-washing their culpability, maybe then a meeting of the minds will be possible. Until then, keep passing meaningless resolutions and buying recognition... A gaping lack of evidence requires as much in order to dupe the ignorant masses.
"A Lie travels around the world while the Truth is still putting on her boots."

The United States should be picking on things its own size. Why don't we also ask for a resolution on France for its banning a resolution to restrict the freedom of expression, the same restrictions of freedom that Armenians champion for Turkey to disown, yet now support in the case of France. Hypocritical or a case of 'Cause Gone Wild?'

Unfortunately for Ms. Pelosi, if she's going to make this a 'political' issue, as most 'politicians who decide to play historians' do, there might be a few good Turks here in California who might still not vote for her (not because of her staunch support for the Armenian 'genocide' claims but) because even those who are slightly to the right of Karl Marx see her as too liberal.

And I suspect the Armenian-American population of 'conservative' leaning ideology would not grant her their votes on this 'one issue' . . . NOT!

Re: Susan's Post:

These are typical denialist resposeses and does not excuse the genocide of the Armenians. No excuse justifies a genocide.

Re: Murat's comments

The US House of Representatives represent the constituents of the districts. The will of the people are asking to be represented on this issue. More importantly this is issue has bi-partisan support in Congress. Conservative or Liberal ideology is not a factor.

Please read a couple of Editorials published in our local newspaper.


A end to denial

Turkey, U.S. must face the history of the Armenian Genocide.

The Fresno Bee
April 24, 2005

Today marks a somber and heartbreaking anniversary for Armenians, in this country and elsewhere, and indeed for all people who love justice. It was 90 years ago today that the Ottoman Turks began their genocidal campaign to eliminate Armenians and every vestige of their centuries-old history and culture from the region they occupied.

That the Turks failed in the attempt wasn't for lack of effort. The survival of Armenians and their culture owes mostly to the determination of the Armenian people not to be swept from the face of the earth, and to accidents of history that eventually brought the survivors to safer shores, including America and the Valley.

The heartbreak of the day, and the long history of pain and loss, is compounded by anger with modern Turkey, which aggressively refuses to acknowledge the awful past, and frustration with the government of this country, which still refuses to officially recognize that the genocide took place.

The policy of a series of U.S. administrations, from both parties, has been to hope the issue will go away. Turkey has been viewed as a vital ally for decades, first as a Cold War bulwark against the former Soviet Union, with which Turkey shared a border and the strategic Black Sea, and later as a potential stabilizing power, a democratic regime in the midst of the despotism of the Middle East.

Such geopolitical concerns may be understood, but they were never -- and are not now -- sufficient to excuse this deep denial o­n the part of the Turks or the calculated indifference of the United States. There was never any chance that Turkey would somehow hurl itself into the old Soviet bloc. The deep history of animosity between Turkey and Russia was sufficient guarantee of that.

Today, the Turks want desperately to be admitted to the European Union. That makes a great deal of sense for Turkey, Europe and for the rest of the world. The economic benefits of that move would almost certainly shore up Turkey's sometimes fragile democracy, and permit the development of a truly modern and prosperous state with a strong stake in peace. That's vital for the Middle East, where Turkey could be an enormously important role model for other nations.

But the Turks have been told plainly that they won't get in unless the denial ends. French President Jacques Chirac in particular has been emphatic that Turkey must first acknowledge that the genocide took place before it can seriously be considered for EU membership.

Why don't we hear similar words from American presidents? The White House has been trying to ignore the genocide since Woodrow Wilson first dismissed frantic telegrams from the American ambassador in Constantinople (now Istanbul) in 1915, warning that mass murders were under way.

We're cognizant of these issues here, of course, because of the presence of a large Armenian-American community in the Valley. We enjoy the profound contributions that members of that community have made over the years in commerce, politics, education, religion and the arts -- it's difficult to imagine Fresno and the Valley without its rich Armenian flavors.

And we know -- we remember -- that the first Armenians arrived in the Valley after fleeing for their lives from a murderous regime.

Turkey's intransigence must end some day. Witness the problems Japan is again having with its neighbors over Japanese reluctance to acknowledge crimes by its World War II-era regime. That won't last either. Japan and Turkey -- every nation that has made war upon entire peoples -- must o­ne day own up to that history.

Why not now?

----

U.S., Turkey must say the words 'Armenian genocide'

The Fresno Bee
June 16 2005
By Jim Boren

In the close-knit Armenian families of the San Joaquin Valley, the
stories of the first genocide of the 20th century are passed along
to each generation at dinner tables and family gatherings. It's a
ritual to ensure that this scar o­n world history won't be forgotten.

But this isn't just a history lesson about nameless victims of the
Armenian genocide of 90 years ago. These stories are very personal.
They trace how family members made their way to the Valley and the
tragic circumstances of those who died in a calculated slaughter that
meets every definition of a genocide.

They talk about the great-grandmother whose children were murdered
by the Turks and o­nly escaped the genocide by being hidden in a
basement by a friendly doctor and his wife. Or the 8-year-old girl
whose brother was killed and her o­nly hope was to find a way to
survive a Turkish death march through the desert.

They talk about how 1.5 million Armenians were killed during a massacre
that the Turkish government still won't acknowledge.

U.S. reluctance The Turks' intransigent attitude about those events
still angers many Armenian-Americans. There's also disappointment
because the United States government has buckled under threats from
Turkey if our nation dares call this tragic chapter what it is -- a
"genocide."

Because Turkey sits in a strategic spot in the world, the U.S. State
Department, several presidents and Congress have refused to officially
declare that a genocide occurred.

The United States doesn't want to offend the Turkish government.
Never mind that our leaders are offending the survivors of those
1.5 million Armenians slaughtered during World War I. This wasn't
the collateral damage of war. The Armenians were rounded up by the
Turks and executed.

But the politics of this issue could change thanks to Turkey's desire
to become part of the European Union. French President Jacques Chirac
says Turkey must admit to the genocide as o­ne of the conditions of
entry into the EU.

That says a lot about Turkey standing o­n principle. Its leaders won't
acknowledge the genocide, but they may admit to it occurring if the
Turks get an economic benefit. That tells you all you need to know
about this ally of the United States.

Today is a special day for the Armenian community. It's the 90th
anniversary of the genocide and a series of commemorative events have
been held the past week across the Valley. o­ne of those was a dinner
by the Armenian Community School of Fresno that honored survivors of
the genocide.

In a north Fresno banquet room last week, family members told moving
stories about how their relatives were killed in the genocide and
what it took for some of them to survive. They all know these family
stories very well, and they will not shield their children from this
awful history.

It's something that must be passed o­n.

Harrowing experience

The Armenian Community School honored genocide survivors from four
families. All but o­ne have since died, but Oghda Boghosian, at age
98, was there to receive her honor surrounded by family members. Also
honored were Mourad and Elizabeth Bedrosian, Anna Boyajian Koligian
and Dertad and Siroun Tookolan.

Oghda Boghosian was 8 when the Turks came for her family. Her oldest
brother was killed and her mother thought her best chance at survival
was to send Oghda o­n a march with her brother's wife.

Going o­n a march usually meant death to participants, either through
the sheer torture of the procession without adequate food and water
or being shot when Turkish soldiers tired of marching along with
their victims. But it also could be a chance to flee.

Oghda was taken from the march by two Turkish boys and given to a
Turkish family that wanted an Armenian girl to keep. She ultimately got
away, and then finally arrived at Ellis Island in 1920. She married
Nigholas Boghosian, and after several years they ended up in Fowler
and went into the farming business.

Oghda Boghosian's story is not unusual and this 98-year-old woman
knows all too personally that there was a genocide that claimed family
members, and so many others. It o­nly compounds the tragedy for this
genocide to be officially ignored.

The Turkish government knows the truth. The American government knows
the truth. It's time for both to speak it publicly.

"Today, the Turks want desperately to be admitted to the European Union."

Not a Europe that restricts the freedoms of expression.

"Conservative or Liberal ideology is not a factor."

It is a factor in my decision not to support Ms. Pelosi in her reelection bid due to her 'many' other positions, unlike Armenians who would support a blow-up doll as long as she is wearing an 'I Hate Turkey' jersey.

The proclamations of Nancy Pelosi, any other politician, any state, or any so-called "experts" of history are of little consequence in determining the validity of a claim of genocide.

The United Nations' Convention on the Prevention and the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide stipulates certain guidelines to establish whether a genocide has taken place or not. TheInternational Court of Justice in the Hague is the only authority to reach a verdict on this issue.

That there was a genocide of the Jews was proven beyond doubt by the Nuremberg Trials after Worl War II. After all, the Jews had no territorial claims from Germany; they did not have an army; they did not attack German towns and civilians; nor did they start a civil war. They were killed because of their race and religion.

By contrast, the Armenians laid claim to a chunk of the Ottoman Empire (what was left of it); they formed an army of over a 100,000 men with the help of the Russians and other allies; they attacked Turkish towns and killed their civilians --hoping to provoke the Turks to respond in kind so that they could get sympathy and support from the West. Thus, a civil was was born.

The Malta Tribunal conducted in Malta by the British after Word War I could not find the evidence necessary to convict the Turks sent to the island to be tried for war crimes. Consequently, no serious scholar would accept the charge of genocide against the Turks.

Perhaps this is the reason why the Armenians do not want to open their archives either in the Republic of Armenia, or in the Armenian ARF office in Boston.

If the Armenians have credible, court-admissible evidence, why don't they take their case to the International Court of Justice in the Hague to prove their claims?

In the meantime, neither Ms. Pelosi, nor any U.S. or foreign politician, should prostitute themselves to get the votes of this ethnic minority, namely the Armenians.

E. Baker

I am sure Speaker Pelosi has repeatedly pledged and now she will fulfill her promise and officially recognize the Armenia genocide?

Re: Erkin Baker post

I have read a series of contradictions in your post. You have mentioned that "...any other politician, any state or any so-called "experts" of history are of little consequence in determining the validity of a claim of genocide."
It is disturbing to rule out representatives of the people, and heads of government, and to question the credentials of historians who have spent careers on various subjects, including the Armenian genocide. I assume you are also ruling out Turkey's government representatives who deny the genocide, or is it only people who assert the validity of the Armenian genocide? In either case it does not make sense to rule out representatives of government.
It also does not make sense to question historian's expertise if they have properly researched the Armenian genocide and conclude that it did occur. Are they deemed "experts" if they conclude a denialist perspective?
I am encouraged that many Turkish scholars have also recognized the Armenian genocide to be a fact of history and they predict the Turkish government will soon stop denying the Ottoman history and acknowledge it to be true. Turkey will finally join the rest of the International community in proper acknowledgment.
There were many witnesses to the Armenian Genocide. Although the Young Turk government took precautions and imposed restrictions on reporting and photographing, there were lots of foreigners in the Ottoman Empire who witnessed the deportations. Foremost among them were U.S. diplomatic representatives and American missionaries. Some of their reports made headline news in the American and Western media. Also reporting on the atrocities committed against the Armenians were many German eyewitnesses. The Germans were allies of the Turks in W.W.I. Numerous German officers held important military assignments in the Ottoman Empire. Some among them condoned the Young Turk policy. Others confidentially reported to their superiors in Germany about the slaughter of the Armenian civilian population. Many Arabs in Syria where most of the deportees were sent saw for themselves the appalling condition to which the Armenian survivors had been reduced. Lastly, many Turkish officials were witnesses as participants in the Armenian Genocide. A number of them gave testimony under oath during the post-war tribunals convened to try the Young Turk conspirators who organized the Armenian Genocide.

The decision to carry out a genocide against the Armenian people was made by the political party in power in the Ottoman Empire. This was the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) (or Ittihad ve Terakki Jemiyeti), popularly known as the Young Turks. Three figures from the CUP controlled the government; Mehmet Talaat, Minister of the Interior in 1915 and Grand Vizier (Prime Minister) in 1917; Ismail Enver, Minister of War; Ahmed Jemal, Minister of the Marine and Military Governor of Syria. This Young Turk triumvirate relied on other members of the CUP appointed to high government posts and assigned to military commands to carry out the Armenian Genocide. In addition to the Ministry of War and the Ministry of the Interior, the Young Turks also relied on a newly-created secret outfit which they manned with convicts and irregular troops, called the Special Organization (Teshkilati Mahsusa). Its primary function was the carrying out of the mass slaughter of the deported Armenians. In charge of the Special Organization was Behaeddin Shakir, a medical doctor. Moreover, ideologists such as Zia Gokalp propagandized through the media on behalf of the CUP by promoting Pan-Turanism, the creation of a new empire stretching from Anatolia into Central Asia whose population would be exclusively Turkic. These concepts justified and popularized the secret CUP plans to liquidate the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire. The Young Turk conspirators, other leading figures of the wartime Ottoman government, members of the CUP Central Committee, and many provincial administrators responsible for atrocities against the Armenians were indicted for their crimes at the end of the war. The main culprits evaded justice by fleeing the country. Even so, they were tried in absentia and found guilty of capital crimes. The massacres, expulsions, and further mistreatment of the Armenians between 1920 and 1923 were carried by the Turkish Nationalists, who represented a new political movement opposed to the Young Turks, but who shared a common ideology of ethnic exclusivity.

The United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide describes genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group." Clearly this definition applies in the case of the atrocities committed against the Armenians. Because the U.N. Convention was adopted in 1948, thirty years after the Armenian Genocide, Armenians worldwide have sought from their respective governments formal acknowledgment of the crimes committed during W.W.I. Countries like France, Argentina, Greece, and Russia, where the survivors of the Armenian Genocide and their descendants live, have officially recognized the Armenian Genocide. However, as a matter of policy, the present-day Republic of Turkey adamantly denies that a genocide was committed against the Armenians during W.W.I. Moreover, Turkey dismisses the evidence about the atrocities as mere allegations and regularly obstructs efforts for acknowledgment. Affirming the truth about the Armenian Genocide, therefore, has become an issue of international significance. The recurrence of genocide in the twentieth century has made the reaffirmation of the historic acknowledgment of the criminal mistreatment of the Armenians by Turkey all the more a compelling obligation for the international community.

Metin, If I understand your previous comment, 100,000 Armenian men formed an Army from various villages, trained, armed, then intentionally "provoked" the Turkish army into massacring them, in the hopes to "get sympathy and support from the West" Logistically, and logically, this does not make sense, nor does it make sense to provoke a war against your own state. The Armenians were citizens of Turkey (the Ottomans), they actually served in the Turkish army and were intentionally
un-armed, then later killed off as well.

Nancy Pelosi would still get elected if not one Armenian voted for her. She doesn't have to support genocide recognition to garner votes. She realizes it is the right thing to do for humanity, and hopefully take a step forward to help Turkey finally acknowledge it's inhumane past.

Metin, If I understand your previous comment, 100,000 Armenian men formed an Army from various villages, trained, armed, then intentionally "provoked" the Turkish army into massacring them, in the hopes to "get sympathy and support from the West"

Rich: So you been reading my mind? Where did I make that comment?

By the way, something happens to politicians when they get offered bigger posts than they can afford.

They become more more centrist in their radical agendas, then they start the reasoning process, and then they try to make both (or all) sides happy.

How long will it be after Pelosi becomes Speaker that she too will 'defer' the genocide resolution for yet another time.

Why do we need to pass resolutions to convince Turkey (or anyone else) to do the right thing anyway? Do we really think that if the entire world passed resolutions, then we should all accept the 'fact' that a genocide occurred?

The Armenians are on a 'one sided' crusade and are totally own a 'one issue' platform. Unfortunately, there are problems involving all Americans and world citizens every day that we should concentrate on first. Maybe we should put some of that passion into curing cancer.

"Rich: So you been reading my mind? Where did I make that comment?"

Those aren't your exact words, but that seems to be the gist of the 4th paragraph of your previous post. If that's not what you meant, what did you mean?

Personally, I thought your post would have been more persuasive without that claim, which seems a bit incredulous to me.

Rich . . . I mean Mike D:

I was responding to your (or Rich's) comment claiming the Armenians provoking the Turks. Maybe you should read the comments more clearly.

MikeD: As for my 4th paragraph, I am commenting on the Armenians' usual quick embracing of 'any' thing, person, place or being that would support their cause, no matter what the rest of the platform they stand on or for.

i.e. France and its recent attempt at restricting the freedom of expression, the very same restrictions that Armenians want the Turks to ease.

If the Turks call something black, the Armenians would call it white, until the Turks start calling it white. Then of course, the Armenians would call it blue.

I would support Ms. Pelosi even if she succeeds in this resolution attempt (if) I supported the rest of her liberal platform. I wouldn't make this one issue decide how I would vote. But would any Armenian admit to not supporting a candidate that is anti-everything they stand for, accept for support of a genocide tag.

'Hypocrisy for Dummies' is probably out on paperback somewhere for those needing a definition.

If you carefully check the name 'Posted By:' on the "100,000 men" mentioned original post, you would discover the writer's name is 'Erkin Baker.' My name happens to be 'Metin.' Contrary to public opinion, Turks do also participate in differing opinions when it comes to issues, including the 'genocide' issue.

Sorry, my mistake. In most forums I participate in, the poster's name is at the top of the post, not the bottom. I saw "metin" above Erkin Baker's post, and thought they were your words. (Perhaps Rich made the same mistake.)

Well let's stop and think for a minute, (unlike rich who just keeps saying stuff from his behind) first of all, why would any race lie about a genocide? Second, if anyone wants proof of the Armenian genocide then they should go to the deserts in Syria where my ancestors where murdered in many filthy ways, the desert is full of minimum 1.5 million Armenian skeletons, and I'm sure us Armenians didn't go and plant those bodies there to get recognition.

It is incredible and alarming how Turkey has its denialist agents planted all over the world. It is equally alarming that the Turks think that they can set other sovereign countries' policies regarding the genocide. Turkey needs to mind its own business and worry about it's laws that punish anyone who dare to disagree with their official lies. The Turks have used blackmail to intimidate other countries from recognizing and condemning the Armenian genocide. But thank god, like all lies, the Turkish lying machine has finally been cracked from within and thanks to outside pressures like the one from France. Soon, the Turks won't be able to contain the snowball effect of people recognizing the genocide both from within and outside of its borders. The question is whether Turkey can ever find the courage to admit its guilt and make things right with Armenians.

Dear Serkay;

You say:

"Well let's stop and think for a minute, (unlike rich who just keeps saying stuff from his behind) first of all, why would any race lie about a genocide? Second, if anyone wants proof of the Armenian genocide then they should go to the deserts in Syria where my ancestors where murdered in many filthy ways, the desert is full of minimum 1.5 million Armenian skeletons, and I'm sure us Armenians didn't go and plant those bodies there to get recognition.?"

I totally agree with you let us think .... but I don't believe we need to think about it that long seconds can suffice. Yes, let us go to Syria and find your ancestors, if we can, and let us find their murderers. The Turks are all for bringing out facts, examing them with a microscope, however your counterparts do not want to. We do.

How long did that take: about 20 seconds to think, cut, past, type and post!

Spread the word, let us come to the table and go to Syria or to Armenia, Turkey, the North Pole if we have too, we have been waiting for such an opportunity. No one is listening.

Have a great day!

First, I would like to apologies about my mistake in my previous post I wasn't referring to rich I was referring to murat I thought the names of the post were on top of the post instead of the bottom so I apologies to you Rich. Second..... Why don't you and I set up a nice meeting erol and after our meeting we can go to Syria and find real proof and once and for all shut you all up. Since I have actually gone there and seen the proof in person I am 110% sure that you will leave Syria with disappointment.
So when will this meeting be?

You have a good day yourself my friend.

Its all true armenian genocide is all real you don't believe it that screw you I bet wat serkay is saying is true so forget the others and listen to serkay

Hey Serk, guess who? I agree with you, what is up with Murat. We have endless amounts of proof and few survivors left of the Armenian Genocide. I would like Murat to prove in anyway possible that the Armenians have done anything to the Turks. It is closed minded people like him preventing the American people as a whole to accept the Armenian Genocide, and also the fact that America is afraid to accept on the grounds that they have military bases in Turkey. I am glad that the Armenian community is gaining a lot more politicians who are willing to do anything in their power to try to get others to accept the Armenian Genocide. The only thing the Armenian community has to look forward to is for these politicians to actually go through with their proposals. The Armenian community on the other hand will not stop fighting to get the Genocide recognized by all, including the Turks who must never forget about their long overdo acceptance.

"The Armenian community on the other hand will not stop fighting to get the Genocide recognized by all, including the Turks who must never forget about their long overdo acceptance."

G-d willing, one day Armenians will care enough about their own country to stop wasting all their cash, votes and other resources on this matter, and instead begin to clean up their own act. Such a shame that Armenia and it's people are so poor, have such a mafia-saturated goverment, and have no natural resources.. unless you count self-pity, self-hate, and racism against Turks.
By all means, never quit fighting to indoctrinate the world.. You no doubt need something to distract you from the sorry state of your homeland...

Candidates promise the most absurd things to get elected, but once they become office-holders, interests of America, not ethnic-constituents, determine which one(s) of those promises can actually be delivered. It has always been like that and I hope Pelosi's case will be no different.

Armenian genocide claims boil down to racist and dishonest history. Racist because Turkish suffering and losses are deliberately dismissed; dishonest because Armenian revolts and supreme treason are also deliberately ignored.

It is time petty politics over biased history are abandoned in favor of peace.

It is time America rules over hate-mongering, revenge-seeking Armenians, too.

It is time America acts like America!

Mr. Kirlikovali leads us to believe that the American people have a disconnect with America's self-interests and that of the Armenian genocide recognition.

The government represents the people, if it does not represnt the people who does it represnt? Who determines its self-interest? In my opinion self-interest is a code word for a current government policy or position. Governement policies or positions can change.

As it stands today America has a flawed policy from the State Department regarding the proper acknowledgment of Armenian genocide.

This issue is not limited to "ethnic-constituents" although they do have a right to be an active and integral part of the United States political system. Other ethnicities, human rights organizations, and many political representatives who are NOT of Armenian decent stand by pushing for proper recognition of the Armenian genocide, including members of the Editorial Board of the Fresno Bee.

Minorities are fortunate in the United States to have human rights, and equality.

Mr. Kirlikovali claims of "revolt", and "treason" "Turkish suffering and loss",are merely Armenian genocide denialist propoganda arguements to cast dought.

Nothing justifies mass killing of innocent men women and children.

I would suggest Mr. Kirlikovali and other denialists to read:

"A Shameful Act" by Taner Akçam maybe it will help bring the reality of history back into focus.

Oh, I need to mention that Mr. Akcam is Turkish and many other principled Turkish scholars are researching this subject and concluding that an Armenian genocide did occur.

Taner Akcam is a violent terrorist who escaped from a Turkish prison. Is this an accurate depiction of your new poster boy?

Akcam is a Turkish sociologist and historian, obtained political asylum in Germany after receiving a 10-year prison sentence at home for working on a student journal. He now teaches at the University of Minnesota. Hardly anti-Turkish, he dedicates his book to Haji Halil, a righteous Turk who, at the risk of being hanged, protected eight members of an Armenian family in his home during the genocide.

As you might expect from an author of such courage, Akcam pulls no punches. Ottoman Turkish leaders "did deliberately attempt to destroy the Armenian population." Turkey continues to deny the genocide because many of the leaders involved in it "later became central figures in the Turkish government" and "admitted openly that the republic could only have been established by eliminating the Armenians and removing their demand for self-determination in Anatolia."

Taner Akcam was a member of dev yol a terrorist organization that killed hundreds of innocent people in the 1970's. He was also bosom buddies with abdullah ocalan the former leader of pkk responsible for thens of thousands of dead. He is a terrorist. He is not a historian his phd is in sociology and not in history, he cant read and write Ottoman.

Harout Sassounian quoted in the article is also a former terrorist, he was responsible for bombing the house of the Turkish ambassador in the early 1980's. His brother harry sassounian killed a Turkish diplomat and is now in jail.
Taner Akcam and Harout Sassounian a nice bunch both terrorists, both of them spend some time in jail.

Oran,

Why then is he able to walk freely in the United States and enjoy the fruits of our freedom? Why then was he also able to walk the streets and enjoy the his freedom in Germany?

Why was he not arrested as he set foot in the US or Gemany and other countries he visited?

In today's climate of terrorism he would have been arrested and sent back to Turkey.

It seems that the Turkish government through the Court Systems verdict and punishment has no credibility outside it's own borders to have professor Taner Akcam in jail.

Seriously.. what is achieved if a bill passes? You will jump up and down and celebrate for a bit, but then what?

Will Turkey suddenly hand over Eastern Anatolia to you?

Will you go burning the books of all the historians who disagree with you? (And there are some excellent historians who disagree with you i.e. Bernard Lewis, Andrew Mango etc).

So French Parliament passes a bill that acknowledges the allegations as truth, but the French state historian, Gilles Veinstein disputes this version. All this achieves is to harden the Turkish view that this is a political campaign that has nothing to do with history. This proved sufficiently embarrasing for Europe as a whole that the EU withdrew its demand for recognition. Do you think Europeans want a 'lets all fess up to our extensive list of war crimes' session?

Will the US start passing bills predetermining the study of all atrocities - or only those that spend billions lobbying for it?

If you wish to be taken seriously on a scholarly level, rather than being part of an obvious attempt to secure electoral votes - take your evidence to international adjudication. Turkey has been pushing for this, call their bluff.

Does your evidence stand up to that sort of scrunity?

Many of the worlds leading Ottoman historians say no.

The British, who carried out war crimes investigations for 2 and half years and found no evidence, say no.

Perhaps they are wrong and you are right. Take your evidence to court and settle this.

The lack of willing to do this invites doubts as to the validity of your case.

This is a serious matter that will find its conclusion on many fronts.

The course to Armenian genocide recognition by the Turkish government may be the last front given it's antagonistic policy toward this human rights issue, in the mean time others are recognizing the Armenian genocide as a genocide.

This is a step forward toward human rights not only for Armenians but for all humanity.

On a scholarly level the history clearly shows the Armenians were victims of genocide.

The ones who claim the Armeninan genocide as untrue hold a denialist position alligned with the Turkish government's current policy.

"Electoral votes" has nothing to do with this issue and nor does the Armenian lobby have significant political leverage to do so. But the perception is always welcome.

Nor does the Armenian lobby "spend billions" to lobby, the main leverage the Armenian lobby holds is human rights and truth.

"Electoral votes has nothing to do with this issue and nor does the Armenian lobby have significant political leverage to do so."

Yes, the topic is clearly denialism.

I believe it is a complete coincidence that Pelosi is the representative for California, home of the largest diaspora community; moreover - I believe it is complete coincidence that it was France, home of Europes largest Armenian community - and with an election in a few months - that just tried to make any dispute punishable by law (this law will never pass, it is unenforcable - unlike the Holocaust, there is no legal verdict (Nuremburg) to attach it to, and secondly they probably do not want to arrest, among others, their own state historian, Gilles Veinstein).

Why do you want politicians to determine your history for you? And once that is done, what next? Draw up a list of the (according to War Nerd) "literally thousands" of genocides and recognise all of them too?

Recognition will not find its 'conclusion' because there are too many books out there by too many respected historians that dispute the Armenian thesis - my guess is the campaign will then take this bill and use it as the basis on which to try and ban schools from introducing any of them into curriculums, like they did last year in Massachusetts.

Once all the governments in the world, apart from Turkey, have given you the recognition you demand, there is still simply too much material out there for you to ever have the conclusion that you want.

Turkish recognition? Forget it - just as you are used to seeing pictures of starving Armenians and hearing survivors tales, Turks are used to seeing pictures of massacred Turks and survivors tales. I know this because I live in Turkey.

Do Armenian nationalists think they can use genocide issue to blackmail Turkey over Nagorno Karabakh? Forget it. A vast part of Turkey's foreign policy is now dependent on Azerbaijan's Caspian energy links.

The EU? Forget that too, the EU couldn't care less, they just want Turks out and if Armenia doesn't serve as an excuse, something else will.

This will never come to a conclusion because history cannot be changed - politicians can write a version of it, but that cannot change it. There will always be some military or Middle Eastern historian who says 'Well, hang on.. why are they using forgeries like the Naim-Andolian volumes?'

On a scholarly level, you cannot get the concensus you want from historians so you demand that politicians declare you right and shut down the debate.

Thought policing, political book-burning.

Lee,

I do not think you have a grasp of the congressional election process. Concressman Pelosi does not have a significant number of Armenians (also who are registered voters) to make a difference in whether she gets elected into office or not.

Lee wrote:
"On a scholarly level, you cannot get the concensus you want from historians so you demand that politicians declare you right and shut down the debate."

Politicians can freely make their own decicions. No one is here to make statements or hold positions they believe are not correct.

Lee wrote:
"Turkish recognition? Forget it - just as you are used to seeing pictures of starving Armenians and hearing survivors tales, Turks are used to seeing pictures of massacred Turks and survivors tales. I know this because I live in Turkey."

As I stated in my previous post genocide recognition is good for ALL humanity including the Turks who live in Turkey.

Lee wrote:
"Do Armenian nationalists think they can use genocide issue to blackmail Turkey over Nagorno Karabakh? Forget it. A vast part of Turkey's foreign policy is now dependent on Azerbaijan's Caspian energy links."

I do not believe Nagorno Karabagh became an Independent State to black mail Turkey in any way.

Lee wrote:
"The EU? Forget that too, the EU couldn't care less, they just want Turks out and if Armenia doesn't serve as an excuse, something else will."

The Turkish policies of yester year and today has made it difficult to join the EU. The Armenian genocide is just a portion of Turkey's intollerance of it's geographic neighbors.

Lee wrote:
"This will never come to a conclusion because history cannot be changed - politicians can write a version of it, but that cannot change it..."

I agree history can not be changed no one is asking for politicians to write history. But they can acknowledge what has happened in history.

Lee wrote:
"On a scholarly level, you cannot get the concensus you want from historians so you demand that politicians declare you right and shut down the debate."

How free is the debate on the Armenian genocide in Turkey?, Turkish scholars can't even sucessfully assemble a forum without the authorities, and public protest interfering.

The history of the Armenian genocide is a part of Ottoman/Turkey's past.

Armenian genocide denialists do fabricate and whitewash history and they will be known as denialists, including those who agree with them.

Lee wrote:
"Thought policing, political book-burning."

The Germans were known for this type of activity durring the holocaust. I think this is where you can begin to draw "coincidence" with Ottoman/Turkey.

I am curious why in the last few years has there been so many of Hitler's book "Mein Kampf" books sold in Turkey?

Mein Kampf Sales Soar in Turkey":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/turkey/story/0,,1447209,00.html

Mein Kampf? Because a Turkish translation was published and people curious about an insight into a lunatics mind bought it. I read it years ago myself. Does this have any relevance other than a clumsy allusion to the Holocaust?

Why was Armenia an ally of Nazi Germany? We can all ask silly, irrelevant questions.

"Armenian genocide denialists do fabricate and whitewash history and they will be known as denialists, including those who agree with them."

The Encyclopedia of Historians and Historical Writing has written that, over a 60-year career, Bernard Lewis has emerged as "the most influential postwar historian of Islam and the Middle East."

Are they all 'denialists'?

What does denialism mean, anyway? Nobody denies the events took place, the dispute regards the circumstances. As Lewis says, "The issue is not whether the massacres happened or not, but rather if these massacres were as a result of a deliberate preconceived decision of the Turkish government; there is no evidence for such a decision."

Perhaps by denial, you are referring to the Armenian version - which certainly is denialist.

To discuss the history of Turks/Kurds and Armenians without talking about the history of Armenians slaughtering Turkish/Kurdish villagers is denialism.

This is fully evidenced by the Russian archives and by nationalist Armenian publications that were boasting about their uprising prior to deciding there was more mileage in victimhood.

Historians are not letting you get away with it.

If your evidence is up to it, call Turkey's bluff. Go to court. If you believe in the truth of your version of history, go to court.

Hi Lee,

A little backround on Bernard Lewis:

Bernard Lewis, Professor Emeritus at Princeton University in the department of Near Eastern Studies, began his career as a historian with an honest assessment of the Armenian Genocide as a "terrible holocaust." He soon reversed his position, serving as leading spokesman for the Turkish government's denial campaign, along with Princeton University Professor Heath Lowry. Lowry was exposed as a paid spokesman for the Turkish government's worldwide campaign of genocide denial in the seminal journal article, "Professional Ethics and the Denial of Armenian Genocide", ("Holocaust and Genocide Studies," 1995).

Lewis' genocide denial became international news on June 21, 1995, when a French court condemned him for statements he made during a 1993 interview with French newspaper "Le Monde." The case, which argued that Lewis' statements caused harm to Armenian Genocide survivors, was filed by the International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism and the Forum of Armenian Associations, representing a number of French Armenian organizations, including the ANC of France. The Court found Lewis "at fault," stating that, "his remarks, which could unfairly revive the pain of the Armenian community, are tortuous and justify compensation." The court further affirmed that, "the historian is bound by his responsibility toward the persons concerned when, by distortion or falsification, he credits the veracity of manifestly erroneous allegations or, through serious negligence, omits events or opinions subscribed to by persons qualified and enlightened enough so that the concern for accuracy prevents him from keeping silent about them." Lewis was symbolically fined one franc and "Le Monde" was ordered to reprint portions of the French court judgment, which appeared two days later.

Bernard Lewis has not written a single book specifically on the Armenian genocide, in not doing so I sought he has done any indepth research on the subject if so let me know.

The issue is gaining more ground on the judicial level with countless civil cases in favor of the Armenian genocide victims from parties withholding insurance claims.

Legally, in recent years the Armenian genocide has been building precidence.

The only "bluff" as you call it, is with the Turkish governments policy of denial, they can easily make ammends, but choose not to do so.

Armenia has been willing to diplomatically solve the issue without preconditions, but Turkey chooses not to resolve the issue. It would seem that this would be the best route to resolve the matter other then third party resolution i.e. some international court system.

I seriously question Turkey's willingness to abide by an international court's decison on any given matter, when they have always violated international laws.

Dear Rich,

Yes, I am well aware that Lewis was convicted in a civil case in France, a decision which French historian Pierre Nora, among 19 historians who protested the recognition bill, called a "scandal".

Nora explained "The French parliament is being held captive by Armenian pressure groups."

Afterall, Lewis did not say anything that the top French Ottoman historian (and French state consultant on these matters), Gilles Veinstein has not said.

Such is the outrage among French historians about this sort of thing that one, Jean-Michel Thibaux, has gone as far as applying for Turkish citizenship as he plans to protest by abandoning France.

Foreign historians have also put their disapproval on record, "If French judges want to censor history, including all the history books published all over the world, they will be insulted by everyone siding with the academic world, and with free and uncensored researches."

The Encyclopedia of Historians and Historical Writing described Lewis as "the most influential postwar historian of Islam and the Middle East" four years after the trial.

Obviously they did not take the French court very seriously either.

Nor did Cheney, who says - as archived on the whitehouse website - "You simply cannot find a greater authority on Middle Eastern history". I hardly think the US administration would be interested in publicising their links with the man if he was considered a genocide denier in any respected circles.

Thank you for bring the France issue up - it is an excellent illustration of my point that politicians cannot make inconvenient history, or inconvenient historians, go away.

Have you ever considered the possibility that all of this is not just some vast international conspiracy and perhaps events were not quite as clear cut as you want to believe?

Anyway, Merry Christmas.

Hello Lee,

Ah, let's not be quick to throw stones on civil freedoms of expression. I am equally sure that you are aware of Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code but conveniently ommitted any mention of it.

More information on Article 301:

Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, which makes offending "Turkishness" a criminal offence.

"Article 301 is not in line with the European Convention on Human Rights," Eurlings said. "It is very vaguely formulated, and it will always grant judges and prosecutors [who] don't want a modern Turkey, [who] don't want a Turkey of freedoms, it will grant them the opportunity to indict people for a nonviolent expression of opinion."

Bernard Lewis may be recognized as an authority but he is not God writing the Bible nor is he immune from misrepresenting history or better not conducting enough research to make his conclusions on this specific time in history.

A much more plausable reason why these scholars selectievle use the term massacre rather then more accurately calling it an Armenian genocide can be the highly sensitive nature of the subject to the Turkish government.

Genocide research scholars and historians who accuratly charactorize the Armenian genocide can be jailed, restricted access to the so-called Turkish archives, and threatened by Turkish nationals.

On the other hand historians you have listed calling the Armenian genocide a massacre are more likely and do have easier access to Turkish archives becasue they will not be seen as a threat to their policy of denial.

They simply have more to loose then to gain as being "authorities" on various subjects outside of the Armenian genocide issue.

Also a national award to Bernard Lewis by Bush and Cheney's comments on Lewis does not hold any credibility to me personally. I had no repsect for this Administration not only on the Armenian genocide but more so that they are inept at anything related to foreign public policy.

A vast conspiracy is does not seem in anyway to be a credible reason why historians do research on the Armenian genocide other then to educate and to contribute to the knowledge of inhumanity, in the hopes of making society a better place to live.

I am sure you agree (although obviously not on this paticular subject) that it is not right to have state sponsored genocide or any genocide on any people for any reason, especially innocent civilian populations.

France's laws are cutting edge in respsect to this issue. Maybe if States were more intolerant to people who deny inhumanity we would start to have a more civil society. Also on the other hand if more States were intolerant to inhumanity we would have a more civil society. We have a long road ahead of us on human rights from many perspectives.

If Armenians durring the Ottoman/Turkey era were allowed there human rights we may not be having this dialoge on the subject.

Happy belated Christmas, I wasn't sure if you were Christian or not.

Dear Rich,

I did not ommit to mention Penal Code 301 - I was responding to a direct statement regarding a court case in France. But yes, I agree Penal Code 301 should be discarded.

I vehemently disagree that governments declaring official state versions of history are cutting edge - especially against the will of historians. That is an act of totalitarianism and should not play any part of free society.

As for the motivation for historians to prostitute their trade and write a particular way, I for one would have certainly been more inclined to feel pressured by the prospect of being blown up by ASALA terrorists while they were active or being labelled "Genocide Denier" - rather than the risk of having my access to Ottoman archives limited.

Best wishes.

Well we may have another disagreement on this but I believe governments do have a role in history for many reasons: archival records they are essentially the gate keepers in many respects to historians, also governments are more likely to keep records of what has happened in the past directly or indirectly, governments make history why not have them interept it.

Everyone disagrees with something even if historians are bias from the Armenian genocide perspective it does not make another view (in this case French laws) in opposition. Certainly it does not make them totalitarian states. I would argue that America is headed for a totalitarian state then France, if we were to talk about civil liberties being taken away.

In my view denialists positions choose to oppose or call the the Armenian genocide a "massacre" to avoid the heated issue.

Recent Turkish scholars such as Taner Akcam and Pamuk are perfect examples of people who have not cowed down to heated public scruteny and rebuke.

Historian Hilmar Kaiser stated: - I talked to very high ranking officials who turned up at a tea house; these include leaders from the ruling AK party, people who are concerned with security in Turkey, and also academics."

Academics of Turkish decent are few that acknowledge the genocide but the numbers are rising although very slow. Even they have hope that the Turkish government will finally face it's true past rather then it's current policy of denial.

ASALA hasn't been around since the mid 80's, so the the historians have little to worry about on that front.

Dear Rich,

Yes, archival records are important, but when one examines the archives for state held evidence they find the following:

"There are in hands of Majesty's government at Malta a number of Turks arrested for alleged complicity in the Armenian massacres. There are considerable difficulty in establishing proofs of guilt. Please ascertain if the United States government is in possession of any evidence that would be of value for the purpose of prosecution." - BritishArchives. PRO--F. 0. 371/ 6500/ E.3552, Curzon to Geddes, Telegram No 176, dated March 31, 1921.

"I have made several inquiries at the State Department, and today l am informed that while they are in possession of a large number of documents concerning the Armenian relocations, from the description, I am doubtful whether these documents are likely to prove useful as evidence in prosecuting Turks confined in Malta." - British Archives: PRO--F. 0.371/ 6500/ E.6311 Geddes to Curzon, Telegram No 374, dated June 1921.

The UK cites this absence of evidence in refusing recognition.

Assuming Nancy Pelosi passes her bill, the US archives will become very contradictory indeed and vulnerable to considerable dispute.

Lee,

I think you and I will agree that they the governments do have archival information, but also limit access when it is sensitive to their self-interest.

Also I will give Turkey some credit in making it's archives more accessible but historians are still running into difficulty in gaining access. It is also hard to determine if the information they release to the public is all the information they have. It is more likely judging from the way historians access information that it is made public in pieces and not in it's entirety. The information that is public is pre-screened.

Hilmar Kaiser for example was not called an outright propogandist, but rather a scholar when conducting research in Turkey, in recent past.

Kaiser made a point that massacres did happen but a broader picture conclude that it was genocide.

VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS EQUALS LYNCHING

Let me lay it out as plainly as possible:

1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the UN. 1948 convention. (Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive.)

2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a "competent court" after "due process" where both sides are properly represented and evidence cross examined.

3- Such a "competent court" was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist.

4- Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual. It reflects Western bias against Muslims in general and Turks in particular. The term genocide must be used with the qualifier "alleged", if one values ideals like truth, objectivity, and fairness.

5- Genocide claim is based on racist and dishonest history. Racist because it ignores the much larger Turkish suffering and death toll while it honors only Armenian dead and suffering. Dishonest because it dismisses brutal Armenian armed revolts, domestic and international Armenian terrorism, and supreme Armnianb treason (as in joining an invading enemy army to kill their Muslim neighbors) which caused their temporary wartime resettlement in another part of the Ottoman Empire (hence cannot be labeled a deportation.)

6- Recognizing Armenian claim as genocide will deeply insult Turks around the globe and derail the excellent relations currently enjoyed between the U.S. and Turkey. It will, no doubt, please Armenia and but also guaranteed outrage Turkey, America's close ally since the Korean War of 1950-53. Turks stood shoulder to shoulder with Americans in Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. American gratitude and thanks will appear to come (because of the Armenian lobby) in the form of the worst insult that can be dished out to an entire nation after the worst injury suffered by that nation (ie the forgotten tragedy the Turks suffered during WWI.)

7- History is not a matter of "conviction, popular belief, consensus, media frenzy, political resolutions, or propaganda." History is a matter of research, peer review, thoughtful exchange, informed debate, and objective and honest scholarship. Even historians, by definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is reserved for a "competent court" with its legal experts and due process.

8- What we witness today amounts to lynching of the Turks by Armenians to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry. American values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet. Unprovoked , unjustified, and unfair defamation and thus outraging of Turkey, one of America's closest allies in the troubled Middle East, in order to appease some nagging Armenian activists is not helping American interests.
Hate based policies and proclamations have never been an American way to do business. Why start now?

Anyone claiming genocide verdict by the much discredited Armenian evidence is engaging in "convicting and executing without due process" (not unlike lynch mobs.)

Anyone who, knowingly or unknowingly, is not using the qualifier "alleged" before the term genocide is biased, bigoted, and dishonest.

Fairness is all I ask,

Peace,

VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS EQUALS LYNCHING

Let me lay it out as plainly as possible:

1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the UN. 1948 convention. (Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive.)

2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a "competent court" after "due process" where both sides are properly represented and evidence cross examined.

3- Such a "competent court" was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist.

4- Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual. It reflects Western bias against Muslims in general and Turks in particular. The term genocide must be used with the qualifier "alleged", if one values ideals like truth, objectivity, and fairness.

5- Genocide claim is based on racist and dishonest history. Racist because it ignores the much larger Turkish suffering and death toll while it honors only Armenian dead and suffering. Dishonest because it dismisses brutal Armenian armed revolts, domestic and international Armenian terrorism, and supreme Armnianb treason (as in joining an invading enemy army to kill their Muslim neighbors) which caused their temporary wartime resettlement in another part of the Ottoman Empire (hence cannot be labeled a deportation.)

6- Recognizing Armenian claim as genocide will deeply insult Turks around the globe and derail the excellent relations currently enjoyed between the U.S. and Turkey. It will, no doubt, please Armenia and but also guaranteed outrage Turkey, America's close ally since the Korean War of 1950-53. Turks stood shoulder to shoulder with Americans in Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. American gratitude and thanks will appear to come (because of the Armenian lobby) in the form of the worst insult that can be dished out to an entire nation after the worst injury suffered by that nation (ie the forgotten tragedy the Turks suffered during WWI.)

7- History is not a matter of "conviction, popular belief, consensus, media frenzy, political resolutions, or propaganda." History is a matter of research, peer review, thoughtful exchange, informed debate, and objective and honest scholarship. Even historians, by definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is reserved for a "competent court" with its legal experts and due process.

8- What we witness today amounts to lynching of the Turks by Armenians to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry. American values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet. Unprovoked , unjustified, and unfair defamation and thus outraging of Turkey, one of America's closest allies in the troubled Middle East, in order to appease some nagging Armenian activists is not helping American interests.
Hate based policies and proclamations have never been an American way to do business. Why start now?

Anyone claiming genocide verdict by the much discredited Armenian evidence is engaging in "convicting and executing without due process" (not unlike lynch mobs.)

Anyone who, knowingly or unknowingly, is not using the qualifier "alleged" before the term genocide is biased, bigoted, and dishonest.

Fairness is all I ask.

Peace

It's blatently false to make claims that the Armenian genocide issue is based on "racist and dishonest history", nor is "conviction, popular belief, consensus, media frenzy, political resolutions, or propaganda".

Nor is "lynching of the Turks by Armenians to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry".

The issue of the Armenian genocide origniated from the mass destruction of the Armenian people premeditated and executed buy the Ottoman Turkish government.

Looking into alterior motives to deny the Armenian genocide has no credibility.

The false claims as stated above casts the victim as the victimizer, similar to the Nazi propoganda that tried to justify the holocaust of the Jewish people.

A sense of "fairness" was not given to the Armenian victims of genocide who had no judge nor jury, only the (Ottoman Turkish government) executioner.

In addition I found an article appropriate to the subject of a court system as the last post mentioned.

-----

Turkey may fall in its own trap by taking Genocide issue to court
By Harut Sassounian

Exasperated by the international community's ever-growing acceptance of the Armenian Genocide and discouraged by its failed attempts to quash any mention of this issue the Turkish government has decided to embark on a bold new adventure according to Turkish newspapers last week.

Admitting that Turkey has nothing to show for after spending millions of dollars on anti-Armenian propaganda Erdal Safak wrote in Sabah: "Turkey will be waging a tooth-and-nail struggle in the international arena rather than exhausting its breath on symposiums that the West doesn't heed." He went on to state: "Sources say Turkey is even considering taking the case to the Permanent Court of Arbitration [the International Court of Justice]."

Acting as if he had just discovered a magic wand Safak wrote: "We wholeheartedly support this plan. There is no other way to put an end to the allegations that bothered us just in April in the past but recently have been bothering us from the first day of each year. This is the only way to save our nation from this huge trauma and the damage caused by the increasing feeling of being faced with an "international conspiracy " fanned by new links in the chain of countries which officially recognize Armenian claims [of genocide]."

The newspaper Hurriyet reported this new initiative under the following colorful headline: "Ankara is getting ready to say: "slug it out." Ugur Ergan the reporter for Hurriyet wrote that the Turkish government's "Coordination Committee to Fight Against Alleged Genocide Claim" had met on Dec. 26 2006 and decided to change Ankara's policy on the Armenian Genocide. This Council's membership consists of the ministers of Foreign Affairs Justice National Education and Culture the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces the Higher Education Council and representatives from various universities and organizations.

Stating that "brochures symposia and newspaper ads were not giving the desired result in fighting the genocide claim " the Committee decided to pursue all legal avenues against the Republic of Armenia as well as the Armenian Diaspora.

In his remarks in Parliament on Nov. 14 2006 Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul reportedly declared: "Genocide claims can be taken to International Courts. Work is being carried out along those lines and Turkey's point of view being accurate should be approved through the decision of an international judicial body." Gul reportedly discussed the possibility of taking France to the European Court of Human Rights in order to block a proposed French bill that would make the denial of the Armenian Genocide a crime.

The article stated that Turkey after getting advice from domestic and foreign jurists would submit the Armenian Genocide case to the International Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague under the provisions of the U.N. Genocide Convention of 1948. Turkey and Armenia would supposedly select three arbitrators each and these arbitrators would then appoint an independent and neutral president.

Turkish officials propose that all archives including those belonging to Turkey the ARF in Boston the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and all foreign missions that operated in Turkey during the genocide be compiled. They suggest that "a wide-scale forensic study" be conducted in order to determine if there were any demographic changes and diseases during that period.

According to Hurriyet after these documents are submitted to the court the two sides would present their respective cases and then wait for the court's judgment.

The Turkish government according to this article believes that the Armenians "will be cornered" because they will be obliged to prove that in 1915 they were subjected to genocide. "The Armenians have no documents in their hands to prove this whereas there are in Turkey's hands very strong documents demonstrating that the deportation was justified by legitimate self-defense " Hurriyet said.

If this report is accurate it is simply amazing that the Turkish government would approach such a serious matter so childishly. To begin with Turkey assumes that Armenia would fall for such an obvious ploy. Are Turkish leaders foolish enough to believe that the Armenian government would accept going to court in order to prove the genocide? The only reason Armenians would want to go to court is to demand reparations and the return of the Armenian territories currently occupied by the Republic of Turkey.

The key issue here is whether Turkey would agree before the start of the arbitration to comply with the eventual decision of the arbitrators and return all looted assets and occupied territories to Armenians should the court so decide. Unless Turkish officials accept this condition their bluff would be called long before they can brag about "cornering the Armenians."

I don't believe the Turks are serious about taking the Armenians to court over the genocide issue. This Turkish threat is just a public relations ploy in order to tell the world that they were ready to go to court but Armenians refused to do so.

We already have one recent example of Turkey talking tough first and then quietly eating its words. Several months ago the Turkish Foreign Minister pledged to take the issue of the Armenian Genocide to the United Nations. Shortly after making that statement the Foreign Minister declared that Turkey would not go to the U.N. as he was afraid that the Armenian side would win in what he called a "highly-politicized body."

I will not be surprised if the Turks very shortly also withdraw from this foolhardy notion lest they lose not just a court case but also a large chunk of territory!

Notice how Armenians never talk about Turkish victims of Armenian brutality, torture, and mayhem? Do names like Dro, Pastermadjian, and thousands of others ring a bell? How about Ottoman-Armenians under French uniforms cutting down their Ottoman-Muslim neighbors? And under Russina uniforms slaughtering even more? You want to see pictures? Go to www.armenianreality.com.
We have an ago-old asying in Turkish: "You can't cover the sun with mud." Meaning? Armenian cannot fool the whole world all the time. The truth will shine on them sooner or later. Armenian mass deception can work in Fresno or Glendale, but not in places where Armenians cannot generate "information pollution".

Why is it that Armenian faslifiers never talk about Turkish victims of Armenian revolts, terrorism, and treason?

What can justify a genocide of innocent Armenian civilians?

Nothing, if there was "truly" a genocide. On the other hand, Armenian terrorists using Armenian civilians as "human shields" can justify civl wars and civilian casualties.

Sadly we have fringe groups, and advocates who deny the genocide of the Jews durring WWII. Sadly, similar denialist attitudes pertain to the Armenian genocide.

There are two paths to the Armenian genocide -- one of it's occurance at the hands of the Ottoman Turkish Government, and the other, of denial.

I commend the Turkish civilians at the time of the Genocide who saved Armenians from death, putting there own lives at risk.

I also commend my Turkic people of today, for standing up and facing the dark past of Turkish history, and accepting the "truth" of the genocide.

Jewsih Holocaust is an undisputed fact; Armenian Genocide is a hotly contested allegation. Jews did not kill or backstab Germans to establish a Jewish satet on German soil; Armenians did all that and more in the Ottoman Empire. Turkish acts were a wartime military necessity in the spirit of defending one's country in the face of internal and external threats to existence.

I keep asking and the Armenian lobbysists keep skirting this simple question: in your best informed estimate, how many Muslims (mostly Turks) did the Armenians kill in 1914-1918?

Obviously failing to see the distinct parallels between the innocent mass killings of Armenians and the Jewish people by the perpetrator governments is something that you need to seriously re-evaluate.

The German government did fabricate propoganda to justify killing innocent Jewish people, starkly similar to the Turkish government of that era untill today.

The Germans at the time and frindge groups of today deny the Jewish killings, not unlike the Turkish government and frindge groups of today.

Durring the civil unrest of the era a more sensibe question may be: How many ethnic Turkish people killed eachother?

Jewish Holocaust is an undisputed fact; Armenian Genocide is a much disputed allegation.

Jews didn't revolt against Germany of joined invading armies of Germany's enemies or kill their German neighbors in order to establis a Jewish state on German soil; Armenians committed all these henoius crimes and more in Eastern Anatolia during WWI.

Since the Armenian writer(s) seem to know all there is to know about the Turkish-Armenian conflict, let me ask a simple question to them: How many Muslims (Turks, Kurdsm, and others) did the Armenian kill during 1914-1918?

How many?

The point is the governents propoganda of Turkey and Germany tried to justify the killing of innocent lives. The ends and the means were the same, killing without justifiation.

It may be possible that the ethnic Turks were killing eachother over the spoils of the Turkish governments sanctioned rape, killing, and out right pillaging of innocent Armenians throughout Eastern Anatolia.

Also the Turkish internal governmental power struggle contributed to the civil war i.e. death of it's ethnic Turkish people.

Forgive me to intervene in your discussion without end.

Without end, because one cannot unfortunately convince that which use fallacious arguments in objective to dilute and to expurgat the real context. This Genocide is a indisputable fact. Only, Weinstein, MC Carthy and some others support a thesis reverses against the opinion of a multitude of eminent historians and politicians in the world. The Armenians were destroyed wildly and despoiled. They represented an obstacle in extension on oriental slope of Ottoman Empire. They were Christian and had important capacities in Empire. Since year 1894, even if the international community did not make its duty towards these sacrificed people, the voices have risen to denounce these crimes. And this crime is a Genocide! Turkish State knows this truth. For this reason it fights of all its forces. But the truth will be truth until the end of time.

An imprescriptible crime that Attaturk itself allowed on 1926 in Smyrn:

"I am about to show these plotters that the Republic of Turkey cannot be overthrown by murderers or through their murderous designs...

These left_overs from the former Young Turk Party, who should have been made to account for the lives of millions of our Christian subjects who were ruthlessly driven en masse, from their homes and massacred, have been restive under the republican rule. They have hitherto lived on plunder, robbery and bribery and become inimical to any idea, or suggestion to enlist in useful labor and earn their living by the honest sweat of their brow.

Under the cloak of the opposition party, this element, who forced our country into the Great War against the will of the people, who caused the shedding of rivers of blood of the Turkish youth to satisfy the criminal ambition of Enver Pasha, has, in a cowardly fashion, intrigued against my life, as well as the lives of the members of my cabinet."

Negationnism is the final phase of the Armenian Genocide.

The Armenians want to live in peace with the Turkish people. Not it responsible.

My only intervention to finish.

I have coined a new term "Ethocide™" at exactly at 8:58 am, on Wednesday, May 7, 2003, , after being frustrated by the incredibly biased coverage of Turkish-Armenian issue in the American press and prejudiced writers who blindly and faithfully recite the "official Armenian position" on the Turkish-Armenian conflict.

"Ethocide" , my humble gift to the English language, is coined from the words "ethics" and "cide". Short definition of Ethocide™ is "deliberate and systematic extermination of ethics via mass deception". If you want to know what "ethocidal coverage" of a controversial issue is, just read the Armenian writers above. For a more detailed study of "Ethocide", you may wish to google the word "Ethocide".

Also, I am in the process of writing a book titled "Ethocide, Not Genocide" exposing the Armenian lobby for the mass deception they cultivated since 1915. After my book, the future generations will dismiss the Armenian claims with a simple statement: "What happened during WWI was not genocide, but what the Armenian lobby did since WWI is clearly ethocide."

One of the key questions in exposing the Armenian lobby is a simple one that I have already asked and the Armenian writers carefully avoided answering many times before:

How many Muslims (mostly Turks, but also Kurds, Circassians, Arabs, and others, too) did the Armenian nationalists kill during 1914-1918?

How many?

You may have added to the English language but it's hardly a "contribution" to humanity from a denialist perspective of the Armenian genocide.

How many Muslims (mostly Turks, but also Kurds, Circassians, Arabs, and others) did the Armenian nationalists kill during 1914-1918?

How many?

Go to an Armenian Genocide denialist web site to find an answer that you may believe is true.

I can always do that. But I want your "learned" opinion.

How many Muslims (mostly Turks, but also Kurds, Circassians, Arabs, and others) did the Armenian nationalists kill during 1914-1918?

How many?

If you can always do that then what Armenian Genocide denialist web site would someone go who is interested to answer your question?

You are not fooling the readers with your evasive answers.

Why is it so difficult for you people to answer a simple question? Why must you endlessly recite what you memorized since your childhood?

And what part of the following question don't you understand? Isn't it in plain enough English?

Let me ask one more time:

How many Muslims (mostly Turks, but also Kurds, Circassians, Arabs, and others, too) did the Armenian nationalists kill during 1914-1918?

How many?

If you have been reading the previous posts you may already find that your question did recieve a number of responses.

Otherwise it is yourself that is running away from the issue that (as you stated) "frustrates" you the most: comming to terms with the Turkish Government's policy of genocide against the innocent Armenian people.

I know too well I cannot change yout mind and I don't intend to. All I am doing here is documenting for all to see how disconnected the Armenian writers are to the historical facts and how they are brainwahsed to disregard the truth. They are taight to recite what they have been fed since early childhood.

This question, as I explained above, is at the crux of the matter. This debate cannot advance if the Armenian writers (who seem to know all there is to know about the Turkish-Armenian conflict) try desperately to evade a simple question with an honest answer.

So, I must insist on asking it:

How many Muslims (mostly Turks, but also Kurds, Circassians, Arabs, and others) did the Armenian nationalists kill during 1914-1918?

How many?

From reading your same posts it is evident that you are the one who is "brainwashed" with the repeaded questions.

And as I stated before, your question did recieve a number of responses already.

Your also under the usumption that the Armenian Genocide is subject to debate?

How insulting to humanity.

Your answers were no answers; evasion, diversion, excuse, and/or dismissal.

Your answer to my question, or rather lack of it, is a clear proof that there was no genocide and that it was a civil war within a world war.

How can Armenians love "monologue" so much and hate "responsible debate"? What are they afraid of? That their genocide fraud would be exposed?

When Erdogan, the Turkish PM, proposed to Armenia that a joint reserach group be establised to properly analyze the Turkish-Armenian conflict, the response was the same as the above Armenian writers: "No need for study a=or debate. We know it all. That's that."

Well, if you know it all, then would you plase have the courage to answer my simple question with a staright answer:

How many Muslims did Armenians kill during WWI?

(I am still waiting... No easy escape for you...)

Ergun wrote:
"Your answers were no answers; evasion, diversion, excuse, and/or dismissal."

Your interptations of my previous response to your same question is yours to except, or reject.

Asking the same question does not further ligitimize YOUR evasion of exceptence of the Armenian genocide.

You must not understand, most everyone (including myself) who advocate human rights paticularly aganist government sanctioned genocide are not filled with "hate". On the contrary, we try and bring light to genocides to avoid them today and in the future.

Your position seems to justify genocidal acts agisnt innocent civilians and perpetuate hate.

You need a lot of courage to face history, except it and move on as many ethnic Turkish people are doing now.

I am not sure if you can appreciate the difference between the terms "allegations" and "judgment". While anyone can make any wild claim, only court judgments are filtered through the "due process" by careful and orderly cross-examination of factual, relevant input. The Armenians have never won a court case authorizing them to use the term genocide. Yet, they seem to endlessly benefit from a bogus "judgment" of genocide without "due process".

Genocide is a precisely defined legal term that requires a "verdict by a competent court" to assert. Not all suffering, not all killings, not all casualties, not all "my-granma-told-me" stories can be slapped on with a casual genocide label. Armenians have many "my-granma-told-me"stories, but so do we, Turks and other Muslims. It is just that you choose to ignore ours.

You could not even answer a simple question about the Muslim suffering. I proved it above. If you don't know about it, then what kind of "human rights champion" are you advocating human rights for only certain humans but not others?

If you know about Muslim suffering at the hands of Armenians but choose to ignore it anyway, then that's selective morality at best, racial and ethnic discrimination at worst.

For an atrocity to be considered genocide, the plaintiff must prove that there was "an intention" to commit genocide; then the defendants cross examine the documents and rebut. Such a "due process", like Nuremberg, has actually been attempted by the British in Malta but never carried out due to lack of evidence that could stand the scrutiny of any court of law. Since the Armenians had not been able to come up with any evidence, other than crude forgeries and hearsay, of Ottoman intent, the Armenian activists had concocted countless conspiracy theories, based them on the documents other Armenians forged, second hand comments on "lost documents", repetitive hearsay logs that can circle the earth, and eyewitness stories which prove nothing more than tit-for-tat cruelty in a wartime, none of which would stand in a court room. If they did, then the Armenians would be in that court room back in 1918, right after the conclusion of the World War I. Just like they sued New York Life for insurance money after 90 years, they would have sued The Republic Of Turkey back in 1923 and not a moment later. The Armenian activists know that they can not win in a court room due to shaky foundation of their wild claims, so they mostly use media, politicians, and "training" to settle history by censorship.

To "prove the Ottoman premeditation" on the alleged genocide, the Armenian activists and scholars came up with three pillars, according to Professor Guenther Lewy ( "Revisiting the Armenian Genocide", Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2005) hoping that they would convince the world that the wartime measure of resettlement of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire amounted to genocide. He wrote:

" ...Most of those who maintain that Armenian deaths were premeditated and so constitute genocide base their argument on three pillars: the actions of Turkish military courts of 1919-20, which convicted officials of the Young Turk government of organizing massacres of Armenians, the role of the so-called "Special Organization" accused of carrying out the massacres, and the Memoirs of Naim Bey which contain alleged telegrams of Interior Minister Talât Pasha conveying the orders for the destruction of the Armenians. Yet when these events and the sources describing them are subjected to careful examination, they provide at most a shaky foundation from which to claim, let alone conclude, that the deaths of Armenians were premeditated...."

It is clear by even a precursory scanning of historical facts that Armenian claims of genocide cannot be substantiated and that it was wartime suffering caused by a civil war engineered, provoked, waged, and lost by the Armenians with financial, political, and military support from Russia, England, France and, tot varying degrees, other enemies of the Ottoman Empire. Turks were defending their country and their lives like any self-respecting nation would do.

Since you know all there is to know, like every ARmenian around, perhaps you can help me wuith my second question:

How many Muslims did Armenians kill in Azerbaijan in 1992-1994 period? And how many civilian, non-combatant Azeri refugees were forced to flee their home at gunpoint by armed Armenian thugs?

You nullify your own arguements when you claim the Armenian genocide is as you say is "alleged" or "so-called" before you believe it should be tried in some kind of international court. Who suggested that this be taken to an international court? The perpetrator government? This strikes me as odd, a criminal asking to be tried in court. I am sure this is a political stunt with preconditions, as is the case with similar governemnt talks between Armenia and Turkey. There is no reason trust can be placed in talks with the Turkish governemnt.

Victims of attrocities such as the Armenian genocide need "authorization" before making public in describing what happened to them? The actual victims the ones who ultimatly died (not counting the additional survivors) have no voice, they are dead.

A Court case does not make a reality, untrue.

Also it seems evident that you are basing the Armenian genocide purely from an Armenians' perspecitve which is unsuprizingly also false. Many other Governments and Scholars, and humant rights organizations (who are not ethnically Armenian) support the history of the Ottoman Turkish government committing genocide against the Armenians.

The Turkish government's denialist position which you seem to support does not justify mass killing of innocent lives of it's ethnically Armenian populations.

It was a gross inhumanity to man justifying the killings of innocent lives further perpetuates hate and inhumanity to man.

No government then and now can justify killing innocent people en-mass. I have heard these propoganda positons before it is nothing new.

Calling Armenians "thugs" or any other nationality shows the lack of sensitivity you have toward other ethnicities.

These are purely hateful racist remarks.

It is a disservice to your people when you hurl insults at other ethnicities.

This is not a productive exchange of information.

Maybe taking a racial sensitivity class is in order.

Common Turkish Government apologist positions:

(The Turks had to deport the Armenians from the eastern war front where they were helping the Russians who promised them a homeland.)

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

Response:

Armenians all over Anatolia, not just on the eastern war front, were wiped out. The cities of Yozgad, Sivas, Caeserea, Hadjin, Marash, Adana, and Ankara -- just to name a few -- are hardly in the east. One needs but to look at a map of Turkey to see this. Turkish apologists depend on American ignorance of geography to make such foolish claims

Both the Turks and the Russians offered the Armenians autonomy. Neither promise could be trusted. Truth is the first victim of war. Neither the Turks nor the Russians had a history of granting their subjects freedom. The last tsar, Nicholas II, would not even share power with his own Russian people, which prompted the Russian revolution during World War I. Russia even forbade Armenian refugees, who had managed to flee the Genocide, from returning to their ancestral lands, which the Russian armies had overrun during the war. Prince Lobanov-Rostovsky, foreign minister of Russia in 1895, summed up Russia's traditional stance by saying, "Yes, Russia wants Armenia, but without the Armenians."

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

A Turkish Government appologist position:

(The Armenians were killed in a civil war, or an ethnic feud; it was not genocide.)

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

Response:

When the armed government of 25 million people turns on and attempts to exterminate an unarmed minority of three million old men, women, and children, it is hardly an "intercommunal struggle," "an ethnic feud," or "civil war"; it is nothing more or less than genocide. The Turkish government had a bureaucracy, tax money, an army, irregular troops, the local police, and special killing squads to carry out its mission. What did the Armenians have?

If it was a feud between Turks and Armenians, what explains the genocide carried out by Turkey against the Christian Assyrians at the same time?

Turkish armies invaded the fledging Armenian Republic in the Caucasus inhabited by indigenous Armenians in order to wipe out not only Armenians in the Ottoman Empire but also Armenians who lived elsewhere.

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

A common Turkish Government apologist position:

(Turks died too. Perhaps some three million Turks died during the period of the alleged genocide against the Armenians)

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

Response:

It is doubtful that three million Turks died in World War I. Turkish propagandists sometimes use the more correct, but still deceptive, expression "three million Muslims." Yes, three million Muslims probably did die in WW I, but so did twenty million Christians. What has that got to do with the Armenian Genocide?

The Turks died, unfortunately, because their own government led them into World War I against the European Allies. Many Turkish Muslims also died fighting Arab Muslims, who were seeking their freedom from Ottoman oppression, and Indian Muslims who were with the British Middle East army in Mesopotamia. All this Muslim blood, then, is on the head of the Ottoman Turkish government and not on the victimized and helpless Armenians.

There were at most around three million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, most of them old men, women, and children, and they can hardly be blamed for the death of three million "Turks or Muslims." That is absurd.

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

A common Turkish Government apologist position:

(It is your word against ours.)

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

Response:

The Turkish government has confessed in earlier times. Prime Minister Damat Ferid Pasha placed the blame squarely on the Young Turk Party and held war crime trials in which the chief perpetrators were condemned to death.

Prince Abdul Mecid, the heir apparent to the Ottoman Throne, said during an interview: "I refer to those awful massacres. They are the greatest stain that has ever disgraced our nation and race. They were entirely the work of Talat and Enver. I heard some days before they began that they were intended. I went to Istanbul and insisted on seeing Enver. I asked him if it was true and they intended to recommence the massacres that had been our shame and disgrace under Abdul Hamid. The only reply I could get from his was: 'It is decided. It is the program.'"

Mustafa Kemal Pasha (later surnamed "Ataturk") said in a 1926 interview with a Swiss reporter that "these holdovers from the Young Turkey [sic.] Party should be made to account for the lives of millions of our Christian subjects who were ruthlessly driven en masse from their homes and massacred. . . ."

And, of course, Hitler knew and drew a lesson from it. As he sent his Death Heads troops into Poland to start World War II, he said: "Go. Kill without pity. Who nowadays remembers the annihilation of the Armenians?"

It is noteworthy that when you ask questions to yourself, you answer them with a robotic response. But when I ask you a simple question, you avoid answering. It seems you Armenians love monologues.

Since you know everything there is to know, let me ask two simple questions which you never answered properly:

1- How many Muslims did Armenians kill during WWI (1914-1918)?

2- How many Muslims did Armenians kill during their occupation of Azerbaijan (1992-1994)?

Read the previous posts...

I think disinitersted third parties will agree that I will not be able to get straight answers from Armenian lobbyists. If you read the entire thread above, you will see the Armenians will dart in with pre-packaged, oft-repeated, "official Armenian position", with no references to Muslim suffering that Armenians caused.

This is akin to stating the American civil war from only one side and claiming genocide. Like a Northerner, totally ignoring the Southern suffering, and claiming the Southerners committed genocide. Or the Southerners, deliberately dismissing Norhern suffering and claiming genocide. It is partisan history; bad history; unfair politicization of the past.

If I could get the Armenians to set aside for a momemnt what they love to recite mindlessly and answer my questions, I have others to ask:

1- Didi Armenians resort to armed rebellions against their own government prior to 1915?

2- Did Armenians establish terrorist groups with the aim of destroying and dismembering the Ottoman Empire (with the help of the major European powers at the time, of course)?

3- Did the Armenian don the uniforms of the invading enemy armies to kill their ow n Ottoman-Muslim neighbors?

4- What did the Ottoman-Armenians wearing Russian uniforms in Erzurum, Erzincan, Van, Bitlis, and otjer places, under the command of Pastermadjian, Dro, and others like them do?

5- What did the Ottoman-Armenians wearing French uniforms in Adana, Kova, Osmaniye, Maras, Urfa, and other places do to their Ottoman-Muslim neighbers?

6- What did the terrosis Armenia organizations do to Ottoman-Armenians who wished to stay loyal to the Ottoman Empire?

7- Were the Otoman-Armenians who stayed loyal to the Ottoman Empire and refused to take part in the murder of Ottoman-Muslims subjected to "TERESET" (Temporary Resettlement order)?

There are more... many more...

But do you think I can get a staright answer to any of my questions from the Diaspora Armenians?

After all, I could not even
get an answer to the most basic one of those questions after asking it a million times: How many Muslims did Armenians kill in 1914-1918 period?

Armenians don't like reasoned, responsible, and documented debate with "denialists" like me... You see, "denialists" challenge the bogus genocide because they ask too many hard questions...

Yes, let the third parties decide for themselves from reading our posts who has not been forth right.

In addition, Ergun is not suprisingly under the false assumption that Armenians do not help Muslums under the similar plight of genocide. This is a gross mistake.

Armenian lobbyists are trying to help the Muslums in Darfur who are currently subject to genocide, a simple web search can justify this.

I challenge readers of this weblog to research what "Armenian lobbyists" have contributed to the eradication of genocide denial, and genocides of today.

Rather then being a Turkish Government appologist, perpetuating hate, denial, and tradmarking a word, think about helping your fellow "Muslum" people in Darfur.

I have problems with every fact, figure, and characterization you drop in your sentences.

This problem is not between Armenians and a foreign government (Turkey) as you people allways portray. This problem is between Turks of all walks (70+ million) and the global Turkish Diaspora (5+ million). Do you think any Turkish government can get re-elected if they succumb to Armenian lies?

Why are you ignoring my questions? (I know the reasons but other readres may wish to hear them from you.) Let me repeat the "4Ts" here:

1- Tumult: Did Armenians resort to armed rebellion before 1915?

2- Treason: Did Armenians commit treason by joining the invading enemy armies?

3- Terror: Didi Armenian commit terrorist acts before, during, and after 1915?

4- Turkish suffering: How many Turks (and other Muslims did Armenian torture and kill en-masse?

Answers please, not "canned speeches"...

I do not doubt that you have "probems" with my responses and commnents and as you stated are "frustrated", sometimes the truth is painful.

Why do you enjoy living in pain??

So, your questions are on behalf of 70 million Turkish "muslums" not counting the muslums in Darfur who are victims of genocide today. So you only care about Turkish "muslums" and not the genocide that is occuring today. It stands to reason if you do not care for human life during the genocide of Armenians why should you now muslum or otherwise, this is sad.

A select few of the 70 million Turkish people unfortunatly are left with misinformation or simply ignorance on the Armenian genocide. The Turkish government in large part controls what is taught in school system on this subject, giving it's version of history. It is a challenge to overcome Turkey's nationalistic views of the civilian populations, going against it by comming to terms with its history of the Armenian genoicde is a challenge but in the long run it will be a one of the steps toward transparency and a step closer to exceptence in the International Community or European Union.

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

Simply using questions by Turkey's propoganda to justify killing innocent Armenian civilians of the Ottoman Era did not fool anyone then as it does now...

You say "Why do you enjoy living in pain?". I am not in pain; I am frustarted with Armenian lies and Western bias which enables their propagation.

Yous ay "...sometimes the truth is painful." Is thay why you cannot answer my questions directly?

You seem worried about Darfur's Muslims but the corcodiles tears you shed are obvious when one remembers how hatfeul you are when Azerbaijani Muslims are concerned. More than one million of them are refugees on their own soil because Armenia militarily occupies 20% of Azerbaijan. What about those muslims? Why do you keep silent about them?

Why do you enjoy living in hatred?

I offer tangible proof to our readers who can see for themselves through a simple web search how Armenian organizations are trying to help stop a genocide in Darfur irrigardless of any religion.

Calling it "crocidile tears" is another example of your basesless, racial name calling toward Armenians.

My point here is that if you were concerned with inhumanity to man including "Muslums" which you single out, then help stop genocides of today.

From reading your posts it is clear that your only concerned with genocide denial simply being an appologist for Turkey, and a Turkish nationlist view.

Azeri's are just as welcome to enter Nagorno Karabagh, if they apply for proper visa's, visitation, etc... Like any other foreign country.

I don't see your name associated with anything that delves into the issue of humanrights i.e. helping any other race then your own, this is very suspect to your motives, and sinerity.

Also, as menioned numerous times in my responses and what you are avoiding yourself is that I have responded to your questions, just read the posts above. If you havent at least the readers will.

According to U.N. and intenational law, Karabagh
(means "black vineyard" in Turkish and Azxeri) belongs to Azerbaijan, whether it is brutally occupeid by armed thugs of a neighboring country or not. There are U.N. resolutions demanding Armenia to respect international law. Now you are caught hands in the cookie jar asking for "visas" for Karabagh Azeri's to visit their "homes"? That is typical of Armenian disrespect for law, truth, and reality.

What kind of a human rights champion are you, while shedding crocodile's tears for Darfur Muslims, you will totally dismiss Muslims suffering at the hands of Armenian nationalists during WWI?

Body-for-bod-, loss-for-loss, pain-for-pain, Muslims experinced about FOURFOLD more suffering than Armenians. Where are your crocodile's tears for the wasted masses of Ottoman Muslims (a significant portion at the hands of Armenian nationalists)?

I shall insist on the queations you don't dare answer for the benefit of all:

1- Didi you (Armenians) revolt before 1915?

2- Did you cause Muslims suffering and death before 1915? (How many?)

3- Did you join invading enemy armies?

4- Didi you attack the rear of your own government's armies with your own "militias"?

5- Did you use the Ottoman governmant issued guns on the backs of Ottoman soldiers? (What would Americans do if you Armanian-Americans used American arms on the backs of American soldiers? Would they simply "temporarily relocate Armenians" or do "other things" also to you?)

Demagoguery is cheap; rhetoric is cheaper. But the cheapest of them all is reciting from memory a bunch of partisan talk while ignoring the real questions on the table.

Why don't you be the first Armenian ever to answer what is being asked, rather than blindly and tirelessly repeating that genocide lie?

You are not fooling anyone!

Please, do not purport to know the legalities of international law much less internatioanal humanrights.

If you are another one of those Turkish Governement appologists (which seems evident) Many other Countries would have issue with international law and human rights which Turkey abuses on a daily basis.

I can find no other word more inyour previeoous post then hypocracy.

Your questions seem no closer to reality from the first point you asked them, and move yourself no closer from coming to terms from your denialist positons of the Armenian genocide.

Now, the voices in your head seem to echo that I was a part of the trumpted up positions you portray?

Our readers merely have to do research (as I mentioned before) and take a look at your previous posts, to see who is detached from reality.

Coming from your perspective you have little if any credibility to judge who may be a "humanrights champion".

Your Turkish propogandist questions have come from a position of justification of genocide against innocent Armenians.

As I have stated before for the benifit of the readers there are stark simililarities to the justification of killing innocent Jews and other ethnicities from the German Nazi's of WWII. The Turkish government much like the Nazi's of Germany made up propoganda to justify killing innocent people.

From reading Ergun's questions they bare stark similarities to propoganda used to justify killing.

Simply stating: There is NO justification for killing innocent human life, in this case Armenians at the hands of the Ottoman Turkish Government.

See what you did again? You avoided answering my questions again.

OK, let me try this. Did you know up until 1820, Erivan, the capital of Armenia was a "Turkish-Azeri-Muslim majority" town, with few Armenians and others?

Did you know that as a net result of the "replacement and repopulation" policy of the Czarist Russia, Muslims were massacred or forced to flee? And the lands, homes left vacant were filled with "trustworthy elements" like "Armenian Christians"?

Out of those millions of Muslim inhabitants in lands that house Armenia, how many Muslims are still in AArmenia?

And out of thousnds of mosques, how many are still standing?

Your answers will reveal a lot about Armenia and Armenian way of thinking (both then and now.)

You keep accusing me of denying genocide: how can one deny something that does not exist?

Killings, murders? Yes
Starvation, epidemics? Yes.
Feuds, marauding bands? Yes.
Human suffering, pain, loss? Yes.
Relocations? Yes.

But ON BOTH SIDES!
The trouble with genocide criwds is that THEY IGNORE MUSLIM SUFFERING CAUSED BY YOUR ARMENIAN GRANDPARENTS.

And just because they do, it doesn't mean that MY PAIN, SUFFERING, AND LOSS ought to be forgotten, ignored, or dismissed.

Wartime tragedy? Yes.
Genocide? No.

NOT EVEN BY A LONG SHOT!

What happened to the ethnically Turkish people during the Ottoman era was not a genocide.

I believe the challenges you are facing is:

-What constiutes a genocide?

-Also you may need to re-evaluate the definition of genocide.

-You may need to understand the various forms of Armenian genocide denial.

It may be evident to our readers that your ethnically bias filters preclude your fair and balanced view of what happend durring this time period.

Nobody should diminish human suffering (from your side or mine) becuase it is not about the conflict between ETHNIC races, it is mans inhumanity-to-man that needs to be addressed.

Why be a pawn to government propoganda, or racially charged talking points that serve the purpose of defusing the truth?

How do you debate people who are programmed to recite what they memorized since their childhood no matter what you ask them?

Patiently.

OK, let me try another tack. .

1- You present a controversial piece of history, the Turkish-Armenian conflict, to unsuspecting readers as "settled history". This issue anything but settled. This debate (if you can call it that, as I get monologue repeated to me no matter what questions I ask or how often I ask them) attests to the fact that there are serious facts and arguments refuting Armenian allegations of genocide.

2- You act stunned when others remind that there is a whole other view, heretofore mostly ignored or dismissed out of bias, categorically rejecting the Armenian allegations.

3- Leaving history aside for a moment, I will simply remind you one important legal aspect of this issue which you insist on not understanding:

According to Article 6 of the "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide", adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948,

" Persons charged with genocide ... shall be tried by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed, or by such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction with respect to those Contracting Parties which shall have accepted its jurisdiction."

In the interest of truth, fairness, honesty, and integrity, I dare you to produce a verdict by such a competent court authorizing the use of the term genocide to describe the Turkish-Armenian conflict.

If you cannot produce such a court verdict, then I expect you to issue a written apology to readers for misleading them and start using the qualifier "alleged" before the term genocide, from now on.

4- Oh, and don't bother with the decisions of the Kangaroo courts martial of the occupied Istanbul during 1919-1920, as the British, the occupiers, were so embarrassed by the mockery of justice there that they asked the British Crown Courts to take over. As a result of this request, Malta Tribunal (1919-1921) preparations were started but was abandoned in 1921 after two years of evidence gathering while some 144 Ottoman-Turkish leaders were exiled to Malta awaiting the trials. None of them was charged with any crime. That should have been the end of all claims and allegations. But then, you don't know the Armenians who will resort to anything from misrepresentation, embellishment, distortion, fabrication, and propaganda to make their lies stick at any cost. They will use any platform, ranging from politics and media to academia and religion, and even others, except where it really counts, court rooms, to make their racist and dishonest allegations stick.

5- History is not a matter of beliefs, convictions, films, political resolutions, editorials, or consensus. Rather, history is a matter of honest research, fair use of all applicable sources, unbiased peer review, and reasoned debate.

You stated:

"You present a controversial piece of history, the Turkish-Armenian conflict, to unsuspecting readers as "settled history". This issue anything but settled. This debate (if you can call it that, as I get monologue repeated to me no matter what questions I ask or how often I ask them) attests to the fact that there are serious facts and arguments refuting Armenian allegations of genocide."

1. You assume there is a controversy in this history well there is not.

2. You assume the readers are "unsuspecting" and ignorant of the Armenian genocide. Well most who have already read my posts and have done independent research on there own (as I have suggested would likey disagree with your posts. I have suggested to our readers to do independent research you have not, all you have done is ask questions to try and shift blame to the victims of genocide falsly casting them as victimizers, a similar propoganda tool used by Nazi Germany.

3. You also assume this is some sort of "debate"? I never assumed that this was a debate nor have I suggested in my posts as such.

4. Mischaractorizing my posts as "monologues" and "programed responses from chilhood" diminishes your objectivity from learning and keeps yourself in a filtered and racialy bias position as I have mentioned in my previous posts.

You stated:

"You act stunned when others remind that there is a whole other view, heretofore mostly ignored or dismissed out of bias, categorically rejecting the Armenian allegations."

1. I am not "stunned" I have read these type of Turkish Government apppologist views they are nothing new and shed no light from the Armenian genocide denialist perspective.

You stated:

"Leaving history aside for a moment, I will simply remind you one important legal aspect of this issue which you insist on not understanding:

According to Article 6 of the "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide", adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948,

" Persons charged with genocide ... shall be tried by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed, or by such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction with respect to those Contracting Parties which shall have accepted its jurisdiction."

In the interest of truth, fairness, honesty, and integrity, I dare you to produce a verdict by such a competent court authorizing the use of the term genocide to describe the Turkish-Armenian conflict."

Leaving history aside for a moment, I will simply remind you one important legal aspect of this issue which you insist on not understanding:

According to Article 6 of the "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide", adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948,

" Persons charged with genocide ... shall be tried by a competent tribunal of the State in the territory of which the act was committed, or by such international penal tribunal as may have jurisdiction with respect to those Contracting Parties which shall have accepted its jurisdiction."

In the interest of truth, fairness, honesty, and integrity, I dare you to produce a verdict by such a competent court authorizing the use of the term genocide to describe the Turkish-Armenian conflict."

1. Don't assume that I "insist on not understanding"

2. You nullify your own arguements when you claim the Armenian genocide is as you say is "alleged" or "so-called" before you believe it should be tried in some kind of international court. Who suggested that this be taken to an international court? The perpetrator government? This strikes me as odd, a criminal asking to be tried in court. I am sure this is a political stunt with preconditions, as is the case with similar governemnt talks between Armenia and Turkey. There is no reason trust can be placed in talks with the Turkish governemnt.

Victims of attrocities such as the Armenian genocide need "authorization" before making public in describing what happened to them? The actual victims the ones who ultimatly died (not counting the additional survivors) have no voice, they are dead.

A Court case does not make a reality, untrue.

You stated:

"In the interest of truth, fairness, honesty, and integrity..."

YOUR views need to be re-evalutated BEFORE assuming that others lack truth, fairness, etc...

You stated:

"If you cannot produce such a court verdict, then I expect you to issue a written apology to readers for misleading them and start using the qualifier "alleged" before the term genocide, from now on."

1. You are up to your neck in sand (the truth,humanity) yet you try and throw one grain of sand (your view,in-humanity)

2. My point is maybe historians, Kurds, including reasoned unfearful Turkish people, the New York Times, The Fresno Bee, Governments, or other major metropolitan papers will hardly consider "appologizing".

3. This would be akin to asking the Jewish community to appologize to Nazi Germany at the time of WWII.

You stated:

"History is not a matter of beliefs, convictions, films, political resolutions, editorials, or consensus."

No one said it was~

You stated:

"Rather, history is a matter of honest research, fair use of all applicable sources, unbiased peer review, and reasoned debate."

I would guess that you wrote these words defining history without doing some "research" yourself?

I find humor in that you included "reasoned debate" in your definition of history.

Maybe thats why your caught in this quagmire of Armenian genocide denial, your belief in debating history.

You simply believe the Armenian genocide is a matter of, as you state a "debate", it is not.

You simply "deny" history to be true.

If the Turkish-Armenian conflict is not controversial, as you falsely claim, then what are we discussing here all these months? Hollywood movies? Cooking? Weather? Traffic?

Here is what Dr. Gwynne Dyer, a London-based independent journalist said in 1976: "... The deafening drumbeat of the propaganda, and the sheer lack of sophistication in argument which comes from preaching decade after decade to a convinced and emotionally committed audience, are the major handicaps of Armenian historiography of the diaspora today..."

You claim this issue is settled and that there is no room for investigation, or debate and you characterize the need to go to an international court on this a "stunt".

Well, was Nuremberg a "stunt"?

Jewish Holocaust achieved its status as an undisputed fact today not because of editorials, documentaries, Hollywood movies, political resolutions, and other such actions, but because of Nuremberg trials. All the evidence was put on table; scrutinized; cross-examined in the proper sense of law and due process. The accused were given a chance to defend themselves but their defenses were refuted with "authenticated: facts, "reliable" figures, "honest" testimonies, and corroborated from many independent sources. That is why no one can question the solidity and strength of the Nuremberg verdicts.

Look what E. Alexander Powell, An American, says in his book, The Struggle for Power in Moslem Asia, The Century Co., New York & London (1923), pages 32-33,

"...Now I can readily understand and make allowance for the public's errors and misconceptions, for it has had, after all, no means of knowing that it has been systematically deceived, but I can find no excuse for those newspapers which, clinging to a policy of vilifying the Turk, failed to rectify the anti-Turkish charges printed in their columns even when it had been proved to the satisfaction of most fair-minded persons that they were unjustified...A case in point was the burning of Smyrna in September, 1922. There was scarcely a newspaper of importance in the United States that did not editorially lay that outrage at the door of the Turks, without waiting to hear the Turkish version, yet, after it had been attested by American, English, and French eye-witnesses, and by a French commission of inquiry, that the city had been deliberately fired by the Greeks and Armenians in order to prevent it falling into Turkish hands, how many newspapers had the courage to admit that they had done the Turks a grave injustice?..."

There are millions of documents, witnesses, facts we can produce that were always ignored up until this moment.

For example, how many readers know that

... Armenians had established terrorist gangs as early as 1887 and continuously preyed upon defensless Muslim villages until 1915 and beyond?

... Armenians staged violent, armed revolts against their own government both before and during a war where their government was under vicious attacks;

... Armenians killed not only Ottoman-Muslims, but also Ottoman-Jews, even their own Ottoman-Armenians who wished to stay loyal to the Ottoman State;

... Armenians joined the invading enemy armies;

... Armenians donned Russian uniforms and killed their Ottoman-Muslims neighbors in the East;

... Armenians donned French uniforms and killed their Ottoman-Muslims neighbors in the South;

... Armenians declared their intentions to carve up the Ottoman Empire to create a greater Armenian on Turkish soil;

... Armenians followed up with violence, terror, treason, and revolts to implement their treasonous aims in a geography where they only constituted a "minority" (averaging about 15%);

... Armenians did everything in the book to backstab their own government, their own fellow citizens, and their own neighbors.

... Armenians committed much more heinous crimes that we can effortlessly document and prove at a court of law, like Nuremberg.

You know this; that's why you carry this debate to newspaper columns, the backrooms of political lobbies, Armenian-schemed pseudo academia (like called genocide scholars most of whom are not even historians); propaganda, public relations, religion, and any other route that does not involve "authentication, challenge, refutation, and humiliation".

Armenians went too far with their lies... Now we shall take them to task of proving their lies... Like ever increasing casualty numbers... like their crimes listed about that they never talk about...

Armenians have been at it for 90+ years... We've only just begun!

You stated:

"If the Turkish-Armenian conflict is not controversial, as you falsely claim, then what are we discussing here all these months? Hollywood movies? Cooking? Weather? Traffic?"

You try and interject conflict and/or controversey toward the Armenian Genocide. Do you believe I have been trying to bring out historical points to justify the Armenian genocide when it is already a historical fact? I dont need to defend something that is true, your challenge is to deny it and ramble on about points that justify denying it.

You stated:

"You claim this issue is settled and that there is no room for investigation, or debate and you characterize the need to go to an international court on this a "stunt".

Well, was Nuremberg a "stunt"?"

Why would (as I stated before) the victimzer governement or it's denialist appologists need to ask the victims (or representatives) to a court of anykind? Criminals do not like to ask to be tried in court this is a suspicious propostion from a government who has consistantly denied the Armenian genocide.

I am sorry to hear your comments toward ethnic Armenians. It further justifies that you are not working toward humanity but working against it.

The difference between you and me from reading your posts is that I believe there are many humanitarian Turkish people today as ther was durring the Armenian genocide. My ill will is toward the government of Turkey's policies not it's people, per se.

Maybe if more focus was put on making Turkey more tollerant toward it's own citizens of differing religous and ethnic faith we would not be here.

Public relations must be a nightmare even the word "Turk" has a negative conotation by most, of there own doing, no one else.

I don't have to hurl negatives toward Turkey they must lie in there own bed.

I wonder how much time or concern you have for the Turkish citizens in Turkey who have been slain as of late?

Also as I have stated before my challenge is to readers of this post to weigh in on your denialist positions, and read the volumes of information on the Armenian Genocide from noted scholars, academics, and historians.

You stated:

"...Do you believe I have been trying to bring out historical points to justify the Armenian genocide when it is already a historical fact? "

Whose fact?

Not mine.

Not honest historians' either.

Look what 69 such experts and researchers of them said in a public statement:

" TO THE MEMBERS OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

The undersigned American academicians who specialize in Turkish, Ottoman and Middle Eastern Studies are concerned that the current language embodied in House Joint Resolution 192 is misleading and/or inaccurate in several respects.

Specifically, while fully supporting the concept of a "National Day of Remembrance of Man's Inhumanity to Man," we respectfully take exception to that portion of the text which singles out for special recognition:

". . . the one and one half million people of Armenian ancestry who were victims of genocide perpetrated in Turkey between 1915 and 1923 . . .."

Our reservations focus on the use of the words "Turkey' and "genocide" and may be summarized as follows:

From the fourteenth century until 1922, the area currently known as Turkey, or more correctly, the Republic of Turkey, was part of the territory encompassing the multinational, multi-religious state known as the Ottoman Empire. It is wrong to equate the Ottoman Empire with the Republic of Turkey in the same way that it is wrong to equate the Hapsburg Empire with the Republic of Austria.

The Ottoman Empire, which was brought to an end in 1922, by the successful conclusion of the Turkish Revolution which established the present day Republic of Turkey in 1923, incorporated lands and people which today account for more than twenty-five distinct countries in Southeastern Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, only one of which is the Republic of Turkey.

The Republic of Turkey bears no responsibility for any events which occurred in Ottoman times, yet by naming 'Turkey' in the Resolution, its authors have implicitly labeled it as guilty of "genocide" it charges transpired between 1915 and 1923;

As for the charge of "genocide," no signatory of this statement wishes to minimize the scope of Armenian suffering. We are likewise cognizant that it cannot be viewed as separate from the suffering experienced by the Muslim inhabitants of the region.

The weight of evidence so far uncovered points in the direct of serious inter communal warfare (perpetrated by Muslim and Christian irregular forces), complicated by disease, famine, suffering and massacres in Anatolia and adjoining areas during the First World War. Indeed, throughout the years in question, the region was the scene of more or less continuous warfare, not unlike the tragedy which has gone on in Lebanon for the past decade. The resulting death toll among both Muslim and Christian communities of the region was immense. But much more remains to be discovered before historians will be able to sort out precisely responsibility between warring and innocent, and to identify the causes for the events which resulted in the death or removal of large numbers of the eastern Anatolian population, Christian and Muslim alike.

Statesmen and politicians make history, and scholars write it. For this process to work scholars must be given access to the written records of the statesmen and politicians of the past. To date, the relevant archives in the Soviet Union, Syria, Bulgaria and Turkey all remain, for the most part, closed to dispassionate historians. Until they become available, the history of the Ottoman Empire in the period encompassed by H.J. Res. 192 (1915-1923) cannot be adequately known.

We believe that the proper position for the United States Congress to take on this and related issues is to encourage full and open access to all historical archives and not to make charges on historical events before they are fully understood. Such charges as those contained H.J. Res. 192 would inevitably reflect unjustly upon the people of Turkey and perhaps set back irreparably progress historians are just now beginning to achieve in understanding these tragic events. ...(signatures)..."

As the above comments illustrate, the history of the Ottoman-Armenians is much debated among scholars, many of whom do not agree with the historical assumptions embodied in the wording of H.J. Res. 192. By passing the resolution Congress will be attempting to determine by legislation which side of the historical question is correct. Such a resolution, based on historically questionable assumptions, can only damage the cause of honest historical inquiry, and damage the credibility of the American legislative process.

You stated:

Why would (as I stated before) the victimzer governement or it's denialist appologists need to ask the victims (or representatives) to a court of anykind? "

Because they feel they are innocent of the baseless Armenian charges.

You stated:

" Criminals do not like to ask to be tried in court this is a suspicious propostion from a government who has consisteantly denied the Armenian genocide."

Criminals don't. That is one more proof that Turks are not criminals.

Also, Armenian claims of genocide are bogus; something that does not exist cannot be denied. If you want to be credible with your bogus genocide charges, then you had better produce a verdict by a competent court as the U.N. definition of genocide requires.
Armenian claims cannot be substantiated with historical evidence. They are little more than wartime propaganda.

You don't have to take my word for it. Look what the missionary George M. Lamsa, well known for his research on Christianity, says in his book on those wild stories published in the media without checking facts (The Secret of the Near East, The Ideal Press, Philadelphia, 1923, page 133)

"...In some towns containing ten Armenian houses and thirty Turkish houses, it was reported that 40,000 people were killed, about 10,000 women were taken to the harem, and thousands of children left destitute; and the city university destroyed, and the bishop killed. It is a well-known fact that even in the last war the native Christians, despite the Turkish cautions, armed themselves and fought on the side of the Allies. In these conflicts, they were not idle, but they were well supplied with artillery, machine guns and inflicted heavy losses on their enemies..."

You stated:

"...My ill will is toward the government of Turkey's policies not it's people, per se."

How do you explain the Armenian terrorism and hate crimes in our midst today then? Two Turkish diplomats were killed in Santa Barbara in 1973 by an older Armenian assassin and another Turkish diplomat was slain in Los Angels in 1982 by a teenager Armenian assassin. Many attacks, bombings, bomb threats, assault and batteries, and violent hate crimes were committed by Armenians in California in the last 30+ years. Some of the victims were Turkish-Americans who had nothing to do with any government. Why this intense hatred then? Why cultivate such intense negative feelings? Why teach Armenian kids to hate Turks? Why? Why? Why?

You sated:

" Public relations must be a nightmare even the word "Turk" has a negative conotation by most, of there own doing, no one else."

This is an incredibly racist remark. How can the name of a people be given a wholesale, defamatory, derogatory like that in this day and age? You stated it because you obviously believe it. That makes you racist. Since when racial slurs and stereotyping accepted as PR yardsticks?

For your information, Turks are proud of their heritage and that includes this writer. We have been around for more than 5000 years; with written alphabet since first millennium, perhaps even earlier. Turks have established 16+ empires and states, with the Ottoman Empire lasting 623 years. The Republic of Turkey is the last state, established in 1923, and already the 16th largest economy in the world.

Armenians on the other hand never had their sovereignty and were rules by almost every empire in the region (Romans, Greeks, Persian, Byzantium, Seljuk Turks, Arabs, Ottoman-Turks, Russians, Iranians, and a few others that I cannot recall this second.
Armenians have no culture of statehood. This is proven by the fact that they have trouble with all of their neighbors today because of irredentist Armenian policies, coveting lands from neighbors: Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. As a result, the first chance Armenia got when the Soviet Empire collapsed, Armenia chose to attack her neighbor and engage in ethnic cleansing in Karabagh (black vineyard in Turkish) and Western Azerbaijan. And the Armenia you created is a basket case. Imagine a land-locked, poverty-stricken, corruption-ridden, violent country whose major exports are Armenian terrorism and illegal aliens and major import is foreign aid.

You stated:

" ...don't have to hurl negatives toward Turkey they must lie in there own bed..."

I am stating here in no uncertain terms that Turks are very happy with their bed and have very clear conscience about their history and culture. Furthermore, Turks are extremely proud of their accomplishments; and very self-confident and positive about life and future (as you probably gathered from my postings.).

If you go to Turkey today, you would be startled to find out that Turks really don't care about the Armenian lies of genocide at all. The Armenian issue is not the reason-d'etre for them, the way it clearly is for Armenians. Until a few years ago, if you asked about the Armenian allegations of genocide in Turkey, most Turks would not even know what you are talking about. That is because Turkey, in the years of nation building, chose to educate its children with love, hope, tolerance, and optimism. When you teach 6+ centuries of history of a multi-continent empire, Armenians do not even appear on the radar screen.

Turks feel Armenians betrayed during a war of survival for Turks; they could no longer be trusted; and those who were engaged in treason were relocated. There was suffering due to starvation, epidemics, war, and this suffering did not discriminate on the basis of religion. Consequently, all suffered, including the Muslims. The West only sees the Armenian suffering and dismisses my suffering. And that kind of selective morality and discriminations is not acceptable in this day and age.

Armenians ask why send women and children to Tereset (Temporary resettlement). They say what harm could they possibly do. Historian Prof. Standford Shaw of UCLA explained it by saying that it was no longer possible to differentiate between loyal Armenians and disloyal ones (Could the U.S. tell who was hostile (Viet Kong) and who was friendly (South Vietnamese) in all the years of Vieatnam War?) Armenians terrorists would use women and children as human shields. Other "innocent families" would "aid and abet" Armenian terrorists. As a result, most were subjected to Tereset.

Not all Armenians were subjected to Tereset though. For example, those in the capital Istanbul were not relocated. Neither were the Armenians in Edirne, Izmir, and other Western regions (save a few activists and gang leaders). Armenians of Aleppo were also not moved. Catholic and Protestant Armenians were also excluded. And those who served in the Ottoman Army could stay with their families. Those in city centers could also stay. Those who were bakers, doctors, etc. could also stay if they were not involved in treason. Those who could afford, could buy train tickets. In most areas away from train stations, oxen pulled carriages, horses, donkeys were provided. Food and medicine rations were planned. Property was recorded for safe keeping and for returning to their owners after the war. We can prove all of these things with countless documents and corroborating paper trails. You see, it was a wartime measure. Not a wholesale annihilation like you portray.

Why relocation? Because it is an effective wartime measure that every Western country, including the U.S., France, and the U.K. have used many times before. Let's read what the French lawyer and a specialist on the Armenian question Georges de Maleville, writes on military justification of resettlement in his book ( La Tragédie Arménienne de 1915, -The Armenian tragedy of 1915 -, Editions F. Sorlot-F. Lanore, Paris, 1988, p 61-63) :

"...In all the countries, under all the regimes, the staff of the armies in the field evacuate towards the back, the populations which live in the zone of fights and can bother the movement of the troops, especially if these populations are hostile. Public opinion does not find anything to criticize to these measures, obviously painful, but necessary. During winter of 1939-1940, the radical - socialist French government evacuated and transported in the Southwest of France, notably in the Dordogne, the entire population of the Alsatian villages situated in the valley of the Rhine, to the east of the Maginot line. This German-speaking population, and even sometimes germanophil, bothered the French army. It stayed in the South, far from the evacuated homes and sometimes destroyed until 1945....And nobody, in France, cried out for inhumanity..."

It was a temporary wartime measure taken purely in self-defense ; not a planned annihilation of a people.

And that is the plain truth.

I find it appropriate to post valuable information that is lacking for the benifit of our readers:

WHY DO PEOPLE DENY THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE?

The scholarship of the Armenian genocide and attempts to repudiate it through denial need to be addressed giving our readers various reasons why the latest form of denial are takening place
such as the posts above
Here is a compilation of information I have sourced to inform our readers as to the reasons of Armenian genocide denial.

----

The Harmfulness of Genocide Denial:

We should not be surprised by instances of what many would consider to be inappropriate use of academic credentials and skills, since, after all, academics and professionals have contributed in direct ways to genocidal
killing projects, including the Armenian genocide and the Holocaust. They have
done so by lending their talents and prestige to racist, victimizing ideologies that are central features of many genocides, by helping to create and administer the policies and technologies of mass killing, and by actually engaging in the killing. [1]

notes:

1. For a survey of the roles of several] professions in the Holocaust and
other eases of genocidal killing, see Eric Markusen, "Professions,
Professionals, and Genocide," in Charny, ed., Genocide, 2:264-98. With few exceptions, studies of the role of specific professions in genocide
focus on the Holocaust; but see the path-breaking article by Vahakn N.
Dadrian, "The Role of Turkish Physicians in the World War I Genocide of the Ottoman Armenians," Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 1:2 (1986), pp. 169-92.
On the involvement of various professions in the Holocaust, see, among others,
Omer Bartov, The Eastern Front, 1941-45: German Troops and the Barbarisation
of Warfare (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1986) and Hitler's Army: Soldiers,
Nazis, and War in the Third Reich (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991);
Alan D. Beyerehen, Scientists Under Hitler: Politics and the Physics
Community in the Third Reich (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1977);
Christopher R. Browning, The Final Solution and the German Foreign Office: A
Study of Referat D III of Abteilung Deutschland, 1940-1943 (New York: Holmes
& Meier, 1977) and "Genocide and Public Health: German Doctors and Polish
Jews, 1939-41," Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 3:1 (1988), pp. 21-36; Michael
H. Kater, Doctors Under Hitler (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina
Press, 1989); Peter Hayes, Industry and Ideology: 1. G. Farben in the Nazi
Era (New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987); Herbert Hirsch, "Nazi Education: A Case of Political Socialization," Educational
Forum, 53:1 (1988), pp. 63-16; Robert Jay Lifton, The Nazi Doctors: Medical
Killing and the Psychology of Genocide (New York: Basic Books, 1986); Ingo
Muller, Hitler's Justice: The Courts of the Third Reich, trans., Deborah Lucas
Schneider (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991); Benno Muller-Hill,
Murderous Science: Elimination by Scientific Selection of Jews, Gypsies, and
Others, Germany 1933-1945 (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1988); Robert Proctor, Racial Hygiene: Medicine Under the Nazis (Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1988); Gunter W. Remmling, "Discrimination,
Persecution, Theft, and Murder Under Color of Law: The Totalitarian
Corruption of the German Legal System, 1933-1945," in Isidor Wallimann and
Michael N. Dobkowski, eds., Genocide and the Modern Age: Etiology and Case
Studies of Mass Death (Westport, CT, and London: Greenwood Press, 1987), Ch.
10; Telford Taylor, "The Legal Profession," in Henry Friedlander and Sybil
Milton, eds., The Holocaust: Ideology, Bureaucracy, and Genocide (Millwood,
NY: Kraus International Publications, 1980), pp. 133-140; and Max Weinreich,
Hitler's Professors: The Part of Scholarship in Germany's Crimes Against the
Jewish People (New York: YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, 1946).

...If highly educated academics and professionals have been able to repudiate their ethical codes and serve as accomplices and
perpetrators of actual genocides, it is likely that they would be even more able to engage in an activity in which no one is killed.

It would be a mistake, however, to underestimate the serious harm caused by denial of genocide, particularly denial wrapped in the guise of legitimate scholarship. In this section, we examine the harm done by pseudo-scholarly
denial of known genocides and consider the assertion, put forth by some scholars, that deliberate denial is a form of aggression that ought to be regarded as a contribution to genocidal violence in its own right. Then we
briefly address the question of what might motivate academics to make a career
out of denial of genocide.

Some of the ways in which denial of genocide causes "violence to others" have identified by Israel W. Charny in his essay on "The Psychology of Denial of Known Genocides," in which he emphasizes that denial conceals the horror of
the crimes and exonerates those responsible for it. [2] This point is echoed by Deborah Lipstadt, who, in her recent book on denial of the Holocaust, writes that "Denial aims to reshape history in order to rehabilitate the
perpetrators and demonize the victims." [3] Denial also, according to Charny, "attacks the historical spirit and morale" of the survivors and the descendants of those killed and places "further burdens on their recovery."
[4] In short, denial prevents healing of the wounds inflicted by genocide. [5] Furthermore, it constitutes an "attack on the collective identity and national cultural continuity of the victim people." [6]

notes:

2. Israel W. Charny, "The Psychology of Denial of Known Genocides," in
Charny, ed., Genocide, 2:23.

3. Deborah E. Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth
and Memory (New York: The Free Press, 1993), p. 217.

4 Israel W. Charny, "The Psychology of Denial of Known Genocides," in
Charny, ed., Genocide, 2:22.

5.See, for example, Levon Boyajian and Haigaz Grigorian, "Psychological
Sequelae of the Armenian Genocide," in Hovannisian, ed., The Armenian Genocide
in Perspective, Ch. 10, and Miller, Survivors: An Oral History of the Armenian
Genocide, Ch. 8.

6 Israel W. Charny, "The Psychology of Denial of Known Genocides," in
Charny, ed., Genocide, 2:23.

A number of scholars have argued, in fact, that the deliberate denial of a known genocide is a harmful act that deserves to be included in the same moral domain with indirect and direct contributions to the actual genocides. Thus,
Charny states that "Denials of genocide make no sense unless one sees in them renewed opportunities for the same passions, meanings, and pleasures that were at work in the genocide itself, now revived in symbolic processes of murdering the dignity of the survivors, rationality, dignity, and even history itself'
(emphasis in original). [7] Indeed, denial may be thought of as the last stage of genocide, one that continues into the present. A kind of double
killing takes place: first the physical deed, followed by the destruction of remembrance of the deed.

Historian (and Holocaust survivor) Erich Kulka regards the denial of genocide as an offense in its own right, asserting that "Attempts to rewriteHolocaust history on the pretext of 'revisionism,' aided by scholars with academic
backgrounds, must be viewed as intellectual aggression," a repetition in thought of what was enacted earlier as physical deed. [8] In his recent book on denial of the Holocaust, Pierre Vidal-Naquet characterizes Robert Faurisson, whose "scholarly" denials of the Holocaust have been widely disseminated, as a "paper Eichmann." [9]

We concur with Charny, Kulka, and Vidal-Naquet in regarding denial of genocide as an egregious offense that warrants being regarded as a form of contribution to genocidal violence. Denial contributes to genocide in at least two ways.
First of all, genocide does not end with its last human victim; denial continues the process. But if such denial points to the past and the present, it also has implications for the future. For by absolving the perpetrators of
past genocides from responsibility for their actions and by obscuring the reality of genocide as a widely practiced form of state policy in the modern world, denial may increase the risk of future outbreaks of genocidal killing.

Why Might Intellectuals Engage in the Denial of Known Genocides?

There are several possible motivations for denial of genocide, and these can be complex. The motivations to which we would call attention include: self- serving ideology, bigotry, intellectual confusion, careerism, identification
with power, and a particular conception of knowledge. It seems unlikely, however, that denial rests only on one of these motivations; moreover, the particular combinations of motivations may vary with individuals. Also, what
prompts denial may vary with different examples of genocide: anti-Zionism, for example, may help explain denial of the Holocaust, but in terms of its content tells us nothing about why the Armenian genocide has been denied. On the other
hand, if we focus not on the content of the motivation, but on its form (ideology) and goals (political and psychological purposes), then the
motivations for denial in these two cases may have more in common than appear at first glance.

notes:

6 Israel W. Charny, "The Psychology of Denial of Known Genocides," in
Charny, ed., Genocide, 2:23.

7.Ibid., p. 18.

8.Erich Kulka, "Denial of the Holocaust," in Charny, ed., Genocide, 2:57.

9.Pierre Vidal-Naquet, Assassins of Memory: Essays on the Denial of the
Holocaust (New York: Columbia University Press, 1992), p. 57.

------

Ideology, Bigotry and the Denial of the Holocaust

Scholars who have analyzed deniers of the Holocaust have concluded that they are primarily motivated by ideology. Thus, Vidal-Naquet, in his examination of Faurisson and other French "revisionists," asserts that "all revisionists are resolute anti-Zionists." [10] Similarly, on the basis of her even more
comprehensive survey of Holocaust deniers, Lipstadt concludes that "it is clear that deniers have no interest in scholarship or reason. Most are antisemites or bigots." [11]

These answers are no doubt correct, but they are incomplete. It may be that all revisionists are anti-Zionists, but there are surely anti-Zionists (some of them Jewish) who do not deny the reality of the Holocaust. Similarly, there
are people who are highly antisemitic, but are well aware that the Holocaust took place.

Intellectual Confusion, Rationalization

Clues to the thinking of academics who question the reality of the Armenian genocide have been provided by Israel Charny and his colleague Daphna Fromer, who sent questionnaires to sixty-nine scholars who signed an advertisement
which, in the words of Charny and romer, "questioned insidiously the evidence
of the Armenian genocide" and appeared in several newspapers, including the New York Times and the Washington Post. [12] In analyzing the comments of the seventeen scholars who provided "active responses" to their mailing, Charny and Fromer discerned a number of "thinking defense-mechanisms" that enabled
the scholars to engage in "the denial of genocide." These mechanisms included
what the authors term "scientificism in the service of denial," i.e., the claim that not enough empirical evidence is available to justify an unequivocal position on the reality of the genocide; and "definitionalism,"
i.e., acknowledging deaths, but denying that they were the result of "genocide," thus shifting responsibility for the genocide away from the Turkish government and trivializing the killing of over a million Armenians as
the inadvertent result of famine, war, and disease.

Whether anyone is led into denial by such reasoning is an open question, but such thinking does serve to make denial easier thereafter, while, at the same time, it preserves the appearance of objectivity.

notes:

10.Ibid.,p. 87.

11Deborah E. Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust, p. 206.

12.Israel W. Charny and Daphna Fromer, "A Follow-up of the Sixty-Nine
Scholars Who Signed an Advertisement Questioning the Armenian Genocide,"
Internet on the Holocaust and Genocide, Special Double Issue 25/26 (April
1990), pp. 6-7.

-----

Careerism, Power, Knowledge

"Careerism" is a complicated phenomenon, but for our purposes we would identify two (non-exclusive) forms that it may take: one that is oriented more toward material goals, and one that involves more the satisfactions that go
with power. Both share the "thoughtlessness" that Hannah Arendt saw as the essence of the "banality of evils": an imaginative blindness that prevents one from reflecting upon the consequences of one's actions. [13] But elsewhere Arendt also speaks of a "willed evil," and the second type of careerism is not
far removed from this: not simply the obliviousness to hurt, but the
infliction of hurt. [14]

Intellectuals who engage in the denial of genocide may be motivated in part by either type of careerism, or by both. The more insidious form, however, is the second type of careerism. Here material rewards are important, but more so,
the opportunity for certain psychological and social satisfactions: a sense of importance, of status, of being in control, all of which can come through identification with power, something we believe we have shown in the
memorandum we have analyzed. The price for intellect in the service of denial,
however, is a particular conception of knowledge, one in which knowledge not
only serves the ends of those in power, but is defined by power But to define
truth in terms of power is to reveal the bankruptcy, irrationality, and above
all, danger, of the whole enterprise of denial of genocide. Inherent in such
a view of knowledge is both a deep-seated nihilism and an urge to tyranny.

notes:

13. Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil,
revised and enlarged edition (New York: The Viking Press, 1964), pp. 49,
278-88.

14. Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1958), pp. 239-40.

----

Concluding Comments: Scholars and Truth

Scholarship is, or should be, a quest for truth. What scholars writeand say in that quest matters a great deal. Directly or indirectly, our words contribute to a shared consciousness--to the constellation of beliefs that a society forms in connection with issues of any kind. Scholars' contributions to that shared consciousness become especially important in relation to a society's struggles with large, disturbing, and threatening historical events.

Nowhere is scholarly research and commentary more significant than in connection with genocide. Here the scope of mass murder and the depth of its moral violation defy understanding and arouse every kind of confusion, whether in the form of diffuse passions or resistance to painful evidence. Careful scholarly evaluation can hardly eliminate these confusions, but it can
diminish them in favor of reasoned interpretation and the channeling of
passion into constructive policy. Generally speaking, the extremity of human harm brought about by genocide raises the stakes of scholarly commentary.

Where scholars deny genocide, in the face of decisive evidence that it has occurred, they contribute to a false consciousness that can have the most dire reverberations. Their message, in effect, is: murderers did not really murder; victims were not really killed; mass murder requires no confrontation, no reflection, but should be ignored, glossed over. In this way scholars lend their considerable authority to the acceptance of this ultimate human crime. More than that, they encourage--indeed invite--a repetition of that crime
from virtually any source in the immediate or distant future. By closing their minds to truth, that is, such scholars contribute to the deadly psychohistorical dynamic in which unopposed genocide begets new genocides.

Those of us who wish to be true to our scholarly calling have a clear obligation here. We must first expose this form of denial. At the same time we must ourselves bear witness to historical truths--to the full narrative of mass murder and human suffering. To be witnessing professionals in this way requires that we take in grim details so that we can tell the story with accuracy and insight. It is a task to which we must bring both heart and mind, an approach that combines advocacy and detachment. We require sufficient detachment to maintain rigorous intellectual standards in evaluating evidence and drawing conclusions. At the same time our moral advocacy should require us
to open ourselves to suffering as a way of taking a stand against cruelty and killing, whatever its source.

You stated:

"...Do you believe I have been trying to bring out historical points to justify the Armenian genocide when it is already a historical fact? "

Whose fact?

Certainly not mine.

Not non-partisan, honest historians', either.

Here is what 69 such experts and researchers of them said in a public statement: published in New York Times and Washington Post on May 19, 1985:

" TO THE MEMBERS OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

The undersigned American academicians who specialize in Turkish, Ottoman and Middle Eastern Studies are concerned that the current language embodied in House Joint Resolution 192 is misleading and/or inaccurate in several respects.

Specifically, while fully supporting the concept of a "National Day of Remembrance of Man's Inhumanity to Man," we respectfully take exception to that portion of the text which singles out for special recognition:

". . . the one and one half million people of Armenian ancestry who were victims of genocide perpetrated in Turkey between 1915 and 1923 . . .."

Our reservations focus on the use of the words "Turkey' and "genocide" and may be summarized as follows:

From the fourteenth century until 1922, the area currently known as Turkey, or more correctly, the Republic of Turkey, was part of the territory encompassing the multinational, multi-religious state known as the Ottoman Empire. It is wrong to equate the Ottoman Empire with the Republic of Turkey in the same way that it is wrong to equate the Hapsburg Empire with the Republic of Austria.

The Ottoman Empire, which was brought to an end in 1922, by the successful conclusion of the Turkish Revolution which established the present day Republic of Turkey in 1923, incorporated lands and people which today account for more than twenty-five distinct countries in Southeastern Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, only one of which is the Republic of Turkey.

The Republic of Turkey bears no responsibility for any events which occurred in Ottoman times, yet by naming 'Turkey' in the Resolution, its authors have implicitly labeled it as guilty of "genocide" it charges transpired between 1915 and 1923;

As for the charge of "genocide," no signatory of this statement wishes to minimize the scope of Armenian suffering. We are likewise cognizant that it cannot be viewed as separate from the suffering experienced by the Muslim inhabitants of the region.

The weight of evidence so far uncovered points in the direct of serious inter communal warfare (perpetrated by Muslim and Christian irregular forces), complicated by disease, famine, suffering and massacres in Anatolia and adjoining areas during the First World War. Indeed, throughout the years in question, the region was the scene of more or less continuous warfare, not unlike the tragedy which has gone on in Lebanon for the past decade. The resulting death toll among both Muslim and Christian communities of the region was immense. But much more remains to be discovered before historians will be able to sort out precisely responsibility between warring and innocent, and to identify the causes for the events which resulted in the death or removal of large numbers of the eastern Anatolian population, Christian and Muslim alike.

Statesmen and politicians make history, and scholars write it. For this process to work scholars must be given access to the written records of the statesmen and politicians of the past. To date, the relevant archives in the Soviet Union, Syria, Bulgaria and Turkey all remain, for the most part, closed to dispassionate historians. Until they become available, the history of the Ottoman Empire in the period encompassed by H.J. Res. 192 (1915-1923) cannot be adequately known.

We believe that the proper position for the United States Congress to take on this and related issues is to encourage full and open access to all historical archives and not to make charges on historical events before they are fully understood. Such charges as those contained H.J. Res. 192 would inevitably reflect unjustly upon the people of Turkey and perhaps set back irreparably progress historians are just now beginning to achieve in understanding these tragic events. ...(signatures)..."

As the above comments illustrate, the history of the Ottoman-Armenians is much debated among scholars, many of whom do not agree with the historical assumptions embodied in the wording of H.J. Res. 192. By passing the resolution Congress will be attempting to determine by legislation which side of the historical question is correct. Such a resolution, based on historically questionable assumptions, can only damage the cause of honest historical inquiry, and damage the credibility of the American legislative process.

You stated:

Why would (as I stated before) the victimizer government or it's denialist apologists need to ask the victims (or representatives) to a court of any kind? "

Answer: Because
1- they feel they are innocent of the baseless Armenian charges and smears
2- and they want to expose the Armenian deception for all to see.

You stated:

" Criminals do not like to ask to be tried in court this is a suspicious proposition from a government who has consistently denied the Armenian genocide."

Answer: Criminals don't. That is one more proof, therefore, that Turks are not criminals. If Turks were guilty as you baselessly charge, would Turks wish to chance the scrutiny of a court room? Turks are self-confident that Turks can expose the Armenians fraud in a court room easily and effortlessly.

Also, since Armenian claims of genocide are bogus; something that does not exist cannot be denied. If you want to be credible with your bogus genocide charges, then you had better produce a verdict by a competent court, as the U.N. definition of genocide requires.
Armenian claims cannot be substantiated with historical evidence. They are no more than wartime propaganda. In that sense, Armenians are still fighting World War I; they are stuck in a warped time zone... The Armenians still live in the twilight zone.

You don't have to take my word for any of it. Look what the missionary George M. Lamsa, well known for his research on Christianity, says in his book on those wild stories published in the media without checking facts (The Secret of the Near East, The Ideal Press, Philadelphia, 1923, page 133)

"...In some towns containing ten Armenian houses and thirty Turkish houses, it was reported that 40,000 people were killed, about 10,000 women were taken to the harem, and thousands of children left destitute; and the city university destroyed, and the bishop killed. It is a well-known fact that even in the last war the native Christians, despite the Turkish cautions, armed themselves and fought on the side of the Allies. In these conflicts, they were not idle, but they were well supplied with artillery, machine guns and inflicted heavy losses on their enemies..."

Case in point: The New York Times published 145 anti-Turkish stories in 1915 without giving even one chance to Turks to rebut the wild accusations. Can you imagine today a newspaper making allegations over 135 days and not even once letting its readers learn the other side of the story? Such was the anti-Turkish bias then. Armenians simply rode those waves. But this kind of media bias and bigotry got Armenians nowhere. Here we are, in 2007, Armenians still waging a war of terror (1973 to present) and propaganda (1915 to present.)

You stated:

"...My ill will is toward the government of Turkey's policies not it's people, per se."

How do you explain the Armenian terrorism and hate crimes in our midst today then? Two Turkish diplomats were killed in Santa Barbara in 1973 by an older Armenian assassin and another Turkish diplomat was slain in Los Angels in 1982 by a teenager Armenian assassin. Many attacks, bombings, bomb threats, assault and batteries, and violent hate crimes were committed by Armenians in California in the last 30+ years. Some of the victims were Turkish-Americans who had nothing to do with any government. Why this intense hatred then? Why cultivate such intense negative feelings? Why teach Armenian kids to hate Turks? Why?

An Armenian kid who has never seen or met a Turk in his/her life is ready to kill one. How is that possible? Who is poisoning thee young minds? It is people like you who do, with your mindless, baseless, endless, hate-filled monologues. That's who.

You sated:

" Public relations must be a nightmare even the word "Turk" has a negative connotation by most, of there own doing, no one else."

I am not the one WHO IS HIDING BEHIND A FIRST NAME, am I?
I am proud of my family name, my heritage, and my history. I proudly display them all for all to see. As you can see, I have nothing to hide.

Nevertheless, you made an incredibly racist remark. How can the name of a people be given a wholesale, defamatory, derogatory like that in this day and age? You stated it because you obviously believe it. That makes you racist. Since when racial slurs and stereotyping accepted as PR yardsticks?

Turks having been around for more than 5000 years; with written alphabet for 2000+ years, Turks are proud of their multi-continent, multi-culture, multi millennium rich heritage. Turks have established 16+ empires and states in much of the known world in history, with the Ottoman Empire alone lasting 623 years. The Republic of Turkey is the last state, established in 1923, and already the 16th largest economy in the world and rising. Turks are skilled empire and nation builders. Turks have very strong characters of highly self-confident nature which make them legendary in the art of warfare and statesmanship. That is why anti-Turkish plans can never be successful.

Armenians on the other hand never had their sovereignty (save a few years here and there) and were mostly ruled by other empires in the region (Romans, Greeks, Persian, Byzantium, Seljuk Turks, Arabs, Ottoman-Turks, Russians, Iranians, and others.
Armenians can be excused, therefore, for having no culture of statehood or nation building. . This is proven by the fact that they have trouble with all of their neighbors today because of irredentist Armenian policies, coveting lands from neighbors, namely Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. As a result, the first chance Armenia got when the Soviet Empire collapsed, Armenia chose to attack her neighbor and engage in ethnic cleansing in Karabagh (black vineyard in Turkish) and Western Azerbaijan. And the Armenia created as a result of aggression and ethnic cleansing is, understandably, a basket case. Armenia today is a land-locked, poverty-stricken, corruption-ridden, violent country whose major exports are Armenian terrorism and illegal aliens and major import is foreign aid and Russian soldiers. After reading a Los Angeles Times article on Armenia, I remember writing a letter with the title "Armenians are creating the hell they created".

That is the difference between Turks and Armenians (I can expand on this with facts, figures, dates, and sources, if you wish, to make it clearer for you.)

You stated:

" ...don't have to hurl negatives toward Turkey they must lie in their own bed..."

Hurl negatives toward Turkey ?

Then what was "...even the word 'Turk' has a negative connotation"
And what do you think blaming Turkey with a fraudulent genocide is all about?
But I have long since given up expecting straight answers from you, much less getting them.

Turks are quite happy with their bed, thank you, and have a clear conscience about their glorious history and unique culture. Furthermore, Turks are extremely proud of their accomplishments; and very self-confident and positive about life at present and in future. In fact, they scored the highest in "happiness index" according to a poll carried out in all EU countries. (There are about 100,000 illegal Armenian aliens working in Turkey as we speak. As you defame and demonize Turkey and Turks, your brethren are happy to work and make a living in Turkey. These are Armenia Armenians now, not Turkish-Armenians, who already live rich, prosperous lives in Turkey.)

If you go to Turkey today, you would be startled to find out that Turks really don't care about the Armenian lies of genocide at all. The Armenian issue is not the reason-d'etre for them, the way it clearly is for Armenians. Until a few years ago, if you asked about the Armenian allegations of genocide in Turkey, most Turks would not even know what you are talking about. That is because Turkey, in the years of nation building, chose to educate its children with love, hope, tolerance, and optimism. When you teach 6+ centuries of history of a multi-continent empire, Armenians do not even appear on the radar screen.

Turks feel Armenians betrayed during a war of survival for Turks, so they could no longer be trusted. Those who were engaged in treason were temporarily relocated as a wartime measure for national security. Most of them arrived at the destination, as you can see even in Armenian sources (I can provide them if you wish.) There was suffering due to starvation, epidemics, war, and this suffering did not discriminate on the basis of religion or ethnicity. Consequently, all peoples of the area suffered, including the Muslims. The West only sees and grieves the Armenian suffering and dismisses Turkish and Muslim suffering. This kind of selective morality and discriminations is unethical, unjust, and unacceptable in this day and age.

Armenians ask why send women and children to Tereset (Temporary resettlement). They say what harm could they possibly do. Historian Prof. Stanford Shaw of UCLA explained it by saying that it was no longer possible to differentiate between loyal Armenians and disloyal ones (Could the U.S. tell who was hostile (Viet Kong) and who was friendly (South Vietnamese) in all the years of Vietnam War?) Armenians terrorists would use women and children as human shields. Other "innocent families" would "aid and abet" Armenian terrorists. As a result, most were subjected to Tereset.

Not all Armenians were subjected to Tereset though. For example, those in the capital Istanbul were not relocated. Neither were the Armenians in Edirne, Izmir, and other Western regions (save a few activists and gang leaders). Armenians of Aleppo were also not moved. Catholic and Protestant Armenians were also excluded. And those who served in the Ottoman Army could stay with their families. Those in city centers could also stay. Those who were bakers, doctors, etc. could also stay if they were not involved in treason. Those who could afford, could buy train tickets. In most areas away from train stations, oxen pulled carriages, horses, donkeys were provided. Food and medicine rations were planned. Property was recorded for safe keeping and for returning to their owners after the war. We can prove all of these things with countless documents and corroborating paper trails. You see, it was a wartime measure. Not a wholesale annihilation like you portray.

Why relocation? Because it is an effective wartime measure that every Western country, including the U.S., France, and the U.K. have used many times before. Let's read what the French lawyer and a specialist on the Armenian question Georges de Maleville, writes on military justification of resettlement in his book ( La Tragédie Arménienne de 1915, -The Armenian tragedy of 1915 -, Editions F. Sorlot-F. Lanore, Paris, 1988, p 61-63) :

"...In all the countries, under all the regimes, the staff of the armies in the field evacuate towards the back, the populations which live in the zone of fights and can bother the movement of the troops, especially if these populations are hostile. Public opinion does not find anything to criticize to these measures, obviously painful, but necessary. During winter of 1939-1940, the radical - socialist French government evacuated and transported in the Southwest of France, notably in the Dordogne, the entire population of the Alsatian villages situated in the valley of the Rhine, to the east of the Maginot line. This German-speaking population, and even sometimes germanophil, bothered the French army. It stayed in the South, far from the evacuated homes and sometimes destroyed until 1945....And nobody, in France, cried out for inhumanity..."

It was a temporary wartime measure taken purely in self-defense ; not a planned annihilation of a people.

And that is the plain truth.

I think by now from reading your posts, you are rambling on previous posts and taking my comments out of context (as expected)and mischaractorizing them (as expected), and defaming ethnicites, cultures and history (as expected).

Fortunatly our readers will learn some of the reasons why denialists are caught up in not working toward humanity but trying in vain to unwittingly work aganist it.

You stated:

"Turks having been around for more than 5000 years; with written alphabet for 2000+ years, Turks are proud of their multi-continent, multi-culture, multi millennium rich heritage. Turks have established 16+ empires and states in much of the known world in history, with the Ottoman Empire alone lasting 623 years. The Republic of Turkey is the last state, established in 1923, and already the 16th largest economy in the world and rising. Turks are skilled empire and nation builders. Turks have very strong characters of highly self-confident nature which make them legendary in the art of warfare and statesmanship."

You easily omit that other ethnicities including Armennian have contributed to practically every facit that you are proud of. Frankly crossculture is to be expected with past empires.

There is nothing wrong with being proud of your ethnicity.

Unfortunatly I may only ask our readers to again research to find that the Turkish laws of today do not contribute to the welfare of any minority, on the contrary they have promoted a nationalistic fervor over the years to literally have frequent incidence of killing minorities, and other who are not muslum or wish to practice freedom of speech that opposes Turkish policies.

----

Many would find it suspect that Hitler's book "Mein Kampf" has sold over 100,000 in two months in 2005.

Also worth noting I believe you may be removed from yet another reality along with denial of the Armenian genocide. From reading this article I have a quote that also contradicts your posts:

"Metropoll Strategic and Social Studies Centre showed that half Turkey's 70 million people were convinced the country was surrounded by enemies."

article:

Mein Kampf, the book Hitler wrote in prison before he rose to power in 1933, has become a bestseller in Turkey, provoking consternation.
The dreams of creating a master race are being snapped up by young Turks. Its publishers believe that more than 100,000 copies have been sold in the past two months.

Its sudden appeal has alarmed Turkey's Jewish community and is causing concern in the EU. A German diplomat said its success "might not give the right signals" to Europeans in advance of Turkey's opening accession talks in October.

"Obviously we're very concerned," Ivo Molinas, one of Turkey's 25,000 Jews, said in Istanbul. "This is a democratic country and the book can't be banned, but it would be good if the Turkish government openly said they don't like it being sold. Unfortunately, there has been no such approach."
Although Jews have been assured by booksellers and the publishers that their motives are "purely commercial and not ideological", Jewish officials say the book's popularity has coincided with a wave of anti-semitic articles in the press.

Mr Molinas, a columnist in the weekly Shalom, said: "There has been a big increase in articles attacking us in the fundamentalist and nationalist press, because of what is happening in the Middle East, the Israeli-Palestinian problem and the war in Iraq.

"That has affected readers, and I think boosted sales of Mein Kampf." Analysts believe the book's popularity is related to a rise in nationalism and anti-US sentiment since the invasion of Iraq. A survey last month by the Metropoll Strategic and Social Studies Centre showed that half Turkey's 70 million people were convinced the country was surrounded by enemies.

Many Turks fear that joining the EU will expose their country to permissiveness and force them to give up treasured traditions.

-----

Lastly I will ask our readers to my previous post to be more informend as to the reasons of Armenian genocide denial.
Rhetorically asking,

"WHY DO PEOPLE DENY THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE?"

I have also added more information for our readers to help understand the various forms of denial, as it directly relates to Armenian Genocide denial.

----

Twelve Ways To Deny Genocide

1. Question and minimize the statistics.

This is one of the biggest distractions to the main issue itself. By claiming that the numbers are exaggerated or inflated, and that only a few hundred thousand were killed, not over a million, they try to completely side-track the entire issue. As if a few hundred thousand would not have been a genocide as well.

2. Attack the motivations of the truth-tellers.

The claim that Armenians cannot be trusted because they may want reparations is like saying no victim should ever be heard, because they are biased in their pursuit of justice.

3. Claim that the deaths were inadvertent.

As a result of famine, migration, or disease, not because of willful murder. Also mention that Turks/Muslims died too at that time - without mentioning that they died on the battlefield, not at the hands of their very own government.
4. Emphasize the strangeness of the victims.

The victims were infidels (Christians), a fifth-column, and not "good" Ottoman Turks.
5. Rationalize the deaths as the result of tribal conflict, coming to the victims out of the inevitability of their history of relationships.

Check. Armenians and Turks could not share that land anymore since some Armenians might prefer independence to being second class citizens.

6. Blame "out of control" forces for committing the killings.

They often blame the very Kurds they later struggled to keep down.

7. Avoid antagonizing the genocidists, who might walk out of "the peace process."

Turkey refuses to even open diplomatic relations with Armenia because it talks about the Armenian Genocide.

8. Justify denial in favor of current economic interests.

Undoubtedly Turkey's number one weapon in denying the Armenian Genocide. Constant threats to the west the military contracts worth billions will be canceled have worked wonders in legislatures considering the issue. In fact, the debate over whether to officially recognize the genocide in the west is clearly not about whether it happened or not - since it very clearly did - but on just what economic/diplomatic repercussions Turkey has threatened or might retaliate with if they do recognize a 90 year old truth.

9. Claim that the victims are receiving good treatment, while baldly denying the charges of genocide outright.

Show how a few thousand Armenians were not killed in Istanbul as evidence that 2.5 million were not killed/driven out in Anatolia.

10. Claim that what is going on doesn't fit the definition of genocide. At the time of writing (September 2004), the European Union, the Secretary General of the United Nations and even Amnesty International still avoid calling the crimes in Darfur by their proper name. There are three reasons for such reluctance:

A.Another misconception is the "all or none" concept of genocide. The all-or-none school considers killings to be genocide only if their intent is to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group "in whole." Their model is the Holocaust. They ignore the "in part" in the definition in the Genocide Convention, which they often haven't read.

B. Since the 1990's, a new obstacle to calling genocide by its proper name has been the distinction between genocide and "ethnic cleansing," a term originally invented as a euphemism for genocide in the Balkans. Genocide and "ethnic cleansing" are sometimes portrayed as mutually exclusive crimes, but they are not. Prof. Schabas, for example, says that the intent of "ethnic cleansing" is expulsion of a group, whereas the intent of "genocide" is its destruction, in whole or in part. He illustrates with a simplistic distinction: in "ethnic cleansing," borders are left open and a group is driven out; in "genocide," borders are closed and a group is killed.

C. Claim that the "intent" of the perpetrator is merely "ethnic cleansing" not "genocide," which requires the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. The U.N. Commission of Experts report of 2005 took this way out. It confused motive with intent. (Ironically, the U.N. Commission report even included a paragraph saying motive and intent should not be confused, an exhortation the Commission promptly violated, itself.) Even if the motive of a perpetrator is to drive a group off its land ("ethnic cleansing"), killing members of the group and other acts enumerated in the Genocide Convention may still have the specific intent to destroy the group, in whole or in part. That's genocide.

11. Blame the victims.

Perhaps the most insulting tactic of all. Saying that actually it was the Armenians who were massacring and wiping out Turks.

12. Say that peace and reconciliation are more important that blaming people for genocide.

This is often heard from Turks, American government officials and others who have clearly never been victims of genocide. Much like telling a man whose mother was raped and murdered by the next door neighbor that it is more important to get along with your neighbors, this will never be accepted by Armenians who deserve and need an apology and reparations. They need an apology from Turkey now not only for the genocide, but for the nearly century long denial and miseducation campaign that took place, the continued mistreatment of Armenians in Turkey, the blockade of Armenia since the early 1990s and the post-genocidal war taking even more Armenian land.

By,
Dr. Isreal Charny:

The Editor-in-Chief of the Encyclopedia of Genocide; Executive Director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide, Jerusalem; Professor of Psychology & Family Therapy, and Founder and Former Director of the Program for Advanced Studies in Integrative Psychotherapy at the Dept. of Psychology & Martin Buber Center, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Link to naritive biography:
http://asa.sa.utoronto.ca/Photos/9900/Events/Charny/charnyCV.htm

You have not responded to the issues I have raised in my last post. Instead, you have chose to cut-and-paste more Armenian propaganda.

Why did you ignore, for example, Armenian terrorism in California? Or in America? or in the world?

Do you condone Armenian terrorism?

Why do you keep spreading long discredited propaganda material like the Hitler quote?

Don't you know that that bogis quote, in the form of an undated, unsigned, out-of-sequence note, was planted in the Nuremberg documents by an over-zeolous Armenian reporter?

That it was so out of place that the U.S. judges refused to use that bogus questionable material in their proceedings?
(You can read the scholarly paper written on this subject in my column at www.turkla.com.)

Why are you ignoring Armenian treason?

Why are you ignoring armed Armenian revolts victimizing my people?

Why are you ignoring the horrendous Turkish suffering cused by the Armenian nationalists?

While we are at it,why are still hiding behind a first name? (Is that a fictitious first name, too?)

Are you ashamed of being an Armenian?

Charny is a well-known anti-Turkish, pro-Armenian, partisan writer and a retired psychologist who has lots of time to spread pure Armenian propaganda. If you wish to know what Israel's position on the Turkish-Armenian conflict, then here are a few highlights from non-partisan Jews and Israelis.

1- Why does Israel's position matter? Although Israel was established in 1948, that is, many years after the WWI when the Turkish-Armenian civil war took place, Israel's views matter when it comes to the relentless civil war/genocide debate, or more correctly, the Armenian attempts to defame Turkey for political benefit. Israel's views matter because the term genocide was coined by a Polish-Jew, a lawyer, and a Holocaust survivor, by the name of Rafael Lemkin in 1943, to legally define the horrors of the WWII, when he lost most of the members of his family in Nazi concentration camps. This term was later adopted by the United Nations in 1948 and came into effect in 1951. This unique Jewish tragedy, the Holocaust, is one of the most widely and thoroughly studied subjects in history. The motives and modes of the Nazi perpetrators and stages, details, results, and impacts of their horrible crimes against humanity are all meticulously documented. Results of massive research on a year by year, location by location, country by country, victim by victim basis, can be viewed and the horrors of Holocaust can be re-lived by a visit to the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC, a federal institution founded by an act of the U.S. Congress. Most of the Jewish survivors of the Holocaust live in Israel and foreign heads of state visiting Israel pay tribute to the victims of the Holocaust as the first order of business. Israel's history and heritage is enmeshed with acts of persecution of Jews throughout history, which gives the Israelis a distinctive and important place in the realm of "victim-hood". So, when Israel speaks about genocide, the world listens. I personally have the greatest respect for Israel's views on genocide.

2- Why do I protest the existence of a bogus Hitler quote in the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC? Emblazoned on one of its walls, as a direct result of political pressure sweetened with monetary support by the Armenian lobby in the US, is
"The infamous Hitler quote: a forgery" (which also happens to be the name of a scholarly research tracing the origin of the Hitler quote which makes absolutely no reference to Armenians in any way, shape, or form.) That may be reason, too, for the refusal of the US Prosecutor to enter into evidence this "questionable material" in the Nuremberg trials. Why was the Hitler quote "embellished", as the Historian Prof. Lowry who undertook this study put it, we will never know. But we have a pretty good idea: to boost the credibility of the Armenian claims by first associating it with Hitler and the Holocaust experience. If you wish to read about this most persistent Armenian fraud from Armenian sources, then I can reproduce here another essay, "Armenian Historian Says The Hitler Quote Is A Hoax", written by an Armenian historian (published in Armenian reporter on August 2, 1984; I still keep the original.) Truth seekers must maintain the pressure on this museum to make it get rid of its Armenian-fabricated concoction. The dignified memory of the Holocaust does not need that deceptive burden. This single fakery is perhaps the gravest insult to the silent memory of 6+ million Jewish victims of the Holocaust. Armenians know their "tall tales" don't stick; so they are trying to "piggy back" their fraudulent account of the WWI on the proven fact of Holocaust "to gain credibility by association".

3- What is the role of Israeli and/or Jewish scholars in refuting the baseless Armenian allegations? Some readers may not know the fact that some of the most important works of scholarly research refuting the Armenian allegations were carried out by Jewish historians like Prof. Stanford Shaw of UCLA, Prof. Bernard Lewis of Princeton, and others. Israeli leaders, government, Jewish scholars, researchers, and people have always supported the Turkish position from the heart, and always said that it was a true wartime tragedy, but never a genocide.
The Jewish scholars' important research and revelations were so devastating to the Armenian allegations, that Prof. Shaw's home in Los Angeles was bombed by some Armenian extremists in 1977 as a retaliation for what he wrote in his book. Prof Shaw is also the scholar who mentored other prominent historians like Prof. Justin McCarthy of the Univ. Of Louisville, Kentucky, and Prof. Heath Lowry of Princeton Univ. Albert Amateau was an Ottoman-Jew who loved Turkey and defended his "Vatan" until the day he died at the age of 105 in 1995 and I personally witnessed his precious work between 1987-1995. I am proud to call myself his friend. I may even publish our private communications one day, which are now neatly piled in numbered boxes and stored in my garage awaiting my attention.

4- What are lay Israelis and/or Jews saying about the bogus genocide? You will read striking letters from my other Jewish friends below: one Jewish-American, one Turkish-Jewish-American, and one Turkish-Jewish-Israeli, among others. After reading the enormous body of literature created by Jewish defenders of Turkish position, some of which are sampled below, you will come to realize that our Jewish friends did so much for us, Turks and Turkish-Americans, for which they were targeted and hated by some in the Armenian community. In future, if and when the occasion arises, I would like to summarize and evaluate the Armenian hatred for Jews for defending the Turks. That should make a pretty good reading.

5- The Jewish Times, June 21, 1990, Circulation: 470,000:

"...An appropriate analogy with the Jewish Holocaust could be the systematic extermination of all the Moslem population in the Republic of Independent Armenia, which represented at least 30 to 40 % of the total population of this republic..."

6- Israeli Foreign Minister and 1994 Nobel Peace Prize winner Shimon Peres
Turkish Daily News, April 10, 2001, Ankara, Turkey:

"...We reject attempts to create a similarity between the Holocaust and the Armenian allegations. Nothing similar to the Holocaust occurred. It is a tragedy what the Armenians went through, but not a genocide."

7- The Israeli Consulate, Los Angeles, USA, April 15, 2001, confirming the Perez statement in response to inquiries from Armenian-American daily Asbarez to the Israeli Consulate in Los Angeles, asking whether the Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres did actually say the ARMENIAN was meaningless and reject any similarities between the Holocaust and the ARMENIAN.

"...This issue [of the Armenian Genocide] should be dealt with by historians and not politicians. We do not support the comparison of the Armenian tragedies to the Jewish Holocaust. Israel will not take a historical and political stance on the issue..."

8- Rivka Cohen, ambassadress of Israel in Armenia,
At a press conference in Yerevan, on February 8, 2002.

"...Holocaust is a unique phenomenon, because it was planned and aimed at the extermination of a whole nation..."."

9- Israeli Foreign Office, Official statement, February 19, 2002

"...Israel recognizes the tragedy of the Armenians, however, these events can not be compared with a genocide..."

10- Albert Amateau, Notarized Statement, ( on Franz Werfel's confesions & Armenian treason), FTAA, New York, 1992

"...Werfel confessed to me his shame and remorse for having written that story, in which he had blamed the Ottomans as the aggressors and terrorists. Fifty thousand Armenians, residents of villages in and around Erzurum in Turkey, surreptitiously ascended a mountain called Mussa Dagh (dagh is Turkish for mountain) with arms, ammunition, victuals, and water, sufficient to withstand a siege of many days. Before ascending that mountain, they had captured hundreds of Muslim Turks and Jews, their fellow citizens and neighbors, with whom they were supposedly on good terms. They murdered them all in cold blood, for no other reason than they were Muslims and Jews. Thereafter, every night armed Armenian bands came down from that mountain and attacked the rear of Ottoman and German armies fighting the Russian invaders. This was at the very beginning of the First World War, and part of the secret plans made by the Russians and assigned to the Armenian Revolutionary Federation.

The Turks were mystified. The Armenian attackers would disappear. Try as they did, at first the Ottomans were unable to trace the disappearing Armenians, but finally they discovered that Mussa Dagh was the hiding place. The Ottomans found the mountain fortress unassailable. They laid siege and waited 40 days before the Armenian rear guard conceded defeat and laid down their arms. But the Ottoman forces found the mountain empty. The large army had disappeared down the other side of the mountain where they had found an exit to the Mediterranean. French and British men-of-war had been signaled and they picked up the main army, transporting the soldiers to Alexandria, Egypt, then under the control of the British. Less than 500, the rear guard who gave themselves up, were captured by the Ottomans.

Yet, in telling the story to Werfel to write, the (Armenian) Bishop (in Vienna, Austria) had claimed 50,000 victims captured and put to death, an invented story, just as the story of 1.5 million massacred in 1915. If 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives during that war, they died as soldiers, fighting a war of their own choosing, against the Ottoman Empire which had treated them decently and benignly. They were the duped victims of the Russians, of the Allies, and of their own Armenian leaders..."

11- Paul Palmer, PhD. (Yale, Chemistry), February 09, 2001, from a letter sent to Steven Feinstein, an AFATH sympathizing genocide scholar

"... As an American Jew who did live thru The Way (born 1938), I have a personal concern with the Holocaust. I also lived in Turkey for five years and learned and saw how well the Turks have treated the Jews.

I found your article very strange. The tack taken was that the Turks are guilty, the Turks are known to have done it, why don't they 'fess up, it will make them feel better...The Turkish position is not that they don't want anyone to discuss it or know about the controversy. They claim that the Armenians turned to help invading Russians against their host country and that the now hostile Armenians were relocated as part of war operations. While this caused suffering and death to Armenians, it was no greater than the suffering borne by Turks and Kurds in that area.

What enrages Turks is quite the opposite of what you portray. Instead of suppressing history, the Turks have tried, over and over, to bring out the history and the studies, but to no avail. The Armenians came to the United States earlier and in far greater numbers than the Turks. They have their own enclaves in Fresno and elsewhere, which the Turks lack. The Armenians are better situated politically to shout their cause in legislatures, while the Turks are left to murmur. The Turks have abundant historical records, arguments and diplomatic reports on their side. The Armenians have over 70 recent murders of Turks around the world (and most likely more being planned) to prove their historical case.

Where is the academic forum for a dispassionate hearing on the history, with the documents and findings posted on the web for all to see? I would have thought that an institute with a name like Holocaust Studies would be a perfect place. Yet you seem to be more influenced by the harsh complaints of an Armenian friend (my guess) than by any impulse to find the truth.

You have done your Institute and academia a disservice by your rush to decree a result, which should rather have been the outcome of a long investigation, if the investigation did indeed arrive at that result..."

12- Rachel Krespin, Fairfield, CT, In her letter to President Bush, sent April 23, 2002

"... Turks at no time in their history have committed a Genocide. Even the first Prime Minister of Armenia said it himself. Please do not allow dishonoring and defaming of our true ally Turkey, just because some people are speaking lies and half truths. Please stand firm with and for our real friends...

...(Here is) the Manifesto of Hovhannes Katchaznouni, the first PM of the Independent Armenian Republic, published by the Armenian Information Service Suite 7D, 471 Park Ave., New York 22 - 1955 :

'... The war with us was inevitable... We had not done all that was necessary for us to have done to evade war. We ought to have used peaceful language with the Turks...We had no information about the real strength of the Turks and relied on ours. This was the fundamental error. We were not afraid of war because we thought we could win... Our army was well fed and well armed and [clothed] but it did not fight. The troops were constantly retreating and deserting their positions ; they threw away their arms and dispersed in the villages. ...In spite of the fact that the Armenians had better material and better support, their armies lost. ..... the advancing Turks fought only against the regular soldiers ; they did not carry the battle to the civilian sector. ....the Turkish soldiers were well-disciplined and that there had not been any massacres...'

13- Rachel Krespin, ACJTR, speech delivered at the 25th Convention of ATAA in Washington DC 11 December 2004 (ACJTR: The American Council on Jewish-Turkish Relations, a non-profit organization dedicated to the defense and protection of the historic friendship between the Turkish, Jewish and American peoples. Website: www.acjtr.org )

"...My maternal family is from Edirne and that my mother at the age of four moved to live in Samsun in 1920 (at the footsteps of great Ataturk)...I am the grand-daughter of Nesim Bey from Bursa, (who) fought Turkey's War of Independence, during the Greek occupation of his city. (Nesim Bey) was so instrumental in the resistance, that the Greek had declared him "wanted" with a significant sum of "drahmi"s for his head. It was my grandmother Rahil (my namesake), who (hiding in her attic) single-handedly sew all the Turkish flags that would adorn every roof-top in Bursa, on the day of liberation, November 11, 1921..

... We organized campaigns, made donations, wrote letters, in our effort to defend and elevate the good name of Turks and Turkey. We always stood together against many challenges, like slanders and "genocide libels", and against all those who made a profession of Turkey-bashing...We tirelessly disseminated information about the Turks and Turkey and how this great nation welcomed my ancestors escaping the horrors of the Spanish Inquisition. How Sultan Beyazid II opened the doors of the vast Ottoman Empire to provide a safe haven for us, the Sephardic Jews.(who joined the other Jews of Anatolia, who had been there thousand years and had welcomed the Seljuk Turks there).
That kind of history makes good friends.

When our brethren in Europe's Christendom suffered, lived in ghettos and were persecuted, we lived considerably better, among the Moslem Turks. We flourished, brought "printing" to the empire, contributed to thought and literature and served our country with loyalty and honor. The relations throughout our common history were mostly fruitful, mutually beneficial and friendly. These friendly ties, knotted over and over for centuries, found expression also in the recognition of the State of Israel soon after her birth, by the then young Republic of Turkey and in the continued bilateral relations and cooperation between the two countries.

Turkey has also been a dependable ally of America, for decades. Turks have fought heroically, side by side with Americans in Korea, have stood firm defending the borders of the NATO alliance, of which Turkey is a member, during the long Cold War years and continued to contribute their share more recently, in Bosnia and Afghanistan.

14- "...ISRAEL AGAIN RESPONDS TO ARMENIAN DIPLOMATIC NOTE ON GENOCIDE. In a 19 February (2002) response to Armenia's diplomatic note of 15 February, the Israeli Foreign Ministry again rejected any comparison between the Armenian genocide of 1915 and the Holocaust.

'Israel recognizes the tragedy of the Armenians and the massacre of the Armenian people, but at the same time believes that this should not be described as genocide,' the Israeli statement said. Armenia had protested an earlier statement made in
Yerevan on 8 February by Rivka Kohen, Israel's ambassador to both Armenia and Georgia. Kohen characterized the 1915 killings as 'merely atragedy' that cannot be compared to the Holocaust ..."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, February 19, 2002. (RFE/RL is a private, international communications service to Eastern and Southeastern Europe, Russia, the Caucasus, Central and Southwestern Asia, funded by the U.S. government, currently listing in its website 22 languages of broadcast..)

15- Momo Asafrana, Tel Avıv, Israel, written in a private chat group, December 3, 2004 (I secured written permission from him to use this wonderful letter of his.)

"... I would like to relate, especially to the Armenian friends, this incident that I heard. I am a Jew, of Istanbul origin, and have lived in Israel for the last 35 years. My wife's father is a Caucasus-Jew who died before I could get to know him. As far as I can remember, they had escaped from the Caucasus when he was a young boy and resettled in Adana (an agricultural and trade hub, as well as a port city in the South of Turkey). About 10 years ago, at a family wedding, I met an old gentleman who knew about my deceased father-in-law and mentioned some incidents about his childhood, his family, and the turmoil of those days, that were quite interesting to us.

According to what he told me, During WWI, the Russians invaded the Caucasus, and with the help of local Armenians, they have chased Turks and Jews, killed whoever they could catch, and then pillaged and plundered Turkish and Jewish villages. He was about 10 years old and my father-in-law was only 3 and he said there is no way he could forget that exodus, that fleeing. Turks and Jews brought with them to Anatolia whatever they could pack with them. Jewish families first went to Van (a city by the lake Van in Eastern Anatolia). While some Jewish families settled there, others continued their travel to settle in Adana and other places, and still others went as far as Palestine.

What I am trying to my Armenian friends is this: everything has a prior history. If the Armenian attack and kill Turks, Turks, in their quest to avenge those Armenian atrocities, may have caused massacres in their counter attacks and chases. Aren't these 'eye for an eye' feuds conventional and normal under the conditions of those days? In contrast, what the Germans did to 6 million Jews can not be explained by such feuds, chases, or civil wars; there was absolutely no reason for the Holocaust. I never quite understood how the Armenians want to be included in the same category as the Jews of Holocaust. Let's leave those old issues and the old world behind. Let's look at the present. Let's talk about what we can do to create a beautiful, happy new world... We should learn from those old stories and history; we should talk about the truth and agree on it; and let's together build a more secure world to hand over to our children...Nobody benefits from feuds, hatred, and animosity; one can only gain tears that way; let's worry about tomorrow, brothers, tomorrow! "

16- Elihu Ben Levi, Vacaville, California. San Francisco Chronicle, December 11, 1983

"...I see no problem in your quoting my story in your book. Those who create all this fuss around the Armenian issue do not want to understand one thing: instead of teaching love and brotherhood to their kids, they are teaching grudge and hatred (like the Palestinians do). What do they want to achieve with this attitude? Enough of this animosity already...The age old Armenian issue no longer interests me. My children's future is more important..."Momo Asafrana, December 09, 2004, responding to writer's request for permission to publish his story above.

"...We have first hand information and evidence of Armenian atrocities against our people (Jews). Members of our family witnessed the murder of 148 members of our family near Erzurum, Turkey, by Armenian neighbors, bent on destroying anything and anybody remotely Jewish and/or Muslim... Armenians were in league with Hitler in the last war, on his premise to grant themselves government if, in return, the Armenians would help exterminate Jews. Armenians were also hearty proponents of the anti-Semitic acts in league with the Russian Communists.

17- Bernard Lewis, on the American TV C-SPAN 2, 25 March, 2002

"...Saying that the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire was the same as what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany is a downright falsehood. What happened to the Armenians was the result of a massive Armenian armed rebellion against the Turks, which began even before war broke out, and continued on a larger scale. Great numbers of Armenians, including members of the armed forces, deserted, crossed the frontier and joined the Russian forces invading Turkey. Armenian rebels actually seized the city of Van and held it for a while intending to hand it over to the invaders. There was guerilla warfare all over Anatolia. There is clear evidence of a decision by the Turkish Government, to deport the Armenian population from the sensitive areas. Which meant naturally the whole of Anatolia. Not including the Arab provinces which were then still part of the Ottoman Empire. There is no evidence of a decision to massacre. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence of attempt to prevent it..."

18- Prof. of History at UCLA, History Of The Ottoman Empire And Modern Turkey, Cambridge University Press, 1977, Vol. II, p 315.

"... Armenians again flooded the czarist armies, and the czar returned to St. Petersburg confident that the day finally had come for him to reach Istanbul. Hostilities were opened by Russians, who pushed across the border on November 1, 1914, though the Ottomans stopped them and pushed them back a few days later. A subsequent Russian counter offensive in January caused the Ottoman army to scatter, and the way was prepared for a new Russian push into eastern Anatolia, to be accompanied by an open Armenian revolt against the sultan...

Armenian leaders in Russia now openly declared their support of the enemy and there seemed no other alternative. It would be impossible to determine which of the Armenians would remain loyal and which would follow the appeals of their leaders. As soon as the spring came, then, in mid-May 1915 orders were issued to evacuate the entire Armenian population from the provinces of Van, Bitlis, and Erzurum, to get them away from all areas where they might undermine the Ottoman campaigns against Russia or against the British in Egypt, with arrangements made to settle them in towns and camps in the Mosul area of Northern Iraq. In addition, Armenians residing in the countryside (but not in the cities) of the Cilician districts as well as those of north Syria were to be sent to central Syria for the same reason. Specific instructions were issued for the army to protect the Armenians against nomadic attacks and to provide them with sufficient food and other supplies to meet their needs during the march and after they were settled. Warnings were sent to the Ottoman military commanders to make certain that neither the Kurds nor any other Muslims used the situation to gain vengeance for the long years of Armenian terrorism. The Armenians were to be protected and cared for until they returned to their homes after the war..."

........

I have nothing further to add to the above sentiments expressed by prominent Jews and/or Israelis. I know I cannot change the minds of fanatic Armenian falsifiers; but those fair-minded truth seekers amongst us may take note of the above.

No one other then yourself is contributing to the ultimate form of genocide, and that is genocide denial. Our readers can look beyound your ulterior motives to attack the victims as victimizers. It is an act of "double killing" as described by Elie Wiesel's article below.

As I stated before, I think by now from reading your posts, you are rambling on previous posts and taking my comments out of context (as expected)and mischaractorizing them (as expected), and defaming ethnicites, cultures and history (as expected).

Confronting Genocide Denial

February 2007

Confronting Genocide Denial responds to recent examples of genocide denial as they relate to historical memory, media literacy, freedom of speech and genocide prevention.

Denial of genocide is the final stage of genocide. It is what Elie Wiesel has called a "double killing." Denial murders the dignity of the survivors and seeks to destroy remembrance of the crime. In a century plagued by genocide, we affirm the moral necessity of remembering.
-Statement by Concerned Scholars and Writers in commemoration of the Armenian Genocide of 1915

Holocaust survivor and Nobel Prize winning author of Night, Elie Wiesel emphasizes the personal, political and moral consequences of genocide denial. Thus, recent incidents of genocide denial raise serious concern. In November 2006, Sudan's president, Lt-Gen Omar al-Bashir, rejected claims that hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed in Darfur. One month later, Iran's president, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, who has referred to the Holocaust as a "myth," sponsored a conference for Holocaust deniers. Then, in January 2007, Hrant Dink, a Turkish-Armenian journalist, was assassinated, in part, for speaking openly about the Armenian Genocide.

How do people respond to incidents of genocide denial? Scholars, artists, and elected officials answer this question using the tools at their disposal. For example, Iranian scholars, including Azar Nafisi, published a letter condemning their government's decision to sponsor a conference for Holocaust deniers. Artists, from novelist Elif Shafak to the punk rock band System of a Down, discuss the Armenian Genocide in their work and speak about the consequences of its denial. Recently, elected officials have attempted to curtail genocide denial by making it illegal. In October 2006, the French Parliament passed a law making it a crime to deny the Armenian Genocide. In January 2007, Germany proposed that the European Union should pass a law that would incarcerate deniers of the Holocaust. (Currently, nine EU member states - Germany, Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakia- have laws against Holocaust denial.) And, on January 26, 2007, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a resolution condemning any denial of the Holocaust.

Despite the overwhelming breadth and depth of evidence documenting past genocides, most notably the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust, recent events demonstrate that groups, individuals and nations will continue in their efforts to convince others that these atrocities were not genocidal in nature. Israel Charney and other scholars have noted that it seems as if people who deny genocide seem to use the same arguments. In December 2006, just as the German government finally opened an archive holding approximately fifty million Nazi documents, the president of Iran was sponsoring a widely publicized conference for "scholars" who deny the Holocaust ever happened. How might we come to understand this juxtaposition of a warehouse of evidence on the one hand and people, such as former Louisiana state representative and KKK Imperial Wizard David Duke, who say that gas chambers were never used to kill Jews? How might we respond when we come into contact with genocide deniers? What are the implications of allowing comments that distort or falsify history to go unchecked? Once we recognize the "moral necessity" of challenging genocide denial, what strategies might be used to prevent this "double killing"?

Finally, while genocide denial raises universal issues of prejudice, propaganda, morality, and freedom of speech, it is also a deeply personal issue for those touched by genocide. As Professor Henry Theriault, a descendant of Armenian genocide survivors, explains:

Deniers operate as agents of the original perpetrators [of the genocide], pursuing and hounding victims through time. Through these agents, the perpetrators reach once again into the lives of the victims long after their escape from the perpetrators' physical grasp.1

How might we begin to imagine the personal consequences of genocide denial? How do we help students understand how genocide deniers challenge all of our humanity? The resources provided here help students understand the personal, political and moral consequences of genocide denial in order to highlight how individuals, groups and nations are responsible for preserving the historical memory of past genocides as well as raising public recognition of ongoing genocides.
---------------------------
1. Henry C. Theriault, "Denial and Free Speech: The Case of the Armenian Genocide," in Richard Hovannisian ed. Looking Forward, Moving Backward: Confronting the Armenian Genocide (New Brunswick, Transaction Pub., 2003) pp. 231-262.

---------

More information to benifit our readers why a select few hold a denialist position against humanity.

-------

Genocide denial occurs when an otherwise accepted act of genocide is met with attempts to deny the occurrence and minimize the scale or death toll. The most well-known type is Holocaust denial, but its definition can extend to any genocidal event that has been minimized or met with excessive skepticism, notably denial of the Armenian Genocide.

Most instances of genocide denial are usually considered a form of Historical revisionism. However, in circumstances where the event in dispute is not seen to constitute genocide by the majority of scholars, the use of the term may be instead considered propaganda. The extremely serious nature of the crime of genocide, along with the terrible reputation it creates and potential repercussions that may come against a nation as a result of committing it, ensures that whenever genocide is charged, there will be parties that attempt to avoid or divert blame.

Techniques used by genocide deniers
While the arguments made by a genocide denier vary depending on which genocide is being denied, most arguments have a common basis. Typical denier accusations include conspiracies stating that the targeted ethnic group conspired against the accused state with its enemies, that death tolls have been exaggerated in order to create undeserved sympathy, that the victims provoked the actions against them, through either armed insurrection or exploitation of the majority, and that the evidence supporting a genocide thesis was largely fabricated. Deniers often argue from ignorance, approaching the subject without acknowledging eyewitness records or previously made studies, or previous conclusions, and claim falsehood based on lack of direct evidence. Deniers also accumulate pieces of data from less-cited or less-used sources that do not support a genocide thesis and exaggerate them in an attempt to counter records indicating such.

The list of acts of genocide denial is extensive, and proof of genocide is often difficult to obtain, either because governments are involved in the denial or because there is debate whether the occurred atrocities can be considered genocide (especially within a culture discussing its own recent events). For example, Ward Churchill, a controversial scholar and activist in the area of Native American studies, asserts that the concept of holocaust denial applies to the minimization of the significance of attempted extermination of other victims of the Nazi holocaust such as Roma and to the marginalization of other "holocausts" such as the near elimination of Native Americans.

Denial of particular genocides
Deniers of the Holocaust state that the genocide of Jews during World War II, referred to as the Holocaust, did not occur.
The death toll of the Great Chinese Famine caused by the government of Mao Zedong was higher than China's death toll in the Second World War. This could only be proved some decades later with demographic evidence;
The Nanjing Massacre (1937) by the Japanese army has been denied by many Japanese politicians, such as Ishihara Shintaro, and mainstream historians;
The Armenian Genocide (1915-1917) which was committed by the radical Young Turk government of the Ottoman Empire is today denied by the government of Turkey, asserting that the mass deaths of Armenians were the result of a civil war coupled with famine, despite the standpoint of the majority of western, Russian and Armenian scholars. Although some Turkish writers are being persecuted for going against the state's official standpoint concerning the event, the situation might change complexion in the coming years, mainly as a result of Turkey's attempt to join the European Union. The Pontic Greek and Assyrian Genocides that occurred around the same time are similarly denied;
The Holodomor famine in Ukraine in 1932-33 killed at least 3 million victims after agricultural produce has been confiscated from peasants by the communist authorities of the Soviet Union. Its genocidal character is denied by authorities and researchers in Russia. In the West, an example of a Holodomor objector is Canadian journalist Douglas Tottle.
The Ustaše genocide by the Croats, who killed hundreds of thousands of Serbs during WWII in Jasenovac and other places, was denied by Croatian president Franjo Tuđman and by many others in present day Croatia.
The genocide of Bengali Hindus and some Muslims in the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities is denied by Pakistan, whose military perpetrated the acts when they were in control of the East Pakistan region.
The Indonesian genocide in East Timor during its occupation of the country between 1975 and 1999 was also denied. The figure of 200,000 dead, first put forward by the Catholic Church in East Timor in 1982, accounted for nearly a third of the original population of nearly 700,000. This figure was rejected by the Indonesian government as an exaggeration [2], as was the figure of 180,000 in a report by East Timor's Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation [3] in January 2006;
Various war crimes in the former Yugoslavia have been denied by participants in the wars there, and by some in the West. The 1995 Srebrenica massacre, judged to be an act of genocide by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) it the case Prosecutor vs. Krstic, is still denied by some Serbs (in some cases the denial is whether or not it constituted an act of genocide, not whether or not the massacre took place). American journalist Diana Johnstone is among those accused of denying or minimizing these massacres [4], as well as Noam Chomsky and defunct British magazine LM. (see below).

Denial of more than one genocide
The British magazine LM, previously Living Marxism, adopted a highly skeptical attitude to the general consensus of events in conflicts such as Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. This attitude was criticized as being in effect support of mass murderers. In the case of Rwanda the magazine did not deny that mass murder had taken place, but argued that it was a vicious civil war rather than a deliberate attempt to wipe out an ethnic group. The magazine also ran an article which claimed that a picture supposedly showing a Serbian prison camp, was in fact of a safe haven for refugees. They were sued for libel, lost, and as a result went bankrupt in 2000.[5][6][7][8]
Noam Chomsky has been accused of minimizing or denying genocide in at least two contemporary cases; the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia.[9][10], and the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. He has also been accused of supporting a Holocaust denier, Robert Faurisson. Supporters of Chomsky generally argue that the allegations against him are made in bad faith, and that he did not in fact defend or support any genocidal government. The implication is often that his critics are motivated by a desire to smear a prominent leftist, as in for example this article by Christopher Hitchens which defends Chomsky in relation to the Khmer Rouge and Faurisson. Similarly, Chomsky claimed that the context of the quote in which he denied the Srebrenica massacre[11] was invented. The newspaper that published it later apologized and retracted the story.[12] For more detail, see Criticism of Noam Chomsky.

Writing on genocide denial in general
Gregory H. Stanton, formerly of the US State Department and the founder of Genocide Watch, lists denial as the final stage of a genocide development:

" Denial is the eighth stage that always follows a genocide. It is among the surest indicators of further genocidal massacres. The perpetrators of genocide dig up the mass graves, burn the bodies, try to cover up the evidence and intimidate the witnesses. They deny that they committed any crimes, and often blame what happened on the victims.[13] "

George Orwell writes in 'Notes on Nationalism' that

" The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them. For quite six years the English admirers of Hitler contrived not to learn of the existence of Dachau and Buchenwald. And those who are loudest in denouncing the German concentration camps are often quite unaware, or only very dimly aware, that there are also concentration camps in Russia. Huge events like the Ukraine famine of 1933, involving the deaths of millions of people, have actually escaped the attention of the majority of English russophiles. Many English people have heard almost nothing about the extermination of German and Polish Jews during the present war. Their own antisemitism has caused this vast crime to bounce off their consciousness. In nationalist thought there are facts which are both true and untrue, known and unknown. A known fact may be so unbearable that it is habitually pushed aside and not allowed to enter into logical processes, or on the other hand it may enter into every calculation and yet never be admitted as a fact, even in one's own mind.[14] "

Israel Charney, Executive Director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Israel, describes Genocide Denial by putting it into the following catagories:

" 1. Innocence-and-Self-Righteousness
The respondents claim that they only intend to ascertain the truth. Moreover, they do not believe that human beings could have been so evil as the descriptions of the genocide imply. Furthermore, even if many deaths took place a long time ago, it is important to put them aside now and forgive and forget.

2. Scientificism in the Service of Confusion

The position taken is seemingly an innocent one that we do not know enough to know what the facts of history were, and rather than condemning anyone we should await the ultimate decision of research. This is a manipulative misuse of the valued principle in science that facts must be proven before they are accepted in order to obfuscate facts that are indeed known, and to confuse the minds of fair-minded people who do not want to fall prey to myths and propaganda. The very purpose of science, which is to know, is invoked in order to justify a form of know-nothingness.

3. Practicality, Pragmatism and Realpolitik

Here the claim is made that dealing with ancient history is impractical, it will not bring peace to the world in which we live today. One must be realistic and live through realpolitik.

4. Idea Linkage Distortion and Time-Sequence Confusion

This is a dishonest linkage of different ideas, often out of time sequence, to excuse denials of the facts. Present needs, whether justified or not, are taken as a reasonable basis for censoring or changing the record of past history.

5. Indirection, Definitionalism, and Maddening

These are responses which avoid the issue by failing to reply, or no less by going off on tangents about trivial details that avoid the essential issue whether genocide took place. The avoidance can also be done in a seductive manner of acknowledging that the issue should be discussed, but then it never is. [15]

Notable Genocide Deniers
Bernard Lewis Armenian Genocide denier who was tried in France for Armenian Genocide denial.
Bradley Smith, founder of the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust.
David Irving Holocaust Denier who has been tried in Austria for Holocaust Denial.
David Hoggan, controversial American historian and Nazi apologist, wrote several books on the subject.
Harry Elmer Barnes, an early historical revisionist, Holocaust denier, and antiwar activist.
Justin McCarthy, American revisionist historian and advocate of Armenian Genocide denial.

"Turks having been around for more than 5000 years; with written alphabet for 2000+ years, Turks are proud of their multi-continent, multi-culture, multi millennium rich heritage. Turks have established 16+ empires and states in much of the known world in history, with the Ottoman Empire alone lasting 623 years. The Republic of Turkey is the last state, established in 1923, and already the 16th largest economy in the world and rising. Turks are skilled empire and nation builders. Turks have very strong characters of highly self-confident nature which make them legendary in the art of warfare and statesmanship. That is why anti-Turkish plans can never be successful."

lol, i suggest you to re-study history...possibly not from turkish school books.

you say turks where skilled?

yeah, skilled at raping, torturing and massacring women, children and old persons. that was and is your only skill, no culture could be so crude.

reporting Mustafa Yuka (50),
"It was Armenians who brought culture, arts and city planning to Malatya," he continues. "We learned everything from them. Carpenters, blacksmiths, goldsmiths, weavers... They were all Armenian. We learned from them, but then did not see to them. We lost those beautiful people. All went to Europe and America."

he is talking about the killing of 3 christians, happened 1 week ago, not 90 years ago.

Today is the 24 of april, the commemoration day of the armenian genocide. may find the victims peace, without the turkish propaganda that is acontinuing offense to each victims memory.

Psychology of Armenian hate, fanaticism, and violence.

What is the psychology of the Armenian hate for all things Turkish cultivated so persistently? What, for example, is the driving force behind the teenage Armenian terrorist? Or the sixty-year-old Armenian lobbyist? What are the forces that are responsible for maintaining that level of negative feelings constantly? Are the inner forces that drive one to terrorism the same as those that cause one to erupt in violence at home or in the workplace? Or are these different kinds of anger?

How else can one explain "forced busing elementary or secondary school Armenian kids" to political rallies of grownup Armenians in front of Turkish consulates every April 24th ?

How do those kids psychologically handle the intense negative feelings they are forced to immerse into, such as hysterical outbursts, shouting obscenities, holding pickets with gory pictures, angry parents shouting strange slogans, and more?

What kind of permanent damage would these hate filled rallies inflict on the minds of those impressionable children? Would the reader, for example, allow his/her 8-9-10 year old son(s) and/or daughter(s) to take part in such negatively charged emotional rallies? Why? Or why not?

Are there any demonstrable connection(s) between the effect of these rallies on kids and the fact that most Armenian terrorists happen to be so young?

It seems like the list of questions grows as one thinks about the issue of Armenian terrorism. And there are certainly more questions than answers on this subject.

I would like to share with you at least one such attempt to seek answers. In his essay
" Psychology of the Armenian incidents", (2 February 2002, Turkish Daily News) retired Turkish ambassador Gunduz Aktan explores the Armenian psyche of "sole victim".

Aktan relates his impressions of a workshop arranged during the Holocaust meeting held in London University's SOAS center at the end of January 2002. This workshop was mainly devoted to the psychology of the Armenian incidents. He says it was a very complicated subject and a challenging topic in the area of human sciences. He writes:

"...Let's put aside the historical, political and financial sides of the issue and 'who is right, who is wrong' approach and let's try to look at it as human beings from the standpoint of the Armenians. The majority of the Armenians was subjected to relocation between 1915-1916. There is no doubt that the incidents were full of personal tragedies... It is natural for the people who faced this disaster, to hate (Turks). Many Turks, who were expelled from the Balkans and the Caucasus to Anatolia in a similar way, must have felt similar feelings. But these Turks did not transmit their pain to the following generations. They raised their children
in a forward-looking manner..."

My family's case is in point. My paternal grandparents were totally wiped out in the village of KIRLIKOVA; no survivors, except my father as a one year old baby (you can read more about it in my column at www.turkla.com.) When I see those survivors on TV telling their stories, I can not understand why they complain as they are still alive to tell their stories. As for me, I don't even know where my folks are buried... In what unmarked mass grave... And met their end in what unspeakable condition? But since I was NOT brought up with hatred, I have no animosity towards the Greeks. My neighbor is Greek and we go to the movies together. We laugh and joke and drink beer together... I think it is the way the Armenian kids are brought up that is causing Armenian extremism, fanaticism, and terrorism. In seems to me, that this issue is more "social" as in child upbringing, than mental as in psychological. But this is one man's opinion, mine.

Aktan goes on to say:

"... The part that cannot be understood is important in terms of Turco-Armenian relations. According to a panelist of the meeting Mr. L. Shirinian, the trauma of the Armenians still continues since the Turks do not recognize the genocide. (Turks') denial of the genocide pulls them so much into the past that they cannot return to the future..."

Begging the pardon of Mr. Shrinian, how in the world can I recognize a bogus genocide? The Armenians are the ones who blew a thousand year of peaceful co-habitation in Anatolia, because they schemed against and backstabbed their own state, their own neighbors, to establish a greater Armenian on Turkish soil where the Armenians were not even a majority. Because of this, they resorted to terrorism and ethnic cleansing of Turks... and betrayal and treason... It is because of the wartime measure the Young Turks took, that I am able to write these lines, otherwise, most of the Turks would be annihilated, just like my grandparents were. Between Two-and-a-half and three million Muslims were killed during WWI; 523,000 of them met their tragic end at the hands of Armenian nationalists... What genocide are Shirinian and others like him talking about?

Let go back to Aktan:

"... Prof. Dadrian also said similar things on this issue. It means that as long as we do not recognize the genocide, it is impossible for the Armenians to put the past behind and look to the future. I do not know of any other example for the depth of dependence of a society on its enemy, if I may say so, to become normalized. Such a dependence may stem from Armenians' attribution to Turkey of an identity of a 'father' who did wrong to his child instead of protecting him as expected. And obviously this is not compatible with Turks' being a hate object of the Armenians...."

If the Armenians attribute the identity of a 'father' to Turkey, a father who did wrong to his child, then I reverse that and throw it back at them: what about the child who did wrong, a terrible wrong, to the father? What then? Does the father apologize or the son who did wrong?

Aktan continues:

"... At this point, memory problem arises. What the first generation, which was subjected to relocation, told to the following generations, constitutes the basis for genocide claims. The memory of this generation depends on the spontaneous experience. But the third generation, who received the bitter memories transmitted orally, should imagine the incidents in their minds. In other words, interiorizing the pain of the first generation, the third generation has to reconstruct the incidents in their imagination that caused this pain. At the meeting it was said that people could be very creative in this respect. As a result, 'every Armenian became his or her own historian'.

Commenting on this point, a British psychoanalyst pointed out that the humans have a genetic memory, too. The savagery happened during the evolution lives silently in the depths of our unconscious and leads us to exaggerate the memories of the disasters we faced in our lives by contaminating them. If this is true, it is hardly possible for the Turks to accept the responsibility of such an exaggerated past and 'save' the Armenians.

An older British professor voiced in a very human terms that this psychology of the Armenians would negatively affect their social dynamism. It was felt that the participants of the panel understood the problem but were helpless to think of a solution.

Another speaker of the Panel Dr. D. Calonne indicated that grandmother figure was also important in the writings of Saroyan, Najarian and Balakian, as it was in Alishan's poems. The grandmother was the factor that transmitted the disaster to the following generations and thus establishing a link with the past. The grandmother was "mad as her people's history". Her madness passed onto her grandson. Calonne noted that the grandmother gained the stature of "Magna Mater" as explained in the book titled "The Great Mother" by Erich Neumann. Certain Jungians claim that this pre-monotheistic figure reflected a very regressive characteristic and was close to madness.
Is it really possible to solve this problem?..."

First, I would like to thank Aktan for this thought provoking article.

Second, I think these issues should be researched, evaluated, debated, and fy=urther explored in panels and documented by scholarly experts.

Third, I happen to think that the Armenian extremism and fanaticism have more to do with social factors - such as teaching Armenian children hate for all things Turkish and believing hate is the sole glue holding the Armenian diaspora together - than with psychological factors, such as the rejection of genocide charges by Turks, my-grandma-told-me stories, gene factors, and others.

Fourth, the Armenian can wait until the hell freezes over to hear any words even remotely resembling acceptance of their bogus genocide charges from Turks (other than a few selfish turncoats which the Armenian lobby currently employs or supports).

Fifth, as the Armenian wait for recognition, I sure will be waiting to hear their apology to the Turkish nation for unsolicited and unjustified acts of betrayal, treason, terrorism, ethnic cleansing, and 90+ years of defamation (see my essay at www.turkla.com :"The six apologies due Turks since WWI")

It appears both sides will be doing lots of waiting...

Thank you professor Akçam, for representing the moral, and humanitarian obligations that Turkey has yet to face in its denialist polices, as well as there agents of denial.

I find it fitting to let our readers know what respected Turkish professors, academics, scholars like Dr. Akcam have to go through to champion humanity.

-------

A Shameful Campaign by Taner Akçam

For many who challenge their government's official version of events, slander, emailed threats, and other forms of harassment are all too familiar. As a former Amnesty International prisoner of conscience in Turkey, I should not have been surprised. But my recent detention at the Montreal airport--apparently on the basis of anonymous insertions in my Wikipedia biography--signals a disturbing new phase in a Turkish campaign of intimidation that has intensified since the November 2006 publication of my book, A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility.At the invitation of the McGill University Faculty of Law and Concordia University, I flew from Minneapolis to Montreal on Friday, February 16, to lecture on A Shameful Act. As the Northwest Airlines jet touched down at Trudeau International Airport about 11:00 a.m., I assumed I had plenty of time to get to campus for the 5:00 p.m. event. Nearly four hours later, I was still at the airport, detained without any explanation. "Where are you going? Where are you staying? How many days are you staying here?" asked the courteous officer from Citizenship and Immigration Canada. "Do you have a return ticket? Do you have enough money with you?"As the border control authorities were surely aware, I travel frequently to Canada: three or four trips a year since 2000, most recently with my daughter in October 2006,just before the publication of A Shameful Act. Not once in all that time had I been singled out for interrogation. "I'm not sure myself why you need to be detained," the officer finally admitted. "After making some phone calls, I'll let you know." While he was gone, my cell phone rang. The friend who had arranged to pick meup at the airport had gotten worried when I failed to emerge from Customs. I explained the situation as well as I could, asking him to inform my hosts, the Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism at McGill and the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies at Concordia, that I might be late for the lecture. The Zoryan 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
Institute and the Armenian Students' Associations of Montreal, co-presenters of the event, would also need to be updated. The immigration officer returned with a strange request: could I help him figure out why I was being detained? You're the one detaining me, I was tempted to say. If you don't know the reason, how do you expect me to know? You tell me. However, I knew better than to challenge him, giving the impression that I had something to hide. "Let me guess," I answered. "Do you know who Hrant Dink was? Did you hear about the Armenian journalist who was killed in Istanbul?" He hadn't. "I'm a historian," I explained. "I work on the subject of the Armenian Genocide of 1915. There's a very heavy campaign being waged by extreme nationalist and fascist forces in Turkey against those individuals who are critical of the events that occurred in 1915. Hrant Dink was killed because of it. The lives of people like me are in danger because of it. Orhan Pamuk, Turkey's Nobel Laureate, couldn't tolerate the attacks against him and had to leave the country. Many intellectuals in Turkey are now living under police protection." The officer took notes. "In connection with these attacks there has been a serious campaign against me in the US," I went on. "I know that the groups running this campaign are given directives and are controlled by the Turkish diplomats. They spread propaganda stating that I am a member of a terrorist organization. Some rumors to that effect must have reached you." The officer continued to write. "For your information, in 1976, while I was a master's degree student and teaching assistant at Middle East Technical University, I was arrested for articles I had written in a journal and sentenced to 8 years and 9 months in prison. I later escaped to Germany, where I became a citizen. The Turkish criminal statute that was the basis for my prosecution, together with similar laws, was repealed in 1991. I travel to Turkey freely now and went there most recently for Hrant Dink's funeral." The officer finished his notes. "I'm sorry, but I have to make some more phone calls," he said, and left. My cell phone rang again. It was McGill legal scholar Payam Akhavan, an authority on human rights and genocide, who was to have introduced my lecture. Apologizing for my situation, Prof. Akhavan let me know that he'd contacted the offices 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3
of Canadian Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day and Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Canadian Identity Jason Kenney. Bishop Bagrat Galstanian, Primate of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of Canada, also called to confirm that he too had been in touch with Secretary Kenney's office. I was going to be released. About 3:30 p.m. the officer returned with a special one-week visa. Upon my insistence that I had a right to know exactly why I had been detained, he showed me a sheet of paper with my photograph on top and a short block of text, in English, below. I recognized the page at once. The photo was a still from the 2005 documentary Armenian Genocide: 90 Years Later, a co-production of the University of Minnesota Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies and Twin Cities Public Television. A series of outtakes from the film, originally posted on the CHGS Web site, could be found on the popular Internet video site, YouTube, and elsewhere in cyberspace. The still photo and the text beneath it comprised my biography in the English-language edition of Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia which anyone in the world can modify at any time. For the last year--most recently on Christmas Eve, 2006--my Wikipedia biography had been persistently vandalized by anonymous "contributors" intent on labeling me as a terrorist. The same allegations had been repeatedly scrawled, like gangland graffiti, as "customer reviews" of A Shameful Act and my other books at Amazon.com. It was unlikely, to say the least, that a Canadian immigration officer found out that I was coming to Montreal, took the sole initiative to research my identity on the Internet, discovered the archived Christmas Eve version of my Wikipedia biography, printed it out seven weeks later on February 16, and showed it to me as a result. The fact was that my upcoming lecture had been publicized well in advance in the Canadian print and broadcast media. An announcement had even been inserted in Wikipedia five days before my arrival. Moreover, two Turkish-American Web sites hostile to my work--the 500-page Tall Armenian Tale and the 19,000-member Turkish Forum listserv --had been hinting for months that my "terrorist" activities ought to be of interest to American immigration authorities. It seemed far more likely that one or more individuals had seized the opportunity to denounce me to the Canadians. Although I was forced to cancel two radio interviews, I made it to the McGill campus in time to lecture on A Shameful Act.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 4
On Sunday, February 18, before boarding my return flight to Minneapolis, I was detained for another hour. It was obvious that the American customs and border authorities knew what had happened at the adjacent offices on the Canadian side. "Mr. Akçam," I was gently advised, "if you don't retain an attorney and correct this issue, every entry and exit from the country is going to be problematic. We recommend that you do not travel in the meantime and that you try to get this information removed from your customs dossier." The well meaning American customs official could hardly have known the extent of the problem. Wikipedia and Amazon are but two examples. Allegations against me, posted mainly by the Assembly of American Turkish Associations (ATAA), Turkish Forum, and Tall Armenian Tale, have been copy-pasted and recycled throughout innumerable Web sites and e-groups ever since I arrived in America. By now, for example, my name in close proximity to the English word "terrorist" turns up in well over ten thousand Web pages. The first salvo in this campaign came in response to the English translation of my essay, "The Genocide of the Armenians and the Silence of the Turks." In a sensational March 19, 2001, commentary from the ATAA Turkish Times ("From Terrorism to Armenian Propagandist: The Taner Akçam Story"), I was introduced to Turkish-Americans as a mastermind of terrorist violence, including the assassinations of American and NATO military personnel. Posted at the ATAA Web site in April 2001 and circulated via Turkish Forum in December 2001 and June 2003--my protests notwithstanding--"The Taner Akçam Story" ended up by March 2004 at Tall Armenian Tale next to a photo of a PKK member, which was captioned as "a younger Taner Akçam, from PKK.org." Three years later, the photo has been updated, but Artun's commentary remains, a frequently cited resource for copy-pasters. As further evidence of my "terrorist" past, Tall Armenian Tale posted a detailed chronology related to incidents of arrest, on dates that even I can't remember, for leafletting and postering in my student movement days. Whoever provided this information failed to note, however, that people were frequently arrested for such activities even after official permission had been obtained. An entire 9-page section of 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 5
Tall Armenian Tale is now dedicated to vilifying me and my work, and well over 200 pages of that site mention my name. Next came an announcement from Turkish Forum: "For the attention of friends in Minnesota....Taner Akçam has started working in America...It is expected that the conferences about so called Genocide will increase in and around Minnesota. Please follow the Armenian (Taner Akçam's) activities very closely." My contact information at home and at work was conveniently provided "in case people would like to send their 'greetings' to this traitor." Soon enough, harassing emails were sent anonymously to myemployer, the University of Minnesota, and to me personally. A profile of the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies and its director, my colleague Stephen Feinstein, was added to Tall Armenian Tale. With the publication of A Shameful Act, the circle began to close in. On Nov. 1, 2006, the City University of New York Center for the Humanities organized a gathering at the CUNY Graduate Center to introduce my book. Before I rose to speak, unauthorized leaflets bearing an assault rifle, skull, and the communist hammer and sickle were distributed in the hall. In rhetoric obviously inspired by Mustafa Artun's commentary, I was labeled as a "former terrorist leader" and a fanatic enemy of America who had organized "attacks against the United States" and was "responsible for the death of American citizens." As soon as I finished my lecture, a pack of some 15 to 20 individuals, who had strategically positioned themselves in small groups throughout the hall, tried to break up the meeting. Brandishing pictures of corpses (probably Muslims killed by revenge-seeking Armenians in 1919), they loudly demanded to know why I had not lectured on the deaths of "a million Muslims." Shouting and swearing in Turkish and English, they completely disrupted the discussion in the lecture hall and the book-signing session nearby. I was verbally assaulted as a "terrorist-communist" and lashed with the vilest Turkish profanities. Two individuals dogged my footsteps from the podium to the elevator doors, howling, "We are the soldiers of Alparslan Türkeş!" (A Turkish politician who was arrested in 1944 for spreading Nazi propaganda, Türkeş later founded the Nationalist Movement Party.) The security guards surrounding me had to intervene when I was physically attacked. 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 6
A month later, on December 4, I was scheduled to speak at another New York event, a symposium at Yeshiva University's Cardozo School of Law on "Denying Genocide: Law, Identity and Historical Memory in the Face of Mass Atrocity." As if to illustrate this very theme, a 4,400-word letter signed by Turkish Forum's IbrahimKurtulus "on behalf of Dr. Ata Erim the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Federation of Turkish American Association, FTAA and Dr. Kaya Buyukataman the President of Turkish Forum" was sent to the law school dean and faculty three weeks in advance, urging the cancellation of the symposium and labeling me as "a propagandistic tool of the Armenians." Two days later, on November 19, Turkish Forum published an 800-word letter to the dean from Turkish-American activist Ergun Kirlikovali, with the title, "Turkish Forum's Letter to the University". Kirlikovali characterized me in this official Turkish Forum's letter as "a convicted terrorist in Turkey... one of the leaders of an armed and clandestine group advocating a Marxist-Leninist takeover of Turkish Republic caught red-handed in a bombing plot in late 1970s... part of a group which bombed the limousine of the American ambassador Comer in Ankara in 1969... He is in America probably illegally." Gusan Yedic of Turkish Forum posted further "terrorist" allegations about me on November 24, with this sarcastic admonition: "The friends who are going to attend the concert of Taner Akcam and his orchestra at Yeshiva University are earnestly requested to behave in a gentlemanly manner. Attendees are obliged to follow black-tie party rules." On November 30, Turkish Forum mobilized an email campaign against the "Taner Akcam conference." Members were also urged to attend the symposium and a "pre-meeting for Turks," coordinated by Ibrahim Kurtulus. I forwarded this information to the event organizers with a request that appropriate precautions be taken. I let them know that if they were going to allow intruders from Turkish Forum to leaflet my presentation and disrupt the symposium, Iwasn't going to participate. Yeshiva was concerned. An organizer who had attended the CUNY gathering on Nov. 1 assured me that security would be increased.As a pre-emptive step, the event committee informed the Turkish Consulate that the law school symposium was intended to be general in scope, comparative and 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 7
scholarly in approach, and not focused on either Taner Akçam or Turkey. They made it clear that any disruption similar to the CUNY incident would not put Turkey in a favorable light. A Turkish consular official disavowed any government involvement in the disruption at CUNY, which he attributed to "the actions of civilians" in grassroots organizations. There was nothing the Consulate could do about them, he said. The organizers stressed that they intended to take extra security precautions and that the Consulate ought to think hard about what would happen if the symposium was invaded and its participants attacked. Just one day before the symposium there was another phone conversation between the Turkish consular official and the organizers. He assured them that no disruption would take place and only two or three Turkish representatives would attend. The government kept its word. The symposium was peaceful and no leaflets were distributed. The Turkish consular official attended with ATAA President-elect Gunay Evinch, both of whom were scrupulously polite. It was as though three intense weeks of mobilization had never happened. For many Turkish intellectuals, freedom of speech has become a struggle in North America as well as in our native country. What is happening to me now could happen to any scholar who dissents from the official state version of history. Since my return from Montreal, the Canadian immigration authorities have refused to say exactly why I was detained. As a result, I am unable to face my accusers or examine whatever "evidence" may be filed against me. Although I have formally requested access both to my Canadian and American dossiers--a process that could take months-- I have had to cancel all international appearances. Meanwhile, my Wikipedia biography and Amazon book pages remain open to malicious insertions at any time. Nevertheless, my American book tour continues under tightened security. Although it is stressful and very sad to have to lecture under police protection, I have no intention of cancelling any of my domestic appearances. After all, the United States is not the Republic of Turkey. The Turkish authorities whether directly or through their grassroots agents have no right to harass scholars exercising their academic freedom of speech at American universities. Throughout my life I have learned in unforgettable ways the worth of such freedom, and I intend to use it at every opportunity.

Fellow Armenians and anyone else who is interested in the truth,

I would encourage you to ignore anyone who spouts denialist propaganda. Why give them credibility by dignifying their vitriolic rantings with a response? The turkish people have been lied to for hundreds of years by their government and they have my pity, however, I would engourage anyone of intelligence to question what their government tells them, especially If you live in a "restrictive" state that controls information. If your Turkish, do you honestly think that you are truly free in a country that will arrest you for "Insulting Turkishness". Don't you think as an intelligent person you have to question the veracity of any government that would make it a crime for you to disagree with them?

Turkish Nationalism and religious intolerance were responsible for the Genocide and those same ideals are what fuel the denial. You were indoctrinated from birth by your government and it was an easy lie to embrace, no one wants to believe that their Great-Grandfather drowned babies in the river. The irony is that if you truly loved your country rather than your government you would question all that's been spoon-fed to you since birth. I certainly don't believe everything George Bush tells me and because I question and am free to disagree, I am able to make my politicians accountable for what they say and do. Before you get into any intellectual or philosophical argument you need to have two very important things; unfettered access to unbiased information and the ability to explore your own fallibility, in other words: Do you have all the facts and when confronted with them can you admit your wrong? Most Turk's don't have uncontrolled access to the facts so we can't get too mad about their ignorance, what we must do is give all our support to brave men like Taner Akcam who's tireless personal quest for the truth is shadowed only by his courage to embrace it.

The above postings reveal one thing: the politics of mass-deception and discrimination .

Turkish suffering caused by Armenians and Armenian armed revolts, treason, and terrorism all ignored to substantiate charges of genocide

Those postings also show how little the Diaspora Armenians really know and understand Turkey and how biased and bigoted they can be about the Turkish history.

I am the son of a sole survivor of a Turkish village. My father, as a one year old baby, was whisked at the last minute to the relative safety of Istanbul, the capital of the Ottoman Empire. All we know about his past is what was hastily scribbled on a piece of crumpled, old paper , pinned on his tiny baby clothes: "Akif's son Ratip. Born Kirlikova. 1911." We still do not know where his parents, relatives, and the rest of the entire population of the village are buried, although we suspect somewhere around the village of Kirlikova, hence my last name.

My tragic story is, by no means. unique. Take my story, multiply it by 72 million (roughly the current population of Turkey) and you will hear the collective Turkish side of the story of the World War I. Such widespread, total, and devastating the WWI calamity suffered by Ottoman-Muslims. About 3 million Muslims, mostly Turks, lost their lives during WWI.

No less than 523,000 of those Ottoman-Muslim dead met their tragic ends at the hands of brutal and murderous Armenian nationalists, militarily and financially supported by Russia, Britain, and France. Those "allies", invaded my country, Anatolia, and rained death and destruction on my people, the Turks, between 1914-1918. Most Ottoman-Armenians, Ottoman-Greeks, and others helped the " invading allies". Consequently, there is not a single Turkish family today which is not devastated by this calamity, let alone not touched. Turks did not invade France or Britain or Russia; the allies came, uninvited, to Anatolia. They invaded, occupied, and killed. Turks were only defending themselves, like any self-respecting citizen anywhere would do.

Among the parties responsible for this man's inhumanity to man, like most Ottoman-Christians, Czarist Russia, Imperial Britain, and colonialist France, I must place two unlikely sources near the top: the U.S. Protestant missionaries and U.S. media.

The U.S. Protestant missionaries were allowed to operate in Ottoman lands with Sultan's permission since mid 19th Century and were supposed to help all humans in need. Instead, they chose to divide and polarize the Ottoman citizens. In the end, they managed to destroy a millennium of harmonious Christian-Muslim co-habitation in Anatolia. They did it all "in the name of God". They did it by using the Ottoman-Christians to hate and kill their Ottoman-Muslim neighbors; retaliations and feuds didn't take too long to follow. Then the missionaries sent home to U.S. media cynically embellished and provocative accounts of Christian suffering at the hands of Muslims, while totally ignoring Muslim suffering at the hands of Christians (like my grandparents and the entire population of the village of Kirlikova.).

The U.S. media was only to eager and happy to publish those exaggerations, without questioning or checking them, as if they were gospel. This went on for years fanning the flames of hatred towards Turks further. You can understand why I blame, for example, the New York Times more than anything, for whipping up a frenzy in public, eventually causing the American entry into World War I, more than anything. ( Fact: NYT published 145 anti-Turkish stories in 1915 without even once allowing a rebuttal by Turks. Imagine that!)

Non-combatant Ottoman-Muslim civilians in Eastern Anatolia have been rounded up, beaten, raped, tortured, thrown down water wells, packed into mosques and burned alive, regardless of their age or sex, by well-armed and supplied Armenian militia. Gory photos of Ottoman-Muslim women, children, and elderly, butchered and dismembered by Armenians, carefully archived documents listing times of the Muslims' death and locations of the Muslim mass graves, along with Muslim survivors' eye-witness accounts. All this clearly points to an inter-communal war between the Ottoman-Armenian and Ottoman-Muslim, mostly Turkish, irregular forces. In other words, a civil war!

Yet, while we are relentlessly bombarded with messages of Armenian losses almost daily, we hardly hear any mention of even more colossal Muslim and Turkish suffering; body-for-body, loss-for-loss, about four times worse than Armenian suffering. All we hear is that standard line: that the Armenian genocide happened and that the Turkish government (not 72 million of Turks like me) denies it. Armenian armed revolts (1890-1915), mass murders of Ottoman-Muslims by Armenian nationalists (1895-1920), Armenian terrorism that even victimized those Ottoman-Armenians who chose to stay loyal to the Ottoman Empire (1887-1918), and worst of all, supreme Armenian treason as in joining invading enemy armies (1914-1918) are all cruelly brushed aside, arrogantly ignored, and shamefully dismissed... And this two-way human tragedy is simplistically reduced to one way genocide.

Why such a lopsided coverage and erroneous characterization of Christian Armenian-Muslim Turk civil war?

Is it religious and ethnic discrimination? Historic bias? Pure hatred for all things Turkish? Racism? All that and more?

...

You wrote:
"Take my story, multiply it by 72 million (roughly the current population of Turkey) and you will hear the collective Turkish side of the story of the World War I."

This sentence in itself speaks volumes. Your personal story does not reflects an opposing view of the Armenian genocide.
You really believe your the voice of 72 million people, most all of whom are ignorant to the facts of history paticularly the Ottoman era Armenian genocide.

you wrote:

"Born Kirlikova. 1911." We still do not know where his parents, relatives, and the rest of the entire population of the village are buried, although we suspect somewhere around the village of Kirlikova..."

Kirlikova is in Northern Greece, the Greeks sacked your family, not the Armenians.

The Turkish government also pillaged, and killed the Greeks as well as all the other ethnic minorities in the region.

You asked:

Why such a lopsided coverage and erroneous characterization of Christian Armenian-Muslim Turk civil war?

Nobody really hears a "collective side" as you portray becasue it was not a genocidal act.

72 million Turks and all I read is your story on a few web sites and editorials, the conspiracy is within the Turkish government no where else.

No one is saying that nothing happend to your family but its evident your focus is misdirected.

Also you wrote:

"Why such a lopsided coverage and erroneous characterization of Christian Armenian-Muslim Turk civil war?"

Lopsided as you state, maybe because of the 72 million Turks most of whom are ignorant of the facts, not educated all together, or more then likely except the accounts of Turkey's genocidal history and affraid to speak out, for fear of getting defamed as you did to Dr. Ackam and all those who except the genocide as a genocide, (including myself). Or Worse getting KILLED like Hrant Dink who spoke the truth which is against Turkey's policy of denial.

Also I would stop short of characterizing it as a religious "Christian Armenian-Muslim Turk civil war" as you state, but then again I have already read a lot of inaccuracies of your accounts. It was not a religious civil war, it was an all out mass slaughter of Armenian innocents.

The guise of calling it a "civil war" shows no excuse for killing innocent people en mass.

You also stated:

"Is it religious and ethnic discrimination? Historic bias? Pure hatred for all things Turkish? Racism? All that and more?"

Religion had little if anything to do with it, other then the Ottoman elietes easily manipulating the Turkish masses to turn on Armenians. It was an easy way to single out the minority class, and instill hatred among the Turkish populations at the time.

Similar to the Nazi's using various forms of propoganda to turn on the Jewish populations. The various forms propoganda made it even easyier for the Turkish masses to be unwittingly manipulated to do horrific, and barbaric acts.

It would not make sense to all of the sudden hate Turks, when they shared so much for so long before the attrocities began. What changed the thinking was the genocide.

Also I have mentioned before numerous times the issue is with the Government of Turkey, not its population.

I hate Turkey's policies not the people!

Concerning Akcam, a simple question, I dare you to answer (I know how skilled you are in not answering what is asked but only recite memorized Armenian propaganda)

Is Akcam, the current poster boy of the AFATH community (*), a terrorist who is convicted by Turkish courts, jailed, and escaped from his jail cell?

Yes or No?

Terrorists supporting terrorists for a common cause... Naturally!

Second question: While the Turkish community poured onto the Istanbul streets by the tens of thousands to denounce the killing of Hrant Dink (who also criticized the Armenian Diaspora for getting hung up on 1915) in January 2007, did the Armenian Diaspora pour out by the tens of thousands on to the Los Angeles streets when a Turk (diplomat Kemal Arikan) was killed by a young Armenian gunman in January 1982?

Forget outpouring, did a single Armenian denounce4 Armenian terrorism?

Forget denouncing, didn't the Armenians pass the hat to raise funds for the legal defense of the young Armenian assassin?

Isn't this a stark contrast highlighting the differences in attitude of the Turks and Armenians towards hate crimes?

Turkish assassin's shocked and saddened father turns very own his son over to the Turkish police who catches the young killer within hours of the crime and the Turkish people from the president on down to man on the street denounce the horrible act, on one hand.

The Armenian assassin is "hid" by the Armenian community until n "American" tips the police and cause his capture and supported by the Armenian community with financial help after the crime, no one denouncing the despivable act, on the other...

You think this stark contrast is lost on the fair-minded, truth-seeking, and peace-loving people any where?

********

By the way, I put my money where my mouth is and here is what I wrote about Hrant Dink's murder at www.turkla.com" on Jan 24, 2007:

TURKEY'S COMPASSIONATE REACTION TO HRANT DINK'S MURDER SHATTERS MYTHS ABOUT TURKS
Ergun KIRLIKOVALI ergun@turkla.com

The headline could easily be: "Turkish reaction underscores differences in attitudes between Turks and Diaspora Armenians towards hate crimes and/or terrorism".

Or how about this: "Turks, despite Western misperception, do not hate Armenians".

Or this: "Turkey proved once more that it is a land of tolerance where many faiths act harmoniously as one in the face of adversity."

First, let me state in no uncertain terms that we, the members of Turkish-American community, condemn the dastardly murder of Hrant Dink in the strongest possible language; express our deep sorrow and convey our heartfelt condolences to the victim's family, friends, and, indeed, the entire Turkish nation. We consider those bullets fired on Dink as having been aimed at human rights, freedom of speech, democracy, and unity in Turkey.

ATAA (Assembly Of Turkish American Associations), home of 63 Turkish American Associations across U.S., Canada and Turkey, located in Washington, D.C. USA, condemned the killing of Turkish Armenian journalist, Hrant Dink, in a press release dated January 19, 2007. " ...The killing of Mr. Dink is a great loss to Turkey. Mr. Dink was the editor of Agos, an Armenian-language newspaper in Istanbul, and also wrote for the Turkish daily, Zaman. He was a respected member and voice of Istanbul's prosperous and growing Armenian community... ATAA reaffirms that people are entitled to their own opinions and the expression of the same. Turks are struggling for the same rights in Europe and America..." said the press release.

I did not know Dink personally and I strongly disagreed with him on his characterization of Turkish-Armenian conflict during WWI.

Dink called it genocide, I know it was not; it was a civil war started by Armenian nationalists.

Dink was compassionate about the Armenian suffering and losses; I am compassionate about both Turkish and Armenian and others' suffering and losses during the same time period and in the same geography.

Dink ignored or dismissed Armenian treason, revolts, and terrorism; I write about them all the time.

Dink hardly ever mentioned the Ottoman-Armenians who donned the uniforms of the invading Russian and French armies to kill their Ottoman-Muslim neighbors; I stress that forgotten fact in most of my writings.

Dink wanted dialogue and peace; so do I and 70 million Turks. Dink thought dialogue and peace could come from, well, accepting Dink's views. Whereas I think dialogue and peace can come from "learning about the other side of the story, namely the Turkish side and making room for Turkish suffering and losses (like my grandparents...)

Dink did not dwell upon more than a million Azeri made refugees at gunpoint on their own soil in 1992-1994 by the Armenians; I wrote about this ethnic cleansing campaign waged by Armenia frequently.

Dink did not condemn Armenian aggression in Karabagh and the wholesale massacre of the entire population of Khodjaly on February 19, 1992; I did, many times.

Dink wanted the Turkish-Armenian border opened, as he thought trade would improve relations and increase prosperity in the region. I want Armenia to end military occupation of Azerbaijan first, allow the 1+ million Azeri refugees to return to their homes in Karabagh and western regions of Azerbaijan, and then and only then can the Turkish-Armenian border be opened.

While Dink, and many biased and ill-informed Diaspora Armenians and their allies, wanted Turkey to face her history; I wanted Armenians, and their many western allies, to face their own history along with Turks facing Turkish history.

Dink implied facing history would build a better future; I am saying facing Dink's idea of history is a bad idea due to falsified and biased nature of Dink's version of history.

As you can see, while Dink and I agreed on the need for calm dialogue and peace between the Turks and the Armenians, we disagreed on how to get there - and pretty much on everything else.

These differences in opinion, though, are no reason for anyone to be hurt, let alone shot. We should be able to settle our differences by words, not bullets.

At this moment, I can hear some readers saying "Go tell that to the gunman". Well, I did, with my letters. Turks did it with their outpouring of heartfelt condolences; their numbers - tens of thousands of Muslim Turks walked; and their slogans "We are Armenians today" and "We are Hrant Dink today". Turkey did with its heart and soul, with immediate public statements of sorrow from top political leaders down to ordinary citizens. The killer's father actually turned his son in! What more can anyone ask from a nation whose police caught the gunman within 36 hours!

Now let us flip the coin on those who thought "Go tell that to the gunman" and whom I shall call "my sarcastic friends". In all fairness, how did they react when the Turkish diplomat, Kemal Arikan, about the same age as Dink at the time of death, was assassinated in the same dastardly way as Dink, on January 27, 1982, in Los Angeles? Arikan was also married and he had children. Did "my sarcastic friends" take part in a walk down Wilshire Avenue shouting "We are all Kemal Arikan today" and "We are all Turks today"? Oh, by the way, was there even a protest walk like the one in Turkey hat in the first place? Were there thousands of Americans, of Armenian descent or not, protesting a dastardly hate crime committed in our midst by a brainwashed Armenian teenager - Hampig Sassoonian, the convicted Armenian killer, was 19 years old? Were there determined and massive opposition by Armenians to hate crimes against Turks? Answers are: No, no, no, no, and no...

How about the other two Turkish diplomats gunned down in Santa Barbara in 1973 by a hate-filled Armenian older man? Did anyone protest then? Any walk participated by thousands of Americans condemning hate crimes and terrorism? Any posters? Any catchy slogans? Anything? Answers are: No, no, no, no, and no... Did the French do any protesting or marching or condemning in 1980s when the Armenian terrorists attacked the Orly Airport killing many? Or the Turkish consulate in Marseille or Lyon?

Did the Austrians do any protesting or marching or condemning in 1970s when the Armenian terrorists attacked the Turkish Embassy in Vienna and kill innocent Turks?

in 1970s when the Armenian terrorists attacked the Turkish Embassy in Vienna and kill innocent Turks?

Did the Canadians do any protesting or marching or condemning in 1970s when the Armenian terrorists attacked the Turkish Embassy in Ottawa and kill innocent Turks?

The list goes on and on. When you compare the reaction to hate crimes by nations, you know Turks passed the test of compassion and tolerance with flying colors.

Then there is this. When a 17 year old Turkish kid killed an innocent Armenian writer, the killer's father immediately turned him over to the police and the Turkish nation from top to bottom condemned the killer. The Turkish assassin and his hate crime were shown zero tolerance by Turks.

When Hampig Sassoonian, the 19 year old Armenian kid who killed and innocent Turkish diplomat, did the killer's parents turn him over to the LAPD? Of course not! In fact, far from it. Killer was hidden from view in a series of safe places until anonymous tips led to killer's capture by LAPD. What did the Armenian Diaspora do? Did they protest hate crimes? Condemn terrorism? Of course not! They raised funds for his legal defense. They held religious services, candle light vigils, glorifying a brainwashed, bloodthirsty assassin!

When you compare the two reactions above, you cannot help but be impressed by the strong Turkish rejection of hate crimes and be absolutely disgusted by Armenian Diaspora's embracing of Armenian terrorism since 1973.

One can argue anything one wants. But the two vastly different (opposite) reactions to hate crimes documented above are irrefutable facts. Namely, one reaction by Turks clearly rejecting a hate crime during January 19-23 2007, another reaction by most in Armenian Diaspora passionately embracing many hate crimes and acts of terrorism since 1973. With your permission, I WISH TO ETCH IN STONE THIS STARK DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TURKS AND THE ARMENIAN DIASPORA ON REACTING TO HATE CRIMES. Even the most biased and virulent anti-Turk should be able to see this big picture and hopefully wake up.

In case you were on a short visit to Mars the last few days, the editor of Agos newspaper published in Istanbul, Turkey, and a prominent member of the Turkish-Armenian community, Hrant Dink, was gunned down. The assassination took place as Dink was leaving the Agos building. According to eyewitnesses, an 18-19 year old man wearing a white hat and blue jean jacket fired four bullets at Dink at close range. Three of those bullets hit Dink in his head and neck killing him on the spot. The killer then ran away on foot. Turkish police arrested two suspects fitting this description a few miles from the crime scene. When the images of the suspect, recorded by the security cameras of the businesses nearby, were broadcast to public, a stunning development occurred. The suspect's own father turned his son in! His father, a soft spoken man of humble means who lives more than a thousand kilometers away from Istanbul, in the Black Sea coastal city of Trabzon, saw his son's photo on TV. He did not hesitate one minute to call the police with information on his son. The suspect was captured with this fantastic tip within 36 hours of his crime. Since the suspect is under age, 17 years old, it was thought he had to have acted by support and guidance of others. Further investigation and some great police work resulted in 8 more arrests. Investigation is far from over.

Hrant Dink's lawyer, Erdal Dogan, stated in a phone interview with NTV anchor right after the shooting, that Dink had alerted the Sisli District Attorney about the threats Dink had received but that Dink had not ask for police protection in the form of perhaps body guards around the clock. Dink had written about the threats he had received in his latest article and described his feelings with the phrase "Dovish skittishness of the state of my soul."

In a compassionate and sensitive move, the President of Turkey, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, immediately declared the event "ugly and shameful" and condemned it. Prime Minister Erdogan, lost no time to deliver his speech of condolences, where he also condemned the event and called it a move against the unity of Turkey. Turkish Interior Minister Aksu and Justice Minister Cicek flew from Ankara to Istanbul to evaluate the developments at the crime scene as soon as they heard the assassination. Statements of shock and sadness form all media personalities, industry leaders, ordinary citizens kept pouring in. Grieving Turks, Muslims, Christians, and Jews alike, created huge crowds at the crime scene and shouted slogans condemning killer(s). As one can clearly see, Turkey from its highest levels of government to it widest base of citizenry sincerely condemned this assassination and mobilized swiftly for the immediate capture of the perpetrator(s).

Even after all this sincere and honest outpouring of sympathies by the Turkish people, turning over to the police of the killer by his father, arrest of the killer and 8 other suspects all within 36 hours of the crime committed, and public statements by the president and prime minister of Turkey, and much more, some in Armenian Diaspora still could not help themselves attack, insult, and demonize Turkey. Some fanatic Armenian groups circulated press releases with a headline "Turkey killed Hrant Dink." Do you now understand why we cannot enter a thoughtful discussion with these radical Armenian lobbyists? Look how warped and sick their take is on a single event! Now multiply this by hundreds of thousands of times and you will arrive at the "alleged" genocide wrap with which the Turks are unfairly burdened. This is why we, Turks, Turkish-Americans, and Turkish Diaspora, cannot, and will not, see eye to eye with Armenian Diaspora. Armenian Diaspora lie a lot, misrepresent and falsify even more, and when neither work, then they fabricate, in the true spirit of Andonian, the master faker.

I hope that the U.S. Congress wakes up to this hateful agenda of the Armenian Diaspora soon enough and reject the baseless Armenian allegations of genocide when it comes up for a vote. I sincerely hope so. Otherwise the Turkish-American relations would be seriously and permanently damaged if the US Congress recognizes Armenian claims as settled history. It would be a grave mistake to think that Turkish pride and honor can be fodder to America's arrogant and ignorant local politics.

I hope also that the French government does not send that ill-intentioned anti-Turkish law banning the freedom of speech on Turkish-Armenian conflict, the infamous denial law, to the Senate where it is expected to pass. If that happens, I am writing here in black and white, France can kiss Turkey goodbye for decades if not longer. A huge black hole would sit right in the middle of world maps in France and the French would need rather long legs to jump from the Balkans to the Middle East or North Africa to Caucasus and Turkic Central Asia. These are not simply idle threats as I am in no position to speak for the Turkish government or the Turkish people. But I do keep my finger on the pulse of the Turkish nation to the best of my ability. And I do know Turks value their honor and dignity more than the French value the ever shrinking reach of their political influence.

I wish to remind France that she still owes an apology to Turks for invading Anatolia during WWI, raining death and destruction on Turks, and destroying thousand year of peaceful-cohabitation of Turks and Armenians in Anatolia by using neighbor-against-neighbor approach. With this law, French politicians would be adding insult to the historic pain and suffering they inflicted on Turks. Since the French parliament now appears to be in the business of history, perhaps the French care to face their history with Algerians in 1950s and 1960s. Then they can look at French persecution of Africans, Asians, and others.

Turkish views on the Turkish-Armenian conflict are already mostly censored by large American dailies like NYT, LAT, Boston Globe, and others, under the pretext that "they do not conform to the consensus." Expect this "hidden embargo on Turkish views" or "secret censorship" to pick up speed after the Dink murder.

The translation of this kind of censorship is the trampling of one's freedom of speech if one's speech challenges the conventional wisdom. There is a lawsuit going on in Boston where ATAA along with non-Turkish American teachers and students challenge the department of education's decision to censor out responsible opposing Turkish views regarding the alleged Armenian Genocide from suggested reading materials.

In March of 2006, two retired Turkish ambassadors were scheduled to give a seminar on Turkish views at USC which was abruptly cancelled at the last moment when the Armenian community applied pressure laced with veiled threats on organizers at USC.

In May 2006, an Armenian professor guest lecturer's blatantly propagandistic views were presented to students At El Camino College as settled history, despite strenuous objections by the Turkish-Americans present.

For years, LAT and NYT kept printing editorial after op-ed after news article every April, some simply paraphrasing Armenian claims demonizing Turkey, rarely printed Turkish-Americans' rebuttals, if at all. Frustrated by this censorship, more than 300 Turkish intellectuals signed a statement in April of 2001 presenting their views which the NYT refused to publish even as a paid statement on grounds that "It was against the generally accepted norms and conventional wisdom."

GNP (an arm of LAT published in Armenian dominated Glendale) even sent a pre-emptive message to this Turkish-American writer that his letters would no longer be published so he need not bother writing them.

Every April, PBS stations would air partisan documentaries produced by Armenian and/or pro-Armenian filmmakers despite ever increasing chorus of Turkish-Americans requesting equal time to respond to unproven allegations in them.

Holocaust museums that are supposed to foster tolerance in America yield under the Armenian pressure and invite only Armenian speakers carefully designed events to define the Turkish-Armenian conflict with zero input about the other side of the story.

There are many more such examples of prejudice censorship which paint a different picture about the practice of free speech in America. The message by these unfortunate partisan acts, heard loud and clear, time and again, is that if your speech opposes generally accepted norms, challenges conventional wisdom, and questions consensus, then it will be censored. If this means speech is curtailed, so be it. And the messengers, mainly opinion makers in media, academia, politics, and elsewhere, seem to have no qualms about trampling upon the free speech rights of Americans, mainly of Turkish descent but others too, which can only point to their anti-Turkish and/or anti-Muslim prejudice and blatant bigotry.

*********

You asked:

"Concerning Akcam, a simple question, I dare you to answer (I know how skilled you are in not answering what is asked but only recite memorized Armenian propaganda)

Is Akcam, the current poster boy of the AFATH community (*), a terrorist who is convicted by Turkish courts, jailed, and escaped from his jail cell?

Yes or No?"

(Getting off the subject a bit)I do not believe you understand what propoganda is if you already except propoganda from the Turkish policies. I do not have memorized propoganda to refer too other then historical refereces, and it is not from any government entity. I do not need to get into a historical debate on something that is true.

To your question
I would likely say "No" reason being that the term terrorist is a loose term in Turkish government standards number one being that the ultimate form of mass terror was committed by Turkey. How can they regulate laws for what is considered Terror when they committed mass terror? unless they deny this themselves which is the case.

It is evident that the international community excluding Turkey believes Turkey is wrong to convict, prosecute and jail someone otherwise he would have been extradited by a number of Countries he already has been in and currently resides.

you also wrote:

"Second question: While the Turkish community poured onto the Istanbul streets by the tens of thousands to denounce the killing of Hrant Dink (who also criticized the Armenian Diaspora for getting hung up on 1915) in January 2007, did the Armenian Diaspora pour out by the tens of thousands on to the Los Angeles streets when a Turk (diplomat Kemal Arikan) was killed by a young Armenian gunman in January 1982?"

Out of years of suppression of Turkish scholars and the general populous it was natural to show solidarity toward an ethnic Armenian Turkish citizen.Many of whom were personal friends of the Armenian publication and they went to the streets, it was not a protest but more-so a funeral procession.

Any person getting killed is not right including a government representative and advocates of Turkish denialist policies such as a Turkish diplomat. I don't recall an out pouring of Turkish American citzens going to the streets for any reason in the US, when he was killed.

What litmus test do you catagorize as "assesing with flying colors"?

You seem to think all Armenians have control over all Armenians in the US and abroad? This is not so, terrorism is wrong againt anyone.

The point you are missing is that governments have control over policies such as denialist policies of the Armenian genocide. Control over whether to make Turkey a more tollerant nation over it's citizens which it does not, paticularly to its minorities.

All these various issues you raise that goes against your beliefs and does not tell you anything other then unfairness through your eyes.

Turkey may likely be the last Country to acknowledge what it did to the innocent Armenian people, what is now called the Armenian genocide.

All these other points you mentions I suppose is an attempt to diminish what happend durring this era of history, it does not.

The Turkish government continues to hold on to it's oppressive policies against it's minorities. Scholars can not even have an open debate on the subject in it's own Country that in itself should make you wonder for a least a second or two.

Go ask for open dialogue in Turkey on the subject where it is oppressed, scholars and editors have tried and found themselves run out of the Country, threatened, burned there publishing bulidings, and killed.

you stated in part:

"...accepted norms, challenges conventional wisdom, and questions consensus..."

Your "accepted norms, challenges conventional wisdom, and questions consensus" is somewhere to be found alligned with policies of Turkey and agents of its policies. Thats why you cant find it here in the US or many other countries in the world.

From your perspective it is going to be harder and harder to find becuase you simply are trying to find justifications of your positions from a foundation that is simply not true.

Also a point that I mentioned earlier in a previous post:

"Born Kirlikova. 1911." We still do not know where his parents, relatives, and the rest of the entire population of the village are buried, although we suspect somewhere around the village of Kirlikova..."

Kirlikova is in Northern Greece, the Greeks sacked your family, not the Armenians.

------

I don't understand your deep seated passion (other then your beliefs against the genocide)

Maybe a nationalistic emotional tie that hurts your ancestoral history where you family was killed (in Northern Greece by Greeks)

Maybe you find a common justification that the Greeks were Christian and so were Armenians and you make it a Muslum vs. Christian conflict?
Which it's not.

Maybe the pride and nationalism in your ethnicity is so strong that you can not believe the dark history of the Ottoman government?

I do not discount overt and covert agents of the Turkish government either. Armenian genocide denialist Scholars have worked closely with the Turkish government.

While you concoct many theories about my passion and question my sincerity, you are forgetting one tiny fact:

I AM NOT THE ONE WHO IS HIDING BEHIND A FIRST NAME (PERHAPS ALSO FAKE) ALL THESE MONTHS!!!!!

My name has appeared in full, with enormous pride, openness, and honesty, in all of my writings. I believe in facts, not propaganda. You may like or dislike what I write , but you cannot question their truth and honesty, just like you cannot question my name, signed proudly and in full after everything I write.

Is everything you write as "sound" as your first name?

You white-washed Akcam's terrorist activities in 1970s in Turkey, hiding behind yet another concocted excuse: definition of terrorist. (Why am I not surprised?) Dis you or did you not know that Akcam was caught in the act, tried by Turkish courts, convicted, jailed, and broke out of his jail cell? It is a simple question; why can't you answer at least one question in your life plainly, openly and honestly?

It is remarkable how easily you condone terrorism, not only committed by supporters of Armenians like Akcam, but also by Armenians themselves. In case you also conveniently forgot the heinous crimes committed by the Armenian terrorists since 1973, here is a brief list. Also below, I included Armenian terrorism before, during, and after the World War I. If one views the gap between 1923-1973 as a temporary self-silencing of Armenian terrorists, "the threads of continuity" in Armenian terrorism over a span of about the last 150 years or so becomes evident. Therefore, Armenian terrorism is not something that came out of desperation in the last minuet. It is an oft-practiced, cultivated, and revered tradition among the Armenians. Nothing can last this long, 150 years, not terrorism, not wars, nothing, if there is not a strong and systematic support for it in the community it originates.

Even the partial documentation below proves beyond a shadow of doubt that there was significant Armenian terrorism before the WWI. Once the dimensions and depth of Armenian terrorism is established, it will be clear to any fair-minded reader, that the measures taken by the Ottoman government to eliminate armed political violence and organized crime among Ottoman-Armenians for the safety and welfare of all Ottoman citizens and the security and survival of the Ottoman state can hardly be considered a genocide.

Organized violence by the Armenian nationalists date back to 1880s ( if earlier cases are set aside as armed rebellions and/or civil unrest). Armenian nationalists used propaganda, agitation, and terror, in that order, for more than 25 years prior to 1915, to foment hostilities between the Muslims and Christians of Anatolia.

According to American sources (I can provide a list if you wish), the plan set in motion by the Armenian nationalists was to attack remote, defenseless Turkish villages and kill Muslims indiscriminately. This, they hoped and planned, would provoke massive and brutal retaliations by Turks and trigger European intervention under the pretext of "protecting the Ottoman-Christians". Once the European powers put an end to the Ottoman sovereignty in Eastern Anatolia, a greater Armenian state would be created in its place.

The Armenian nationalists resorted to this underhanded and bloody plan, because they knew the Armenian did not have the numbers or the means to create a greater Armenian by themselves - as Balkan Christians were able to do. The latter formed majority where they lived (the Greeks, the Bulgarians, the Serbians, etc.) , whereas Armenian were scattered over an area larger than the Balkans and were never more than a thoird of the population where they lived. In most places, Armenians made up only 5-20 percent of the population. Even the racist King Crane report right after the WWI made it clear that an Armenian state was not viable and that even if all the Armenian around the world decoded to move to Eastern Anatolia, they would not make up half the population.

All this boils down to the fact that establishing a greater Armenia in eastern Anatolia, like the U.S. president Wilson was naively led to believe and support, would be nothing more than the creation of the first apartheid regime in the world, by invading (or non-resident) powers, resulting in rule of a massive Muslim majority by a tiny Christian minority. That is why the British, the French, the Russians, and later, the Americans kept the Armenian aspirations at arms length, paying only lip service for as long as Armenian services were needed for the allied causes and did not require much investment in terms of allied man and material.

Fast forwarding to1973, more than 70 Turkish diplomats, their family members, and/or bystanders were indiscriminately killed by the organized Armenian terrors groups, such as ASALA, JCAG, ARA, and others. Below, please find a chronological rundown of Armenian atrocities and terrorism around the world.

*******************

ARMENIAN TERRORISM BEFORE, DURING, AND RIGHT AFTER WWI

"...The Armenians incited confusions and committed terrorist acts. (...) Excitement and terror were necessary to raise the spirit of the people. The party was aiming at terrorizing the Ottoman government, thus contributing to reduce the prestige of this regime while working for its total destruction. Hentchaks wanted to eliminate all the Turkish and Armenian personalities working for the government, as well as all the spies and the informants. To allow them to realize all these terrorist actions, the party organized a specific branch completely devoted to the execution of acts of terrorism. The most convenient moment to start the general rebellion which would allow implementation of immediate objectives was the engagement of Turkey in war..."

Louise Nalbandian, The Armenian Revolutionary Movement: The development of Armenian Political Parties Through the Nineteenth Century", Berkeley, Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1963

*******************

".... As for the tactics of the revolutionaries, anything more fiendish one could not imagine - The assassination of Moslems in order to bring about the punishment of innocent men, the midnight extortion of money from villages which have just paid their taxes by day, the murder of persons who refuse to contribute to their collection boxes, are only some of the crimes of which Moslems, Catholics and Gregorians accuse them with no uncertain voice. The Armenian revolutionaries prefer to plunder their co-religionists to giving battle to their enemies; the anarchists of Constantinople throw bombs with the intention of provoking a massacre of their fellow-countrymen. If the object of English philanthropists and the roving brigands (who are the active agents of revolution) is to subject the bulk of eastern provinces to the tender mercies of an Armenian oligarchy, then I cannot entirely condemn the fanatic outbreaks of the Moslems or the repressive measures of the Turkish Government. On the other hand, if the object of the Armenians is to secure equality before law and the maintenance of security and peace in the countries partly inhabited by Armenians, then I can only say that their methods are not those calculated to achieve success... "

Sir Mark Sykes, The Caliph's Last Heritage, London 1915, p 409.

****************

"... Under such circumstances the revolt of a handful of Armenians had not a chance of success and was therefore unjustifiable. As a friend to the Armenians, revolt seemed to me purely mischievous. Some of the extremists declared that while they recognized that hundreds of innocent persons suffered from each of these attempts, they could provoke a big massacre which would bring in foreign intervention. Such intervention was useless so long as Russia was hostile. Lord Salisbury had publicly declared that as he could not get a fleet over the Taurus mountains he did not see how England could help the Armenians, much as he sympathized with them... "

Sir Edwin Pears, Forty Years in Constantinople, London 1915, p 155.

*******************

Assassinations of Ottoman leaders by Armenian terrorists took place right after the WWI.

*******************

ARMENIAN TERRORISM FROM 1973 TO PRESENT

January 27, 1973 Santa Barbara, California| The Armenian Gourgen Yanikian, a U.S. citizen, invites the Turkish Consul General, Mehmet Baydar, and the Consul, Bahadir Demir to a luncheon. The unsuspecting diplomats accept the friendly invitation. Gourgen Yanikian murders his two guests. He is sentenced to life imprisonment.

April 4, 1973 Paris Bombings at the Turkish Consulate General and the offices of Turkish Airlines (THY). Extensive damage.

October 26, 1973 New York Attempted bombing of the Turkish Information Office. The bomb is discovered in time and defused. A group calling itself the "Yanikian Commandos" claims responsibility. They want the release of the double murderer of Santa Barbara, Gourgen Yanikian, who insidiously murdered two Turkish diplomats.

February 7, 1975 Beirut Attempted bombing of the Turkish Information and Tourism Bureau. The bomb explodes while being defused. A Lebanese policeman is injured. The "Prisoner Gourgen Yanikian Group" claims responsibility.

February 20, 1975 Beirut The "Yanikian" group demanding the release of the double murderer of Santa Barbara strikes again. Extensive damage is caused by a bomb explosion at the THY offices. ASALA (Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia) also claims responsibility for the bombing.

October 22, 1975 Vienna The Turkish Ambassador, Danis Tunaligil, is assassinated in his study by three Armenian terrorists. ASALA claims responsibility.

October 24, 1975 Paris Ambassador Ismail Erez and his driver, Talip Yener, are murdered. The ASALA and the JCAG (Justice Commandos for the Armenian Genocide) dispute responsibility.

October 28, 1975 Beirut Grenade attack on the Turkish Embassy. The ASALA claims responsibility.

February 16, 1976 Beirut The First Secretary of the Turkish Embassy, Oktar Cirit, is assassinated in a restaurant on Hamra Street. The ASALA claims responsibility.

May 17, 1976 Frankfurt, Essen, Cologne Consulates General in Frankfurt, Essen and Cologne are the targets of simultaneous bomb attacks.

May 28, 1976 Zurich Bomb attacks at the offices of the Turkish Labor Attache and the Garanti Bank. Extensive damage. A bomb in the Turkish Tourism Bureau is defused in time. Responsibility is claimed by the JCAG.

May 2, 1977 Beirut The cars of the Military Attache, Nahit Karakay, and the Administrative Attache, Ilhan Özbabacan, are destroyed. The two diplomats are uninjured. Credit is claimed by the ASALA.

May 14, 1977 Paris Bomb attack at the Turkish Tourism Bureau. Extensive damage. The "New Armenian Resistance Group" claims responsibility.

June 6, 1977 Zurich Bomb attack at the store of a Turkish citizen, Hüseyin Bülbül. June 9, 1977 Rome Assassination of the Turkish Ambassador to the Holy See, Taha Carim. He dies soon after the attack. The JCAG claims responsibility.

October 4, 1977 Los Angeles Bomb attack at the house of Professor Stanford Shaw, who teaches Ottoman history at the University of California in Los Angeles (UCLA). Responsibility is claimed by an "Armenian Group of 28."

January 2, 1978 Brussels Bomb attack at a building containing Turkish banking services. The "New Armenian Resistance" claims credit.

June 2, 1978 Madrid Terrorist attack on the automobile of the Turkish Ambassador, Zeki Kuneralp. His wife, Necla Kuneralp, the retired Turkish Ambassador Besir Balcioglu die immediately in the rain of gunfire. The Spanish chauffeur, Antonio Torres, dies of his injuries in the hospital. ASALA and JCAG claim responsibility.

December 6, 1978 Geneva A bomb explodes in front of the Turkish Consulate General. Extensive damage. The "New Armenian Resistance Group" claims responsibility.

December 17, 1978 Geneva A bomb explodes at the THY Bureau. ASALA claims responsibility.

July 8, 1979 Paris The French capital experiences four bomb attacks in a single day. The first is at the THY offices; the next at the offices of the Turkish Labor Attache; the third in the Turkish Information and Tourism Bureau. A fourth explosive, intended for the Turkish Permanent Representative to the O.E.C.D., is defused before it explodes. The JCAG claims responsibility.

August 22, 1979 Geneva A bomb is thrown at the car of the Turkish Consul General, Niyazi Adali. The diplomat escapes unhurt. Two Swiss passers-by are injured. Two cars are destroyed.

August 27, 1979 Frankfurt The offices of THY are totally destroyed by an explosion. A pedestrian is injured. The ASALA claims responsibility.

October 4, 1979 Copenhagen Two Danes are injured when a bomb explodes near the offices of THY. ASALA claims credit.

October 12, 1979 The Hague Ahmet Benler, the son of Turkish Ambassador Özdemir Benler, is assassinated by Armenian terrorists. The murderers escape. JCAG and ASALA claim responsibility.

October 30, 1979 Milan The offices of THY are destroyed by a bomb explosion. ASALA claims responsibility.

November 8, 1979 Rome The Turkish Tourism Office is destroyed by a bomb. ASALA claims responsibility.

November 18, 1979 Paris Bomb explosions destroy the offices of THY, KLM, and Lufthansa. Two French policemen are injured. Responsibility is claimed by ASALA.

November 25, 1979 Madrid Bomb explosions in front of the offices of TWA and British Airways. ASALA, in claiming responsibility, states that the attacks are meant as a warning to the Pope to cancel his planned visit to Turkey.

December 9, 1979 Rome Two bombs explode in downtown Rome, damaging the offices of PAN AM, British Airways and the Philippine Airways. Nine people are injured in the terrorist attack. A "New Armenian Resistance Movement" claims responsibility.

December 17, 1979 London Extensive damage is caused when a bomb explodes in front of the THY offices. A "Front for the Liberation of Armenia" claims responsibility.

December 22, 1979 Paris Yilmaz Çolpan, the Tourism Attache at the Turkish Embassy is assassinated while walking on the Champs Elysées. Several groups, including ASALA, JCAG and the "Commandos of Armenian Militants Against Genocide" claim responsibility.

December 22, 1979 Amsterdam Heavy damage results from a bomb explosion in front of the THY offices. ASALA claims credit.

December 23, 1979 Rome A bomb explodes in front of a World Council of Churches Refugee Center, being used as a transit point for Armenian refugees from Lebanon. ASALA claims credit for the attack and warns the Italian authorities to halt "the Armenian diaspora."

December 23, 1979 Rome Three bomb explosions occur in front of the offices of Air France and TWA, injuring a dozen passers-by. ASALA claims responsibility, stating that the bomb was placed "in reprisal against the repressive measures of French authorities against Armenians in France" (i.e., questioning suspects, carry out investigations, etc.)

January 10, 1980 Teheran A bomb which explodes in front of the THY offices causes extensive damage. ASALA claims responsibility.

January 20, 1980 Madrid A series of bomb attacks, resulting in numerous injuries, occurs in front of the offices of TWA, British Airways, Swissair, and Sabena. The JCAG claims credit for the attacks.

February 2, 1980 Brussels Two bombs explode within minutes of each other in front of the downtown offices of THY and Aeroflot. The "New Armenian Resistance Group" issues a communique in which they claim responsibility for both attacks.

February 6, 1980 Bern A terrorist opens fire on Turkish Ambassador Dogan Türkmen, who escapes with minor wounds. The would-be-assassin, an Armenian named Max Klindjian, is subsequently arrested in Marseilles and returned to Switzerland for trial. The JCAG claims credit for the attack.

February 18, 1980 Rome The offices of Lufthansa, El Al and Swissair are damaged by two bomb attacks. Telephone messages give three reasons for the attacks: 1. The Germans support "Turkish fascism"; 2. The Jews are Zionists (ASALA); 3. The Swiss behave "repressively" towards the Armenians.

March 10, 1980 Rome Bomb attacks on the THY and Turkish Tourism Bureau offices on the Piazza Della Repubblica. The blasts kill two Italians and injure fourteen. Credit for the attack is claimed by the "New Armenian Resistance of the Armenian Secret Army."

April 17, 1980 Rome The Turkish Ambassador to the Holy See, Vecdi Türel, is shot and seriously wounded. His chauffeur, Tahsin Güvenç, is also slightly wounded in the assassination attempt. JCAG claims responsibility for the attack.

May 19, 1980 Marseilles A rocket aimed at the Turkish Consulate General in Marseilles is discovered and defused prior to exploding. ASALA and a group calling itself "Black April" claim credit for the attack.

July 31, 1980 Athens Galip Özmen, the Administrative Attache at the Turkish Embassy, and his family are attacked by Armenian terrorists while sitting in their car. Galip Özmen and his fourteen-year-old daughter, Neslihan, are killed in the attack. His wife, Sevil, and his sixteen-year-old son, Kaan, are wounded. Credit for the double killing is claimed by ASALA.

August 5, 1980 Lyon Two terrorists storm into the Turkish Consulate General in Lyon and open fire, killing two and injuring several other bystanders. ASALA claims credit for the attack.

August 11, 1980 New York An "Armenian group" hurls paint bombs at the Turkish House across from the United Nations, home of the Turkish Representations in New York.

September 26, 1980 Paris Selçuk Bakkalbasi, the Press Counselor at the Turkish Embassy, is shot as he enters his home. Bakkalbasi survives but is permanently paralyzed as a result of his injuries. ASALA claims responsibility for the attack.

October 3, 1980 Geneva Two Armenian terrorists are injured when a bomb they are preparing explodes in their Geneva hotel room. The two, Suzy Mahseredjian from Canoga Park, California, and Alexander Yenikomechian, are arrested. Their arrest leads to the formation of a new group called "October 3," which subsequently strikes at Swiss targets.

October 3, 1980 Milan Two Italians are injured when a bomb explodes in front of the THY offices. ASALA claims credit for the attack.

October 5, 1980 Madrid The offices of Alitalia are rocked by a bomb explosion which injures twelve individuals. The ASALA claims responsibility for the attack.

October 6, 1980 Los Angeles Two molotov cocktails are thrown into the home of the Turkish Consul General, Kemal Arikan. He survives with injuries.

October 10, 1980 Beirut Two bombs explode near Swiss offices in West Beirut. A group calling itself "October 3" claims responsibility for these bombings as well as others on the same day against Swiss offices in England.

October 12, 1980 New York A bomb placed in front of the Turkish House explodes. Four passers-by are injured. JCAG assumes responsibility.

October 12, 1980 Los Angeles A travel agency in Hollywood, owned by a Turkish-American, is destroyed. JCAG claims responsibility.

October 12, 1980 London The Turkish Tourism and Information Bureau's offices are damaged by a bomb explosion. ASALA claims credit.

October 12, 1980 London A Swiss shopping complex in central London is damaged by a bomb blast. Callers claim the explosion was the work of "October 3."

October 13, 1980 Paris A Swiss tourist office is damaged by a bomb explosion. "October 3" again claims credit.

October 21, 1980 Interlaken, Switzerland A bomb is found in a Swiss express train coming from Paris. Luckily, it does not explode. "October 3" is believed to be behind the action, which could have caused a catastrophe.

November 4, 1980 Geneva The Swiss Palace of Justice in Geneva is heavily damaged by a bomb explosion. Credit is claimed by "October 3."

November 9, 1980 Strasbourg Heavy damage results from a bomb blast at the Turkish Consulate General. The attack is claimed by ASALA.

November 10, 1980 Rome Five people are injured in attacks on the Swissair and Swiss Tourist offices. ASALA and "October 3" claim credit.

November 19, 1980 Rome The offices of the Turkish Tourism Bureau and those of THY are damaged by a bomb explosion. ASALA claims responsibility.

November 25, 1980 Geneva The offices of the Union of Swiss Banks are hit by a bomb explosion. Responsibility is claimed by "October 3."

December 5, 1980 Marseilles A police expert defuses a time bomb left at the Swiss Consulate in Marseilles. "October 3" claims responsibility.

December 15, 1980 London Two bombs placed in front of the French Tourism Office in London are defused by a Scotland Yard bomb squad. "October 3" claims the bombs are a warning to the French for assistance they have rendered the Swiss in fighting Armenian terrorism.

December 17, 1980 Sydney Two terrorists assassinate sarik Ariyak, the Turkish Consul General, and his bodyguard, Engin Sever. JCAG claims responsibility.

December 25, 1980 Zurich A bomb explosion destroys a radar monitor at Kloten Airport, and a second explosive planted on the main runway of the airport is defused. "October 3" claims credit for these attempted mass-murders.

December 29, 1980 Madrid A Spanish reporter is seriously injured in a telephone booth while calling in a story to his paper about the bomb attack on the Swissair offices. "October 3" claims responsibility.

December 30, 1980 Beirut Bomb attack on the Credit-Suisse offices. ASALA and "October 3" fight over who gets the credit.

January 2, 1981 Beirut In a press communique, ASALA threatens to "attack all Swiss diplomats throughout the world" in response to the alleged mistreatment of "Suzy and Alex" in Switzerland. On January 4, ASALA issues a statement giving the Swiss a few days to think things over.

January 14, 1981 Paris A bomb explodes in the car of Ahmet Erbeyli, the Economic Counselor of the Turkish Embassy. Erbeyli is not injured, but the explosion totally destroys his car. A group calling itself the "Alex Yenikomechian Commandos" of ASALA claims credit for the explosion.

January 27, 1981 Milan The Swissair and Swiss Tourist offices in Milan are damaged by bomb explosions. Two passers-by are injured. "October 3" claims credit for the bombing in a call to local media representatives.

February 3, 1981 Los Angeles Bomb-squad officials disarm a bomb left at the Swiss Consulate. The terrorists threaten in anonymous phone calls that such attacks will continue until Suzy Mahseredjian is released.

February 5, 1981 Paris Bombs explode in the TWA and Air France offices. One injured, heavy material damage. "October 3" claims credit.

March 4, 1981 Paris Two terrorists open fire on Resat Morali, Labor Attache at the Turkish Embassy, Tecelli Ari, Religious Affairs Attache, and Ilkay Karakoç, the Paris representative of the Anadolu Bank. Morali and Ari are assassinated. Karakoç manages to escape. ASALA claims responsibility.

March 12, 1981 Teheran A group of ASALA terrorists try to occupy the Turkish Embassy, killing two guards in the process. Two of the perpetrators are captured and later executed by the Iranians. ASALA claims credit.

April 3, 1981 Copenhagen Cavit Demir, the Labor Attache at the Turkish Embassy, is shot as he enters his apartment building late in the evening and is seriously wounded. Both ASALA and JCAG claim the attack.

June 3, 1981 Los Angeles Bombs force the cancellation of performances by a Turkish folk-dance group. Threats of similar bombings force the group's performances in San Francisco to be canceled as well.

June 9, 1981 Geneva Mehmet Savas Yergüz, Secretary in the Turkish Consulate, is assassinated by the Armenian terrorist Mardiros Jamgotchian. The arrest of the ASALA terrorist leads to the formation of a new ASALA branch called the "Ninth of June Organization," which will be responsible for a new series of attacks.

June 11, 1981 Paris A group of Armenian terrorists, led by one Ara Toranian, occupies the THY offices. Initially ignored by the French authorities, the terrorists are only evicted from the premises after vehement protests from the Turkish Embassy.

June 19, 1981 Teheran A bomb explodes at the offices of Swissair. The "Ninth of June Organization" claims responsibility.

June 26, 1981 Los Angeles A bomb explodes in front of the Swiss Banking Corporation offices. Again the work of the "Ninth of June Organization."

July 19, 1981 Bern A bomb explodes at the Swiss Parliament Building. "Ninth of June" claims responsibility.

July 20, 1981 Zurich "Ninth of June" strikes again. A bomb explodes in an automatic photo-booth at Zurich's international airport.

July 21, 1981 Lausanne Twenty women are injured as a bomb laid by Armenian terrorists explodes in a department store. "Ninth of June" claims responsibility.

July 22, 1981 Geneva A bomb explodes in a locker at the train station. Authorities suspect "Ninth of June."

July 22, 1981 Geneva An hour later, a second bomb explodes in a locker at the station. Police cordoned off the area following the first explosion, thereby preventing injuries from the second.

August 11, 1981 Copenhagen Two bombs destroy the offices of Swissair. An American tourist is injured in the explosion. "Ninth of June" claims responsibility.

August 20, 1981 Los Angeles A bomb explodes outside the offices of Swiss Precision Instruments. The attack is claimed by "Ninth of June."

August 20, 1981 Paris Explosion at Alitalia Airlines. "October 3" is back in action.

September 15, 1981 Copenhagen Two people are injured as a bomb explodes in front of the THY offices. Police experts manage to defuse a second bomb. Credit is claimed by a "Sixth Armenian Liberation Army."

September 17, 1981 Teheran A bomb explosion damages a Swiss Embassy building. ASALA's "Ninth of June" claims responsibility.

September 24, 1981 Paris Four Armenian terrorists occupy the Turkish Consulate General. During their entry into the building, the Consul, Kaya Inal, and a security guard, Cemal Özen, are seriously wounded. Terrorists take 56 hostages. Özen dies of his injuries in the hospital. The terrorists are ASALA members.

October 3, 1981 Geneva The main post office and the city courthouse are hit by bomb explosions. An ASALA member is scheduled to go on trial for murder in the courthouse. "Ninth of June" claims credit for the attacks, which leave one person injured.

October 25, 1981 Rome An Armenian terrorist fires at Gökberk Ergenekon, Second Secretary at the Turkish Embassy. Ergenekon is wounded in the arm. ASALA claims credit in the name of the "September 24 Suicide Commandos."

October 25, 1981 Paris Fouquet's, the fashionable French restaurant, is the target of a bomb attack. A group calling itself "September-France" claims the attack.

October 26, 1981 Paris The same group is behind the explosion of a booby-trapped automobile in front of "Le Drugstore."

October 27, 1981 Paris "September-France" carries out a bomb attack at Roissy Airport.

October 27, 1981 Paris A second bomb explodes near a busy escalator at Roissy Airport. No one is injured. "September-France" claims responsibility.

October 28, 1981 Paris The same group is responsible for a bomb attack in a movie theater. Three people are injured. November 3, 1981 Madrid A bomb explodes in front of the Swissair offices, injuring three persons. Considerable damage to nearby buildings. ASALA claims responsibility.

November 5, 1981 Paris A bomb explodes in the Gare de Lyon, injuring one person. The attack is claimed by the Armenian "Orly Organization."

November 12, 1981 Beirut Simultaneous bomb explosions occur in front of three French offices: the French Cultural Center, the Air France offices and the home of the French Consul General. The "Orly Organization" claims responsibility. This organization owes its name to the fact that the French police arrested an Armenian at Orly Airport in Paris because of forged papers. The idea now is to "bomb him free."

November 14, 1981 Paris A bomb explosion damages an automobile near the Eiffel Tower. "Orly" claims responsibility.

November 14, 1981 Paris "Orly" launches a grenade attack on a group of tourists disembarking from a sightseeing boat on the River Seine.

November 15, 1981 Paris "Orly" threatens to blow up an Air France airplane in flight.

November 15, 1981 Beirut Simultaneous bomb attacks are carried out against three French targets: the "Union des Assurances de Paris", the Air France offices and the "Banque Libano-Française". "Orly" is responsible.

November 15, 1981 Paris A McDonald's restaurant is destroyed by "September-France."

November 16, 1981 Paris A bomb injures two innocent bystanders at the Gare de l'Est. "Orly" claims responsibility.

November 18, 1981 Paris "Orly" announces that it has planted a bomb at the Gare du Nord.

November 20, 1981 Los Angeles The Turkish Consulate General in Beverly Hills suffers extensive damage. The JCAG claims credit.

January 13, 1982 Toronto An ASALA bomb causes extensive damage to the Turkish Consulate General. January 17,

1982 Geneva Two bombs destroy parked cars. The ASALA "Ninth of June Organization" claims credit.

January 17, 1982 Paris A bomb explodes at the Union of Banks and a second is disarmed at the Credit Lyonnais. "Orly" claims responsibility.

January 19, 1982 Paris A bomb explodes in the Air France offices in the Palais des Congres. "Orly" claims responsibility.

January 28, 1982 Los Angeles Kemal Arikan, the Turkish Consul General in Los Angeles, is assassinated by two terrorists while driving to work. Nineteen year old Hampig Sassounian is arrested and sentenced to life.

March 22, 1982 Cambridge, Massachusetts A gift shop belonging to Orhan Gündüz, the Turkish Honorary Consul General in Boston, is blown up. Gündüz receives an ultimatum: Either he gives up his honorary position or he will be "executed." Responsibility is claimed by the JCAG.

March 26, 1982 Beirut Two dead, sixteen injured in an explosion at a movie theater. ASALA claims credit for the attack.

April 8, 1982 Ottawa Kani Güngör, the Commercial Attache at the Turkish Embassy in Ottawa, is seriously wounded in an attack by Armenian terrorists in the garage of his apartment house. ASALA claims responsibility.

April 24, 1982 Dortmund, West Germany Several Turkish-owned businesses suffer extensive damage in bomb attacks. The "New Armenian Resistance Organization" claims responsibility.

May 4, 1982 Cambridge, Massachusetts Orhan Gündüz, the Turkish Honorary Consul General in Boston is assassinated. The murderer is still at large.

May 10, 1982 Geneva Bombs explode at two banks. The attacks are claimed by an Armenian "World Punishment Organization."

May 18, 1982 Toronto Four Armenians are arrested for trying to smuggle money out of the country. The money was extorted from Armenians, a common practice throughout the world. In the course of the investigation, it is discovered that the terrorists fire-bombed the house of an Armenian who refused to make his contribution to Armenian terrorism.

May 18, 1982 Tampa, Florida Attack at the office of Nasuh Karahan, the Turkish Honorary Consul General.

May 26, 1982 Los Angeles A bomb damages the office of Swiss Banking Corporation. The suspects: four Armenians accused of involvement in ASALA.

May 30, 1982 Los Angeles Three members of ASALA are arrested when planting a bomb in the Air Canada cargo-office.

June 7, 1982 Lisbon The Administrative Attache at the Turkish Embassy, Erkut Akbay, and his wife, Nadide Akbay, are assassinated in front of their home. JCAG claims responsibility.

July 1, 1982 Rotterdam Kemalettin Demirer, the Turkish Consul General in Rotterdam, is shot down by four Armenian terrorists. An "Armenian Red Army" claims responsibility.

July 21, 1982 Paris Sixteen injured in a bomb explosion near a cafe in the Place Saint-Severin. Credit is claimed by the Orly Organization. "Orly" complains that the French do not treat the arrested Armenian terrorists as "political prisoners," but rather as ordinary criminals.

July 26, 1982 Paris "Orly" is responsible for injuring two women in an explosion in Paris' "Pub Saint-Germain."

August 2, 1982 Paris Pierre Gulumian, an Armenian terrorist, is killed when a bomb he is making explodes in his face.

August 7, 1982 Ankara, Esenboga Airport Two Armenian terrorists open fire in a crowded passenger waiting room. One of the terrorists takes more than twenty hostages while the second is apprehended by the police. Nine people are dead and eighty-two injured emdash; some seriously. The surviving terrorist, Levon Ekmekjian is arrested and sentenced.

August 8, 1982 Paris A bomb is defused in time. "Orly" regrets the discovery.

August 12, 1982 Paris Terrorists open fire on a policeman assigned to protect the offices of the Turkish Tourism Attache. Luckily, he escapes without injury.

August 27, 1982 Ottawa Colonel Atilla Altikat, the Military Attache at the Turkish Embassy, is assassinated in his car. JCAG claims responsibility.

September 9, 1982 Burgaz, Bulgaria Bora Süelkan, the Administrative Attache at the Turkish Consulate General in Burgaz, is assassinated in front of his home. The assassin leaves a message "We shot dead the Turkish diplomat: Combat Units of Justice Against the Armenian Genocide." An anonymous caller claims that the assassination is the work of a branch of the ASALA.

October 26, 1982 Los Angeles Five Armenian terrorists are charged with conspiring to blow up the offices of the Honorary Turkish Consul General in Philadelphia. All belong to the JCAG.

December 8, 1982 Athens Two Armenians on a motorbike throw a bomb at the offices of the Saudi Arabian Airlines. The bomb hits a power pylon, explodes and kills one of the terrorists. His accomplice, an Armenian from Iran named Vahe Kontaverdian is arrested. It is later revealed that ASALA ordered the attack because Saudi Arabia maintains friendly relations with Turkey.

January 21, 1983 Anaheim, California Nine "sophisticated" pipe bombs are confiscated from an Armenian bakery after one of the detonators goes off and causes fire.

January 22, 1983 Paris Two terrorists attack the offices of THY with hand grenades. No one is injured. ASALA claims credit.

January 22, 1983 Paris French police defuse a powerful explosive device near the THY counter at Orly airport. February 2, 1983 Brussels The offices of THY are bombed. The "New Armenian Resistance Organization" claims responsibility.

February 28, 1983 Luxembourg A bomb placed in front of Turkey's diplomatic mission is defused. The Armenian Reporter in New York reports that the "New Armenian Resistance Organization" is responsible.

February 28, 1983 Paris A bomb explodes at the Marmara Travel Agency. Killed in the explosion is Renée Morin, a French secretary. Four other Frenchmen are wounded. A few minutes after the attack, ASALA claims responsibility.

March 9, 1983 Belgrade Galip Balkar, the Turkish Ambassador to Yugoslavia is assassinated in central Belgrade. His chauffeur, Necati Kayar is shot in the stomach. As the two assailants flee from the scene, they are bravely pursued by Yugoslav citizens. One of the terrorists shoots and wounds a Yugoslav Colonel, and is in turn apprehended by a policeman. The second terrorist opens fire on civilians who are chasing him, killing a young student and wounding a young girl. The two terrorists, Kirkor Levonian and Raffi Elbekian, are tried and sentenced.

March 31, 1983 Frankfurt An anonymous caller threatened to bomb the offices and kill the staff of Tercüman newspaper, a Turkish daily.

May 24, 1983 Brussels Bombs explode in front of the Turkish Embassy's Culture and Information offices and in front of a Turkish-owned travel agency. The Italian director of the travel agency is wounded. ASALA claims credit.

June 16, 1983 Istanbul Armenian terrorists carry out an attack with hand grenades and automatic weapons inside the covered bazaar in Istanbul. Two dead, twenty-one wounded. ASALA claims responsibility.

July 8, 1983 Paris Armenian terrorists attack the offices of the British Council, protesting against the trials of Armenians in London.

July 14, 1983 Brussels Armenian terrorists murder Dursun Aksoy, the Administrative Attache at the Turkish Embassy. ASALA, ARA and JCAG claim responsibility.

July 15, 1983 Paris A bomb explodes in front of the THY counter at Orly airport. Eight dead, more than sixty injured. A 29 years old Syrian-Armenian named Varadjian Garbidjian confesses to having planted the bomb. He admits that the bomb was intended to have exploded once the plane was airborne.

July 15, 1983 London A bomb, similar to the one that exploded at Orly, is defused in time. ASALA claims responsibility for both attacks.

July 18, 1983 Lyon A bomb threat is made by ASALA against the Lyon railroad station.

July 20, 1983 Lyon Panicky evacuation of Lyon's Gare de Perrache following a bomb threat from ASALA.

July 22, 1983 Teheran "Orly" carries out bomb attacks on the French Embassy and Air France.

July 27, 1983 Lisbon Five Armenian terrorists attempt to storm the Turkish Embassy in Lisbon. Failing to gain access to the chancery, they occupy the residence, taking the Deputy Chief of Mission(DCM) and his family hostage. When explosives being planted by the terrorists go off, Cahide Mihçioglu, wife of the DCM and four of the terrorists are blown to pieces. The DCM, Yurtsev Mihçioglu, and his son Atasay are injured. The fifth terrorist is killed in the initial assault by Turkish security forces. One Portuguese policeman is also killed and another wounded. The ARA claims responsibility.

July 28, 1983 Lyon Another bomb threat on Lyon-Perrache railroad station. ASALA claims responsibility.

July 29, 1983 Teheran A threat to blow up the French Embassy in Teheran with a rocket attack causes Iranian officials to increase security at the facility.

July 31, 1983 Lyon and Rennes Bomb threats from Armenian terrorists force the emergency landing of two domestic French flights carrying 424 passengers. August 10, 1983 Teheran A bomb explodes in an automobile at the French Embassy. ASALA claims credit for the attack.

August 25, 1983 Bonn A whole series of bomb attacks against offices of the French Consulate General claim two lives and leave twenty-three injured. ASALA claims responsibility.

September 9, 1983 Teheran Two French Embassy cars are bombed. One of the bombs injures two embassy staff members. ASALA claims credit.

October 1, 1983 Marseilles A bomb blast destroys the U.S., Soviet and Algerian pavilions at an international trade fair in Marseilles. One person is killed and twenty-six injured. ASALA and "Orly" claim credit.

October 6, 1983 Teheran A French Embassy vehicle is bombed, injuring two passengers. "Orly" claims responsibility.

October 29, 1983 Beirut Hand-grenade attack on the French Embassy. One of the ASALA terrorists is arrested.

October 29, 1983 Beirut The Turkish Embassy is attacked by three Armenian terrorists. One of the assailants, Sarkis Denielian, a 19 years old Lebanese-Armenian is apprehended. ASALA claims responsibility.

February 8, 1984 Paris Bomb threat on an Air France flight to New York.

March 28, 1984 Teheran A timed series of attacks is carried out against Turkish diplomats: Two Armenian terrorists shoot and seriously wound Sergeant Ismail Pamukçu, employed at the office of the Turkish Military Attache; Hasan Servet Öktem, First Secretary of the Turkish Embassy, is slightly wounded as he leaves his home; Ibrahim Özdemir, the Administrative Attache at the Turkish Embassy, alerts police to two suspicious looking men. They turn out to be Armenian terrorists and are arrested; In the afternoon of the same day, Iranian police arrest three more Armenian terrorists outside the Turkish Embassy; An Armenian terrorist is killed when a bomb he is attempting to plant in the car of the Turkish Assistant Commercial Counselor explodes prematurely. The dead terrorist is later identified as Sultan Gregorian Semaperdan (ASALA).

March 29, 1984 Los Angeles ASALA sends a written threat, saying they will assassinate Turkish athletes who take part in the Olympics.

April 8, 1984 Beirut ASALA issues a communique warning that all flights to Turkey will be considered military targets.

April 26, 1984 Ankara The Turkish Prime Minister, Turgut Özal, receives a threat warning him that if he goes ahead with a planned visit to Teheran, ASALA will schedule a major terrorist operation against his country.

April 28, 1984 Teheran Two Armenian terrorists riding a motorcycle open fire on Isik Yönder as he drives his wife, Sadiye Yönder, to the Turkish Embassy where she works. Isik Yönder is killed, and ASALA claims credit for yet another senseless murder.

June 20, 1984 Vienna A bomb explodes in a car belonging to Erdogan Özen, Assistant Labor and Social Affairs Counselor at the Turkish Embassy in Vienna. Özen is killed and five others seriously wounded, including a policeman. ARA terrorists claim credit for the crime.

June 25, 1984 Los Angeles A news agency office in France receives a letter threatening to attack all governments, organizations and companies which assist, in any way whatsoever, Turkey's team at the Los Angeles Olympics.

August 13, 1984 Lyon A bomb explodes in a Lyon train station causing minor damage. ASALA claims credit.

September 1984 Teheran Several Turkish owned firms in Iran come under attack after receiving warning letters informing them that they are to be targeted. The first victim is the Sezai Türkes Company. A Turkish employee is injured while fighting the fire caused by the explosion. A chain of smaller scale acts of intimidation follows. September 1, 1984 Teheran Iranian authorities expose a plot to assassinate Ismet Birsel, the Turkish Ambassador to Teheran.

September 3, 1984 Istanbul Two Armenian terrorists die as one of their bombs goes off too soon. The ARA claims credit.

November 19, 1984 Vienna Evner Ergun, Deputy Director of the Centre for Social Development and Humanitarian Affairs of the United Nations, Vienna is assassinated while driving to work. The assassins leave a flag with the initials "ARA" on his body.

December 1984 Brussels Authorities are able to thwart a bombing attempt at the residence of Selçuk Incesu, Turkish Consul General.

December 29, 1984 Beirut Two French buildings in East Beirut are bombed. ASALA claims credit.

December 29, 1984 Paris Following an ASALA threat to blow up an Air France plane, police increase security at the Charles de Gaulle Airport.

January 3, 1985 Beirut The offices of Agence France Presse are extensively damaged when a bomb explodes.

March 3, 1985 Paris An anonymous caller to Agence France Presse threatens to attack French interests throughout the world upon the indictment of the three terrorists who participated in the Orly attack.

March 12, 1985 Ottawa Three heavily armed terrorists storm the Turkish Embassy, killing a Canadian security guard in the process. After blowing up the front door, the gunmen enter the building. Ambassador Coskun Kirca manages to escape but suffers extensive injuries. The wife and daughter of the Ambassador, who were taken hostage, are later released, and the terrorists surrender. ARA claims responsibility.

March 26, 1985 Toronto A threat to blow up the city of Toronto's transit system leads to chaos during the rush hour. An "Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Our Homeland" claims responsibility for the threat.

November 1985 Brussels A special anti-terrorist security squad of the Belgian police exposes and arrests three Armenian terrorists with Portuguese passports. They were planning an attack on Turkish officers at NATO headquarters.

November 28, 1985 Paris French police arrest the leader of the terrorist organization emdash; the "Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia-Revolutionary Movement" (ASALA-RM) emdash; Mr. Monte Melkonian, a U.S. citizen. In Melkonian's apartment, police confiscate weapons, explosive devices, arrival and departure information on Turkish ships scheduled to visit France and a picture of Turkey's Ambassador to France, Adnan Bulak.

December 1985 Paris Forty-one shoppers in two of Paris' leading department stores (Gallerie Lafayette and Printemps) are injured (twelve seriously) when nearly simultaneous bomb explosions rip through the stores. In the ensuing panic, some 10,000 Christmas shoppers flee into the street. The Armenian Reporter, published in New York, reports in its December 12th issue that French law enforcement authorities are concentrating on ASALA as the most likely perpetrator. ASALA later takes credit for the two bombings.

November 23, 1986 Melbourne At 2:15 a.m. a bomb explodes in front of the Turkish Consulate General. One dead -presumably the perpetrator- and one Australian injured.

*********

As one can see above, the Armenians' global reliance on terrorism is not a new phenomenon that surfaced in the last 30 years. It has a well documented history of about 150 years, with periods of intensity (1890-1915 and 1973-present) and inactivity (1923-1973). Currently, Armenian terrorism took the form of state aggression as Armenian continues its brutal military occupation of Azerbaijan where more than one million Azeris are made refugees on their own soil and forced to spend freezing winters and scorching summers in leaky old tents with little of no food and medicine for the last 14 years! While the Armenian propagandists love to distort human tragedies caused by wars 100 years ago, they are curiously silent about the same crimes they are committing as you read these lines.

You wrote:

"I AM NOT THE ONE WHO IS HIDING BEHIND A FIRST NAME (PERHAPS ALSO FAKE) ALL THESE MONTHS!!!!!"

As readers are aware many misdirected finatics abound. It is perfectly acceptable given what has happened to people like Hrant Dink and Taner Akcam.

Dr. Akcam is perfectly innocent in this country thank goodness for civil society. Otherwise he would not have been let into this country and would have been extradicted years ago.

Also you make this seem as if All Armenians condone such activities.

Again as I stated before Governements have control over policies such as Turkeys denial policy of the Armenian genocide.

Not one word of your posts justifies the genocide killing of Armenians durring the Ottoman era.

Not one.

You are not being fair to the readers (as expected)
Kurds in Turkey are terrorizing Turkey and I would not blame all Kurds of being terrorists. You could multiply your previous post by thousands rendering you point (what ever it is) fruitless.

You stated:

"As one can see above, the Armenians' global reliance on terrorism is not a new phenomenon that surfaced in the last 30 years."

to reiterate, you have a very, very squwed veiw of reality.

To make the point more clear to our readers.

Would I call all Americans terrorists on the account of what Timmothy McVey did in Oklahoma, certainly not.

Would I call all Iraqis in Iraq terrorists on account of all the bombings that take place now, certainly not.

Would I call all the Irish terrorists from all the bombings they have done, certainly not.

Would I call all Turks terrorists on account of all the terror they have caused to the Armenian people, certainly not.

Any reasonable person would not cast all people on the wrong decison of violence.

The difference is that Turkey as I stated a number of times before has policies that over the century has suppressed it's minorities.

A Government policy, of suppression.

Yet in your squwed veiw (as evidenced in your posts above) you cast "all" Armenians as terrorists? This goes to the heart of your credibility, balance of thought, pure racism, and pure hatred.

You are clouding the issues with irrelevant input. I would like to re0direct focus of readers on the following "crystal-clear" determinations:

1- Despite my repeated demands that you come clear, YOU ARE STILL HIDING BEHIND A FIRST NAME (which could also be fake, knowing how skilled Armenians are in "falsifications": as in those fake Talat Pasha telegrams, bogus Hitler quote, plagiarized "pyramid of skulls" painting, 1.5 million figure, and many others.)

2- You downplay terrorism as it is something condonable or understandable. You listed Timothy McWeigh, one American! Whereas I listed hundreds of terrorist acts committed by Armenian terrorists since 1973 and how the Armenian community, the one you belong to, supported those terrorists by passing the hat in Armenian churches. These acts supporting terrorism is the foundation on which the book by Christian scholar Samuel A. Weems was written: Armenia: Secrets of a Christian "Terrorist" Nation (St. John Press, 2002, Dallas.). You listed one black stain in American history of terrorism; I listed an entire "trend" that lasted over the past 150 years proving how terrorism is supported in the Armenian community.

3- You avoided answering a simple question I asked over many months: How many Muslims did Armenians kill during World War One? (The reason is that the answer will prove beyond a shadow of doubt that Armenian claims of genocide are baseless. So you are trapped between betraying your people by disproving genocide by answering my question and betraying the truth by not answering my question. I will let you live with that dilemma. You made your bed, now lie in it!)

4- You also avoided answering a few other questions: Why are you denying the 4Ts of the Turkish-Armenian conflict during WWI, namely, the Turkish suffering caused by Armenians, Treason by Armenians, Terror by Armenians, and Tumult as in violent Armenian revolts?

**********

Merely listing the many unspeakable acts of terrorism committed in the past 150 years by the Armenian nationalists, terror groups, and/or underground organizations, in the name of advancing the so-called Armenian cause, should give any fair-minded genocide supporter a pause. This 150 year period covers the eras before, during, and after WWI, as well as WWII (the notorious Nazi-Armenians of 812th Battalion) , the cold war (see my previous posting above) and recent, post-cold-war era. 1923-1973 era was quiet for Armenian terrorism on Turks, but not so quite for Armenian terrorism on Caucasus Jews. As Armenian-Nazis, this time donning the Nazi-Germany's uniforms, slaughtered the Jews of Caucasus. (I can provide more specific references on this if you wish, in my future responses.)

What must also be included in these lists are the acts of harassment, intimidation, and terrorism committed by some Armenian extremists in Southern California in the past two decades. Many cultural activities organized by Turkish students associations at USC, UCLA, Cal State Long Beach, UCI, and other institutions of learning were illegally raided by some uninvited Armenian thugs bent on violently interrupting those activities, simply because the Turkish students were promoting a better understanding and appreciation of Turkish culture. Most Armenian extremists can not stand anything Turkish, let alone a cultural night featuring "Turkish Delight", Turkish music, dance, food, and hospitality. More than a few of these nights had to be cancelled by the campus police due the seriousness of the Armenian threat of violence and terrorism. These cases in the police blotters clearly show that some Armenian youths are following in the footsteps of their terrorist predecessors.

But I will leave that judgment to a more qualified person, a prominent historian and a meticulous researcher, Professor Heath W. Lowry of Princeton University. The Armenians attacked, insulted, and defamed him, too, just because he acted as an advisor to the Turkish ambassador. Here is the irony: an Armenian-American historian's son became, not an advisor to an Armenian ambassador, not an Armenian ambassador, but THE FOREIGN MINISTER OF ARMENIA, and yet no one leveled even any of the accusations to this Armenian historian as they did to Prof. Lowry. In case I confused you, let me repeat: an American professor, Lowry, advises a Turkish diplomat and his academic objectivity is questioned and defamed; but an Armenian professor's son BECOMES A MINISTER OF A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT, ARMENIA, and none of those critics see anything wrong with it. If this is not hypocrisy, double standards, and discrimination, and harassment, I do not know what is!

The following paper was written by Prof. Lowry and appeared in "the International Terrorism and the Drug Connection" Ankara (Ankara University Press), 1984, p 71-83 . In this remarkable paper, Lowry examines the 'curtain of fear' created by Armenian terrorists in targeting other Armenians. This may perhaps elucidate the strange behavior observed in the A.F.A.T.H.(*) community today, where one hardly ever witnesses an unsolicited act of public condemnation of the Armenian terrorist acts by Armenian leaders. On the contrary, they are quick to organize fund raising campaigns to finance the legal defense teams of those captured terrorists.

*******************

A.F.A.T.H. = Armenian Falsifiers and Turk Haters

*******************

NINETEENTH AND TWENTIETH CENTURY ARMENIAN TERRORISM: THREADS OF CONTINUITY

Dr. Lowry starts out by pointing to the similarities between the activities of Armenian terrorist organizations in the years 1973-1984 and those of their nineteenth and early twentieth century equivalents vis-à-vis the declared aims, the selection of targets, the use of tactics and rhetoric. He proceeds to trace the 'threads of continuity' in the history of Armenian political violence. He then explores the psychological factors in Armenian society which help ensure a new crop of terrorists with each succeeding generation, who become the 'Armenian National Heroes.' to the youth of the next generation, respected and even emulated.

"... In a recent paper, Dr. Gerard Libaridian, the Director of the Zoryan Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, attempted to come to grasp with what he termed: 'The Roots of Political Violence in Recent Armenian History' [Libaridian, 1983]. Under the heading of 'Root Causes' he wrote:

'In general, it seems that political violence and more specifically political assassinations, have come to life in Armenian society as a reaction against the repressive regimes of the Ottoman and Russian Empires before the First World War. Empires which seem to have left no way, no more peaceful way anyway, for the Armenians to achieve any kind of progress. In the case of the Armenians particularly, as opposed to larger entities, such as the Turks themselves, or the Russians themselves, their inability because of the smaller size of the Armenians, their inability to affect the larger events within the Empires of which they were a part, seems to have directed them to a more individual type of action which political assassination is.'

Compare this view with that expressed in a 1977 letter to the New York Times, written by the Armenian National Committee in Boston, where we read:

'Some Armenians have apparently lost faith in the willingness or capacity of the world's governments to listen to, or act on, peaceful appeals,' [Times, May 30, 1977].

One fact is immediately apparent. If Libaridian is correct in ascribing nineteenth century Armenian political assassination as resulting from the frustration felt by Armenians who were unable to effect change in the Russian and Ottoman Empires from 'within,' and the ANC letter is correct in viewing today's assassinations as stemming from the frustration felt by Armenians unable to influence the world's governments from 'without,' it becomes relatively easy to understand why the level of today's violence is so great. Viewed differently, whereas the goal of creating an independent Armenian State in Eastern Anatolia is certainly shared by both past and present Armenian terrorists, the fact that today's terrorists are forced to try to do from 'outside' what their nineteenth century counterparts were unable to accomplish from 'inside,' points to a higher 'frustration level' among the current crop of terrorists. For, after more than a century of violence, the goal their 'terrorism' ostensibly addresses, the creation of an independent Armenian state, is further from reality today than it was a hundred years ago.

This does not imply, however, that we should complacently view today's acts of terrorism as a 'last gasp effort.' To the contrary, yet another 'thread of continuity' linking the nineteenth and twentieth century Armenian terrorists is their shared inability to comprehend the realities of the world around them. In the same manner that the nineteenth century Armenian revolutionaries failed to see that the geographically dispersed nature of the Armenian minority of the Ottoman population, preordained that their 'nationalism' would not share the success of other Ottoman ethnic minorities and result in the creation of an independent Armenia, carved out of a portion of the Ottoman Empire; so, too, are their twentieth century descendents incapable of grasping the fact that a strong Turkey will never accede to the demands of a handful of terrorists. In other words, one factor totally lacking in the makeup of past and present Armenian terrorists, is logic!..."

Lack of logic, observes Dr. Lowry, may help us understand why the Armenian terrorists of today still cling on to the same, old, failed terror tactics of last two centuries:

".... Political assassinations in the period between 1860 and the outbreak of World War I, took the lives of scores of Ottoman and Russian officials. However, this fact did not influence Russian or Ottoman policy vis-à-vis Armenian separatist aspirations one iota. Nor will the wanton murder of Turkish Diplomats today ever affect the decision-making process of the Government of the Republic of Turkey.

Likewise, the tactic of occupying public buildings, planting them with explosives, and threatening to blow them up if specific demands were not met, did not begin in 1981 Paris, or in 1983 Lisbon. This tactic was first employed by Armenian terrorists in August of 1896, with the takeover of the Ottoman Bank in Beyoglu, Istanbul. Under the threat of blowing up their hostages, they issued a series of demands, just as eighty five years later their twentieth century counterparts did, following the September 1981 occupation of the Turkish Consulate in Paris, France. In the end, the 1896 terrorists surrendered without having seen the fulfillment of their demands, just as their 1981 counterparts did in Paris. Indeed, the only real difference between these operations stemmed from the subsequent treatment accorded to the terrorists. The 1896 occupiers of the Ottoman Bank were shipped out of Istanbul in style on the yacht of the British Ambassador, whereas the terrorists who took over the Paris Consulate were given a French trial and inappropriately light prison sentences. In both instances, the only tangible result was a brief flurry of attention by the press..."

Dr. Lowry then asks the question: " What if any, are the successes of Armenian terrorism?" , given the total failure of a century of senseless violence to achieve its declared aim of the creation of an independent Armenia.

"...To answer this query we must broaden our examination to include the topic of Armenian terrorism, when its objects are terrorist actions against Armenians. A recent study focusing on the years between 1904 and 1906 provides the following statistics on the victims of Armenian political assassination in that era:

'In this three year period there were 105 political assassinations: of which 56 were against Armenian informers; 32 were for political reasons against both Russian and Turkish officials and officers; 7 or 8 were against blackmailers; 5 against usurers; and 2 or 3 were incidental, with unspecified causes. These figures were for the Eastern Armenian regions of Tiflis and Baku, as well as for Van and its vicinity in the Ottoman Empire.' [Libaridian, 1983]

In other words, during this brief three year period, there were two Armenian victims assassinated by Armenian terrorists for every one non-Armenian. This hitherto almost totally neglected fact deserves our attention, for it was not a phenomenon limited to 1904-1906, but rather one which still exists today. Its purpose, then as now, was nothing more or less than intimidation. The conscious attempt to frighten the overwhelming majority of peaceful Armenians into silence as regards the activities of the terrorists.

On September 24, 1933, the then primate of the Armenian Church of America, Archbishop Leon Touranian was assassinated by Armenian terrorists as he prepared to celebrate mass in the Armenian Cathedral of New York City. As he walked up the aisle in plain sight of several hundred waiting parishioners, a group of men blocked his path, knives flashed, and he fell dead on the floor. Not one individual in the crowd was able to identify a single one of the assailants. The New York District Attorney who prosecuted the subsequent trial of the nine man Dashnak cell responsible for the assassination, had the following to say in regard to the failure of a single Armenian present in the Church to testify against the assailants:

'The detectives faced a wall of reticence which did not auger well for a solution of the mysterious killing. Either these Armenians wished to settle the feuds in their own way by murderous counter plots; or they were too much in fear for their own safety to disclose what they know. [Spectator, December 7, 1983]

While those Armenians in attendance may have been unaware of the statistic quoted above, that 56 of the 105 individuals assassinated by Armenian terrorists between 1904-1906 were murdered as 'informers', the message which the terrorists intended to convey had clearly gotten through to them. Anyone who speaks up against one of their members will die.

Nor has this message changed today. Only six months ago, ASALA executed two Armenians (one of them an American) in Lebanon who were charged with having served as C.I.A. 'informants' in regard to the planned (at)tack on the Istanbul Kapolt Carst, some months earlier, [Spectator, January 7, 1984: p. 16].

The result is a 'curtain of fear which makes it extremely difficult for law enforcement authorities of all nations to permeate the ranks of Armenian terrorists. For Armenians know full well what their fate will be if they are labeled as 'informers' by the terrorists..."

Dr. Lowry finds it ironical that after a century of senseless violence, the only success the Armenian terrorists have been able to achieve, is the fact that they managed to create a climate of terror among their fellow Armenians, on behalf of the community they were supposed to be working.

"... While this 'curtain of fear' may well account for the almost total silence of any voices within the Armenian communities of the world (with the exception of the Turkish Armenians), to openly speak out against the activities of Armenian terrorists, it does not account for the fact that many prominent Armenians in Western Europe and the United States of America have frequently used the flurry of press interest occasioned by the latest terrorist attack, to make statements which at least tacitly support such activities. As an example of this attitude we may cite the statement of Mr. Kevork Donabedian, the editor of the Armenian Weekly, an ethnic newspaper published in the United States, which was reported in an article in the Christian Science Monitor

'As an Armenian, I never condone terrorism, but there must be a reason behind this. Maybe the terrorism will work. It worked for the Jews. They have Israel, '[Monitor, November 18, 1980].

This attitude which may be typified as the 'of course we don't condone terrorism, but we must understand the deep sense of frustration experienced by these young men as a result of the great historical injustice done to the Armenians by the Turks, etc. etc.', is repeated in the wake of every assassination, by a variety of Armenian academicians, spokesmen, and religious leaders. What it amounts to is nothing more than a token distancing of oneself from the actual event with the almost ritual 'of course we don't condone terrorism,' followed by a repetition of the same catalogue of charges concerning allegations of 'massacres' and 'genocide' against the Ottoman Empire of 1914-1915. Be the spokesman an Armenian-American or a French-Armenian, the litany seldom varies. As for the intent, it never varies. It is the justification of the actions of the terrorists, on the grounds that their ancestors were the victims of an historical injustice. Albeit de facto, this represents nothing less than an acceptance of the actions of the terrorists. What such individuals are really saying is: 'while I wouldn't want to hold the gun myself, those who do are performing a useful service on behalf of the 'Armenian Cause'.'..."

Dr. Lowry then turns to a detailed case study of how those few captured terrorists have been and are being treated by the Armenian community as a whole.

"...This discussion will focus on an examination of two periods of terrorism, that which I will term the 'Post World War I Round' and the 'Current Round,' which began in 1973 and continues until the present.

Following the end of World War I, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, or the Dashnaks as they are more commonly known, formed a network known as 'Nemesis' designed to track down and assassinate former members of the Young Turk Government. Their first victim was the former Minister of the Interior, Talat Pasha, who was gunned down on March 15, 1921, while walking on the street in Berlin. His assassin was an Armenian named Soghomon Tehlirian. Nine months later the former Ottoman Minister of Foreign Affairs, Said Halim Pasha, was assassinated by an Armenian named Arshavir Shirakian in Rome. Barely four months later, this time working with an accomplice named Aram Yerganian, Shirakian struck again. This time his victims were two former Young Turk officials, Bahaeddin Sakir Bey and Cemal Azmi Bey, who were shot in Berlin on April 17, 1922. A few months later Cemal Pasha was gunned down in Tiflis by two Armenians [Walker, 1980: p. 344]. And the killing continued...

Of more import to us here, than the assassinations themselves, was the response then and now of the Armenian community at large to these events. Tehlirian, the assassin of Talat Pasha, was arrested in Berlin and charged with murder. Within days of his arrest, a 'Soghomon Tehlirian Defense Fund' was established in Berlin, which rapidly grew as Armenians worldwide, and in particular in the United States, sent their contributions to Berlin. Aided by the legal advice thus purchased, Tehlirian was acquitted after a cursory two day trial. For the next forty years, until his death in San Francisco (1960), Tehlirian was accorded the status of an 'Armenian National Hero.' Indeed, the 1968 book by James Nazer entitled, 'The First Genocide of the Twentieth Century,' places this 'title' beneath his photograph [Nazer, 1968]. The author likewise granted the epitaph of 'Armenian National Hero' to Shiragian and Yerganian, two of Tehlirian's fellow 'Nemesis' members.

Skipping forward in time to the 'Current Round' of Armenian terrorism, let us compare the treatment accorded the assassin of Kemal Arikan, the Turkish Consul General in Los Angeles, and that given to the five terrorists who occupied the residence of the Turkish Embassy in Lisbon, with that accorded to their 'Nemesis' forefathers.

Hampig Sassounian was a twenty-year-old Armenian immigrant who had recently moved to Los Angeles, California from his birthplace in Lebanon, when on January 28, 1982 he assassinated the Turkish Consul General to Los Angeles, Kemal Arikan. Following a drawn out trial, he was convicted of this crime in February of 1984. No sooner was Sassounian arrested than Armenian groups throughout the world, but primarily in North America, announced the opening of a variety of 'Sassounian Defense Funds.' A recent article in the Armenian press summarized their results in this regard as follows:

'During the past twenty-two months, literally tens of thousands of Armenians have shown their interest and concern. Armenians in Los Angeles and in other cities throughout this country, Canada, France, Lebanon, England, Greece, Syria, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, South Africa, Argentina, Australia, Italy, Switzerland, Spain and Egypt have rallied to support Sassounian's defense.

This outpouring of monies and personal and collective messages of support is indeed the best measure of a people involved in a political process which ultimately could determine their destiny.' [Asbarez, October 15, 1983].

A survey of the activities carried out by these 'Sassounian Defense Committees' is even more revealing as to the nature and scope of the efforts on his behalf. The following example, typical of numerous similar activities, will serve to illustrate this point. On the evening of Friday, October 21, 1983, at the HOLY CROSS ARMENIAN APOSTOLIC CHURCH in Montebello, California, an 'Evening for Hampig' was organized by the 'Sassounian Defense Committee'. Opening, and indeed we might say 'headlining,' the evening's activities was a 'Special Church Service' presided over by HIS GRACE BISHOP YEPREM TABAKIAN, PRELATE, WESTERN PRELACY OF THE ARMENIAN APOSTOLIC CHURCH. In addition, a variety of well known Armenian artists and singers performed for the benefit of the audience of several hundred Armenians who turned out in a show of 'Moral Support' for the terrorist assassin, Hampig Sassounian [Observer, October 12, 1983:p. 3.].

The most disturbing aspect of this gathering is clearly the fact that it occurred in a religious sanctuary and that it was presided over by the leading Armenian religious authority in the western United States of America. Before proceeding with an analysis of some of the implications of this and similar events, we must examine the treatment accorded the five Armenian terrorists, who in July of 1983 occupied, and subsequently blew up, the Turkish Embassy in Lisbon, Portugal. As their action resulted in their own deaths, as well as that of their innocent victims, they were accorded the status of 'Instant Martyrdom' in the Armenian communities across the world. The following partial list of the numerous 'memorial' services held in Armenian churches and community centers across America, in 'commemoration' of their 'sacrifice' will illustrate this point:

a. On Sunday, October 16, 1983 at the A.C.E.C. in Watertown, Massachusetts, a gathering billed as a 'Political Rally in memory of the Lisbon Five Martyrs' [Weekly, October 15, 1983];

b. On January 21, 1984 in the Armenian All Saints Apostolic Church in Glenview, Illinois, a commemorative service for the 'Lisbon Five' [Weekly, January 14, 1984];

c. On January 22, 1984 in the Saints Vartanantz Church in Providence, Rhode Island, a commemorative service for the 'Lisbon Five' [Weekly, January 14, 1984];

d. On January 28, 1984 in the Armenian Community Center in Dearborn, Michigan, a commemorative service for the 'Lisbon Five' [Weekly, January 14, 1984];

e. On January 29, 1984 in the Saints Vartannantz Church of Ridgefield, New Jersey, a commemorative service for the 'Lisbon Five' [Weekly, January 14, 1984];

f. On February 12, 1984 in the Soorp Khatch Church in Chevy Chase, Maryland a suburb of Washington, D.C., a commemorative service for the 'Lisbon Five' [Weekly, January 14, 1984]

The Armenian Weekly of Saturday, February 11, 1984 provides a lengthy description of one such 'memorial gathering' which was held in the Saints Vartanantz Church before an audience of 'over 400 people.' It consisted of the following segments:

1. A brief 'memorial service' for the souls of the 'five heroes' was held in the Saints Vartanantz Church;

2. A presentation of the flag and candle lighting ceremony performed by the local Armenian 'Boy Scout troop. These children carried in pictures of each of the 'heroes,' lit a candle in front of them, and placed the Armenian tn-color flag before each;

3. The next stage was a series of 'speeches emceed by Unger Harout Misserlian, who began this part of the program by saying: 'Since 1975, Armenian youth have resorted to armed struggle having determined the futility of diplomatic efforts. We should not be grieved by the martyrdom of these boys. Passed are the times of lamentation. Now is the time for sustained struggle.'

4. Following the speeches, there were 'recitations' of Armenian revolutionary poetry and nationalistic songs were sung;

5. Unger Arpie Balian, the representative of the Armenian Relief Society of North America, then spoke. His comments included the following statement: 'We are gathered here to mark the act of our five heroic youths, who, during July of last year with their conscious martyrdom, joined the pantheon of our ancient braves.'

6. Balian's keynote address was followed by a slide show which outlined the development of the Armenian Liberation Movement from the turn of the century to the present;

7. The evening ended with the following scene: 'Five young men, identically dressed and wearing black hoods, marched onto the stage, and after saluting the portraits of the five heroes, unfurled a red banner upon which the following was written in large black letters in Armenian: 'My name is struggle and my end is victory' [Weekly, February 11, 1984: pp. 6-7 & 9].

Clearly, today's Armenian terrorists are being embraced by this generation's Armenians in exactly the same manner as the terrorists of the 1920's (Tehlirian, Shirakian et.aI.) were embraced and accorded hero status by their contemporaries..."

Dr. Lowry, after comparing the past and the present to demonstrate several 'threads of continuity' that link the acts of Armenian terrorists throughout the past century, proceeds to list his observations which might give clues to the future behavior of the Armenian terrorists:

"... 1. The Sanction of the Church: In any minority community, it is the representatives of organized religion who supply the 'locus' around which the group revolves. Among the Armenians, this fact is also true. It was the Church leaders throughout history who have kept the Armenian language, literature, and traditions alive in the memory of their parishioners. Thus, when Armenian Church leaders participate in 'commemorative memorials' for slain or imprisoned terrorists, and allow their sanctuaries to be used for the holding of such commemoratives, they are providing de facto recognition of and approval for the acts which the Armenian terrorists commit;

2. The Sanction of the Press: Both the Armenian and English language ethnic Armenian press in the United States give wide coverage to the activities of Armenian terrorists. As we have seen, through the examples I have presented, this expresses at least tacit approval of the terrorists' actions, and thereby gives its 'stamp of approval' to their efforts..."

Dr. Lowry points out that the Armenian Press and the Armenian Church are the two most important factors that shape the public opinion among the Armenians of the diaspora.

"... As I have repeatedly shown, the attitude of both vis-à-vis terrorism is, at best, questionable. Unfortunately, terrorism is not a topic towards which one may adopt a 'lukewarm' response. You cannot say: 'My form of terrorism is justified, but I don't approve of terrorism.' It is clearly a 'ya hep, ya hic' ('all or nothing') proposition. By failing to openly CONDEMN the senseless killings perpetrated by Armenian terrorists, both the Armenian Church and the Armenian Press are giving their 'stamp of approval' to these activities. Bearing in mind that the overwhelming majority of Armenians fail to make their voices heard on this issue, out of fear, we are faced with a situation where almost the entire Armenian community of the Diaspora, in one form or another, tacitly support the activities of Armenian terrorists.

What are the effects of this attitude on the minds of impressionable children? What does it mean when an Armenian 'Boy Scout Troop' goes to church and participates in a 'memorial commemorative service' for the 'Lisbon Five Martyrs'? When they listen to their elders speak of dead terrorists as 'martyrs' who have 'joined the pantheon of our ancient braves'? The answer to these queries is all too obvious: It means nothing less than that 'terrorists' are being portrayed for today's Armenian youth as fitting 'role models,' as 'heroes' whose actions are worthy of emulation. It further means that for every Armenian terrorist who is captured or killed, there will be another impressionable youth waiting to take his place. It means, in fact, the continuation of 'round after round' of 'generation after generation' of Armenian Terrorism.

History does in fact contain lessons for today. It explains how the failure of the Armenian community to openly condemn the Armenian terrorism of the 1920's has contributed to the 'current round' of terrorist activities, and it suggests that the Armenian failure to condemn today's terrorism will guarantee yet another 'round' in the coming generation..."

Bibliography of Works Cited above:

Asbarez: Publication of the A.R.F. Central Committee of the Western U.S.A. Armenian Newspaper with Weekly English Edition;

Libaridian: Transcript of a paper presented by Gerard Libaridian at the 18th Annual Middle East Studies Association Meeting held in Chicago, Illinois on November 3-6, 1983. Paper was entitled: 'The Roots of Political Violence in Recent Armenian History.';

Monitor: Christian Science Monitor;

Nazer: James Nazer: The First Genocide of the 20th Century. New York, 1968;

Observer: The Armenian Observer. Weekly Armenian newspaper published in Hollywood, California. Osheen Keshishian is its Editor;

Spectator: The Armenian Mirror-Spectator. Weekly Armenian newspaper published by the Baikar Association, Inc. in Watertown, Massachusetts. Barbara Marguerian is Editor;

Walker: Christopher J. Walker: Armenia, The Survival of a Nation. New York, 1980;

Weekly: The Armenian Weekly. Armenian newspaper published by the Hairenik

Association of Boston, Massachusetts. Managing Editor is Kevork Donabedian.

***********

As you can see, Armenian terrorism is not a spur of the moment hate crime; it is a phenomenon, a well documented trend, a cultivated and revered tradition in the Armenian community. That is why no one protested the murder of a Turkish diplomat in Los Angels in 1982 (compare that with 100,000 Turks who protested in Istanbul the killing of Hrant Dink!!!)

Some historic trends are simply too large to ignore or white wash...

You stated:

"Despite my repeated demands that you come clear, YOU ARE STILL HIDING BEHIND A FIRST NAME..."

No one is hiding behind anything especially me.

It is an excepted practice not to use proper names for there are finatics who justify genocidal killings of inncent people what can be more scarry then that.
Nobody cares who I am other then yourself.
As I stated above:

"Would I call all Americans terrorists on the account of what Timmothy McVey did in Oklahoma, certainly not.

Would I call all Iraqis in Iraq terrorists on account of all the bombings that take place now, certainly not.

Would I call all the Irish terrorists from all the bombings they have done, certainly not.

Would I call all Turks terrorists on account of all the terror they have caused to the Armenian people, certainly not.

Any reasonable person would not cast all people on the wrong decison of violence.

The difference is that Turkey as I stated a number of times before has policies that over the century has suppressed it's minorities.

A Government policy, of suppression.

Yet in your squwed veiw (as evidenced in your posts above) you cast "all" Armenians as terrorists? This goes to the heart of your credibility, balance of thought, pure racism, and pure hatred."

You seem to know all about terrorism go work for Homeland Security seems they care less then you on this matter.

They days of the Salem Witch Hunts are over.

Worth noting not one word of your previos post has any relevants to the Armenian genocide its merely meant to distract the issue at hand, your denial of the genocide.

Cut and past all you want it will not diminish what the Ottoman Government committed against the innocent Armenian populations: Genocide.

The point is the killing of Hrant Dink because he recognized the Armenian genocide.

He was killed by Turkish Nationalists bent on supressing it's minorities.

I would not stoop so low as to defame and slander all Turks, as you are Armenians.

I do not need to copy and paste select smoke and mirror Turkish propoganda.

I will spare our readers all the cut and paste internet information on the Turkish Government's intentional inability to protect its minorities, inability to promote tollerance, which is indirectly promoting select radical nationalists to barbarically, torcher, and slay defensless Christian missionaries.

I ask our readers to web search "Hrant Dink Armenian genocide" to get a true perspective of what happend.

I don't have to spoon feed propoganda, the truth is out there already.

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

you stated:

"As you can see, Armenian terrorism is not a spur of the moment hate crime; it is a phenomenon, a well documented trend, a cultivated and revered tradition in the Armenian community. That is why no one protested the murder of a Turkish diplomat in Los Angels in 1982 (compare that with 100,000 Turks who protested in Istanbul the killing of Hrant Dink!!!)"

Your a sorry sack, now your saying that all those posts are in our "tradition in the Armenian Community"

I encourage you to keep posting.

Our readers are getting a very clear descript version of unadulterated racism and bigotry.

Let's go one step at a time and make solid determinations along the way as reached by your comments:

1- You are hiding behind a first name because you say you are afraid of fanatics. This sounds like a convenient smoke screen to cover your real identity: an Armenian lobbyist connected to ARF, ANCA, and /or others. You may also be living a deception you do not want exposed. Either way, "the messenger's identity, motives, and past acts" may have a strong bearing on the "messages". The reader are thus, unfortunately, stripped of the ability to judge the messengers along with the messages.

2- You suggest Googling Hrant Dink. Fine. Then how about Googling the following two words: Armenian, Terrorism? Then you will read what the Western experts and home security officials say about th Armenian terrorists.

3- None of this takes away from the ROCK SOLID FACT that no Armenian marched for a Turk assassinated by an Armenian in more than 70 occasions since 1973 but more than 100,000 Turks marched in protest of killing of an Armenian by a Turk? And that Armenians raised funds for Armenian killers many times, whereas Turks rejected and disowned the Turkish killer the very first time it happened? Can you not see the vast difference here? Can you not see that the Armenian community owns and supports Armenian terrorism whereas The Turkish community soundly rejects the only hate crime committed by a Turk on an Armenian since 1923? Must you be an Armenian not to see this and not to feel this in your bones? Do you believe that all those innocent Turkish victims of Armenian terrorists since 1973 "deserved death" because they were born Turkish? How can you not see that while Dink's Turkish murderer was turned over to police by no other than his shocked and disappointed Turkish father, more than 100 Armenian terrorists (ASALA, JCAG, etc.) over the past 30+ years were revered, supported, and financed by the Armenian community? Does your hate for all things Turkish make you this blind?

Prof. Justin McCarthy, professor of history at the University of Louisville, Kentucky, U.S.A. presented a very insightful paper on Armenian terrorism at the Symposium on International Terrorism, held by Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey, in 1984, titled : "Armenian Terrorism: History As Poison And Antidote".

After a brief introduction explaining why history is both the cause and the cure for Armenian terrorism, McCarthy state that today's Armenian terrorists are unique, in the sense that there are no Armenians to liberate from foreign oppression or domestic persecution or any other cause; the only justification they claim is vengeance for what they believe are past wrongs. Even if they moved all the diaspora Armenians to eastern Anatolia, which they perceive as being a part of Armenia, McCarthy says, the Armenian population would be about a 10% of the total, making this dream practically impossible to achieve. Without a realizable political goal, motivation behind the Armenian terrorism is reduced to taking revenge. The Armenians blame Turks for varied and numerous crimes, the two of which, the most important ones, are the Turkish rejection of an Armenian state in Eastern Anatolia and the AAG of 1.5 million or more Armenians during and after World War I. Since these views are accepted as true by the majority of Westerners, the Armenian terrorism, victimizing innocent diplomats and others, has caused little outrage, as they are seen as justifiable vengeance, not murder. Chasing the terrorists is treating the symptoms while the disease, teaching the young hatred based on bad history, remains.

"... One of the tragedies of scholarship on the Middle East is that independent
historians have long avoided the Armenian Question. Studying the Armenians
potentially brought with it little praise and much loss. I must admit that my
own intention was not to study Armenians. As a demographer I was fascinated
by the fact that histories of the Ottoman Empire had been written for 300
years, but no one had an accurate idea of who actually had lived in the
Empire. I began studying the population of Ottoman Anatolia to find how many
Anatolians were in each of the millets and what had actually happened to the
Anatolians in the course of the wars that ended the Ottoman Empire. I first
discovered that something was wrong with the accepted wisdom on the Armenians
when I found that many more Anatolian Muslim had died than Armenians. That
did not seem to be genocide..."

McCarthy's researches have revealed a number of facts that invalidate the Armenian positions concerning Turks and Armenians. The facts were based statistics on Armenian population compiled by the Ottomans, which were demographically consistent, accurate data, collected by a government that needed to know Armenian numbers for its own intelligence.

"... In no way were (the statistics) politically or propagandistically motivated, and when they were collected, before the war, the Ottoman government did not expect that they would ever be used in arguments over an Armenian problem. They were, in short, the type of population statistics gathered by every government in the world. However, although the statistics have been available for 70 years, they remained unused. Politicians, terrorists, and Armenian scholars have preferred their own guesses to accurate figures. Their guesses, of course, have supported their contentions that millions of Armenians had been killed or driven from Armenia. Real statistics show a far different picture.

First, despite the presence of 'Armenia' on nineteenth century maps and the assertions of European politicians who had no way to know the truth, there was no Armenia in the Ottoman Empire. The area claimed as "Turkish Armenia" was commonly known as the Six Vilayets--Van, Bitlis, Mamuretulaziz, Diyarbakir, Sivas and Erzurum. In 1912, there were only 870,000 Armenians in the Six Vilayets. Armenians were less than one-fifth of the population of the Six Vilayets as a whole. In some provinces of the Six Vilayets, Muslims outnumbered Armenians 6 to 1. Moreover, Armenians were settled all over the Ottoman Empire, not simply in the east. As many Armenians lived in the rest of the Ottoman Empire as in the Six Vilayets. However, even if all the Armenians of the Empire had come together to live in Eastern Anatolia, the Muslims would still have outnumbered them by more than two to one. The impossibility of building a modern state with such numbers is obvious.

Second, the alleged genocide of the Armenians: Barring the latter-day discovery of a personal diary, no one will ever be able to prove what Talaat Pasa really intended for the Ottoman Armenians. We now know that, like the infamous Hitler quote, the so-called extermination orders of Talat Pasa were forgeries. The only relevant Ottoman documents that have come to light indicate a generally solicitous attitude toward deported Armenians. Yet Muslims surely did kill Armenians during World War I, and Armenians surely died during the deportations. No matter how many Ottoman documents surface
showing benign Ottoman intentions toward Armenians, it is doubtful if any Armenian apologist will ever accept such documents as accurate. Numbers present more indisputable evidence. They allow one to view the situation in Eastern Anatolia during World War I without the blinders of ethnic identity. Statistics have no millet.

The history of the events in Eastern Anatolia is no one-sided tale of massacre and deportation. In April of 1915, the last act of the long Ottoman-Russian wars began. Armenian leaders in the Ottoman Empire adopted two stances toward the war: The Armenian "establishment" -businessmen, churchmen, and educators--professed their neutrality, although they accepted conscription and other unavoidable duties as citizens. Armenian revolutionary groups stepped up their anti-Ottoman activities, including the stock-piling of arms in Eastern Anatolian cities. On the other side, far from professing
neutrality, Armenians in the Russian Empire supported the Czar and Armenians joined Russian forces with the intention of taking Ottoman Armenia and uniting with their brothers.

Both the Ottomans and the Russians cleared border areas of part of their population in preparation for war. The Ottoman government, remembering Armenian support for Russia in past wars, decided to remove Armenians from potential war zone and communications centers. Whether or not hindsight and modern morality tell us that the deportations were a mistake, no one can seriously doubt that the Ottoman government had reason to distrust many of the Armenians of Anatolia. Because of the assistance given by the Armenians to invading Russian armies in 1828, and 1877, the Ottomans decided that they could not trust the Armenians, much as the United States, with much less justification, decided they could not trust Americans of Japanese ancestry in World War II. A forced deportation of Armenians was begun. In areas in which Ottomans authority was weak and in war zones, Armenians suffered terribly. They were set upon by Kurdish bandits and even by some Ottoman government officials. Interestingly, the latter were often Muslims who themselves had been exiled from the Russian Empire, their places taken by Armenians in the Caucasus. In areas to the south where Ottoman authority was strong, such incidents were few and the refugees arrived in Syria in relative safety (as attested by the Armenians themselves).

Before the deportations had begun, the first ottoman thrust into Russian territory had failed and the Russians had begun a strong counter-attack. At the back of the Ottoman army, Armenian revolutionaries seized and held the city of Van, displacing thousands of Muslims, who became refugees. These were soon joined by 800,000 fellow Muslims, refugees from areas taken by the Russian army. By the time warfare ceased more than 400,000 Turks evicted from the Caucasus had been added to the refugee numbers. The Muslim refugees were persecuted by the same Kurdish bandits who attacked the Armenian refugees, and they were killed by Armenian revolutionaries and Armenian volunteers from the Caucasus. The fate of the Muslim and Armenian refugees was remarkably similar. War, bandits, starvation, and disease killed Turks and Armenians
indiscriminately.

By the end of the Eastern Anatolian wars, 1.2 million Muslims from Eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus had become refugees. More than one million of the Muslims of Eastern Anatolia had died, as had at least 130,000 Caucasian refugee Muslims. 870,000 of the Armenians of the Six Vilayets had become refugees or had died. In Anatolia as a whole, 600,000 Armenians and 2.5 million Muslims had died. If this was genocide, it was a strange genocide, indeed, one in which many more killers than victims perished.

If the case against a genocide of Armenians needed any further proof, one would only need to have to look to Istanbul, the capital of the Empire and the area most under government control. In Istanbul, to the shame and guilt of the Ottoman government, perhaps 200 Armenian politicians were executed without trial. But all the rest of the Istanbul Armenians, who presented no threat to the Ottomans, lived through the wars. Their sons and daughters live in Istanbul today. Considering actual genocide in its worst manifestation, Nazi Germany, can one imagine Hitler sparing the lives of all the Jews in
Berlin?

Any comparison between the Ottomans and the Nazis is ludicrous, as is the use of the word genocide to describe the actions of the Turks. What passed between the Armenians and the Turks was not genocide; it was war..."

McCarthy then discusses the series of nineteenth century Turco-Russian Wars, stating that 1915 could be considered the last in that series, which caused the Armenians to lose their place in Anatolia. Professor points to the Russian conquests of the lands of the Crimean Tatars in 1700s, which expand into the Caucasus in the 1800s. The Muslim majority of both areas were deported as part of the Russian colonial policy, and replaced them by Christians imported from elsewhere.

"...Between 1828 and 1920, more than two million Muslims were forcibly evacuated and an unknown number killed. Those who fled found refuge in the Ottoman Empire. In the process, whole nations--the Crimean Tatars, The Abkhazians, The Circassians--ceased to exist in their ancestral homes. .."

McCarthy says Slavic Christians were brought to the Crimea and North Caucasus, while Armenians were welcomed to the South Caucasus.

"... Beginning with the war of 1828-29, the Russians promised privileges and autonomy (a promise still undelivered) to the Armenians, in return for Armenian support against the Turks. Twice, in 1828 and 1854, the Russians invaded Eastern Anatolia, each time favoring local Armenians, and twice they left, taking 100,000 Armenian sympathizers with them to the Caucasus, where the Armenians took the place of emigrant and deceased Turks. (The province of Erivan, the present-day Soviet Republic of Armenia, was 80%
Muslim before 1828). In the 1877-78 war, the Russians took and held the Kars-Ardahan region, driving out Muslims and providing a home for 70,000 Armenians in the region, many of whom came from other areas of Anatolia. Perhaps 60,000 Armenians went to the Russian Caucasus in the troubles of 1895-96. Finally, the migration of the World War I era resulted in an almost even exchange of 400,000 Armenians from Eastern Anatolia for 400,000 Muslims from the Caucasus....Figures on refugee numbers are somewhat imprecise and are the subject of on-going research. However, we know that from the 1820s to the 1920s, almost 600,000 Armenians went from the Ottoman Empire to Russia. Two million Muslims came from Russia to Turkey. Once again, the suffering was far from one-sided..."

McCarthy concluded that Russian Imperial expansion upset the traditional balance of the peoples of the Caucasus and Eastern Anatolia, which caused all the peoples to suffer.

"...In terms of number, dead and deportations, those who suffered most were the Crimean and Caucasian Muslims. If any people were the victims of genocide, it was the Crimean Tatars, victims in their own homeland of a planned extermination begun by Catherine the Great and ended by Joseph Stalin. Yet those who are all too willing to consider Muslims as the agents of genocide seem strangely unwilling to consider Muslims as its victims. .."

McCarthy says all this is a story of human suffering with no hero or villains, only victims, whether Turkish or Armenian. Instead of telling this truth, a myth of the Evil Turk and the Good Armenian has arisen, perpetuated by stories of the sufferings of the
Armenians, which are often true, but they never mention the equal or greater sufferings of the Turks.

"... The myth has been generally believed by non-Armenians because it fits well into a larger, centuries-old myth--the Terrible Turk. To Europeans, who had feared Turks for more than five centuries, the myth of the Armenian genocide seemed just one more example of what they had been taught was the savagery of the Turk. It spoke to a
prejudice that had been nurtured by textbooks, sermons, folk tales, and ancestral fears of the horsemen riding out of the East. The false image of the Turks was too strong to be affected by facts.

When Turks protested that their side should be heard and that their dead should be mourned just as Armenian dead were mourned, they found no sympathy and no understanding. No matter the evidence they presented, nothing they said was believed, and soon the Turks ceased their protests against the injustice. Under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, they busied themselves with the creation of a new Republic, assuming that their success as a modern nation would be the best weapon against the image of the Terrible Turk..."

McCarthy then talks about the success of Turks for being accepted by the West as friends and allies.

"...However, Turkish silence has done nothing to kill the myth of the Armenian genocide. A vocal, well-educated, and media conscious group of Armenians, believing in
their cause and anxious that their children learn to believe as they do, have kept alive the false picture of the genocide. They have succeeded in perpetuating the myth and strengthening its grip. The false picture of Armenian genocide has become the only picture seen..."

McCarthy then gives an example of biased history from a recent history book, The book, The Modern Middle East and North Africa, by Lois Aroian and Richard Mitchell, published by Macmillan, 1984, which had a section titled 'The Armenian Demise'. He quotes the following for this chapter:

'...Armenians throughout Anatolia began marching southward or eastward into the Syrian desert wastes. Turkish and Kurdish forces denied them rest, food, and water. Thousands died on the way. Those who did not were often killed when they reached Dar al-Zor on the Euphrates. Most Armenians caught in the east were killed outright.'

McCarthy says he was especially bothered by one comment where the writers said the historians have not determined how many Armenians died. He says he thought done that.

"...The lack of information on the Armenian dead is explained by the assertion that 'the Ottoman government imprisoned and later killed most of the Armenian educated elite--writers, teachers, businessmen, and prominent clergy who might have written about the event.' In the end, despite the avowed lack of evidence, the authors found a number after all--'Including perhaps 200,000 executed by the government, historians generally accept that as many as 1.5 million Armenians may have died.' Some of what is written on the Armenians in the book is half true. Some is completely false. None of it is completely true.

Of course, one of the great benefits in writing a textbook is that you do not have to prove your assertions. An occasional reference such as 'historians generally accept' is considered to be proof enough. Reading the text, one could be pardoned for thinking that only Armenians suffered, since only one part of one sentence is devoted to all of the Muslim dead of the time--'Greek, Kurdish, and Turkish noncombatants in Anatolia died during the war of hunger and disease, but they were not singled out for death in an
organized campaign.' No mention is made of Armenian or Greek attacks on Muslims, both of which were organized campaigns. Only two paragraphs are given to the entire Turkish War of Independence. .."

McCarthy says the examples of such historical distortions are many, leading to a situation where the Armenian Question is seldom mentioned without accompanying half-truths and falsifications. He says a new wave of false history is observed in the West:

"...Armenian apologists have succeeded in tying themselves to those who wish never to
forget the suffering of the Jewish Holocaust, and the Armenian experience has been portrayed as a 'proto-Holocaust'. Television shows and newspaper articles have repeated and reinforced the old myth, accepted because Europeans and Americans have never been told the truth. A new generation of Armenians is learning the stories that will produce future terrorists.

The lesson is obvious--silence does not work. Historical lies, unless they are countered, will perpetuate themselves. As long as Armenian children believe that their great-grand-fathers were murdered by Turks, some Armenian children will kill in what they believe is revenge. And as long as the world believes in Turkish guilt, little will be done to stop the killers.

The solution is a difficult one--the truth must be fearlessly proclaimed. I say fearlessly, because one American professor, Stanford Shaw, and his family have already been physically attacked for his statements on the fate of the Armenians. Given the intensity of belief in the myth of the Terrible Turk, it may be that the truth will not be heard. Nevertheless, the truth must be spoken. Scholars, especially European and American scholars, must call for the independent and unbiased study of history.

McCarthy believes there will be no quick solution as many years may pass before young Armenians realize that their cause is not just. He says if the true history of the Ottoman Armenians was widely known thirty years ago, there would be no Armenian terrorism today. He feels it is the duty of the historians to insure that thirty years from now the same statement cannot be made.

And the professor concludes his paper with a truly marvelous conclusion:

"...I began by saying that the best weapon against Armenian terrorism is the
study of history. It might be better said that the best weapon is truth..."

***********
What is the connection of Armenian terrorism with the "alleged" Armenian genocide? Plenty. Armenian today are doing what their grandfathers did 100-150 years ago: resorting to harassment, violence, and terrorism to have their political aims accomplished. Truth-seeking fair-minded readers saw in this communication since last November how Armenian do not view Armenian terrorism as anything to be alarmed about, let alone protest against. None in the AFATH community ever protested by marching any act of terrorism by Armenians around the globe the way the Turks did in Istanbul last January. The ARF, Hunchak, Ramgavar, and other Armenian terrorists organization wreaked havoc in the Ottoman countryside between 1860-1920 and none saw anything wrong with killing innocent Muslims, mostly Turks. This trend unfortunately continues today as you saw Rich denying Armenian terrorism over and over again.

Terrorism is only one of the 4 T 's that disprove Armenian allegations of genocide: the other 3 T's are
Armenain treason, Armenian tumult (armed revolts against their own government) and Turkish suffering caused by the Armenian nationalists.

Genocide is a legal verdict that can only be given by a "competent tribunal" (like Nuremberg). Such a court was attempted by the British crown courts in Malta during 1919-1921 and efforts were abandoned when no evidence of Armenian claims of systematic killing were unearthed after two years of search in the Ottoman archives, along with British and American archives. Turks were let go without filing a single charge against them.

And that's the end of all bogus genocide claims today...

As I stated before, our readers are getting a very clear descript version of unadulterated racism and bigotry.

The only thing that is (as you state) "bogus" is your credibility. I've already shown our readers how racist and bigoted you are, yet you keep posting broad generalities of one ethnic people.

I don't think anyone told you when you came to the United States but it is not an excepted norm to use broad generalities toward anyone or ethnic people. It is in Turkey but not here.

Please keep posting it seems to make you feel good, more-so, it further justifies my point of your lack of tollerance toward any ethnic people other then your own.

You stated before that your thoughts are on behalf of 72 million Turkish people.

What an embarrasment to Turkey, more-so to humanity.

I have shown how the Armenian terror groups intimidated, harassed, and murdered countless Muslims, mostly Turks, between 1860-1920 (See above for papers presented by prominent historians Prof. Heath Lowry and Prof. Justin McCarthy.)

I have also listed the terrorist activities of the Armenian terror groups around the globe from 1973 to present, including right here in the U.S. ( i.e. by ASALA, JCAG, others)

I have thus documented how the Armenian community supported and financed those terrorists when they were caught by taking up collections at Armenian churches and showing up for support during court proceedings.

All told, I have tried to document a period of over "150 years Armenian terrorist acts" (assassinations, bombings, bomb threats, assaults, batteries, etc.) , over a geography that is "most of the globe", and how the Armenian communities seem to embrace terrorism. There was not one, REPEAT NOT ONE, demonstration or protest march by Armenians DENOUNCING Armenian killers in OVER 150 YEARS and around the GLOBE!

Then I have contrasted all this obvious trend and plain fact with the strong Turkish reaction last January to Dink's killer: killer's shocked and disappointed Turkish father turned his own son over to police; the killer was caught in 36 hours with help from ordinary Turkish citizens; and more than 100,000 people marched down Istanbul streets "We are all Dink! We Are all Armenians today!" (note: Armenian population in Turkey is 60,000 and not all walked); Turkish political leaders denounced the hate crime in no uncertain terms... Isn't this enough to see that Turks reject hate crimes and terrorism?

NOW IF YOU STILL CANNOT SEE THE STARK CONTRAST HERE BETWEEN THE ATTITUDES OF THE ARMENIAN AND TURKISH COMMUNITIES TOWARDS HATE CRIMES AND TERRORISM, THEN I WOULD ADVISE THAT YOU ENROLL IN A SENSITIVITY COURSE.

IF YOU CANNOT SEE THE DIFFERENCES HIGHLIGHTED ABOVE BETWEEN THE TWO COMMUNITIES, THEN NO AMOUNT OF DOCUMENTATION CAN CHANGE YOUR PREJUDICE AND BIGOTRY.

Too bad for you. But that is your problem. Since I am not really writing for you, but for the benefit of the fair-minded truth seekers out there, I feel I should continue to take a closer look at the Armenian terror groups in our midst. These facts must be brought forward for all to see (not for you appreciate or, God forbid, change your mind)

Today, I will show you how some Armenian terrorists befriended some American politicians and journalists and even appeared in local newspaper columns as "respected community leaders" until caught in the act, arrested, tried, convicted, and jailed. None of those politician or journalist friends of the Armenian terrorist came forward with a statement of remorse or apology for "having misled" the unsuspecting American citizens about the respectability of at least one such respected-Armenian-community-leader-turned-terrorist. To date, I am still waiting to hear one...

None issued reports, either, of how some of those pronouncements made under the request and manipulation of the convicted Armenian terrorist. Wouldn't you want to know what political resolutions were signed into effect by those politicians and glorified by those journalists currying favor with the Armenian leader-turned-terrorist?

I know most readily demonize Turkey and Turks for the alleged genocide, but I still think it would be the proper thing to do for those American politicians and journalists to come clean on their ties with the Armenian terrorist, even if they think those ties are insignificant. It is the thought that counts. It is the gesture of honesty and fairness. Is it too much to expect such behavior from people enjoying public trust?

*******************

1- THE ARMENIAN SECRET ARMY FOR THE LIBERATION OF ARMENIA (ASALA)

www.ataa.org

ASALA is a transnational, ethnic terrorist organization that espouses a Marxist-Leninist political ideology and solidarity with leftist and separatist movements worldwide. Its principal goal is re-establishing "the historical Armenian homeland", an area that includes eastern Turkey, northern Iran, and Armenia. ASALA also demands an admission of guilt from Turkey for "the alleged genocide of Armenians" during Ottoman Empire, as well as end to discrimination they claim Armenians "suffer" in Turkey.

To further its goals ASALA has committed a series of assassinations, bombings and assaults. ASALA terrorism has progressed through two phases. During the first phase, the group carried out attacks against Turkish diplomatic personnel and installations to focus to attention "Armenian Question" and gain support among Armenians. In the second phase, ASALA expanded its operations to include attack against "imperialists" targets. The first of these were bombings in November 1979 against the KLM and Lufthansa offices in Paris and TWA's office in Madrid. In addition, the group launched attacks against the citizens and property of countries holding ASALA member in prison. The policy of indiscriminate violence and disputes over leadership eventually caused a split in ASALA. Following the July 1983 ASALA bombing of the Turkish Airlines ticket counter at Orly Airport in Paris that killed 7, a dissident group, ASALA-RM, was formed.ASALA-RM views indiscriminate "blind" terrorism detrimental to the Armenian cause and favors limiting attacks Turkish targets.ASALA-M continues to favor unrestricted terrorism against Turkish and "imperialist" targets.

Since the split, ASALA's members apparently have been preoccupied with an internal power struggle, leading a reduction in terrorist activity. ASALA, however, was reported to have been among those involved in a series of bombings in Paris September 1986 that killed and injured some 200.The attacks were claimed by the Committee for solidarity with Arab and Middle Eastern Prisoners and were designed to pressure the French Government to release three terrorists prisoners, including ASALA member Varoujan Garabedjian. ASALA has continued to issue threats against French interests to force his release.

2- JUSTICE COMMANDOS OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE (JCAG)

www.ataa.org

The JCAG is an Armenian nationalist revolutionary organization founded in 1975 seeking to reestablish an independent Armenian state within the territory occupied by the former Republic of Armenia during World War I within eastern Turkey. It has pursued this goal through attacks on Turkish diplomats and economic interests outside Turkey in the belief that Turkey bears responsibility for the slaughter of Armenians and the destruction of the Armenian Republic that occurred in 1915.

JCAG differs from the other major Armenian terrorist group, the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA.) in two important respects: First, JCAG is primarily nationalistic rather than Marxist-Leninist. Therefore, it has relied almost exclusively on private support from Armenian communities rather than state-sponsorship from countries hostile to Turkey. Second, the members of JCAG, being very Westernized nationalists, value Western and world public opinion highly and, therefore, take pains to avoid harming non-Turkish nationals mindful of the potential harm such actions could render the Armenian cause. Nonetheless, JCAG has conducted attacks on Turkish targets within the United States, making themselves felt there as a very serious terrorist threat to law and order.

An analysis of 29 noteworthy actions by JCAG in the period from 1975-1983 showed that 52 percent involved assassination of Turkish diplomats, 2 of them in the United States and another in Canada; 45 percent involved bombings and arsons of Turkish diplomatic, tourism, and commercial offices; while 3 percent represented an unfulfilled threat against Turkish targets. JCAG terrorism within the United States took place entirely from January 1982 to May 1982.

On 29 January 1982, Kemal Arikan, consul general of Turkey in Los Angeles, was shot and killed as he was driving home. On 22 March 1982, the offices of Orhan Gunduz, honorary Turkish consul general in Boston, were firebombed and he himself was shot and killed on 4 May 1982. A conspiracy to bomb the home of the honorary consul general of Turkey in Philadelphia was foiled in October 1982.

On 15 July 1983, the ASALA bombed Orly Airport near Paris, killing 7 and wounding over 60 bystanders. This event led to a crisis within ASALA as many members protested what they believed to be counterproductive violence against non-Turkish nationals. The dissenting faction became known as ASALA-Revolutionary Movement, to be distinguished from the mainline ASALA-Militant.

3- ARMENIAN REVOLUTIONARY ARMY (ARA)

www.ataa.org

Beginning also in July 1983, the name "Justice Commandos of the Armenian Genocide" dropped from use while actions similar to those of JCAG began to be claimed in the name of the "Armenian Revolutionary Army'' (ARA). Many analysts believe that the JCAG merely changed its name to ARA and that it is essentially the same organization. It is also possible that members of ASALA-RM and JCAG may have amalgamated themselves into the new ARA. An analysis of 7 actions by ARA in 1983-1985 show that 43 percent of these involved assassinations; 14 percent involved hostage and siege situations; while one car bombing and an unfilled threat each accounted for 14 percent of ARA activities. While ARA made the same disclaimers as had JCAG that it intended no harm to non-Turkish bystanders in contrast to earlier JCAG operations, at least six non-Turkish nationals were killed as a result of these operations.

4- STRUCTURE OF THE ARMENIAN TERROR GROUPS

www.ataa.org

In fact, very little is known about the memberships of these groups, their internal structures, or their relations with possible sponsor states or with other terrorist groups. What little is known about the Armenian groups indicates that they have been involved in factional disputes and internecine fighting that has reduced their effective presence as terrorist groups since the mid-1980s.

5- ARMENIAN-ON-ARMENIAN TERRORISM

Armenian terrorism is not only directed at Turks, Azerbaijanis, and Georgians, but also Armenian citizens and even elected officials. Following is an excerpt from:

The Glasnost Foundation,
Krimsky val 8 117049, Moscow, Russia,
tel/fax: +7 (095) 299 85 38 ;
E-mail: fondglas@online.ru;
website: www.glasnostmedia.ru.

Here is an example of Armenian-on-Armenian terrorism, which should be treated as the tip of the iceberg, as the scope and depth of political violence in Armenia is only matched by paralyzing corruption and grinding poverty in Armenia. Let's read:

...........................

Glasnost - Media Daily News Service, Wednesday, February 13, 2002 5:42 PM

News Bulletin Glasnost Media, English and Russian versions, February 13, 2002

Armenia: Authorities Covering Up Terrorist Case

According to the former Prime Minister Aram Sarkisyan, an activist of the Anrapetyun party, the investigation of the case of October 27, 1999, when a group of terrorists invaded the Armenian parliament and killed the prime minister, the speaker, and six other legislators, has been exploited as a bludgeon to beat politicians into obedience.

The investigation of the isolated part is allegedly being conducted for the purpose of identifying the organizers and supporters of the terrorist act, but in reality, says Sarkisyan, investigators are questioning people who actually were victims of the attack and who are questioning the validity of the investigation and court findings.

According to Sarkisyan, the authorities know that the Armenian public won't be satisfied with the trial of the five defendants in the Oct.27 case, and therefore are staging a show, which the state-controlled media is presenting as a trial for identifying the organizers of the assassination. The fact that no one is bothering to attend this trial shows, says Sarkisyan, that the people expect it to be a complete flop.

To support his allegations that the authorities were not interested in solving the case, he said that since Oct. 27, the authorities have openly taken steps to assist the terrorists, such as cancellation of the death penalty, release on amnesty grounds of the person accused of covering up the planned assassination, etc.

Letter Distributed By The Writer to The U.S. Media Hours After The Terrorist Attack On The Twin Towers In New York

**************

ARMENIAN PREMIER MEETS WITH RELEASED ASALA MEMBER
RFE/RL 05/08/2001

Meeting in Yerevan on 4 May with Varoujan Garabedian, a former member of ASALA (the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia), Prime Minister Andranik Markarian expressed his "joy" at Garabedian's release from a French jail where he served almost 18 years of a life sentence for his alleged role in the 1983 bombing of the Turkish Airlines Office at Orly airport, Noyan Tapan and RFE/RL's Yerevan bureau reported.

Garabedian, who was born in Syria, was released on the condition that he be expelled to Armenia. The French daily "Liberation" reported at the time of Garabedian's release last month that Yerevan Mayor Robert Nazarian had pledged to provide him with employment and accommodation.

**************

"RESPECTED ARMENIAN LEADER" TURNS OUT TO BE A TERRORIST: THE TOPALIAN CASE

Topalian, a national spokesman for Armenian-Americans, was sentenced to 37 months in prison for having stashed 100 pounds of stolen dynamite in a Bedford storage locker. Authorities accused Topalian, a Beachwood, Ohio, resident and former Cuyahoga Community College vice president, of helping to engineer a campaign of terror against Turks for the "alleged" slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians between 1915 and 1923. (1)

Turkish-Americans who attended the hearing said Topalian, 57, deserved his sentence because his intention to commit hate crimes.

Topalian apologized to U.S. District Judge and asked for leniency. He said he went to church every day to ask God for strength. Charges of conspiracy and terrorism directed against the government of Turkey, Turkish businesses and people of Turkish descent were dropped as part of Topalian's plea agreement. But evidence of such criminality is still admissible in Topalian's sentencing.

Several of his friends and supporters testified that Topalian was a great leader who has enormous compassion for children. But Assistant U.S. Attorneys Thomas J. Gruscinski and Bernard A. Smith argued that Topalian showed no compassion for the children at Childtime Daycare Center, which is just 250 feet from the storage locker. Gruscinski said Topalian never took responsibility for taking those children out of danger. Topalian could have made an anonymous call to police saying there was dynamite in there. The police could have gone and got it or Topalian could have had his friends do it for him. The fact is, he didn't.

Topalian's adult children from his first marriage wrote letters to the judge, describing a loving, caring father who taught them well. But Aldrich said the danger posed by the explosives, stored near the day-care center, a school and a gasoline station, outweighed the testimony of Topalian's friends and family. Aldrich said the best lesson Mr. Topalian could teach his children now was the fact that no one is above the law, no matter how much one believes in the rightness of his cause.

Prosecutors said in documents that Topalian used his first wife, Lucy, to rent the storage locker in 1980, a few years after the explosives were stolen from a mining camp in Kalkaska, Mich. Lucy Topalian used fake names and paid the rent in cash. In 1996, when the payments stopped, the owner of the storage facility tried to clean out the locker and discovered the dynamite inside. Bedford police called the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Over the next three years, ATF Agent Peter J. Elliott linked Topalian to the storage locker and dynamite.

The investigation included linking two hairs on a trench coat in the locker to Topalian through DNA tests. Elliott crisscrossed the country in search of witnesses, including Franklin Rhodes, a Wichita accountant who was pelted with shrapnel from a car bomb that exploded outside the Turkish Mission in New York City in 1980. Authorities linked Topalian to the bombing and said he played a key role in getting the explosives to friends.

During the investigation, Lucy Topalian taped a conversation with her ex-husband about the locker, which she gave to the ATF. Gruscinski said that Topalian, since his arrest, had blamed his ex-wife for his troubles. The remark enraged Topalian's daughters and second wife, Michelle. Topalian's attorney asked Aldrich to keep his client free on bond until August so he could spend time with Alique. Citing tensions between his supporters and foes, Aldrich refused.

"Convicted Armenian-American shows no remorse" complained a letter (2). "The almost-festive reaction by many in the Armenian-American community to Mourad Topalian's two felony convictions, reported by John F. Hagan (May 12), is chilling. Topalian pleaded guilty to illegally storing explosives near a day-care center, elementary school and gas station. When set off at a dump site, an explosive cloud extended 40 to 50 feet in the air. Topalian also confessed to the illegal possession of two machine guns. Both of his crimes are punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment, and, according to the indictment, were motivated by Topalian's aim to publicize the alleged Armenian genocide of 1915."

After listing that since 1973, Armenian extremists have perpetrated more than 200 terrorist incidents against Turkish targets, killing at least 70 and wounding at least 524, the letter concludes:

" Topalian, his lawyers and a substantial segment of the Armenian-American community are treating his felony convictions as a credential for sainthood instead of a time for remorse and renunciation of terrorism. That attitude creates a climate sympathetic to continued Armenian violence and intimidation aimed at Turkish Americans and the government of Turkey. The celebratory tone of the May 12 reporting of a planned benefit concert for Topalian, featuring a wine and cheese reception with convicted Armenian terrorist Karnig Sarkissian and Ensemble, encourages more of the same evil."

President Bush nominated Peter Elliott, 40, of Aurora, Ohio, for the position of Marshall. The top cop nominee, Elliott, tracked down Mourad Topalian, an Armenian-American activist who had stashed 100 pounds of dynamite, blasting caps and other weapons in a Bedford, Ohio, storage locker. Nabbed in 1999, Topalian is serving 37 months in prison on explosives charges. In 2001, Elliott was named "Top Cop of Ohio" by the National Association of Police Organizations. The Capital University graduate also received an excellence award from the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. Before joining ATF as a special agent 10 years ago, Elliott worked for the marshal's service as a deputy. His father once held the same job. Among other tasks, the marshal hunts down fugitives and provides security for federal courts. (3)

****************

(1) JOHN CANIGLIA, The Plain Dealer Reporter, January 25, 2001
(2) BRUCE FEIN, Washington, D.C., The Plain Dealer, May 22, 2000
(3) The Plain Dealer, Cleveland, Jan 31 2003

*****************

If all this cannot jolt you into finally realizing the seriousness of Armenian terrorism, I don't know what can?

And if you cannot appreciate balatant Armenian terrorism, how can you bring yourself to see the other three T's, namely, Armenian treason, Armenian tumult (armed revolts), and Turkish suffering caused by Armenians?

How can we expect you (and others like you) to see the major Armenian role in the Turkish-Armenian conflict?

Devoid of this simple adjustment in Armenian attitudes, baseless claims of Armenian genocide continue unabated...

The US State Department does not list the organizations you mention.

If your so alarmed at the current state of the Armenian Community from your bigoted point of view then by all means complain the US Government.

Link:

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/fs/37191.htm

Current List of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations

Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)
Abu Sayyaf Group
Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade
Ansar al-Islam
Armed Islamic Group (GIA)
Asbat al-Ansar
Aum Shinrikyo
Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA)
Communist Party of the Philippines/New People's Army (CPP/NPA)
Continuity Irish Republican Army
Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group)
HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement)
Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM)
Hizballah (Party of God)
Islamic Jihad Group
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU)
Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) (Army of Mohammed)
Jemaah Islamiya organization (JI)
al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad)
Kahane Chai (Kach)
Kongra-Gel (KGK, formerly Kurdistan Workers' Party, PKK, KADEK)
Lashkar-e Tayyiba (LT) (Army of the Righteous)
Lashkar i Jhangvi
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)
Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group (GICM)
Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK)
National Liberation Army (ELN)
Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLF)
PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC)
al-Qa'ida
Real IRA
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)
Revolutionary Nuclei (formerly ELA)
Revolutionary Organization 17 November
Revolutionary People's Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C)
Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC)
Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso, SL)
Tanzim Qa'idat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) (al-Qaida in Iraq) (formerly Jama'at al-Tawhid wa'al-Jihad, JTJ, al-Zarqawi Network)
United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC)

---------

I am sure our readers have aready figured out who is so misdirected.

The only ones who have sympathy to your posts are very few (if not nil), including Turkish Government deniers and their agents.

The point is the Armenian genocide and your denial of it, nothing more.

Your posts are merely trying to cast the denialist victimizer Government, Turkey as victims.

Whatever happened after the fact of the Armenian Genocide does not minimize or make it untrue.

Your also referencing www.ataa.org, not suprizing they are agents in Armenian Genocide denial. I am sure you call this organization home.

Are you denying Armenian terrorism?

Are you ignoring the more than 70 Turkish victims of Armenian terrorists since 1973?

Are you denying the hundreds of assassinations, bombings, bomb threats, assaults and batteris committed by hate-filled Armenians?

In your mind, am I making tese up?

Are you dismissing Armenian aggression and ethnic cleansing in Azerbaijan?

Are you aware that Armenian occupies by force of arms 20% of Azerbaijan proper today?

Are you denying the Van rebellion of 1915?

Are you denying violent Armenian revolts between the 1890-1915 period? (Do you want me to list them here?)

Are you denying exitence of Ottoman-Armenians under the invaders' (i.e. Russian, French, and British)uniforms?

Are you denying killing of Ottoman-Muslims by Ottoman-Armenians?

Do you wiah me to quote here what Armenian leadesr have said, written, and published after the World War One?

If Turks killed all the Armenians during WWI, then where did you and thousands like you come from? A Jurassic park for Armenians?

If Turks hated and killed all Armenians, why are there still Armenisns in Istanbul today?

Why were Armenians in Edirne, Izmir, and other Western Ottoman-cities and regions not subjected to TERESET (temporary resettleent)?

Why? Why? Why?

The fact of the matter is, Armenian plans of finishing the Turk with the help of the allied invaders backfired. Armenian plans of gcreating a greater ARmenia on Turkish soil were doomed from the start, because the ARmenians consitiuted only a MINORITY in the Ottoman lands they coveted. Armenians were only used by th allies for the slefish reasons of the allies. After the war, the Armenians begged for a place at the peace conference table (Paris, 1919) and were finally allwed an "observer status". Imagine that! For all the shameless treason and backstabbing, and killing your Turkish neighbors, and licking the boots of the invaders, and, and, and...all the Armenians got was "an observer status"!!!

Even that is too much, if you ask me... Terrorism, treason, and revolts mean you are not trustworthy... If you can bacstab your fellow Ottoman citizens today, what is there to prevent Armenians from backstabbing their new "fellow citizens" in any allied country?

Isn't it what you do best?

Begging, crying, asking, backsatbbing, revolting, terrorizing, betraying, ethnic cleansing, aggression, demanding, lying, fabricating, distroting, falsifying, defaming, demonizing?

Did I say begging?

Turkey has committed atrocities against its own citizens.

That is something you conviently overlook, not so with the International Community.

The questions you raise try and divert the main point and is in line with the Turkish government circumventing, and denying the Armenian genocide.

Nice attempt but the International Community has listened to this same song and dance for over 90 years.

Keep posting your bigotry does not stop proving itself to our readers.

You don't believe anything I say, although I document everything. I say let's let readers can decide who is telling the truth. After all, I am not the one who is hiding behind a fictitious first name all these months and spew Armenian propaganda. I have signed my full under every statement I make, as I always do, as I believe in openness and honesty.

Since you will not believe me just because I am Turkish, perhaps you will believe one of your fellow Armenians. What follows is a remarkable testimony by an Armenian-American who is honest and brave enough to sign his full name after his messages.

Ed Tashji, American-born son of Ottoman-Armenian and Ottoman-Syrian Orthodox parents, has devoted his whole adult life to defending Turkey and Turkish culture against un-relenting defamation campaigns launched by the A.F.A.T.H. community in the U.S. His love for Turkey and Turks is such that he still refers to Turkey as "my country"; his car plate reads "Vatan"; he wears gold crescent and star necklace everyday; carries the largest Turkish flag every year at the Turkish American Day Parade (May 19) in New York; and has written thousands of letters to U.S. politicians, media, companies, and whoever else would listen, enlightening them about the facts surrounding Turkish history.

I am honored to get to know and befriend Ed Tashji when I lived in New York (1982-1985). Our friendship blossomed into one of the most enduing relations over the years when both of us found ourselves fighting against the same injustice, bias, and bigotry dished out by the notorious Armenian lobby onto Turkey, Turks, and Turkish-Americans.

His work to discredit the AAG did not go unnoticed. All Turkish ambassadors to Washington D.C. since 1960s have honored him during Republic Day balls. All Turkish presidents since 1960 (i.e. Cevdet Sunay, Fahri Koruturk, Kenan Evren, Turgut Ozal, and Suleyman Demirel) have given him a one-on-one audience.

Hulki Cevizoglu, Turkey's Jim Lehrer if you like, devoted an entire TV program of "Ceviz Kabugu" (lasting more than 3 hours) to Ed Tashji, discussing a wide variety of subjects from personal upbringing, hobbies and interests, to politics, history, and anti-Turkish lobbies in the US. Reportedly, there weren't many "dry eyes" left in the entire country of Turkey when Tashji, upon request, sang some sad Turkish songs of the WWI era, that he learned from his mother, many of them long forgotten even in Turkey.

Ed Tashji has held the position of the director of the public relations committee of FTAA many years in the past 20 years. His loving wife of 40+ years, Mary Tashji, also an ethnic Armenian, has been fully supportive of Ed's actions. Mary was always by Ed's side in whatever Ed Tashji said or did. Tashji died in 2005 in New York. Mary Tashji, his widow, still lives in New York.

Tashji also wrote a most revealing auto-biography called "Armenian Allegations: The Truth Must Be Told" (ISBN: 1930574282) , where he shed light on the Armenian agitation and terror during 1890-1915 period, from an Armenian family's aspect.

************
Legend:
A.F.A.T.H. = Armenian Falsifiers and Turk Haters
A.A.G. = The alleged Armenian genocide
F.T.A.A. = Federation Of Turkish American Associations

************

Ed Tashji's sworn statement was printed by F.T.A.A. in New York in 1992 and distributed widely to politicians, media, and academicians in the United States in order to counter the misinformation and defamation campaign waged by the AFATH community. F.T.A.A. included the following foreword with each mailing:

" We, concerned American citizens who are proud of their Turkish heritage, are deeply saddened by recent attempts, SJR 212 and HJR 417, to falsely re-write our history through legislation. Both of these resolutions view the Turkish-Armenian issue from only one side: the Armenian side...

We, law-abiding. hard-working, tax-paying, god-fearing members of the Turkish-American community, are offended by the unfortunate resolutions SJR 212 and HJR 417, which seem to serve no purpose other than to slander our ancestors... The charge of "genocide" is based on "selective review" of available sources, therefore, it's bad history which is why SJR 212 and HJR 417 are bad resolutions...

We, the people, oppose SJR 212 and HJR 417, because both resolutions are factually misleading, historically biased. socially explosive, politically divisive, morally wrong, and are simply 'un-American'.

How do you fight misrepresentation? We believe you fight it by Introducing facts, not fiction! And that's exactly what we are going to attempt to do here, in this little booklet now...and In others like it that will follow in the future...

Please join us now for a truly unique story: that of an Armenian-American who was born in New York In 1932 of an Armenian mother and a Syrian Orthodox father. Both mother and father had been eye-witnesses to the tragic events of WV/I in eastern Anatolia... See if the true suffering and loss they experienced was not, in actual fact, shared by all the peoples of the region... See if they taught their American born sons "their suffering was genocide" or whether they urged their sons to "hate the Turk"... See !f what's espoused In SJR 212 and HJR 417 has anything to do with reality... Maybe then, and only then, the sponsors will find it In their hearts to see things as they really were, and not as some Armenian radicals want them to be seen... "

Through the remarkable sworn statement of ED WARD TASHJI, you will develop an insight into what it is that kept the Turks and Armenians in peaceful co-existence for more than six centuries... and how "an unsuccessful uprising" was packaged and marketed by some radical leaders In the Armenian community as "genocide by the Turkish rulers" and how some young Armenian students were indoctrinated to "hate the Turk".., Here Is a "primary source" telling it like It was and still Is... We are still hopeful that truth, love, and peace will prevail in the end?

We, the people, in the name of truth, oppose SJR 212 and HJR 417!

Federation of Turkish-American Societies
821 United Nations Plaza
New York, N.Y 10017
June 1992

* * *

1989 Sworn Statement By Edward Tashji

( Electronic format available at :

http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:hmeWJw5K5WkJ:www.tallarmeniantale.com )

The following commentary is presented as a sworn affidavit by the undersigned, and Is intended to express explicitly my position on the subject of Turkish-Armenian relations. Being of sound mind and body, fully cognizant of my statements, free of any coercion and/or any suggestion of any monetary recompense, -- I do hereby declare the comments in this written material are solely mine and for which I take full responsibility. My signature follows this declaration and It will appear at the conclusion of this commentary.

Edward Tashji

This is not intended to portray even a semblance of any historical research, nor to create a subterfuge in the expression of my thinking and sincere feelings on a subject to which I have devoted a lifetime of attention. Simply stated, these pages are intended to reveal my position on a highly emotional issue based upon childhood experiences, an exposure to both the Armenian and Turkish communities, and as a result of long years of effort.

The purpose of this life-long effort has been and, by the grace of God will continue to be, two-fold:

Firstly, to continue the bond of brotherhood between the Armenian and the Turkish peoples.

Secondly, with the continuance of the six centuries of trust and harmony, to eradicate an infectious hatred which has manifested itself in innocent hearts and minds of succeeding generations.

To say that my task has been most difficult and potentially dangerous to my life is not an exaggeration, as the content of this commentary will confirm.

The average American is unaware that a serious problem between these ancestral brothers even exists. However, as a result of a blatant anti-Turkish posture on the part of our news media, together with the acceptance by many members of Congress of one version of a tragic story, the Turkish Nation and its God-fearing people are being accused of "genocide."

The absurdity of the charge is equal only to the mindless "hate merchants" within the Armenian community. So why should my pro-Turkish position be of interest to anyone outside the Turkish Community? It should, I say, it must, I emphasize, because I am not Turkish nor am I of the Moslem faith; In reality I am a Christian and an Armenian!!

I was born In Troy, New York -- In 1932 -- as the second son of an Armenian mother and a Syrian Orthodox father, who had been eyewitness to the tragic events which took place In Ottoman Turkey during the First World War. In spite of their suffering, in spite of their losses, in our home, our parents had taught us not to hate the Turkish people, in fact, just the contrary, was instilled in our hearts. We learned the realities of those events about which the West has accepted one interpretation as historical fact.

My wife's background is similar to my own, except that both of her parents were Armenian. Her support of my efforts and her endless patience have been my greatest source of encouragement.

Do you think, dear reader, any book, any newspaper account, or any politician could outweigh the Influence upon me by my parents who were there!? They had no reason to give me false information, and their greatest gift to me was to love the traditions and culture of our peoples. Because of their wisdom, their compassion and their humanity, I was destined to be FREE of all animosity. Based upon THEIR comments to me, and after years of study and effort, (which cannot be described here), I offer for your consideration the following facts which should be recognized by every member of Congress:

1. That the Armenian people had suffered in Ottoman Turkey during the First World War is beyond dispute. Their suffering was brought about as a result of the ravages of war; they suffered as did the Arab, the Jew, the Syrian Orthodox, the Greek, as well as the Turkish Moslem. The suffering of the Armenians was NOT as a result of a "genocide"! To this day, the other ethnic and religious groups which had endured those terrible days, HAVE NOT referred to being the victims of "genocide" In Turkey! But Armenian extremists have used the term "genocide" as a way of concealing their own crimes:

2. My mother was born in Balikesir, not far from the city of Izmir. In her town she had remembered that there were organized Armenian political factions determined to overthrow the government, and engaged in war activities against Turkish military forces as well as thousands of innocent civilians. These groups were active In Turkey then, as they continue to be to this day IN the United States. These are the names of the infamous groups: the Ramgavar, the Huntchak, and the fanatical Dasnaksakgan, (all spelled phonetically). These armed revolutionaries were headed by a maniacal fringe who had even attacked Armenians who did not support them in their treachery and disloyalty against a country where for seven centuries they had prospered and enjoyed total freedom.

3. As a child, my mother had learned a song which had been taught in Armenian school to all the children, The following Is a translation, from the Armenian, of the only words I remember:
"Let us slaughter the Turks -- Let us establish our own country..." What would be our reaction if any cultural or religious community taught their children to kill Americans?!

4. Many Armenians after leaving their homes were allowed to RETURN and take possession of their homes and properties. My uncle was one who returned to his home, and my wife's aunt, who is still living, was another. Her family had returned to their home in Adiyaman.

5. As a refugee, my mother was taken into the home of an Armenian family in the town of Kilis. They lived in a house which they owned, and this was toward the end of 1915!

6. The long list of ethnic Armenians who had attained the highest positions in the Ottoman Government is a matter of record.

7. Armenian fanaticism In Ottoman Turkey spread to our country during those years and it continues to this very day: The Armenian community and church in the United States is torn apart by bitter hatred within its own family. Many Armenians, especially those who came from Turkey in recent years, do not feel any hatred against the Turkish people but dare not make their feelings public, lest they be castigated by church and community leaders. In 1932, while celebrating mass on Christmas morning, the Armenian Archbishop Tourian was assassinated by members of an opposing Armenian group. Today Armenian terrorism has taken the lives of over sixty-five Innocent Turkish Diplomats and family members world-wide.

8. A so-called statement purportedly made by Adolf Hitler referring to the plight of the Armenians, was, after extensive research, proven to be FALSE by historian Robert John, who like myself is born of Armenian ancestry!

9. The following is an exact quotation from a pamphlet printed and distributed by The Armenian Revolutionary Federation, here in New York:
"...Its History: Struggle for National Liberation. Founded in 1890, as a confederation of various action groups struggling for Armenian national and human rights, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, (ARF), known as Dashnaktsoutioun, carried on this struggle with all available means: political action, propaganda, and at times, armed struggle..."

I direct the attention of the reader to the date: 1890! Twenty-five years BEFORE the Armenians began with their theme song: "genocide". I'm certain you made notice of the words: "...armed struggle...".

10. In her book entitled, "The Armenian Revolutionary Movement", the author, Louise Nalbandian, says about her book, in part, the following: "This study covers in detail the armed struggle of the Armenian revolutionists against the Ottoman government, beginning with the first major disturbance in 1862 and extending to 1896..."

And they speak of "genocide"! It is the Turk who is justified in accusing the Armenian of this heinous crime! There is more, much much more which can refute the allegation made against Turkey.

Once again our Congress considers the so-called Armenian Resolution. How dare they sit in judgment of a nation whose true history is not known by those who would accuse Turkey of "genocide"?! I say, Mr. Senator and Mr. Congressman, examine your own history and consider the plight of the American Indian!!

Dear reader, these are the words of my beloved mother:

"... My son, we had everything in Turkey. We owned our own homes, our farm lands, shops, and businesses. We were free in our schools, our churches, and our press. On religious holidays Christians and Muslims would exchange greetings, flowers, and baskets filled with all kinds of foods. After having so much, for so long, WHY should the Turks decide to destroy us?! WE, my son, WE were responsible, beyond any doubt, for the misfortune that befell our people! WE, the Armenians, were not loyal to our homeland, Turkey!..."

Many years later, when several Turkish Naval Officers visited our home In Queens, New York, my mother had said to them, "Welcome my children -- this is your home, welcome..." She had become their "mother" and we their family in the United States.
THIS is humanity!
THIS is God's wish for all of us!
THIS is the only answer if we are to give our children a world free of hatred!
THIS is what I have found In the Turkish heart; I stand in awe of their compassion, of their warmth, their humanity.

I am proud that I have devoted a lifetime of service in behalf of our ancestral brothers and sisters. How we have labored, examples of our efforts, the Identity of the long list of government officials with whom we have met, how we were able to learn to speak Armenian and Turkish, why our home Is called an "Ottoman" home, and much more, is for another time between two hard covers perhaps. May I offer now my concluding statements:

Dear reader, to the Armenian I am a traitor, one who has committed the greatest sin; to the Turk 1 have come to be known as a, "Turk dostu" -- a friend of Turks; ours Is the embrace of brotherhood. I offer the reader my greatest success, that for which I have devoted much of my life, and this you will read on separate pages following my commentary. Read carefully please the writings of an Armenian student who sent me three letters. The most satisfying achievement in my humble life is the third and final letter I received from a young man whom I have never met. Indeed, read his words carefully an~ understand I have not turned against my people, for to do so would be to deny my mother.

I am convinced that hate breeds more hatred, and as we were blessed to have parents who passed on to us their message of love, so have I spoken to all who care to listen, our history, our culture and traditions, begin In Turkey as we have shared with her people the joys and the sorrows of that beautiful land. Today, the Armenians living in Turkey praise us for our efforts. The Syrian Orthodox community shares my position and our children grow free of the cancer of hate. Let the United States Congress honor the sacred memory of ALL the peoples that had suffered, and let not this resolution blemish the honor of a great people. I have dedicated myself to the inseparability of the Turkish and Armenian peoples and no power on earth can deter my resolve. In the name of reason, of universal peace for all mankind, and in the name of the God of all peoples, I remain, yours respectfully,

Edward Tashji
Director of Public Affairs Committee , FTAA

* * *

Knowing the defamatory tendencies of his fellow Armenians too well, Ed Tashji had had his statement NOTARIZED, so that no one (like this so called "Rich") can question its authenticity.

Facts belie Armenian propaganda and expose what really happened in Anatolia during World War I. And it is my duty, as the son of a Turkish survivor from both paternal and maternal sides of that calamity, to set the record straight to the best of my ability.

Truth and fairness are my only motivations...honesty and openness are my only guides...

You just don't get it.

Is anyone to believe that since this person (you posted) views also deny the Armenian genocide given his own ethnicity makes it relevant?

You view things in terms of race Armenians vs. Turks. Also Muslum vs. Christian.

I don't view it in ethnic terms or religious, this was a Ottoman/Turkish Government policy to commit gencoide against innocent Armenians.

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

Also as I stated before your deep seated motivations are misdirected your Grandparents were killed as you stated in Northern Greece. NOT by Armenians.
I think your deep seated issue is against Christians more-so then Armenians. Your being in America (a mostly Christian populated Country) precludes your lashing out at Christians as a whole.

Your excerpt:

"The catastrophe, known as the Balkan Wars, totally wiped out my paternal grandparents in what is today Northern Greece and nearly annihilated my maternal grandparents in what is today Macedonia. Millions of Turks and other Muslims were killed or forced to abandon their homes, fields, and businesses and run, if they were to escape the wrath of the ethnic cleansing campaign brutally unleashed upon them. Death and destruction were all around them, as numerous campaigns were waged ruthlessly by the various and competing Balkan Christians (Greeks, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Serbs, and others)."

-----------

You also stated:

"Truth and fairness are my only motivations...honesty and openness are my only guides..."

I find humor in that you need to mention "honesty" and "openess" to describe yourself.

--------

Keep posting, do you have anymore standard issue Turkish Propoganda?

You stated: " find humor in that you need to mention "honesty" and "openess" to describe yourself".

This, coming from an Armenian who hides behind a fictitious first name all these months!?...

Openness, honesty, and truth...

I will continue to tell the other side of the story about the Turkish-Armenian conflict that the Armenian lobbies in the West have hijacked and deceptively dubbed a genocide.

Here is a gem that will keep you awake at night: Another NOTARIZED statement... This one from an Ottoman-Jew who actually witnessed the Ottoman-Armenian fifth column activities:

SWORN STATEMENT BY ALBERT J. AMATEAU
Franz Werfel's Confessions & The Armenian Treason

Do you know the story behind the book "Musa Daghi" (Moses Mountain in Turkish)?

Do you know that Albert Amateau had exposed the "Musa Daghi" fraud back in 1989 in a sworn statement before he died in 1995? If you missed all that, do not worry, as here is that notarized statement.

In a nutshell, Werfel wrote the Turk-bashing book purely based on gory tall tales told by an Armenian priest friend in Vienna. Never doubting the truth of the stories coming from a priest, Werfel did not bother to check their truthfulness. He just went to work to punish the Turks, thinking he was doing a good deed for humanity. He thought he was helping the "poor, starving Armenians" against those "evil" Turks. Many years later, when he found out about the truth, that Armenians were actually backstabbers, traitors, and terrorists, and that Turks acted in self defense, he was a broken man. He felt sad, cheated, guilty, and even angry. He made all these death bed confessions to his good friend, Albert Amateau.

Now a few words about Albert Amateau. He was an Ottoman Jew, born in 1890 in Milas, Turkey (near Bodrum), who loved Turkey and Turks all his life. He died in 1995, at a ripe old age of 106, in a retirement community in Northern California. I was lucky and proud of befriending and working with this man from 1987 to 1995. Until the day he died, he fought courageously against the AFATH with wonderfully penned letters. He was the honorary leader of the Sephardic Jewish community in America. In what is a fitting tribute to a great man, I am including below a sentimental letter written by RACHAEL BORTNICK of Dallas, which appeared in letters section of the Jewish Bulletin Of Northern California on March 29, 1996, where she pointed out a "sad irony" in the last chapter of this great man's life.

* * *

Sworn Statement By Albert J. Amateau

On this eleventh day of October in the year of 1989, there appeared before me, a notary public duly commissioned by the State of California, Albert J. Amateau, known to me. In my presence the said Albert J. Amateau duly took the required oath and affixed his signature to this instrument as well as to every page of the attached Statement of Facts (nine pages), declaring it to be an integral part of his sworn statement.

Wendy O'Steen, Notary Public - California,
Principal Office in Sonoma County
My Commission Expires December 1, 1992,
Signed and Sealed

Albert J. Amateau, residing at #413 Oak Vista Drive, in the village of Oakmont, City of Santa Rosa, County of Sonoma in the State of California, being duly sworn, deposes that he has prepared and hereby submits the attached statement containing (a) facts, (b) extracts from published and/or uttered communications which disprove the allegations of Armenians that their ethnic brethren suffered genocide by the government of the Ottoman Empire in 1915-1923.

These facts are submitted to oppose approval of resolution S.J.212, introduced by the Honorable Robert Dole, Senator and Republican leader of the United States Senate, at the first session of the 101st Congress of the United States. The said resolution seeks to designate April 24, 1990, as the "National Day of Remembrance" of the 75th anniversary of the alleged Armenian genocide of 1915-1923 perpetrated by the government of the Ottoman Empire.

I was born in Milas, Turkey, on April 20, 1889. In 1905 I was a student at the American Internatioal College in Izmir (Smyrna), Turkey. At the time, The Reverend John McGlaglan was President and I attended classes in English conducted by Professors Lawrence and Evan-Jones. These details to make it possible to ascertain the truth of my statements.

There, I became acquainted and friendly with many Turkish born Armenian students, most of whom were my seniors. Because my Grandfather, whose name I bear, had been the French Consul in Izmir, I was mistakenly considered a Christian and a Frenchman. The Armenian students felt that they could freely discuss their membership in Armenian secret societies, i.e., Huntchak and Tashnak Zutiun, and their active participation in secret military exercises to prepare themselves for military duty in their planned subversive war against the Ottoman Empire and nation. In alliance and collaboration with Tsarist Russia.

In 1906 a number of wealthy Armenians in Izmir were assessinated. Mr. Hayik Balgosian and his friend, Mr. Artin Balokian, had been shot by two men in front of the Balgosian mansion in Karatash, an affluent section of Izmir. Days later, the large establishment in the center of the Izmir Bazaar, the SIVRI-SSARIAN, wholesale dry goods warehouse and store, was bombed. Mr. Agop Sivri-Ssarian and a number of his Armenian employees were killed. The perpetrators then sent secret messages, in Armenian printed lettering, threatening a number of Armenian merchants, doctors, lawyers and architects - unless they "contributed" the sums the leaders of the secret societies had assessed, the recepients would suffer the same fate as Balgosian and Sivri-Ssarian.

A majority of these addresses must have "contributed". A few, who evidently were satisfied with their economic, social and political status, did not approve of the plans for subversion and rebellion. They informed the Izmir Police of their suspicion of the identity of the leaders of the secret societies and that the Apostolic Armenian church on ERMENI MAHALLESI, the main Armenian quarters in Izmir, was possibly the repository of arms and ammunition for the planned rebellion.

I witnessed the police raid on that church; and the truck loads of arms and ammunition which were taken out. Also the arrest of five priests and a number of other Armenians who were in the church at the time of the raid, including a few of my fellow students of the American College. Evidently I had not taken the disclosures of my fellow students seriously enough. Also, I could not understand the Armenian logic for rebellion against a country that had given its ethnic minorities the right to observe and practice their religion, conduct schools for the instruction of their young in their ethnic language and favored many of them with positions of trust. I knew of many Armenians in important positions in the Ottoman Treasury, Foreign Affairs, and as functionaries as consuls,.

I knew of many affluent Armenian doctors, attorneys and even a couple of bankers and architects. It was well known that the Armenians were the merchant princes of the Empire and that the Sultan favored them, especially because, of all the ethnic communities, they were the only ones who spoke the difficult Turkish language as a second language to their own Armenian.

Armenian terrorists in the United States and their duped friends have made it a career to assassinate Turkish consular officials, supposedly in revenge for the alleged Armenian massacre in 1915. Their prelates, leaders, and even our own California governor, Mr. Deukmejian, have not seen fit to express their disapproval, and by their silence have tacitly approved of the assassinations. The leaders of the secret Armenian societies, Huntchak and Tashnak Zutiun, have continued their nefarious activities by agitating for the introduction of their alleged genocide into the instruction program of the public schools of the State of California.

They have also been able, through their boast of one million Armenian votes, to influence State representatives in passing laws to place their Armenian program for a motion picture into operation.

Now they are trying to have the Congress of the United States pass a resolution to designate April 24, 1990, as the 75th anniversary of their alleged genocide of 1.5 million Armenians by the "Ottoman Turks in 1915". I am amazed that intelligent and politically astute gentlemen, such as Senator Robert Dole, the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, and others, his colleagues, have been importuned to sponsor that resolution without any proof of the veracity of the Armenian claims. There is no doubt in my mind that Senator Dole and his colleagues are honest and honorable men. They have been duped to believe the Armenian allegations as true.

To establish the truth to the satisfaction of the Senators, I am submitting extracts from statements - in fact, avowals - by Armenian leaders in their addresses and/or communications with their adherents. These extracts, and the entire statements, are unimpeachable, and the veracity of my quotes can be easily ascertained. I am also submitting statements of others, but especially of Professor John Dewey, of Columbia University, who investigated the Armenian claims of genocide.

a) EXTRACTS from the November 1914 issue of the OFFICIAL ARMENIAN GAZETTE HUNTCHAK, published in Paris, France, by the Armenian Revolutionary Committee of the ARMENIAN NATION. This was a CALL TO ARMS! "...The entire ARMENIAN NATION will join forces - moral and material, and waving the sword of REVOLUTION, will enter this World conflict.... as comrades in arms of the Triple Entente, and particularly RUSSIA. They will cooperate with the ALLIES, making full use of all political and revolutionary means for the final victory of Armenia, Cilicia, Caucasus, Azerbayjan.... heroes who will sacrifice their lives for the great cause of Armenia....Armenians proud to shed their blood for the cause of Armenia...." -Please note the date. It was even before the declaration of war.

b) EXTRACTS from a letter dated JANUARY 27, 1918, and published in the LONDON TIMES on JANUARY 30, 1918, signed by BOGHOS NUBAR, the recognized leader of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, TASHNAK ZUTIUN. This was a complaint that the Allies had refused to invite the ARMENIAN REVOLUTIONARY COMMITTEE HUNTCHAK to the PEACE CONFERENCE at which the treaty between Turkey and the Allies was signed in Lausanne, Switzerland.

"...The unspeakable sufferings and the dreadful losses that have befallen the Armenian Nation by reason of their faithfulness to the Allies.... The fact well known only to a few that ever since the beginning of the war, Armenians fought by the side of the Allies on all fronts... Armenians have been belligerents 'de facto' since their indignant refusal to side with the Turks... our volunteers fought in Syria and Palestine (at the time part of the Ottoman Empire) in the decisive victory of General Allenby.... After the breakdown of Russia, the Armenian legions were the only forces to resist the advances of the Turks whom they held in check until the armistice was signed. Thus they helped the British forces in Mesopotamia (at the time also part of the Ottoman Empire) by hindering the German/Turkish forces from sending troops elsewhere."

----Please note the reference to refusal to side with the Turks, the nation where they were born and of which they were a part. There is no claim of genocide.

c) EXTRACTS from the MANIFESTO, delivered by His Excellency, HOVHANES KATCHAZOUNI, PRIME MINISTER of the ARMENIAN REPUBLIC (established after the First World War) at the CONVENTION of the ARMENIAN REVOLUTIONARY FEDERATION, in Bucharest, Romania, JULY 1923. This was in the nature of a report. "...In the fall of 1914, when Turkey had not yet entered the war but was already making preparations, Armenian revolutionary bands began to form with great enthusiasm...

The ARMENIAN REVOLUTIONARY FEDERATION had active participation in the formation of these bands and the military action against TURKEY... In the fall of 1914 Armenian volunteer bands fought against TURKEY... This was an inevitable result of the psychology on which the Armenian Nation had been nourished during an entire generation... the winter of 1914 and the spring of 1915 were periods of great activity, greatest enthusiasm and hopes... We had no doubt that the war would end with complete victory for the Allies and Turkey would be defeated and dismembered, and its Armenian population would at least be liberated... We had embraced Russia wholeheartedly without any compun(...)... we believed that the Tsarist government would grant us self government in the Caucasus and in the Armenian vilayets (Turkish provinces where many Armenians resided), liberated from Turkey, as a reward for our loyalty, our efforts and our assistance. Unfortunately Russia did not keep its word..!

." One and a half million Armenians are claimed to have been massacred. The avowals of their leaders prior to and after the First World War prove that there had been no massacre - their leaders would have referred to it or claimed it as their calamity, or at least as their contribution to the Allied cause. The allegations of massacre and/or genocide are a later invention to compel the new Turkish Republic to cede to them the five vilayets where they had installed the Armenian Republic, which they later had to give up to the Turkish Republic after a brief war. The Armenians have ever since been trying to obtain either the territory to add to the Russian Armenian Republic, or a large sum of money as the price for stopping the terrorism.

The Armenian people must blame their own leaders and their secret revolutionary societies for the subversive actions which led to their participation in the war with the Allies. They can blame Russia for reneging on its promise, and the Allies for not giving them due credit for their help, but they certainly have no reason to blame the Turkish Republic and/or even the now defunct Ottoman Empire, as their own leaders confessed. Let us now see what Professor John Dewey, of Columbia University, has to say -a broad minded Christian gentleman who went to the Middle East in 1928 to investigate the Armenian claims of genocide. This is extracted from his report published in THE NEW REPUBLIC, vol. 40, November 12, 1928:

"Few Americans who mourn, and justly, the miseries of the Armenians, are aware that till the rise of the nationalistic ambitions, beginning with the 70s, the Armenians were the favored portion of the population of Turkey; or that in the Great War, they treacherously turned Turkish cities over to the Russian invaders; that they have boasted og having raised a hundred and fifty thousand (150,000) men to fight a civil war, that they burned at least one hundred (100) Turkish villages and exterminated their populations. I do not mention these things by way of appraising or extenuating blame, because the story of provocations and reprisals is as futile as it is endless. Finally, one recalls that the Jews took their abode in "fanatic" Turkey when they were expelled from Europe, especially Spain, by "Saintly" Christians, and they have lived in Turkey for some centuries, at least in as much tranquility and liberty as their fellow Muslim Turks, all being exposed alike to the rapacity of their common rulers. To one brought up, as most Armenians have been, in the Gladstonian and foreign missionary traditions, the condition of the Jews of Turkey is almost a mathematical demonstration that religious differences had no influence in the tragedy of Turkey, only as they were combined with the aspirations for political separation, which every nation in the world would have treated as treasonable..."

Professor Dewey had evidently not been told of the rejection by the Jewish Communities of Turkey of the appeals by the European Zionists for political and financial assistance. Insofar as the Jews of Turkey were concerned, the Zionist proposals were "subversive", unless and until the Ottoman government agreed to them. At no time did the Jews of Turkey nurse aspirations for political separation from their Ottoman saviors, who had received them when no other country allowed their either entry or residence. In 1922 in Izmir, Kemal Ataturk, when he captured 100,000 Greek soldiers who had been allowed by the Allied governments to invade and occupy Turkey in Asia, said: "OF ALL THE ETHNIC MILLETS (Communities) THE JEWS ELECTED TO REMAIN LOYAL TO THEIR MOTHERLAND." Now for a brief view of Armenian atrocities against Muslim and Jews - EXTRACTS from a letter dated December 11, 1983, published in the SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, as an answer to a letter that had been published in ! the same journal under the signature of one B. AMARIAN, claiming 1.5 million victims of genocide by the Ottoman Turks:

"..We have first hand information and evidence of Armenian atrocities against our people (Jews) which preceded the so-called massacre of Armenians which you allege in 1915. Members of our family witnessed the murder of 148 members of our family near Erzurum, Turkey, by Armenian neighbors, bent on destroying anything and anybody remotely Jewish and/or Muslim. Armenians should look to their own history and see the havoc they and their ancestors perpetrated upon their neighbors... Armenians were in league with HITLER in the last war, on his promise to grant them self government if, in return, the Armenians would help exterminate Jews... Armenians were also hearty proponents of the anti-semitic acts in league with the Russian Communists. Mr Amarian! Prove that, as you say, a large scale massacre of Armenians occurred. I don't need your bias." Signed ELIHU BEN LEVI, Vacaville, California. Attached as the last page of this statement is proof of Armenian collaboration with Hitler.

My friend, Franz Werfel, of Vienna, Austria, a writer, wrote a book entitled THE 40 DAYS AT MUSSA DAGH, a history of the massacre of Armenians by the Ottoman Turks. The story was told him by his friend, the Armenian Bishop of Vienna and Werfel never doubted the Bishop's account. He did not investigate what he wrote. Years later, when the true facts about Mussa Dagh were established by the research of neutral investigators - which was never denied by the Armenians - Werfel discovered that he had been duped by his friend, the Bishop, with a concocted story. Werfel confessed to me his shame and remorse for having written the book.

THE TRUTH

Fifty thousand Armenians, residents of villages in and around Erzurum in Turkey surreptitiously ascended a mountain called Mussa Dagh (dagh is Turkish for mountain) with arms, ammunition, victuals and water, sufficient to withstand a siege of many days. Before ascending that mountain, they had captured hundreds of Muslim Turks and Jews, their fellow citizens and neighbors, with whom they were supposedly on good terms. They murdered them all in cold blood, for no other reason than they were Muslims and Jews. Thereafter, every night armed Armenian bands came down from that mountain and attacked the rear of the Ottoman and German armies fighting the Russian invaders. This was at the very beginning of the First World War, and part of the secret plans made by the Russians and assigned to the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. ing written that story, in which he had blamed the Ottomans as the aggressors and terrorists.

The Turks were mystified. The Armenian attackers would disappear. Try as they did, at first the Ottomans were unable to trace the disappearing Armenians, but finally they discovered that Mussa Dagh was the hiding place. The Ottomans found the mountain fortress unassailable. They laid siege and waited 40 days before the Armenian rear guard conceded defeat and laid down their arms. But the Ottoman forces found the mountain empty. The large army had disappeared down the other side of the mountain where they had found an exit to the Mediterranean. French and British men-of-war had been signaled and they picked up the main army, transporting the soldiers to Alexandria, Egypt, then under the control of the British. Less than 500, the rear guard who gave themselves up, were captured by the Ottomans.

Yet, in telling the story to Werfel to write, the Bishop had claimed 50,000 victims captured and put to death - an invented story, just as is the story of 1.5 million massacred in 1915. If 1.5 million Armenian lost their lives during that war, they died as soldiers, fighting a war of their own choosing against the Ottoman Empire which had treated them decently and benignly. They were the duped victims of the Russians, of the Allies, and of their own Armenian leaders. A few thousand Armenians may have lost their lives during their relocation, caused by their own subversion.

In making this expose of the truth and disclosing my home address, I know that I risk Armenian harassment. I have already been subjected to telephone and written threats! However, the truth must be told. As one born in the Ottoman Empire, from which I emigrated in 1910 and have never returned to live, I must declare:

1) I am not and never have been employed or paid by any government in Turkey.

2) I am not now and never have been financially interested in any business in Turkey.

3) My parents died before the Second World War. My sister and brother-in-law, residents of the Island of Rhodes, were captured and murdered by Hitler's Nazis. I have no relatives or friends in Turkey. It should be evident that I have no motive in taking the risk, other than my conscientious duty to tell the truth out of my love for my native land. I beg the Honorable Senators and other government officials to demand from the Armenians proof of their claims and explanation of the statement of avowals made by their own leaders. Under the circumstances and in view of the above proof, I cannot conceive that the Senators can in good conscience pass that resolution.

It is not enough to say that they do not mean to hurt the Turks or Turkish/American relations. By entertaining that resolution without proof, they are actually going against the interests of Turkey and the safety of the United States and of NATO.

* * *

The following letter appeared in letters section of
The Jewish Bulletin Of Northern California on March 29, 1996

A SAD IRONY

Your March 8 issue contained an obituary on Albert J. Amateau, Sephardic leader and my friend, who died at 106 in Santa Rosa.

Amateau's oral history, recorded by me in 1985, is deposited at the Western Oral History archives of the Judah L. Magnes Museum.

He had often defended his native country, Turkey, against false allegations of its enemies and detractors in the United States. One involved the accusation of the "genocide" of Armenians in Turkey in the early part of this century.

Amateau had witnessed Armenian terrorism against Muslim Turks (and not the other way around) and the confiscation by the government of arms and ammunition stored in an Armenian church in Izmir.

How sadly ironic, therefore, that the one issue he most ardently contested -- the equating of the Jewish Holocaust with the massive deaths of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire -- was repeated as fact in a Bulletin entertainment article in the same issue as his obituary. Amateau's sister and family on the island of Rhodes were obliterated by Nazis. None of them, or any of the six million Jews of Europe, were part of an armed insurrection. Amateau would have been outraged at the suggestion.

RACHAEL BORTNICK, Dallas

***

As one can see, from the above testimony and letter, Armenians can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time...

The story of a bogus genocide unravels...

And I am proud to play a small part in it.

Who's fooling who?

Your the one who's leading the readers to assume somone is being fooled not myself.

I respect the readers intellegence not to proport myself as Honest and truthful that you need to do.

I also respect the reader's intellegence to ask them to further justify the killing of innocent Armenians called the Armenian Genocide.

Also as I stated before no one is concerned with who I am. Who cares, ficticious names are very common with blogs look around you. Maybe you have nowhere else to self gratify yourself with seeing your name posted on legitimate web sites such as this, other then Turkish Propoganda sites where all these cut and paste information comes from.

------

Also as I stated before your deep seated motivations are misdirected your Grandparents were killed as you stated in Northern Greece. NOT BY Armenians.
I think your deep seated issue is against Christians more-so then Armenians. Your being in America (a mostly Christian populated Country) precludes your lashing out at Christians as a whole. That would make you seem as though you were a Muslum finatic in the eyes of Americans, bent on attacking Christians.

Your excerpt:

"The catastrophe, known as the Balkan Wars, totally wiped out my paternal grandparents in what is today Northern Greece and nearly annihilated my maternal grandparents in what is today Macedonia. Millions of Turks and other Muslims were killed or forced to abandon their homes, fields, and businesses and run, if they were to escape the wrath of the ethnic cleansing campaign brutally unleashed upon them. Death and destruction were all around them, as numerous campaigns were waged ruthlessly by the various and competing Balkan Christians (Greeks, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Serbs, and others)."

-------

My Armenian friend who hides behind a fictitious first name does not seem to understand that the bogus Armenian genocide is exposed even by Armenian sources.

It is true that the Armenian archives are closed to the international research community. The Armenian national archives in Erivan, The Republic of Armenia, might only be seen by select few in the A.F.A.T.H. community. The Armenian nationalists' archives in Boston, USA, are also closed and, again, only a handful in the A.F.A.T.H. community might have access. Other Armenian papers in Glendale, California and Washington DC, as well as in Europe are all closed to the international research community. If access to these Armenian archives, which I collectively call "the evil papers", could be freely had, then one could see what sort of plans were set in motion since 1860 in the Ottoman Empire, Armenia, Russia, and the West, to devour the Turk. No one really knows the real scope and depth of "the evil papers" or where they may lead to.

Also, I would not be surprised one bit, if one day, we find out that those "evil archives", contain the missing links and the "smoking guns" in the unsolved terrorist activities around the world. Information like who paid how much to what assassin via what channels; who got their terrorist training where; who were the teachers and the suppliers who aided and abetted the Armenian terrorists; where the Armenian assassins got their weapons and travel papers; what politicians helped or facilitated the execution of the Armenian plans; and more could all be buried in these "evil papers". I strongly believe that "the evil papers" may prove to be a "gold mine" for criminologists and the study of Armenian terrorism from 1860 to this day. I, therefore, urge the A.F.A.T.H. lobby to put their money where their mouth is; open their "evil papers" to global research and scrutiny; and let the chips fall where they may.

It remains to be seen, whether this denial of public access to Armenian archives has anything to do with much feared discovery of hot leads connecting current and past Armenian leaders to organized terror and hate crimes since 1860. Not only the Armenian leaders, but also their sympathizers, supporters, financiers, and perhaps even some American Protestant missionaries and politicians, may surface on the radar screen of Armenian terrorism, which is responsible for murdering millions of Muslims, mostly Turkish, in the Russian Empire (1860-1915), the Ottoman Empire (1890 -1923), and hundreds in America and around the world (1973-present).

We will never know the answers until and unless the Armenians open their archives fully and unconditionally to public scrutiny by international research community. I would be very curious to know, for example,

-- Who were those American politicians with whom the convicted Armenian terrorist who served time in a federal prison, in his capacity as "a respected Armenian leader" before he was caught, hobnobbed all the time?

-- Who were those media personalities and journalists filing those "glowing reports" about the A.A.G. ?

-- Did any of them take any money from Armenian terrorist and/or his groups and/or associates?

-- Who helped the Armenian terrorist , until he was convicted of transporting explosives illegally across state lines?

-- Are there meeting minutes? IOUs? Payola schemes?

-- What politicians responded to Armenian terrorist and promised to pass what anti-Turkish resolution in the U.S. Congress for the Armenian community?

-- What American politician got paid how much for their "support" for the Armenian cause and by what Armenian organization, groups, and/or Armenians?

-- Who financed what portion of the purchase, manufacturing, transporting, and/or storing of those explosives?

-- What did the other Armenian know about the convicted Armenian terrorist and when did they know it?

-- Why do Armenians fear opening their archives to the American public?

-- How much money did outspoken anti-Turkish politicians like Radanovic, Schiff, and many others receive from the Armenian organizations while in public office?

Thousands maybe even millions of questions like these are still waiting for answers... The A.F.A.T.H. lobby used to complain bitterly: "Turkey's archives are closed. Why don't the Turks open them?". Well, the Turks did open them. Turkish archives are fully open since mid 1987. How about Armenians doing the same now?

Having made those points, please allow me to present some historical evidence and stunning quotes refuting the A.A.G.. They clearly show the real motives and modes of operation of the Armenian nationalists, always skillfully hidden behind the "poor, starving Armenian" myth, were actually to ethnically cleanse the Turks to change the demography of the Eastern Anatolia in Armenians' favor, in order to establish a greater Armenia on Turkish soil. Of course, the Armenians got lots of help from Russia, England, France and others to achieve their utopia, which was not to be, as the major powers eyed the Ottoman lands for themselves.

Enjoy!

***

Legend:
AFATH = Armenian Falsifiers and Turk Haters
AAG = The alleged Armenian genocide
WWI = World War I
Ethocidal = Having the characteristics of systematic and malicious mass deception

***********

"...The war with us was inevitable... We had not done all that was neces-sary for us to have done to evade war. We ought to have used peaceful language with the Turks...We had no information about the real strength of the Turks and relied on ours. This was the fundamental er-ror. We were not afraid of war because we thought we could win... When the skirmishes had started the Turks proposed that we meet and confer. We did not do so and defied them. Our army was well fed and well armed and [clothed] but it did not fight. The troops were con-stantly retreating and deserting their positions ; they threw away their arms and dispersed in the villages. Our army was demoralized during the period of internal strife, the inane destruction and the pillage that went [on] without punishment. It was demoralized and tired. The system of roving bands, which was especially encouraged by the Bureau government, was destroying the unity of the military organization... "

... "...In the early autumn, 1914, when Turkey had not yet entered the war but had already been making preparations, Armenian revolutionary bands began to get formed in Transcaucasia with great enthusiasm and, with especially, much uproar. Contrary to the decision taken during their general meeting at Erzurum only a few weeks before, the Armenian.R.F. had actively participated in the training of the bands and their future military action against Turkey. (...) The Armenians had embraced Russia whole-heartedly, without any compunction. (...) In an undertaking of such gravity, fraught with most serious conse-quences, individual agents of the Transcaucasian A.R.F. acted against the will of our superior authority, against the will of the General Meeting of the Party... In the Fall of 1914 Armenian volunteer bands organized themselves and fought against the Turks because they could not refrain from organizing and fighting. This was an inevitable result of a psychology cherished by the Armenian people during an entire generation : that mentality should have found its expression, and did so. We had created a dense atmosphere of illusion in our minds. We believed we could implant our own desires into the minds of others; we had lost our sense of reality and were carried away with our dreams (...)"

... Hovhannes Katchaznouni, the first Prime Minister of the independent Arme-nian Republic (1918-1922), The Armenian Revolu-tionary Federation (Dashnagtzoutiun) Has Nothing To Do Any More, the Armenian Information Service (edited by Arthur A. Derounian), New York, 1955

***************

"... In history, it happened to the Muslims in Russian Armenia and Eastern Anatolia. 2.5 million Muslims were killed by the Armenians in the worst possible way imaginable. It is sickening to think that the human race is capable of such actions, but there is no denying the fact that the Armenian genocide of 2.5 million Muslims happened. The Armenian General Dro, "the butcher" was the architect of this Armenian genocide of Muslims, 1914-1920..."

Arto Derounian (as John Roy Carlson), Armenian Affairs magazine Winter issue, 1949-50, p 19, footnote.

***************

"...At this moment, 80 000 Armenian soldiers are fighting under the Russian flags against the German and Austrian armies, and 40 000 against Turkey. Thousands of Armenian volunteers coming from everywhere are shedding their blood at the Turkish and Persian border to assure the victory of the Allies. These men are the Armenian revolutionaries so well informed of the mood of the Ottoman soldiers. These men, knowing the most important strategic points, rendered invaluable services to the Russian avant-gardes. Sympathies shown to the Allies by the rebelled Armenia will be recognized and appreciated after the victory of the Entente..."

Armenian newspaper Yeridasart Hayasdan ('Young Armenia', published in the United States), June 25, 1915 issue. (Where is the genocide here? Doesn't it look more like a rebellion, a treason, and a civil war, all rolled into one, which unfolded during an all-out world war?)

***************

"In the campaign of the Caucasus, the Armenian committees splendidly raised the glory of the Russians. They are the soldiers of Antranik who took Saray and Bachkalé for the Russians. Assault against Beyazit was also given by the troops of Antranik and they are the Armenian volunteers under the command of Samson who, preventing an encircling movement of the Turks' in Aserbaidschan, saved the Russians from a bloody defeat. Novoïe Vremia, the most important Russian newspaper, mentions with eulogies the Armenians' love for the Russians and Christendom. (...) The big fight that the Armenians support today, the sacrifices that they make for the Russian cause, their past civilization, will bring to them respect of everyone. (...)"

Letter of 'Yervantoni Committee' from the Armenian newspaper Asbarez (published in the United States), n° 350 of April 23rd, 1915 issue. (Once again; this looks more like treason, rebellion, and a civil war, fought during a world war. How can any honest scholar portray all this as a one sided genocide?)

***************

"...Having men at our disposal, we were able to form bands of Armenian volunteers and send them to the war scene. This way, we were able to express our deep gratitude to Russia which showed us so much benevolence. We find out that certain persons, not supporting the criticism and basing on childish considerations, recommend to terminate this organization instead of approving it and trying hard for its development. It's nothing less than a crime! We shall not stop the organization of the Armenian volunteers. We shall not terminate it. No ! On the contrary, we shall extend it and shall strengthen it. We shall be everywhere in the first row as avant-gardes, and until the end, until the destruction of the enemy, our place will be next to the Russian Cossacks. (...) The Armenians will be of those that will give a deathblow to the dying Turkey in its last moments. Turkey, whilst dying, has to see this of its own eyes and read this cursed page of its history before closing them. Today, our main enemy, is the Turk. Those that, openly or in secret, oppose to the organization of the volunteers or try to limit this force, must be considered as traitors and interior enemies..."

Article signed Sabah-Gulian in the Armenian newspaper Inkenavar Hayasdan ('Independent Armenia'), n°25, published on June 19th, 1916. ( Here is the real, evil face of those, who for a century hid behind the mask of "poor, starving, innocent Armenians" myth.)

***************

"...We ask your Seigneury, to present to His Majesty the Emperor, on my part as well as in the name of my community of Russia, the devoted feelings of his faithful subjects, as well as affection and sympathy without defect of the Armenians of Turkey. Also defend with the Czar the hope which the Armenians of Turkey cherish..."

Letter of Armenian catholicos of Etchmiadzin to the Russian governor general of the Caucasus, the Count Illarion Ivanovitch Vorontsov-Dashkov, on August 5th, 1914

***************

"...The Turkish, disastrous and treacherous race, attacks once more, but with more violence, one of the purest and best peoples of the Aryan race. These fights, which continue for centuries in various forms, are no different from the assault of a nation remained in darkness against the other whom, having already gone through the cycle of social progress, moves towards the light. (...) Either us, or them! This fight dates neither from one year nor from one century. The Armenian nation always resisted bravely to this race which had treason and crime as its guiding principle.

The World must be relieved of this plague and, for the rest and the tranquility of the universe, the Turkish nation must be annihilated. We're waiting heads up and armed with the faith in the victory..."

Article appeared in the Armenian newspaper Hayasdan ('Armenia', published in Sofia), n°56, edition of August 19, 1914 (Is this the kind of language one would expect from "poor, starving, helpless, innocent Armenians", as the original aggressors seem to be exclusively portrayed in the Western media?)

***************

"...The leader of the Turkish-Armenian section of the Dashnagtzoutune did not carry out their loyalty to the Turkish cause when the Turks entered the war... They were swayed in their actions by the interests of the Russian government...A call was sent for Armenian volunteers to fight the Turks on the Caucasian front..." p 37-38

"...The objective of the Armenian Revolutionary Union (Dachnak) was to obtain economic and political freedom in Turkish Armenia by means of the rebellion. Terrorism was adopted since the beginning, it was for the Dachnak committee of the Caucasus a policy or a strategy to attain its aim . In their program adopted in 1892, in the column 'Means', 'Method 8' was described this way : 'Make war and subject the government, the officials and the traitors to terrorism' ; 'Subject the governmental institutions to the destruction and to plunder'. (...) The purpose of these riots was to make sure that European powers would intervene in the Ottoman internal affairs...."

"...At the outbreak of the World War I in Europe, the Turks dashed into feverish preparations to join the Germans. In August, 1914, The Young-Turks asked the Dachnak convention, then taking place in Erzurum, to apply the former agreement of 1907 and to lead the Armenians of Russia to rebel against the Russian State. Dachnakists refused, but they assured that, if a war happened to burst between Turkey and Russia, they would support Turkey as loyal citizens. In return, they stated that they would not be responsible for Armenians of Russia (...) However, the leaders of the Turkish Armenian section of Dachnakists did not keep their promise of loyalty towards Turkey when the latter went to war. Their actions were influenced by the interests of the Russian government and they did not take at all into account the dangers which this war was going to arouse for the Armenians of Turkey. Caution had been completely abandoned without due consideration. Even the decisions of their own agreement of Erzurum were forgotten and an appeal was launched so that the Armenian volunteers go to fight against the Turks on the Caucasian front...."

... K. Sdepan Papazian, Patriotism perverted , Balkar Press, Boston, 1934 ( Writer's note: Here is the story of the evil plans, as well as their execution and aftermath, exposing the bitter reality of rebellious, treasonous, and vicious Armenian nationalists, causing a bloody civil war, told directly from the horse's mouth. All this was unabashedly, persistently and incorrectly portrayed as "poor, starving Armenians exterminated by Turks without any reason, provocation, or threat" myth in the West, duping millions of unsuspecting citizens for more than a century. What a pity! )

***************

"Be it our Armenians or those that are on the other side of the border, I want that they follow my instructions. You should use your authority in your community, so that our Armenians join those that are on the other side of the border ; thus, in the current situation of Turkey, as in the future, I shall let them know what they should do in case of Turco-Russian war, I shall inform them about the nature of their missions and shall ask them to carry out their duty."

Answer of the Russian Governor General of the Caucasus, the Count Illarion Ivanovitch Vorontsov-Dachkov, to Etchmiadzin's Armenian catholicos, on September 2nd, 1914

***************

"...The Russian Armenians, in the ranks of the Moscow army, will carry out their duty to avenge the insult made on the corpses of our brothers; as for us, the Armenians dominated by Turkey, no Armenian's rifle has to leave of our ranks against friends and allies of France, our second homeland. Turkey mobilizes, it conscripts us without telling us against whom. Against Russia ? There now, we will not fire against our own brothers of the Caucasus ; against Balkanic States for which we feel but sympathy ? Never ! You Turks, you you've come to the wrong person. Armenians, Turkey conscripts you without saying against whom : join up as volunteers in the ranks of the French Army and its allies to help to crush the army of Guillaume II..."

Aram Tourabian, The Armenian Volunteers Under the French Flags, Marseille, 1917, p 6

***************

"The Armenians have been, since the beginning of the war, de facto belligerents - since they fought alongside the Allies on all fronts - in Palestine and Syria, where the Armenian volunteers, recruited by the Armenian National Delegation at the request of the French government, made up more than half of the French contingent. In the Caucasus, where, without mentioning the 150,000 Armenians in the Imperial Russian Army, more than 40,000 of their volunteers offered resistance to the Turkish Armies."

Letter from the Leader of the Armenian delegation to Paris Peace talks, Boghos Nubar, to the French minister of foreign affairs, S. Pichon, published on January 30th, 1919 in the Times of London. (Writer's note: What innocent, starving Armenians? What genocide?)

***************

"The awakening of a revolutionary state of mind among the Turkish Armenians resulted from Russian stimulations."

Hairenik, newspaper of the Armenian Dachnak Party, June 28th, 1918 issue

"...There are only 1500 Turks left in Van, the rest having been exterminated." (According to Vital Cuinet, there were 250 000 Moslems in Van in 1892, Archives of the French Foreign Office, diplomatic documents, Armenian matters, Reform plan in the Ottoman Empire, 1893 - 1897, p 2-8).

Gotchnak, Armenian newspaper published in the United States, May 24th, 1915 issue

***************

"In 1894, Mr. Cambon, Ambassador of France in Constantinople, said that it was impossible to find a solution for the Armenian Question. One can not indeed imagine a solution for this question, the most important of all those appeared in Turkey. The fight between Turks and Armenians has an idiosyncratic character. The Armenians know that they will not be able to realize their national aspiration by remaining subjected to the Turks. This situation results neither from Abdul Hamid's tyrannical and bloodthirsty mentality, nor from the chauvinist theories of Young Turks; it is the logical consequence of the principle of the preservation of the Ottoman Empire. (...) The Armenians are spread in the Islamic Ocean and are lapping in the middle of its waves. (...) On the other hand, the Turks know although, as long as there will be Armenians inside Ottoman borders, the integrity of the Empire will always be threatened. Yesterday's Russian peril is substituted by today's British peril. The Armenians are the scouts of the enemy in ambush waiting for the occasion to attack. In view of this situation, the solution of the question can only be the following one: either the Turks out, or the Armenians..."

Article appeared in the Armenian review Armenia (published in Turin), in its issue of June, 1914

***************

"...The Turkish Armenian does not know what a revolution is. He fears a revolution like death. But if there is something he is more afraid of, it is the revolutionary Armenian, the unreasoning revolutionary Armenians, without a conscience, who dragged him from misery to misery for several years, with the thought of doing a good deed for him.

The Turkish Armenian has to confess that this enemy of their own kind has been everywhere and has done its work everywhere. It also had many followers in Russia, England, and Turkey. It is known as a fact that divisive movements and propaganda among groups in a society influence the masses very deeply. When these witless wretches came up with the idea of establishing a large state with the Armenians in Caucasia and Turkey, the God-fearing Armenians with good conscience who were aware of where the best interests of the nation lay, were overcome with sadness: 'An independent state, which will also include within its borders some of the Turkish provinces, is that it? This would be the destruction of Armenians' they said.

This was the truth.! It was impossible for any Armenian with a little bit of discernment not to see it. Because these people were thinking that they could change the bed of a large river with eight or ten pieces of stone. This large river had opened its real bed by flowing for centuries on a strong surface. To change this direction was to tear Armenian interests from the tranquil flow of the river, to push them to draught-ridden lands and to strangle them there forever. Those feeble minded persons failed to see that the foreigners who supported their revolution and evil deeds and championed their causes in their newspapers did not undertake such action for the love of Armenians. The aim, and the sole aim of these so-called protective powers was to cause the shedding of blood in regions which they earmarked for their hegemony and to take over these regions with the pretext of cleaning the blood.

History is still recording what imperialism is capable of doing in places it sets its eyes on. But it was impossible to make the public-spirited revolutionaries comprehend this. The anarchists and propagandists among them who could be useful neither to themselves nor to their communities in any other way were receiving salaries. They were also receiving what they conceived to be pledges. Overwhelmed under these condition, they believed there was Turkish oppression, and they also made their compatriots believe in their lies.

The last quarter of a century of Turkey's history is filled with some Armenian events. Although these events were supposedly aimed at some goals harmful to Turkey, in fact, they were only the oppression of Armenians by Armenians. If the causes and reasons for each event are analyzed one by one and if the events are analyzed meticulously, the only conclusion that will be arrived at is the one we have stated in the previous sentence; the oppression of Armenians by Armenians..."

Migirdic Agop, "The Turkish Armenians", Istanbul, 1922

( Please note: This quotation should jolt any self-respecting, honest, and fair genocide scholar to reconsider his/her ethocidal position of labeling the turmoil and tragedy caused by the Armenian nationalists and their Western handlers (mainly Britain, France, and Russia ) during WWI as genocide. )

***************

"According to your orders, our companions would like to buy weapons through your intervention and according to your choice. We want to know the prices. It is necessary for us: 1° Martinis ; 2° Mauser revolvers ; 3° flint rifles ; 4° American Smith revolvers ; 5° Brownings. In whole quite two hundred items with ammunitions."

Letter of the leaders (the priest Boghos Kalemian and the president H. Melidossian) of the Armache's Hintchak committee (municipality of Ermiche, Izmit), sent to the Hintchak "committee of Constantinople", and dated November 18th, 1914

***************

"... Your three Armenian chiefs, Dro, Hamazasp and Kulkhandanian are the ring leaders of the bands which have destroyed Muslim villages and have staged massacres in Zangezour, Surmali, Etchmiadzin, and Zangibasar. This is intolerable. Look - and here he pointed to a file of official documents on the table - look at this, here in December are the reports of the last few months concerning ruined Muslim villages which my representative Wardrop has sent me. The official Tartar communique speaks of the destruction of 300 villagesby the Armenians..." p 52 (second paragraph)

... "... Yes, of course. I repeat, until this massacre of the Muslim is stopped and the three chiefs are not removed from your military leadership I hardly think we can supply you arms and ammunition...It is the armed bands led by Dro, Hamazasp and Kulkhandanian who during the past months have raided and destroyed many Muslim villages in the regions of Surmali, Etchmiadzin, Zangezour, and Zangibasar. There are official charges of massacres by the Armenians..." p. 54 (fifth paragraph)

Avetis Aharonian, From Sardarapat to Sevres and Lausanne , Armenian Review, Vol. 16, No. 3-63, Autumn, Sep. 1963, pp. 47-57. p.

***************

"...The Armenian political parties worked like terrorist organizations resorting to assassinations and mass violence... ."

... "...The programme of the Dashnaksutiun Party (Armenian Revolutionary Federation) was drafted during the General Congress in 1892. The methods to be used by the revolutionary bands organized by the Party were as follows:

-- To propagandize for the principles of the Dashnaksutiun and its objectives based on an understanding of, and in sympathy with, the revolutionary work.

-- To organize fighting bands, to work with them with regard to the above-mentioned issues and to prepare them for activity.

-- To use every means, by word and deed, to arouse the revolutionary activity and spirit of the people.

-- To use every means to arm the people.

-- To organize revolutionary committees and establish strong links between them.

-- To stimulate fighting and to terrorize government officials, informers, traitors, usurers and every kind of exploiter.

-- To organize financial districts.

-- To protect the peaceful people and the inhabitants against attacks by brigands.

-- To establish communications for the transportation of men and arms.

-- To expose government establishments to looting and destruction (p. 168).

Louise Nalbandian, The Armenian Revolutionary Movement, Berkeley 1963

***************

After the response of my Armenian lobbyist friend who hides behind a fictitiois name for months, I will show you how historians refute the bogus Armenian claims of genocide.

You seem to be mistaken, you are the misdirected lobbyist roaming the halls of Sacaramento, with hardly anyone to talk to.

It's a good thing hardly anyone buys this Turkish propoganda that seems to gratify your misdirected false sentiments.

------

Also as I stated before your deep seated motivations are misdirected your Grandparents were killed as you stated in Northern Greece. NOT by Armenians.
I think your deep seated issue is against Christians more-so then Armenians. Your being in America (a mostly Christian populated Country) precludes your lashing out at Christians as a whole.

Your excerpt:

"The catastrophe, known as the Balkan Wars, totally wiped out my paternal grandparents in what is today Northern Greece and nearly annihilated my maternal grandparents in what is today Macedonia. Millions of Turks and other Muslims were killed or forced to abandon their homes, fields, and businesses and run, if they were to escape the wrath of the ethnic cleansing campaign brutally unleashed upon them. Death and destruction were all around them, as numerous campaigns were waged ruthlessly by the various and competing Balkan Christians (Greeks, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Serbs, and others)."

----------

The ultimate form of terror was committed by the Ottoman Turkish Government and agents of denial such as yourself gratify themselves in double killing of the victims.

Our readers are witnessing inhumanity to man at it's worst.

Turkey's Ultranationalist agents such as yourself are literally blind to inhumanity to it's minorities in Turkey.

I do not need to post victim as victimizer propoganda such as you have. All I ask is for our readers to research forthemselves to see what the Turkish Government has done and it's Current plicies that have lead to oppression and killing of it's minorities in present day Turkey.

It is sad that we need to subject ourselves of racism, bigortry, and inhumanity.

The only way to understand that it exisits is to see it first hand.

Casting the victims as victimizers as I stated before is standard issue propoganda from the Nazi era against the Jews, and we all know the Nazi Germans committed a holocaust simliar to that of the Ottoman/Turks to the innocent Armenian civilians.

Twelve Ways To Deny A Genocide

By Israel Charny, these 12 methods were originally called "Templates for Gross Denial of a Known Genocide: A Manual" in The Encyclopedia of Genocide, volume 1, page 168. These 12 tactics have all been followed (or perhaps more the more accurate word is pioneered) by the Turkish Government, in its genocide denial campaign.

1. Question and minimize the statistics.

This is one of the biggest distractions to the main issue itself. By claiming that the numbers are exaggerated or inflated, and that only a few hundred thousand were killed, not over a million, they try to completely side-track the entire issue. As if a few hundred thousand would not have been a genocide as well.

2. Attack the motivations of the truth-tellers.

The claim that Armenians cannot be trusted because they may want reparations is like saying no victim should ever be heard, because they are biased in their pursuit of justice.

3. Claim that the deaths were inadvertent.

As a result of famine, migration, or disease, not because of willful murder. Also mention that Turks/Muslims died too at that time - without mentioning that they died on the battlefield, not at the hands of their very own government.

4. Emphasize the strangeness of the victims.

The victims were infidels (Christians), a fifth-column, and not "good" Ottoman Turks.

5. Rationalize the deaths as the result of tribal conflict, coming to the victims out of the inevitability of their history of relationships.

Check. Armenians and Turks could not share that land anymore since some Armenians might prefer independence to being second class citizens.

6. Blame "out of control" forces for committing the killings.

They often blame the very Kurds they later struggled to keep down.

7. Avoid antagonizing the genocidists, who might walk out of "the peace process."

Turkey refuses to even open diplomatic relations with Armenia because it talks about the Armenian Genocide.

8. Justify denial in favor of current economic interests.

Undoubtedly Turkey's number one weapon in denying the Armenian Genocide. Constant threats to the west the military contracts worth billions will be canceled have worked wonders in legislatures considering the issue. In fact, the debate over whether to officially recognize the genocide in the west is clearly not about whether it happened or not - since it very clearly did - but on just what economic/diplomatic repercussions Turkey has threatened or might retaliate with if they do recognize a 90 year old truth.

9. Claim that the victims are receiving good treatment, while baldly denying the charges of genocide outright.

Show how a few thousand Armenians were not killed in Istanbul as evidence that 2.5 million were not killed/driven out in Anatolia.

10. Claim that what is going on doesn't fit the definition of genocide. At the time of writing (September 2004), the European Union, the Secretary General of the United Nations and even Amnesty International still avoid calling the crimes in Darfur by their proper name. There are three reasons for such reluctance:

A. Another misconception is the "all or none" concept of genocide. The all-or-none school considers killings to be genocide only if their intent is to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group "in whole." Their model is the Holocaust. They ignore the "in part" in the definition in the Genocide Convention, which they often haven't read.

B. Since the 1990's, a new obstacle to calling genocide by its proper name has been the distinction between genocide and "ethnic cleansing," a term originally invented as a euphemism for genocide in the Balkans. Genocide and "ethnic cleansing" are sometimes portrayed as mutually exclusive crimes, but they are not. Prof. Schabas, for example, says that the intent of "ethnic cleansing" is expulsion of a group, whereas the intent of "genocide" is its destruction, in whole or in part. He illustrates with a simplistic distinction: in "ethnic cleansing," borders are left open and a group is driven out; in "genocide," borders are closed and a group is killed.

C. Claim that the "intent" of the perpetrator is merely "ethnic cleansing" not "genocide," which requires the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. The U.N. Commission of Experts report of 2005 took this way out. It confused motive with intent. (Ironically, the U.N. Commission report even included a paragraph saying motive and intent should not be confused, an exhortation the Commission promptly violated, itself.) Even if the motive of a perpetrator is to drive a group off its land ("ethnic cleansing"), killing members of the group and other acts enumerated in the Genocide Convention may still have the specific intent to destroy the group, in whole or in part. That's genocide.

11. Blame the victims.

Perhaps the most insulting tactic of all. Saying that actually it was the Armenians who were massacring and wiping out Turks.

12. Say that peace and reconciliation are more important that blaming people for genocide.

This is often heard from Turks, American government officials and others who have clearly never been victims of genocide. Much like telling a man whose mother was raped and murdered by the next door neighbor that it is more important to get along with your neighbors, this will never be accepted by Armenians who deserve and need an apology and reparations. They need an apology from Turkey now not only for the genocide, but for the nearly century long denial and miseducation campaign that took place, the continued mistreatment of Armenians in Turkey, the blockade of Armenia since the early 1990s and the post-genocidal war taking even more Armenian land.

Uh-oh!... My "stealthy" Armenian lobbyist friend who hides behind a fictitious "anglicized" name (designed to make American readers think that grassroots Americans are writing the messages he is concocting) for months started sputtering...
He posts the same message again, totally forgetting what that already cut-n-pasted it in the past.
Is it possible that he has come to the end of his nagging recitations?
Does that mean he will start reciting "the official Armenian position" all over again?
****
Dear "Rich", if that's your real name (I am having fun with this).
By reciting 12 ways to deny genocide, you made "genocide-deniers" out of all the Armenian scholars, writers, politicians, clergy, and others listed below:
Hovhannes Katchaznouni, the first Prime Minister of the independent Armenian Republic (1918-1922)
Arto Derounian (as John Roy Carlson), Armenian Affairs magazine, 1949-50
Armenian newspaper Yeridasart Hayasdan ('Young Armenia', published in the United States IN 1915)
Letter of 'Yervantoni Committee' from the Armenian newspaper Asbarez (published in the United States IN 1915)
Sabah-Gulian who wrote in the Armenian newspaper Inkenavar Hayasdan ('Independent Armenia') in 1916
Armenian Catholicos of Etchmiadzin, 1914
The Armenian newspaper Hayasdan ('Armenia', published in Sofia, Bulgaria), 1914
K. Sdepan Papazian, who wrote "Patriotism perverted" , Balkar Press, Boston, 1934
Aram Tourabian, who wrote "The Armenian Volunteers Under the French Flags", Marseille, 1917
Boghos Nubar, head of Armenian delegation to Paris Peace talks ("as observers(!) after all the boot-licking), 1919
Hairenik, newspaper of the Armenian Dachnak Party, 1918
Gotchnak, Armenian newspaper published in the United States, 1915
The Armenian review Armenia (published in Turin, Italy), 1914
Migirdic Agop, writer of "The Turkish Armenians", Istanbul, 1922
The Armenian clergy Boghos Kalemian and the president H. Melidossian of the Armache's Hintchak committee (municipality of Ermiche, Izmit) 1914
Avetis Aharonian, writer of "From Sardarapat to Sevres and Lausanne , Armenian Review, Vol. 16, No. 3-63, Autumn, Sep. 1963"
Louise Nalbandian, writer of "The Armenian Revolutionary Movement, Berkeley 1963"
***
And I am not listing who else you turned into deniers: American, British, French, German, Austrian, Swedish, Turkish, and other scholars, diplomats, journalists, soldiers, statesmen, and others...
Is it possible that in labeling them "genocide-deniers", what you really mean is " truth-seekers"?
After all, how can one deny something that doesn't exist?
Today, for the fair-minded truth-seekers, I will provide some information on the works of AMERICAN TRUTH-SEEKERS, i.e. scholars, journalists, and dignitaries which clearly refute the Armenian claims of genocide.
IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS THAT REFUTE THE AAG

***
Legend:
AFATH = Armenian Falsifiers and Turk Haters
AAG = The alleged Armenian genocide
WWI = The First World War

***

"...In some towns containing ten Armenian houses and thirty Turkish houses, it was reported that 40,000 people were killed, about 10,000 women were taken to the harem, and thousands of children left destitute; and the city university destroyed, and the bishop killed. It is a well-known fact, that even in the last war, the native Christians, despite the Turkish cautions, armed themselves and fought on the side of the Allies. In these conflicts, they were not idle, but they were well supplied with artillery, machine guns and inflicted heavy losses on their enemies ..."

Lamsa, George M., The Secret of the Near East, Philadelphia, 1923, p 133

***

"... Revolutionary placards were being posted in the cities and there were not a few cases of the blackmailing of wealthy Armenians, who were forced to contribute to the cause. Europeans in Turkey were agreed that the immediate aim of the agitators was to incite disorder, bring about inhuman reprisals and so provoke the intervention of the powers. For that reason, it was said, they operated by preference in areas where the Armenians were in a hopeless minority, so that reprisals would be certain.

One of the revolutionaries told Dr. Hamlin, the founder of Robert College, that the Hunchak bands would 'watch their opportunity to kill Turks and Kurds, set fire to their villages, and then make their escape into the mountains. The enraged Moslems will then rise, and fall upon the defenseless Armenians and slaughter them with such barbarity that Russia will enter in the name of humanity and Christian civilization and take possession'. When the horrified missionary denounced the scheme as atrocious and infernal beyond anything ever known, he received this reply: 'It appears so to you, no doubt; but we Armenians have determined to be free. Europe listened to the Bulgarian horrors and made Bulgaria free. She will listen to our cry when it goes up in the shrieks and blood of millions of women and children. We shall do it'..."

Langer, William L., Prof. of History, Harvard, The Diplomacy of Imperialism, Alfred a. Knopf, New York (1960), p 157.

***

"...Saying that the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire was the same as what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany is a downright falsehood. What happened to the Armenians was the result of a massive Armenian armed rebellion against the Turks, which began even before war broke out, and continued on a larger scale. Great numbers of Armenians, including members of the armed forces, deserted, crossed the frontier and joined the Russian forces invading Turkey. Armenian rebels actually seized the city of Van and held it for a while intending to hand it over to the invaders. There was guerilla warfare all over Anatolia. There is clear evidence of a decision by the Turkish Government, to deport the Armenian population from the sensitive areas. Which meant naturally the whole of Anatolia. Not including the Arab provinces which were then still part of the Ottoman Empire. There is no evidence of a decision to massacre. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence of attempt to prevent it..."

Bernard Lewis, on the American TV C-SPAN 2, 25 March, 2002

***

"... Under the 1908 Constitution, the Enver Government had a right to mobilize Armenians of military age as well as Turks, but armed opposition broke out at once, notably at Zeitun..Along the eastern frontier, Armenians began deserting to the Russian Armies and the Enver Government, distrusting the loyalties of those who remained, removed them from the combatant force and formed them into labour gangs.

In April, Lord Bryce and the "Friends of Armenia" in London appealed for funds to equip these volunteers and Russia also was presumable not uninterested in them.These volunteer bands finally captured Van, one of the eastern provincial capitals late in April and having massacred the Turkish population, they surrendered what remained of the city to the Russian Armies in June. The news from Van affected the Turks precisely as the news from Smyrna affected them when the Greeks landed there in May 1919. The rumour immediately ran through Asia Minor that the Armenians had risen.

By this time, the military situation had turned sharply against the Enver Government. The Russian victory at Sarikamis was developing and streams of Turkish refugees were pouring westward into central Asia minor. The British had launched their Dardanelles campaign at the very gates of Constantinople and Bulgaria had not yet come in. It does not seem reasonable to assume that this moment, of all moments, would have been chosen by the Enver Government to take widespread measures against its Armenians unless it was believed that such measures were immediately necessary. Measures were taken..."

Clair Price, The Rebirth of Turkey, New York 1923, p 86-87

***

"... Armenians again flooded the czarist armies, and the czar returned to St. Petersburg confident that the day finally had come for him to reach Istanbul. Hostilities were opened by Russians, who pushed across the border on November 1, 1914, though the Ottomans stopped them and pushed them back a few days later. A subsequent Russian counter offensive in January caused the Ottoman army to scatter.and the way was prepared for a new Russian push into eastern Anatolia, to be accompanied by an open Armenian revolt against the sultan...

Armenian leaders in Russia now openly declared their support of the enemy and there seemed no other alternative. It would be impossible to determine which of the Armenians would remain loyal and which would follow the appeals of their leaders. As soon as the spring came, then, in mid-May 1915 orders were issued to evacuate the entire Armenian population from the provinces of Van, Bitlis, and Erzurum, to get them away from all areas where they might undermine the Ottoman campaigns against Russia or against the British in Egypt, with arrangements made to settle them in towns and camps in the Mosul area of Northern Iraq. In addition, Armenians residing in the countryside (but not in the cities) of the Cilician districts as well as those of north Syria were to be sent to central Syria for the same reason. Specific instructions were issued for the army to protect the Armenians against nomadic attacks and to provide them with sufficient food and other supplies to meet their needs during the march and after they were settled. Warnings were sent to the Ottoman military commanders to make certain that neither the Kurds nor any other Muslims used the situation to gain vengeance for the long years of Armenian terrorism. The Armenians were to be protected and cared for until they returned to their homes after the war..."

Prof. Of History at UCLA, History Of The Ottoman Empire And modern Turkey, Cambridge University Press, 1977, Vol. II, p 315.

***

"...There was an Armenian problem for the Turks because of the advance of the Russians and the anti-Ottoman population in Turkey, which looked for independence and which got on openly with the Russians coming from the Caucasus. There were also Armenian bands - the Armenians boasted of heroic exploits of the resistance-, and the Turks had certainly problems of maintenance of law and order in state of war. For the Turks, it was a question of taking disciplinary and preventive measures against a population not enough secure in a region threatened by a foreign invasion. For the Armenians, it was a question of freeing their country. But two camps agree to recognize that repression was limited geographically. For example, it did not affect the Armenians living somewhere else in the Ottoman Empire.

No doubt that terrible things took place, no doubt that numerous Armenians - and also Turks - died. But no one will certainly ever know the precise circumstances and the balances of the victims. Imagine the difficulty one has to restore facts and responsibilities about the war of the Lebanon, which took place nevertheless not long ago and before the eyes of the world! During, their deportation towards Syria, hundreds of thousands of Armenians died of starvation, of cold... But if one speaks about genocide, it implies that there was a deliberate policy, a decision to annihilate systematically the Armenian nation. This is very doubtful. Turkish documents prove a will of deportation, no extermination..."

Bernard Lewis, History Prof. Of History at Princeton, Article appeared in French newspaper Le Monde, 16 November, 1993

***

"...Much of the history of Anatolia, the Caucasus, the Balkans, and southern Russia can not be understood without a proper assessment of the Muslim dead and Muslim refugees. Only about two centuries ago, the Muslims, mostly Turks, constituted the overwhelming majorities, pluralities, or sizeable minorities in these territories..."

Justin McCarthy, Prof. of History, U. of Louisville, Death and Exile: the Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1923, The Darwin Press, Princeton, 1996

***

",,, Comparison [of the deportation of the Armenians] with the Holocaust is, however, biased on several important aspects:

1. There was no campaign of hatred aiming directly at the Armenians, any demonisation comparable to the anti-Semitism in Europe.

2. The deportation of the Armenians, although in large-scale, was not total, and in particular it does not apply to the two big cities of Istanbul and Izmir.

3. Turkish actions against the Armenians, although disproportionate, had not arisen from nothing. The fear of a Russian intrusion in the oriental Ottoman provinces, the fact of knowing that numerous Armenians saw the Russians as their liberators against the Turkish regime and the awareness of the Armenian revolutionary activities of the Ottoman Empire: all this contributed to create an atmosphere of anxiety and suspicion, aggravated by the situation, growing despair in the Empire and by neurosis - how usual - by the wartime. In 1914, the Russians set up four bulky units of Armenian volunteers and three others in 1915. These units regrouped numerous Ottoman Armenians, of whom some were very known public persons.

4. Deportation, for criminal, strategic or other reasons, had been practiced during centuries in the Ottoman Empire. Ottoman deportations did not aim directly and exclusively at the Armenians. Example: under the threat of the Russian intrusion and the imminent occupation of this city, the Ottoman governor of Van evacuated hastily the Moslem population and sent it on roads without transport or food, rather than to leave it under the Russian dominion. Very few of these Moslems survived this 'friendly' deportation.

5. It is not doubtful that sufferings born by the Armenians were a horrible human tragedy which still marks the memory of this people as that of the Jews' was by the Holocaust. A great number of Armenians died of famine, disease, desolation and also cold, because the suffering of the deportees went on during the winter. Doubtless, there were also terrible atrocities, although not at only one side, as showed the reports of the American missionaries before the deportation, concerning espaecially the destiny of Moslem villagers in the region of Van, fallen in the hands of the units of Armenian volunteers.

But, these events must be seen in the context of a fight, certainly uneven, but for real stakes, and in an authentic anxiety of the Turks - certainly largely exaggerated but not totally ungrounded - towards a deprived Armenian population, ready to help the Russian invaders. The government of the Young Turks in Istanbul decided to resolve this question by the old method - often employed - of the deportation.

The deportees had to undergo terrible sufferings, aggravated by the difficult conditions of the war in Anatolia, by the inferior quality - in the absence practically of all the valid men mobilized in the army - of their escorts and by the misdeeds of the bandits and of many others who took advantage of the occasion. But, there is no serious proof of a decision and a plan of the Ottoman government aiming to exterminate the Armenian nation."

Bernard Lewis, Prof of History at Princeton; Article appeared in French newspaper Le Monde, January 1, 1994

***

"...Activities carried out in the Ottoman Empire by the American missionaries are generally well enough known. On the other hand, one does not always realize the impact they had on American public opinion. The American missionaries discovered very quickly that the Moslems would not change religion so easily that, deprived of any possibility of proselytism among the Turks, they channeled all their energy towards the religious, educational and medical work in aid of the Christian minorities, in particular the Armenians. During a half a century, and even for longer, the missionaries were our main source of information about the situation in the Near and the Middle East and they modeled the American public opinion on this subject. (...) Having been received arms wide-open by the Armenians, it is not surprising that they adopted their cause. The reports they sent to America and the conferences they held, when they went there for vacation constituted pleas in favor of the oppressed Christians and denounced the Turkish oppressors. The congregations which supported these missionaries lined up in their point of view without distrust and developed under the aegis of our Churches a powerful anti-Turkish current of opinion..." (p 27-28)

... "... Atrocity stories have been vastly overdone.; some of the more recent massacres have been wholly nonexistent. One of the local (Constantinople) members of the press and of a relief organization told some friends openly that he could only send anti-Turkish dispatches to America because that is what gets the money for..." (p 30)

... "...Now I can readily understand and make allowance for the public's errors and misconceptions, for it has had, after all, no means of knowing that it has been systematically deceived, but I can find no excuse for those newspapers which, clinging to a policy of vilifying the Turk, failed to rectify the anti-Turkish charges printed in their columns even when it had been proved to the satisfaction of most fair-minded persons that they were unjustified. A case in point was the burning of Smyrna in September, 1922. There was scarcely a newspaper of importance in the United States that did not editorially lay that outrage at the door of the Turks, without waiting to hear the Turkish version, yet, after it had been attested by American, English, and French eye-witnesses, and by a French commission of inquiry, that the city had been deliberately fired by the Greeks and Armenians in order to prevent it falling into Turkish hands, how many newspapers had the courage to admit that they had done the Turks a grave injustice ?..." (p 133)

E. Alexander Powell, The Struggle for Power in Muslim Asia, The Century Co., New York and London, 1923

***

"I see that reports are being freely circulated in the United States that the Turks massacred thousands of Armenians in the Caucasus. Such reports are repeated so many times it makes my blood boil. The Near East Relief have the reports from Yarrow and our own American people which show that such Armenian reports are absolutely false. The circulation of such false reports in the United States, without refutation, is an outrage and is certainly doing the Armenians more harm than good. I feel that we should discourage the Armenians in this kind of work, not only because it is wrong, but because they are injuring themselves. In addition to the reports from our own American Relief workers that were in Kars and Alexandrople, and reports from such men as Yarrow, I have reports from my own Intelligence Officer and know that the Armenian reports are not true. Is there not something that you and the Near East Relief Committee can do to stop the circulation of such false reports?"

Admiral Mark Lambert Bristol served as the Commander of the U.S. Naval Detachment in Turkish waters and as the U.S. High Commissioner to Turkey during the years 1919-1927. His reports are housed in the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress. The latter is an excerpt from Bristol's letter dated March 28, 1921 to Dr. James L. Barton, the Secretary of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions

***

"...For nearly a century, the American missionaries have been maintaining contacts with the Armenian minority. (...) It is by this channel that one learnt in the United States the troubles suffered by the Armenians under the Hamidian regime (...) But the missionaries were not able to or did not want to explain to their coreligionists that the Turks bore exactly the same troubles. As a result, instead of giving to the Americans an impartial image of the situation of all the peoples of the Empire, instead of explaining clearly that it was Hamidian regime who was the oppressor and the Turks suffered as much as the Armenians, the missionaries drew the attention of America only on the misfortunes of the Armenians..."

(p 79-80) ... "...By the end of October, the late Miss Annie T. Allen and Miss Florence Billings, the Near East Relief's representatives in Ankara, compiled a report on the state of the Turkish villages which the Greeks had burned during their retreat and forwarded it to the Near East Relief's headquarters in Constantinople. But the Near East Relief has never published that report, just as Mr. Lloyd George never published the Bristol report on Greek misdeeds at Izmir..." (p 189)

Clair Price, The Rebirth of Turkey, New York, 1923

***

"...The Armenian, for all his ineffaceable nationalism, his passion for plotting and his fanatical intolerance, would be a negligible thorn in the Ottoman side did he stand alone. The Porte knows very well that while Armenian Christians are Gregorian, Catholic, and Protestant, each sect bitterly intolerant of the others and, moreover, while commerce and usury are all in Armenian hands, it can divide and rule secure; but behind the Armenian secret societies (and there are few Armenians who have not committed technical treason by becoming members of such societies at some point of their lives) it sees the Kurd, and behind the Kurd the Russian; or looking west, it espies through the ceaseless sporadic propaganda of the agitators.

Exeter Hall and Armenian Committees:

The Turk begins to repress because we sympathize and we sympathize because he represses, and so, the vicious circle revolves. Does he habitually, however, do more than repress? Does he, as administrator, oppress? So far, we have heard one version only, one part to this suit, with its stories of outrage and echoing through them a long cry for national independence. The mouth of the accused has been shut hitherto by fatalism, by custom, by the gulf of misunderstanding which is fixed between the Christian and the Moslem. In my own experience of western Armenia, extending more or less over four years up to 1894, I have seen no signs of reign of terror. Life in Christian villages has not shown itself outwardly to me as being very different from life in the villages of Islam, nor the trade and property of Armenians in towns to be less secure than those of Moslems. There was tension, there was friction, there was a condition of mutual suspicion as to which Armenians have said to me again and again "If only the patriots would leave us to trade and to till!". The Turk rules by right of five hundred years' possession, and before his day, the Byzantine, the Persian, the Parthian, the Roman preceded each other as over-lords of Greater Armenia back to the misty days of the first Tigranes. The Turk claims certain rights in this matter - the right to safeguard his own existence, the right to smoke out such hornets' nests as Zeitun, which has annihilated for centuries past the trade of Eastern Taurus, the right to remain dominant by all means, not outrageous ..."

David G. Hogarth, A Wandering Scholar in the Levant, New York, 1896, p. 147

***

"... Quoting from the American High Commissioner Admiral Bristol's report: 'The United States should raise its voice against the plans of the Allies and the American people should be told the facts. They (the Turks) were still human and still had rights and the other side of the coin was obscured by the flood of Greek and Armenian propaganda painting the Turks as completely inhuman and undeserving of any consideration, while suppressing all the facts in favor of the Turks.'...."

L. Evans, United States Policy and the Partition of Turkey, 1914-1924, Baltimore, 1965, p 272.

***

"... 2/ My mother was born in Balikesir, not far from the city of Izmir. In her town she had remembered that there were organized Armenian political factions determined to overthrow the government, and engaged in war activities against Turkish military forces as well as thousands of innocent civilians. These groups were active in Turkey then, as they continue to be to this day IN the Unired states. Thees are the names of the infamous groups: the Ramgavar, the Huntcahk, and the fanatical Dashnaksakgan (all spelled phonetically). These armed revolutionaries were headed by a maniacal fringe who had even attacked Armenians who did not support them in their treachery and disloyalty against a country where for seven centuries they had prospered and enjoyed total freedom.

3/ As a child my mother had learned a song which had been taught in Armenian school to all children. The following is a translation, from the Armenian, of the only words I remember: '...Let us slaughter the Turks - Let us establish our own country...'What would be our reaction if any cultural or religious community taught their children to kill Americans?

4/ Many Armenians after leaving their homes were allowed to RETURN and take possession of their homes and properties. My uncle was one who returned to his home., and my wife's aunt , who is still living, was another. Her family had returned to their home in Adiyaman.

5/ As a refugee my mother was taken into the home of an Armenian family in the town of Kilis. They lived in a house which they owned, and this was toward the end of 1915!

...... 9/ The following is an exact quotation from a pamphlet printed and distributed by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation here in New York. '...Its History: Struggle for national liberation. Founded in 1890, as a confederation of various action groups struggling for Armenian national and human rights, The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), known as Dashnaktsoutioun, carried on this struggle with all available means: political action, propaganda, and at times, armed struggle...'

10/ In her book entitled The Armenian Revolutionary Movement, the author, Louise Nalbandian, says about her book, in part, the following: '...This study covers in detail the armed struggle of the Armenian revolutionists against the Ottoman government, beginning with the first major disturbance in 1862, and extending to 1896...

... Dear reader, these are the words of my beloved mother: ' My son, we had everything in Turkey. We owned our own homes, our farm lands, shops, and businesses. We were free in our schools, our churches, and our press. On religious holidays, Christians and Muslims would exchange greetings, flowers, and baskets filled with all kinds of foods. After having so much for so long, why should the Turks decide to destroy us? WE, my son, WE were responsible beyond any doubt , for the misfortune that befell our people. WE, the Armenians were not loyal to our homeland, Turkey!..."

Edward Tashji, the American-born son of an Ottoman-Armenian mother and an Ottoman-Syrian-Orthodox father, Notarized Statement, FTAA, New York, 1992

***

"...According to the terms of the Constitution of 1908, the government of Enver could indeed mobilize the Armenians as well as the Turks in age to be in the armed forces. But an armed opposition started immediately, notably in Zeytoun. At the oriental border, the Armenians began to desert to pass in the Russian armies and the government of Enver, doubtful of the loyalty of those that stayed, separated them from the fighting forces to allocate them to battalions of engineers... In April, 1915, Lord Bryce and 'Friends of Armenia', in London, began to collect money to arm these deserters. One can't claim that the Russians remained indifferent in front of the supplement of these volunteers. Finally, at the end of April, they seized Van... And, having massacred the Turkish population, they delivered what remained of the city to the Russian army..."

Clair Price, The rebirth of Turkey, New York, 1923

***

"... For example, we were camped one night in a half-ruined Tartar mosque, the most habitable building of a destroyed village, near the border of Persia and Russian Armenia. During the course of evening I asked Ohanus if he could tell me anything of the history of the village and the cause of its destruction. In his matter of fact way he replied, Yes, I assisted in its sack and destruction, and witnessed the slaying of those whose bones you saw to-day scattered among its ruins..." (Foreword)

... "...The Tartars [Muslims] were, for the most part, poor. Some of them lived in villages and cultivated small farms; many of them continued in the way of life of their nomadic forefathers. They drove their flocks and herds from valley to valley, from plain to mountain, and from mountain to plain, following the pasturage as it changed with the seasons. They ranged from the salt desert shores of the Caspian Sea far into the mighty Caucasus Mountains. Even the village Tartars are a primitive people, only semi civilized. I can see now that we Armenians frankly despised the Tartars, and, while holding a disproportionate share of the wealth of the country, regarded and treated them as inferiors...." (p. 15, second paragraph)

... "...Our men armed themselves, gathered together and advanced on the Tartar section of the village. There were no lights in the houses and the doors were barred, for the Tartars suspected what as to happen and were in great fear. Our men hammered on the doors, but got no response; whereupon they smashed in the doors and began a carnage that continued until the last Tartar was slain. Throughout the hideous night, I cowered at home in terror, unable to shut my ears to the piercing screams of the helpless victims and the loud shouts of our men. By morning the work was finished..." ( p. 20, second paragraph.)

... "... The method of execution was for an Armenian government 'mauserist' to walk up behind the condemned Muslim in his home or on the street, place a pistol to the back of his head and blow out his brains. This simple way of getting rid of those who were undesirable in the view of the Armenian government and soon became a common way of paying debts...." ( p. 109, second paragraph).

... "...We closed the roads and mountain passes that might serve as ways of escape for the Tartars and then proceeded in the work of extermination. Our troops surrounded village after village. Little resistance was offered. Our artillery knocked the huts into heaps of stone and dust and when the villages became untenable and inhabitants fled from them into fields, bullets and bayonets completed the work. Some of the Tartars escaped of course. They found refuge in the mountains or succeeded in crossing the border into Turkey. The rest were killed. And so it is that the whole length of the borderland of Russian Armenia from Nakhitchevan to Akhalkalaki from the hot plains of Ararat to the cold mountain plateau of the North were dotted with mute mournful ruins of Tartar villages. They are quiet now, those villages, except for howling of wolves and jackals that visit them to paw over the scattered bones of the dead...." (p. 202, first and second paragraphs)

... "...One evening I passed through what had been a Tartar village. Among the ruins a fire was burning. I went to the fire and saw seated about it a group of soldiers. Among them were two Tartar girls, mere children. The girls were crouched on the ground, crying softly with suppressed sobs. Lying scattered over the ground were broken household utensils and other furnishings of Tartar peasant homes. There were also bodies of the Muslim dead...." (p. 203, second paragraph)

... " ... I was soon asleep. In the night I was awakened by the persistent crying of a child. I arose and went to investigate. A full moon enabled me to make my way about and revealed to me all the wreck and litter of the tragedy that had been enacted. Guided by the child's crying, I entered the yard of a house, which I judged from its appearance must have been the home of a Muslim family. There in a corner of the yard I found a women dead. Her throat had been cut. Lying on her breast was a small child, a girl about a year old..." (p. 204, first paragraph)

... "...We Armenians did not spare the Muslims. If persisted in, the slaughtering of Tartars, the looting, and the rape and massacre of the helpless become commonplace actions expected and accepted as a matter of course..." (p 218, first paragraph)

... "... I have been on the scenes of massacres where the dead lay on the ground, in numbers, like the fallen leaves in a forest. Muslims had been as helpless and as defenseless as sheep. They had not died as soldiers die in the heat of battle, fired with ardor and courage, with weapons in their hands, and exchanging blow for blow. They had died as the helpless must, with their hearts and brains bursting with horror worse than death itself..." (p. 218, second paragraph)

... "...We took with us 3000 Turkish soldiers arrested by the Russians and left to us [Armenians] when the Russians abandoned fights. During our retreat of Karaklis, 2000 of these poor devils were cruelly put to death. I was disgusted but I could not make any actual protest. Some of them were burned alive..."

... Leonard Ramsden Hartill, Men Are Like That, The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Indianapolis.1926. Memoirs of an Armenian officer who participated in the Armenian genocide of 2.5 million Muslim people

***

"...(Armenian terrorist attacks against Turkish diplomats) is one of the most dangerous and most neglected of all terrorist movements..."

Fred C. Ikle, US Under Secretary Of defense for Policy, Testimony Before The Subcommittee on Security and Terrorism of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Washington DC, mimeographed, March 11, 1982

***

"...While the Dashnaks [x-Russian Armenian Government] were in power they did everything in the world to keep the pot boiling by attacking Kurds, Turks, and Tartars; by committing outrages against the Moslems; by massacring the Moslems; and robbing and destroying their homes. During the last two years, the Armenians in Russian Caucasus have shown no ability to govern themselves and especially no ability to govern or handle other races under their power..."

U.S. Library of Congress, Bristol Papers, General Correspondence: Container #34.

***

"...I have it from absolute first-hand information that the Armenians in the Caucasus attacked Tartar (Muslim) villages that are utterly defenseless and bombarded these villages with artillery and they murder the inhabitants, pillage the village, and often burn the village..."

U.S. Library of Congress, Bristol Papers, General Correspondence: Container #32: Bristol to Bradley Letter of September 14, 1920.

***

"...In the early part of 1915, therefore, every Turkish city contained thousands of Armenians who had been trained as soldiers and who were supplied with rifles, pistols, and other weapons of defense. The operations at Van once more disclosed that these men could use their weapons to good advantage...."

Henry Morgenthau, Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire in 1915-1916, Ambassador Morgenthau's Story, Doubleday, Page & Co., Garden City, New York (1918). (These simple words from a notoriously anti-Turkish racist are perhaps most damning evidence of all that prove that most Armenians were armed, trained, pre-determined, and vicious aggressors, not all "poor , starving Armenians" as unfairly and incorrectly promoted in the Western media.)

***

"... In the entire region from Bitlis through Van to Bayezit we were informed that the damage and destruction had been done by the Armenians, who, after the Russians retired, remained in occupation of the country and who, when the Turkish army advanced, destroyed everything belonging to the Musulmans.

Moreover, the Armenians are accused of having committed murder, rape, arson, and horrible atrocities of every description upon the Musulman population.

At first we were most incredulous of these stories, but we finally came to believe them, since the testimony was absolutely unanimous and was corroborated by material evidence. For instance, the only quarters left at all intact in the cities of Bitlis and Van are the Armenian quarters, as was evidenced by churches and inscriptions on the houses, while the Musulman quarters were completely destroyed. Villages said to have been Armenian were still standing whereas Musulman villages were completely destroyed..."

Niles, Emory and Sutherland, Arthur, U.S. 867.00/1005, Princeton, 11 October 1919 (Captain Emory Niles and Mr. Arthur Sutherland were Americans ordered by the United States Government in 1919 to investigate the situation in eastern Anatolia

***

"... In the provinces in which the war was primarily fought -Van, Bitlis, and Erzurum - at least 40 percent of the Muslims were dead at war's end. Of course Muslims were not the only ones to die. The Armenian death rate was at least as great and Armenian losses cannot be ignored. But the world has long known of the suffering of Armenians. It is time for the world to also consider the suffering of the Muslims of the east and the horror that it was. Like the Armenians, Muslims were massacred or died from starvation and disease in stupefying numbers. Like the Armenians, their deaths deserve remembrance...."

McCarthy, Justin, Death and Exile, The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims 1821-1922, The Darwin Press Inc., 1995

***

"...At morning tea, Dro [Armenian architect of the genocide of 2.5 million Muslim people - ye] and his officers spread out a map of this whole high region called the Karabakh. Deep in tactics, Armenians spoke Russian, but I got their contempt for Allied 'neutral' zones and their distrust of promises made by tribal chiefs. A campaign shaped; more raids on Moslem villages..." p 354.

... "... 'It will be three hours to take,' Dro told me. We'd close in on three sides. 'The men on foot will not shoot, but use only the bayonets,' Merrimanov said, jabbing a rifle in dumbshow.
'That is for morale,' Dro put in.
'We must keep the Moslems in terror.'
'Soldiers or civilians?' I asked.
'There is no difference,' said Dro.
'All are armed, in uniform or not.'
'But the women and children?'
'Will fly with the others as best they may.'... More stories of Armenian murdering Muslims when the czarist troops fled north. My Armenian hosts told me of their duty here: to keep tabs on brigands, Muslim troop shifts, hidden arms, spies - Christian, Red or Tartar - coming in from Transcaucasus. Then they spoke of the hell that would break loose if Versailles were to put, as threatened, the Muslim vilayets of Turkey under the control of Erevan... Muslims under Christian rule? His lips smacked in irony under the droopy red moustache. That's bloodshed - just Smyrna over again on a bigger scale..." p 358.

... "... The ridges circled a wide expanse, its floors still. Hundreds of feet down, the fog held, solid as cotton flock.
'Djul lies under that,' said Dro. pointing.
'Our men also attack Muslims from the other sides.' ...Then,'Whee-ee!' - his whistle lined up all at the rock edge. Bayonets clicked upon carbines. Over plunged Archo, his black haunches rippling; then followed the staff, the horde - nose to tail, bellies taking the spur. Armenia in action seemed more like a pageant than war, even though I heard our Utica brass roar.... As I watched from the height, it took ages for Djul to show clear. A tsing of machine-gun fire took over from the thumping batteries; cattle lowed, dogs barked, invisible, while I ate a hunk of cheese and drank from a snow puddle. Mist at last folded upward as men shouted, at first heard faintly. Then came a shrill wailing.... Now among the cloud-streaks rose darker wisps - smoke. Red glimmered about house walls of stone or wattle, into dry weeds on roofs. A mosque stood in clump of trees, thick and green. Through crooked alleys on fire, horsemen were galloping after figures both mounted and on foot....

'Tartarski!' shouted the Armenian gunner by me. Others pantomimed them in escape over the rocks, while one twisted a bronze shell-nose, loaded, and yanked breech-cord, firing again and again. Shots wasted, I thought, when by afternoon I looked in vain for fallen branch or Muslim body. But these shots and the white bursts of shrapnel in the gullies drowned the women's cries.... At length all shooting petered out. I got on my horse and rode down toward Djul. It burned still but little flame showed now. The way was steep and tough, through dense scrub. Finally on flatter ground I came out suddenly, through alders, on smoldering houses. Across trampled wheat my brothers-in-arms were leading off animals, several calves and a lamb..." p 360.

... "... Armenian corpses came next, the first a pretty Muslim child with straight black hair, large eyes. She looked about twelve years old. She lay in some stubble where meal lay scattered from the sack she'd been toting. The bayonet had gone through her back, I judged, for blood around was scant. Between the breasts one clot, too small for a bullet wound, crusted her homespun dress....The next was a Muslim boy of ten or less, in rawhide jacket and knee-pants. He lay face down in the path by several huts. One arm reached out to the pewter bowl he'd carried, now upset upon its dough. Steel had jabbed just below his neck, into the spine. ...There were Muslim grownups, too, I saw as I led the sorrel around. Djul was empty of the living till I looked up to see beside me Dro's German-speaking colonel. He said all Muslims who had not escaped were dead..." p 361 (fourth paragraph)....

'The most of the Muslims slaughtered by the Armenians are inside houses. Come you and look.'
'No, dammit! My stomach isn't '
We were under those trees by the mosque, in an open space.
'I don't believe you,' I said, but followed to a nail-studded door. The man pushed it ajar, then spurred away, leaving me to check on the corpse. I thought I should, this charge was so constant, so gritted my teeth and went inside..." p. 361 (seventh paragraph)

... "...The place was cool but reeked of sodden ashes, and was dark at first, for its stone walls had only window slits. Rags strewed the mud floor around an iron tripod over embers that vented their smoke through roof beams black with soot. All looked bare and empty, but in an inner room flies buzzed. As the door swung shut behind me I saw they came from a man's body lying face up, naked but for its grimy turban. He was about fifty years old by what was left of his face - a rifle butt had bashed an eye. The one left slanted, as with Tartars rather than with Kurds. Any uniform once on him was gone, so I'd no proof which he was, and quickly went out, gagging at the mess of his slashed genitals..." p. 362 (first paragraph).

... 'How many Muslim people lived there?'
'Oh, about eight hundred.' He yawned.
'Did you see any Muslim officers?'
'No, sir. I was in at dawn. All were Tartar civilians in mufti.'...
The lieutenant dozed off, then I, but in the small hours a voice woke me - Dro's. He stood in the starlight bawling out an officer. Anyone keelhauled so long and furiously I'd never heard. Then abruptly Dro broke into laughter, quick and simple as child's. Both were a cover for his sense of guilt, I thought, or hoped. For somehow, despite my boast of irreligion, Christian Armenian massacring 'infidels' was more horrible than the reverse would have been.... From daybreak on, Armenian villagers poured in from miles around.

The Armenian women plundered happily, chattering like ravens as they picked over the carcass of Djul. They hauled out every hovel's chattels, the last scrap of food or cloth, and staggered away, packing pots, saddlebags, looms, even spinning-wheels.

... 'Thank you for a lot, Dro,' I said to him back in camp...
'But now I must leave.' We shook hands, the captain said
'A bientot, mon camarade.'
And for hours the old Molokan scout and I plodded north across parching plains. Like Lot's wife I looked back once to see smoke bathing all, doubtless in a sack of other Moslem villages by the Armenian Army up to the line of snow that was Iran.'..." p. 363

Robert Dunn, World Alive, A Personal Story , Crown Publishers, Inc., New York,1952.Memoirs of an American officer who witnessed the Armenian genocide of 2.5 million Muslim people

***

"... On 28 March 1894, the British Ambassador in Istanbul, Currie reported to the British Foreign Office: ' The aim of the Armenian revolutionaries is to stir disturbances, to get the Ottomans to react to violence, and thus get the foreign Powers tointervene." British Blue Book, Nr.6 (1894)..." p 57

"... On 28 January 1895, the British Consul in Erzurum, Graves reported to the British Ambassador in Istanbul: 'The aims of the revolutionary committees are to stir up general discontent and to get the Turkish government and people to react with violence, thus attracting the attention of the foreign powers to the imagined sufferings of the Armenian people, and getting them to act to correct the situation..."

"...On 4 March 1896, the British vice-consul Williams wrote from Van: ' The Dashnaks and Hunchaks have terrorized their own countrymen, they have stirred up the Muslim people with their thefts and insanities, and have paralyzed all efforts made to carry out reforms; all the events that have taken place in Anatolia are the responsibility of the crimes committed by the Armenian revolutionary committees.' British Blue Book, Nr. 8 (1896)..." p 108

Justin McCarthy, Prof. of History, U. of Louisville, Death and Exile: the Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1923, The Darwin Press, Princeton, 1996

***

As one can see, no one wishes to minimize the human suffering during WWI. But this suffering was not limited to Armenians, as Armenians claim. The WWI conditions made worse by the civil war treacherously engineered and ruthlessly waged by the Armenian nationalists caused disproportionately high suffering in the Muslim community, mostly Turkish. Ignoring Turkish suffering and embellishing and exaggerating Armenian suffering is selective morality that borders on racism. Not to mention it is dishonest to dismiss the role Armenian nationalists played in abruptly ending the millennium of harmonious co-habitation of Turks and Armenians in Anatolia.

Human tragedy exists; mutual killings exist; Armenian terrorism, treason, armed insurrection, resulting in massive Turkish suffering, and in turn, Armenian TERESET (temporary resettlement) exist; hunger, starvation, freezing winters, scorching summers, punishing terrains "for all the peoples of the area, not just Armenians" exist; lots of other conditions exist... but genocide? That doesn't exist... It only exists in the political minds of the Armenian spin-doctors who brain washed for many years their children with embellished, distorted, fabricated stories of "evil Turk versus poor-starving Armenian".
Genocide is a myth the Armenian propaganda machine invented since 1965 (the first time that term was uttered by Armenians.)
Since the public didn't take Armenians seriously, good old Armenian tradition of terrorism was kicked into gear again in 1973 (what a blast from the past!). This was coupled with media campaigns, political pressure, pseudo-scholarly book writing, all of which caused the man on the street to think "If the Armenian are crying this much, they must be right." (not suspecting the fact that crying, protesting, nagging, insisting, pressuring, twisting, distorting, falsifying, fabricating, backstabbing, treason, and terrorism and other such phenomena are among favorite Armenian pastimes.)
When all this was further coupled with lack of Turkish response per Western standards (due to time-honored Turkish culture and tradition of dignified silence in the face of overwhelming devastation strengthened by the Turkish will to look to the future with hope rather than the past with hate) , the man on the street had no choice but to believe what s/he was told by the Armenian lobbyists, such as my friend "Rich the stealthy" here.
When Armenians were teaching their children hate for all things Turkish cultivating revenge, and harvesting terrorism, Turks were self-confidently nation-building with hope, forgiveness, peace, and tolerance.
If you have difficulty in believing all this, then please conduct "The Dink Test" to see the difference between the attitudes towards hate crimes in two distinct communities:
Turks, from the top down, rejected and denounced the hate crime in the first instance it happened (i.e. the killing of a Turkish-Armenian by a Turkish teenager). Killer's father turned him over to the police and with help from Turkish citizens, the killer was caught by the police in 36 hours. More Turks and Armenians took part in a protest march and the Turkish leaders in all walks of life issued statements of shock, sadness, and condolences (including this writer.)
Armenians, on the other hand, not only NEVER MARCHED IN PROTEST OF ANY HATE CRIMES committed by Armenians on Turks, but also embraced the Armenian terrorists with show of support at fund raising campaigns and court proceedings, IN THE LAST 150 YEARS! To add insult to injury, some of those ASSASSINS ARE TREATED LIKE "FOLK HEROS" IN THE ARMENIAN COMMUNITY (diaspora, Armenia,and all)! I would be more than happy to provide a long list of Armenian terrorists and assassins if my friend "Rich the Stealthy" wishes...

My humble work dedicated to my father's silent memory continues ...

You're the one who seems frantic to find cut and paste posts to attempt to justify the unjustifiable, denying the suffering of innocent Armenians.

Denyers of Armenian Genocide have no compassion for human life, or dignity toward human life.

As I mentioned before it is common knowledge not to write proper names over the internet, because of finatics such as yourself who are misdirected, and supposedly dedicate "so-called humble work" to there family? I seriously question whether they would be proud, more like dishonored.

Twelve Ways To Deny A Genocide

By Israel Charny, these 12 methods were originally called "Templates for Gross Denial of a Known Genocide: A Manual" in The Encyclopedia of Genocide, volume 1, page 168. These 12 tactics have all been followed (or perhaps more the more accurate word is pioneered) by the Turkish Government, in its genocide denial campaign.

1. Question and minimize the statistics.

This is one of the biggest distractions to the main issue itself. By claiming that the numbers are exaggerated or inflated, and that only a few hundred thousand were killed, not over a million, they try to completely side-track the entire issue. As if a few hundred thousand would not have been a genocide as well.

2. Attack the motivations of the truth-tellers.

The claim that Armenians cannot be trusted because they may want reparations is like saying no victim should ever be heard, because they are biased in their pursuit of justice.

3. Claim that the deaths were inadvertent.

As a result of famine, migration, or disease, not because of willful murder. Also mention that Turks/Muslims died too at that time - without mentioning that they died on the battlefield, not at the hands of their very own government.

4. Emphasize the strangeness of the victims.

The victims were infidels (Christians), a fifth-column, and not "good" Ottoman Turks.

5. Rationalize the deaths as the result of tribal conflict, coming to the victims out of the inevitability of their history of relationships.

Check. Armenians and Turks could not share that land anymore since some Armenians might prefer independence to being second class citizens.

6. Blame "out of control" forces for committing the killings.

They often blame the very Kurds they later struggled to keep down.

7. Avoid antagonizing the genocidists, who might walk out of "the peace process."

Turkey refuses to even open diplomatic relations with Armenia because it talks about the Armenian Genocide.

8. Justify denial in favor of current economic interests.

Undoubtedly Turkey's number one weapon in denying the Armenian Genocide. Constant threats to the west the military contracts worth billions will be canceled have worked wonders in legislatures considering the issue. In fact, the debate over whether to officially recognize the genocide in the west is clearly not about whether it happened or not - since it very clearly did - but on just what economic/diplomatic repercussions Turkey has threatened or might retaliate with if they do recognize a 90 year old truth.

9. Claim that the victims are receiving good treatment, while baldly denying the charges of genocide outright.

Show how a few thousand Armenians were not killed in Istanbul as evidence that 2.5 million were not killed/driven out in Anatolia.

10. Claim that what is going on doesn't fit the definition of genocide. At the time of writing (September 2004), the European Union, the Secretary General of the United Nations and even Amnesty International still avoid calling the crimes in Darfur by their proper name. There are three reasons for such reluctance:

A. Another misconception is the "all or none" concept of genocide. The all-or-none school considers killings to be genocide only if their intent is to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group "in whole." Their model is the Holocaust. They ignore the "in part" in the definition in the Genocide Convention, which they often haven't read.

B. Since the 1990's, a new obstacle to calling genocide by its proper name has been the distinction between genocide and "ethnic cleansing," a term originally invented as a euphemism for genocide in the Balkans. Genocide and "ethnic cleansing" are sometimes portrayed as mutually exclusive crimes, but they are not. Prof. Schabas, for example, says that the intent of "ethnic cleansing" is expulsion of a group, whereas the intent of "genocide" is its destruction, in whole or in part. He illustrates with a simplistic distinction: in "ethnic cleansing," borders are left open and a group is driven out; in "genocide," borders are closed and a group is killed.

C. Claim that the "intent" of the perpetrator is merely "ethnic cleansing" not "genocide," which requires the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. The U.N. Commission of Experts report of 2005 took this way out. It confused motive with intent. (Ironically, the U.N. Commission report even included a paragraph saying motive and intent should not be confused, an exhortation the Commission promptly violated, itself.) Even if the motive of a perpetrator is to drive a group off its land ("ethnic cleansing"), killing members of the group and other acts enumerated in the Genocide Convention may still have the specific intent to destroy the group, in whole or in part. That's genocide.

11. Blame the victims.

Perhaps the most insulting tactic of all. Saying that actually it was the Armenians who were massacring and wiping out Turks.

12. Say that peace and reconciliation are more important that blaming people for genocide.

This is often heard from Turks, American government officials and others who have clearly never been victims of genocide. Much like telling a man whose mother was raped and murdered by the next door neighbor that it is more important to get along with your neighbors, this will never be accepted by Armenians who deserve and need an apology and reparations. They need an apology from Turkey now not only for the genocide, but for the nearly century long denial and miseducation campaign that took place, the continued mistreatment of Armenians in Turkey, the blockade of Armenia since the early 1990s and the post-genocidal war taking even more Armenian land.

------

Keep posting the Turkish propoganda machine and there agents have an endless supply of propoganda.

You seem to need to prove something that did happen, how frustrating it must be to disprove the truth.

You stated :

"...it is common knowledge not to write proper names over the internet, because of fanatics such as yourself..."

Wow!

Should I now apologize to our readers for my being open and honest with them?

Should I have "hid my identity" like a "stealthy Amenian lobbysist" who slyly hid behind an "Anglicized" fictitious first name for months to dupe the public?

Isn't this what your grandfathers like Andonian and Dro and Aram and others did well back in 1914-1918? Camouflage source of Armenian propaganda and make it appear as if it comes from a credible Westerner?

Are you ashamed of your origin and/or heritage?

Why cannot you burst open free and proud like I am?

Why do you people always have to fight dirty and sneaky and devious? Why cannot you be open and honest for a change?

Try it... you'll like it!

Then you will begin to see the immense Turkish suffering your granparents caused on my people.

Perhaps then, and only then, the healing can begin...

****

I have listed Armenian sources that refute the genocide claims. You dismissed them without even grasping what they wrote.

Then I listed American sources that refute the genocide claims. You ignored them too, without so much as trying to understand what they wrote.

OK, let us move on. Today, I will list British sources that clearly demolish baseless Armenian claims of genocide.

The Armenians and their sympathizers base their genocide claims mostly on Englishman Toynbee's wartime propaganda work as embodied in the 1916 Blue Book. This book, in turn, uses most of Morgenthau's, the American Ambassador to Istanbul from November 1913 to February 1916, writings which , in turn, are based on distorted, exaggerated, and or embellished accounts of Turkish-Armenian civil war, filed from Anatolia, by Armenian revolutionaries, Armenian clergy, the American Protestant missionaries, and all other anti-Turkish, anti-Muslim elements of the time.

So much so, that the writers of the book had to codify the sources in order maintain their credibility which clever maneuver they camouflaged as "the need to protect the identity of the witnessess". Only after careful detective work in the British archives by the historians like Justin McCarthy and Salahi Sonyel do we now know (after many decades) that those "sources" were mainly partisans registered with Armenian Revolutionary Federation , the Hunchaks, as well as Armenian clergy and U.S. Protestant missionaries, none of whom, any fair--minded reader and truth-seeker will agree, can be considered "impartial sources".

This is remarkable, because the A.F.A.T.H. community uses of the Blue Book, which was discredited later as wartime propaganda by none other than its own writer, Toynbee -- a fresh out of college history major at the time--, boil down to Armenians' using their own lies "removed and laundered twice": once by Morgenthau and once by Toynbee.

First level of falsification ends with Morgenthau's ambassadorial office, where his Armenian male secretaries, do all the hatchet job for the Ambassador on those field reports who then only signs his name - perhaps as expected from a real estate developer from New York - on the "finished" reports. These reports are circulated widely and even get published readily in the NYT for global readership and generate even more credibility.

Second level of falsification ends with Toynbee's Blue Book which uses the level one exaggerations above as facts, and adds more British spins to them, which makes the Blue Book "the embellishments of the embellishments".

There is even a third level of laundering "dirty information": the AFATH community darts back into this deceptive picture using this Blue Book to convince the rest of the world that Turks committed genocide. Let's see now: lies leading to more lies ending up with most lies. And where are the Turkish views in all this? No where. Not only Turkish counter views are not encouraged or solicited, but they are censored as they came in. Those were the times (beginning of the 20th Century) where you could write anything in a newspaper and get away with it ...

At this stage, the lies have come full circle, back to their originators, laundered with the "magic touch" of Western diplomacy, academia, and media, and loaded with credibility. After all, who will suspect the words of a United States Ambassador and the offices of the Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the respected Armenian clergy and the American Protestant missionaries and the NYT?

Who could imagine that they all lied through their teeth? One and all, all the way down the line! (Apparently, some still do; remember the WMD in Iraq?)

These "reliable sources" have still not apologized to the Turkish nation for the colossal human tragedy they had inflicted on the Ottoman Empire.

These "sources" have still not apologized to the unsuspecting public of the U.S. and the U.K. during WWI for misleading them with their ethocidal(*) reports from the field.

I shall continue to gently remind them to apologize to the Turkish nation, for their acts that pretty much destroyed a millennium of peaceful cohabitation in between the Armenians and Turks in Anatolia. That's the mega picture. The smoke screen is the baseless and meaningless claim of genocide.

Truth-seekers may wish to start writing letters to the editors now, basing those letters on any quotation selected from below that best refutes the next editorial glorifying the Armenian allegations of a bogus genocide.

Here, I provide the truth and the tools for you. How you use them is up to you, the fair-minded readers.

******************

Some of the relevant BRITISH NATIONAL ARCHIVES can be listed as follows:

a) Parliamentary Papers , Hansard,: Commons/Lords
b) Foreign Office: Confidential Print: Various Collections
c) Foreign Office: 424/239-253: Turkey: Correspondence - Annual Reports
d) Foreign Office: 608
e) Foreign Office: 371, Political Intelligence: General Correspondence
f) Foreign Office: 800/240, Ryan Papers
g) Foreign Office: 800/151, Curzon Papers
h) Foreign Office: 839: The Eastern Conference: Lausanne. 53 files

India Office Records and Library, Blackfriars Road, London:

a) L/Political and Security/10/851-855 ,five boxes, "Turkey: Treaty of Peace: 1918-1923"
b) L/P & S/10/1031, "Near East: Turkey and Greece: Lausanne Conference, 1921-1923"
c) L/P & S/11/154
d) L/P & S/11/1031

And here are some striking and revealing BRITISH QUOTATIONS THAT REFUTE THE ARMENIAN CLAIMS OF GENOCIDE:

**************
"...The aim of the Armenian revolutionaries is to foment outbreaks, firstly to induce the Ottomans to react to their violence and secondly to encourage the foreign powers to intervene..."

Letter of the British Ambassador Currie to the Foreign Office, on March the 28th of 1894, British Blue Book, N°6, p 57

******************

"...The aims of the revolutionary committees are to arouse a general discontent and to force the Turkish government and the population to react violently, that would draw the attention of the foreign nations to Armenians' imaginary suffering and encourage them to intervene to right the situation... »

The British Blue Book, N° 6 (1894), p 222-223

******************

« ... The members of Dachnak and Hintchak parties have terrorized their own compatriots, they have irritated the Moslem populations with robberies and wild actions ; they have incapacitated all the efforts to implement reforms ; all the events in Anatolia find their origins in the crimes committed by Armenian revolutionary committees..."

Note written on March the 4th of 1896 by the British vice-consul in Van, Blue Book, N°8 (1896), p 108

******************

« ...Concerning the Armenian revolutionaries' tactics, one cannot expect to think up something more diabolic. Killing Moslems in order to punish innocents, robbing in the middle of the night villages that have just paid, the same day, their taxes. (...) The Armenian revolutionaries prefer robbing their own coreligionists rather than fighting against their enemy ; it's in order to make their compatriots murder that the Armenian anarchists in Constantinople do bomb attacks..."

Sir Mark Sykes, "The Caliph's Last Heritage", London, 1915, p 409-418

******************

"...With Serbia and Belgium, the number of the allied States of the Entente had risen to six. But who is the seventh ally ? (...) It's the Armenians. They participated in the World War from its beginning. (...) They threw themselves enthusiastically into a hand-to-hand fight without waiting for our invitation and without proceeding with any bargaining. (...) Admiring, from the beginning of hostilities, the organization of the Entente, they gave free rein to respect and to the confidence that they gave to us at all times and rushed immediately into fighting. They are still fighting. One hundred thousand of them are in the Russian army, twenty thousand others are fighting with the Caucasus army, and many Armenian volunteers are in the rows of the Entente on the French front..."

"Our seventh ally", article published in the newspaper Daily Chronicle, September 23, 1914 issue ******************

"...We do not hesitate to repeat that these histories of massacres en masse were put into circulation in the evident purpose to bring the British government, at the time of the final liquidation of accounts, to follow a practice hostile to Turkey. So we do not need to apologize for having tried to show with honesty how a nation which was our ally during many years and having the same religion as millions of our fellow countrymen was accused of horrible crimes against humanity on the basis of 'proofs' if not totally invented, at least grossly and shamefully exaggerated..."

... "...The Turk never deigns to explain his own case whereas the pro-Armenians always manage to belong to the upper class, frightening the public by repeating ceaselessly, and by exaggerating it, the number of victims, and apparently by appreciating to its just value an old oriental proverb : 'Give to a lie an advance of 24 hours, and you will need 100 years to catch up with it.'... ...We have no hesitation in repeating that these stories of wholesale massacre have been circulated with the distinct objective of influencing, detrimentally to Turkey, the future policy of the British Government when the time of settlement shall arrive. No apology, therefore, is needed for honestly endeavouring to show how a nation with whom we were closely allied for many years and which possesses the same faith as millions of our fellow-subjects, has been condemned for perpetrating horrible excesses against humanity on 'evidence' which, when absolutely false, is grossly and shamefully exaggerated..."

C. F. Dixon-Johnson, The Armenians, Blackburn, 1916, page 61

******************

"...When Europe knew about the aggression against the Ottoman Bank and the massacre of the Armenians which followed, a good many painters working for the illustrated newspapers came to Constantinople in order to supply some documentation on atrocities committed by the multicephale hydra. Among them, there was the late Melton Prior, the famous war correspondent. It was a man with a hard and resolute temperament, who never let himself be dominated by the events (...) He confided to me that this time he had felt embarrassed. The public at home had heard about hideous atrocities and was anxious to have the images of it. Now, it was difficult to supply them with, because the dead Armenians were buried. Besides, there had been no attacks either against the women or against the children and the Armenian churches had not been desecrated. Having sympathy for the Turks and being fundamentally honest, he refused to invent what he had not seen. But the others hadn't the same scruples. I later saw in an Italian illustrated newspaper some terrible representations of women and children being massacred in churches..."

Sydney Whitman, Turkish Memories, London, 1914, p 29

******************

"...Even in cases of minor importance, one can not totally trust the testimonies of the people. When prejudices, emotion, passions, patriotism get involved in feelings, testimonies lose any value. (...) The histories of atrocities were repeated day after day, and diffused by means of posters, with brochures, with letters and with speech. People enjoying a great reputation and who, at other times, would have had scruple, for lack of proofs, even to condemn their worst enemies, would not hesitate to be the indicters and to attribute to an entire people the most atrocious crimes one can imagine. (...) A circular was prepared by the War ministry asking the officers to report on the misdeeds of the enemy. According to this circular, exactness was not an essential condition: probability was enough. (...) The most popular lies in England and in America were those concerning atrocities. No war can do without it. One considers that to libel the enemy is a patriotic duty..."

Arthur Ponsoby (British Deputy from 1910 till 1918, his book published in 1928 describes propaganda methods used during First World war), Falsehood in War-Time, New York, 1971, p 20-22

******************

"...Marshal Shakir Pasha, the imperial commissioner for the introduction of reforms in Armenia, counts in the first place among the high-ranking officials accused for having participated in the wild repressive measures taken against the Armenians. He was in Erzurum in October, 1895, at the time of the revolt of the Armenians and it's asserted that he behaved there as a real blood-thirsty monster. According to a report which circulates worldwide, he held there, a watch in his hand, and when one came to ask him for instructions, he is said to have ordered that the hard slaughter go on even one hour and a half, some people says two hours.

(...) Given the purpose of our journey, we visited successively Mr. Engrave, the consul of Great Britain, to the governor Mehmet Sherif Rauf Pasha, to the consul of France, Mr Roqueferrier, and to Mr. V. Maximov, the consul general of Russia. We asked each of these if they believed in what is said about Shakir Pasha and notably in the episode of the watch. Mr. Roqueferrier found it a grotesque affair. 'They are rumors invented as one pleases ' he said and added some words of respect towards Shakir Pasha. The Russian consul, Mr Maximov, made us the following statement: 'it's not my role to deny such stories. All that I may say to you is that Shakir Pasha is a nice man, a man with a good heart. I know him for years. He is one of my friends.' The consul of Great Britain, Mr. Engrave, said : 'I was not here at that time and I did not speak to Shakir Pasha of this affair, but the governor assured me that there is nothing of a truth in there and it is largely enough for me, because I believe without hesitation in all that Rauf Pasha says. (...) If the Armenian revolutionaries had not come into the region, inciting the Armenian population to the revolt, do you believe that there would have been massacres ?' I asked Mr. Engrave. 'Certainly not,' he answered. 'I am persuaded that no Armenian would have been killed.' ...."

Sydney Whitman, Turkish Memories, London, 1914, p 70-94

******************

"...During a meeting of the Armenian National Assembly, in the last autumn, Mr. Sdépan Papazian, the presumed author of the statistical figures presented to the Berlin Conference, took on violently to the patriarch to have communicated to the Embassies the statistical figures without having consulted first the National Assembly, what consequentially drew the attention of the opinion to the enormous differences between the figures of Berlin and those supplied more recently by the patriarchy and to provoke remarks on the doubtful character of these two series of figures (...) In the list of Berlin, by an apparently dishonest manipulation of the official figures, the purpose aimed at was to prove that, according to these figures, the Armenian population of Erzurum and Van (including Erzurum and Hakkari) amounted to 1 150 000 souls. I demonstrated afterward that the real number did not exceed doubtlessly 450 000. As for the figures supplied by the Patriarch in the embassy in 1880, they indicated a population of 373 500 Armenians, and 85 000 Nestorians..."

Report of the Major Trotter, specialist of demographic questions in the British Embassy in the Ottoman Empire, dated February 15th, 1882 (Reference : Foreign Office 424/132, n°46, annexe 5)

******************

"...Actually, the European politicians were never able to release themselves from their religious prejudices, notably as regards to Islam. Christendom let itself be contaminated by prejudices bequeathed to the West by the Byzantine columnists and continued to apply to the Moslem world the policy of past centuries (...) The Byzantine sources were for a long time the origin of all the fixed ideas of Europe concerning Near East and the European politicians referred to it as long as Christendom felt threatened by the Turkish peril. One of the popes, the great humanist Pius II, found a very simple means to resolve the Ottoman problem. Before organizing the crusade against the Turks, he sent a personal letter to Mehmet the Conqueror suggesting to him being converted to the Christian religion with all his people. In exchange, he promised to recognize him as the supreme leader of the Christendom and defender of the European order. This letter summarizes perfectly the Europe's attitude towards Turkey. Indeed, Europe would have forgiven the Turks all their conquests, not at all different from those of the other conquering peoples, if only they had agreed to become integrated into the Christendom (...)"

Félix Valyi, Revolutions in Islam, London, 1925, p 27-28

******************

"...The British government of that time and those that followed considered the massacres of 1915-1916 as a horrifying tragedy. We understand the strong feelings for this problem, given the human losses of both parties. But we do not believe that proofs put forward give evidence that those events must be classified as "genocide" as defined by the 1948 Convention of the United Nations on genocide. (...) The events of 1915-1916 constitute a big tragedy, during which the two parties underwent very heavy losses..."

Official Statement by the Embassy of Great Britain in Ankara, July 23, 2001.

******************

"...The British Government had condemned the massacres at the time. But in the absence of unequivocal evidence that the Ottoman administration took a specific decision to eliminate the Armenians under their control at that time, British governments have not recognized those events as indications of genocide... Nor do we believe it is the business of governments of today to review events of over 80 years ago, with a view to pronouncing on them. The events of 1915-16 remain a painful issue in relation to two states with which we enjoy excellent relations..."

Foreign Office spokesman, Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale, AP News, April14, 1999

******************

"...A circular was issued by the War Office inviting reports on war incidents from officers with regard to the enemy and stating that strict accuracy was not essential so long as there was inherent probability..." (p 20).

"...Atrocity lies were the most popular of all, especially in this country and America; no war can be without them. Slander of the enemy is esteemed a patriotic duty..." (p 22).

"...It is impossible to describe all the types of atrocity stories. They were repeated for days in brochures, posters, letters and speeches. Renowned persons, who otherwise would be hesitant to condemn even their mortal enemies for lack of evidence, did not hesitate to accuse an entire nation of having committed every imaginable savagery and inhuman action..." (p. 129).

Arthur Ponsonby, Falsehood in War-Time, New York, 1928

******************

"... The deafening drumbeat of the propaganda, and the sheer lack of sophistication in argument which comes from preaching decade after decade to a convinced and emotionally committed audience, are the major handicaps of Armenian historiography of the diaspora today..."

Dr. Gwynne Dyer, a London-based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries,1976

******************

When asked by Lord Biffen whether Her Majesty's Government will list the factors which have dissuaded them from acknowledging as genocide the Armenian massacre in 1915, Baroness Scotland of Asthal responded:

: "...The Government, in line with previous British Governments, have judged the evidence not to be sufficiently unequivocal to persuade us that these events should be categorised as genocide as defined by the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide, a convention which was drafted in response to the Holocaust and is not retrospective in application. The interpretation of events in Eastern Anatolia in 1915-16 is still the subject of genuine debate amongst historians."

Baroness Scotland of Asthal, expressing the position of the British Government's on the AAG once again, in a written response to a question at the House of Lords, February 7, 2001

******************

"...In April, the Armenian revolutionaries seized the city of Van and established there an Armenian general staff under the command of Aram and Vardan. On May 6th, they delivered the city to the Russian army, having cleaned the district of Van of all the Moslems... Among the most notorious Armenian leaders was Karekin Pasdermadjian, a former member of the Turkish parliament known under the name of Garo. He had taken the leadership of the Armenian volunteers when hostilities between the Turks and Russians had begun... It's known that the attempts of the Turks at the beginning of the war to gain the support of the Dachnak Party against the Russians had failed, the Armenian congress of Erzurum having declared itself neutral in September, 1914. Nevertheless, thousands of Russian bombs and weapons which were in the hands of the members of the party, constituted an evident proof denying this neutrality. The Turks attributed the Russian occupation of the North of Asia Minor to the activities of the Armenian groups which had seriously hindered the defense of the country..."

Felix Valyi, Revolutions in Islam, London, 1925, p 233-23

******************

"...The arrival of this British brigade was followed by the announcement that Kars Province had been allotted by the Supreme Council of the Allies to the Armenians, and that announcement having been made, the British troops were then completely withdrawn, and Armenian occupation commenced. Hence all the trouble; for the Armenians at once commenced the wholesale robbery and persecution of the Muslim population on the pretext that it was necessary forcibly to deprive them of their arms. In the portion of the province which lies in the plains they were able to carry out their purpose, and the manner in which this was done will be referred to in due course ..." p. 175

... "...Armenian troops have pillaged and destroyed all the Moslem villages in the plain. Caravans of refugees were in the meanwhile constantly arriving from the plain, from which the whole Moslem population was fleeing with as much of their personal property as they could transport, seeking to obtain security and protection..." p 177

... "... In those Moslem villages in the plain below which had been searched for arms by the Armenians everything had been taken under the cloak of such search, and not only had many Moslems been killed by the Armenian Army, but horrible tortures had been inflicted in the endeavour to obtain information as to where valuables had been hidden, of which the Armenians were aware of the existence, although they had been unable to find them..." p 178 (first paragraph)

... "...The Armenians from the plain were attacking the Kurdish people with artillery, with a large force in support..." p. 181

... "... I had received further very definite information of horrors that had been committed by the Armenian soldiery in Kars Plain, and as I had been able to judge of their want of discipline by their treatment of my own detached parties, I had wired to Tiflis from Zivin that 'in the interests of humanity the Armenians should not be left in independent command of the Moslem population, as, their troops being without discipline and not under effective control, atrocities were constantly being committed, for which we should with justice eventually be held to be morally esponsible'..." p 184

A. Rawlinson, Adventures in the Near East , Jonathan Cape, 30 Bedford Square, London, 1934 . (First published 1923) (287 pages). Memoirs of a British officer, who witnessed the Armenian genocide of 2.5 million Muslim people.

******************

"... As for the tactics of the revolutionaries, anything more fiendish one could not imagine - The assassination of Moslems in order to bring about the punishment of innocent men, the midnight extortion of money from villages which have just paid their taxes by day, the murder of persons who refuse to contribute to their collection boxes, are only some of the crimes of which Moslems, Catholics and Gregorians accuse them with no uncertain voice. The Armenian revolutionaries prefer to plunder their co-religionists to giving battle to their enemies; the anarchists of Constantinople throw bombs with the intention of provoking a massacre of their fellow-countrymen. If the object of English philanthropists and the roving brigands (who are the active agents of revolution) is to subject the bulk of eastern provinces to the tender mercies of an Armenian oligarchy, then I cannot entirely condemn the fanatic outbreaks of the Moslems or the repressive measures of the Turkish Government. On the other hand, if the object of the Armenians is to secure equality before law and the maintenance of security and peace in the countries partly inhabited by Armenians, then I can only say that their methods are not those calculated to achieve success..."

Sir Mark Sykes, The Caliph's Last Heritage, London 1915, p 409

******************

"... Shortly after the news had spread to Europe of the attack on the Ottoman Bank and the subsequent massacre of Armenians, a number of artists of illustrated newspapers arrived in Constantinople, commissioned to supply the demand for atrocities of the Million-headed-Tyrant. Among these was the late Mr. Melton Prior, the renowned war correspondent. He was a man of strenuous and determined temperament, one not accustomed to be the sport of circumstances but to rise superior to them. Whether he was called upon to take part in a forced march or to face a mad Mullah, he invariable held his own and came off victorious. But in this particular case, as he confided to me, he was in an awkward predicament. The public at home had heard of nameless atrocities and was anxious to receive pictorial representations of these. The difficulty was how to supply them with what they wanted, as the dead Armenians had been buried and no women or children had suffered hurt and no Armenian church had been desecrated. As an old admirer of the Turks and as an honest man, he declined to invent what he had not witnessed. But others were not equally scrupulous. I subsequently saw an Italian illustrated newspaper containing harrowing pictures of women and children being massacred in a church..." p 29

... "...Do you believe that any massacres would have taken place if no Armenian revolutionaries had come into the country and incited the Armenian population to rebellion?" I asked Mr. Graves (The British Consul). "Certainly not" he replied. "I do not believe that a single Armenian would have been killed..." p 70

Sydney Whitman, Turkish Memories, London 1914

******************

"... Under such circumstances the revolt of a handful of Armenians had not a chance of success and was therefore unjustifiable. As a friend to the Armenians, revolt seemed to me purely mischievous. Some of the extremists declared that while they recognized that hundreds of innocent persons suffered from each of these attempts, they could provoke a big massacre which would bring in foreign intervention. Such intervention was useless so long as Russia was hostile. Lord Salisbury had publicly declared that as he could not get a fleet over the Taurus mountains he did not see how England could help the Armenians, much as he sympathized with them..." p 155

Sir Edwin Pears, Forty Years in Constantinople, London 1915, p 24

******************

"... The advent of these revolutionary agents into Kurdistan had the inevitable result of embittering the former good relations of the Turkish Government and the resident Moslem population with the Christians and especially the Orthodox Armenian section of the inhabitants. This was natural for the reason that in Turkey the people have a horror of secret societies and plots, founded on the experience of their own suffering at the hands of the Greek Hetairia and the Bulgarian Komitadjis. The fears of the Turks and the Kurds were genuine. They believed that the members of the once loyal 'millet-i sadika' (the loyal nation) no longer merited the title and that they were arming and preparing to massacre the Moslems. The whole country became like a powder magazine..."

C.F. Dixon-Johnson, The Armenians, Blackburn 1916

******************

You see my "stealthy" Armenian lobbyist friend who loves hiding behind a fictitious "Anglicized" first name for "credibility by association"; truth doe not need any of your dirty tricks.

The truth is plain and simple.

You stated:

"Should I now apologize to our readers for my being open and honest with them?"

Your assuming that you are "open and honest" I am sure by now our readers have concluded that denying the Armenian genocide as a genocide goes against humanity and is an overt double killing of the victims, your posts are anything that resembles openess and honesty.

You stated:

"Should I have "hid my identity" like a "stealthy Amenian lobbysist" who slyly hid behind an "Anglicized" fictitious first name for months to dupe the public?"

If our readers were to find out who lobbys they would find that you actually lobby, all be it in vein.

Also as I stated countless times before it is common not to write proper names on web blogs, look throughout the internet and find this out for yourself.

You stated:

"Are you ashamed of your origin and/or heritage?"

So YOU get a sense of pride of your ethnicity by posting your name over the internet, and you believe your a credible source because of your name??

I'm sure our readers will find this just as amusing as I do.

You stated:

"Why cannot you burst open free and proud like I am?"

I also find humor in that your sense of measuring somones pride is whether he posts his name on a web blog.

You have tried to defame notable scholars and academics in your quest Armenian Genocide denial, a shameless position, falsly justified by denialist propoganda.

You stated:

"Why do you people always have to fight dirty and sneaky and devious? Why cannot you be open and honest for a change?"

Your question as do all your previous questions make an assumptions that is inherantly untrue.
These assumptions itself, I am sure are tell tail signs of your misdirected views.

You Stated:

"Then you will begin to see the immense Turkish suffering your granparents caused on my people."

How much more misdirection can our readers endure. You claim to represent your people? Most people in Turkey are ignorant of the Armenian Genocide because they were not taught the barbaric past of the Ottoman Government genocidal policies to kill innocent Armenians, and the Turkish policy of denial continues today.

You stated:

"Perhaps then, and only then, the healing can begin..."

Your again assuming that you are contributing to the healing process, when in fact you are double killing the Armenian genocide victims. You are misdirected and on the wrong side of humanity.

Thankfully more and more people of Turkish descent are looking past Turkish denialist propoganda and except there dark past.

-----

Keep posting...

Question: How many inaccuracies can an Armenian lobbyist (hiding behind a fictitious first name) can pack into one sentence?

Answer: How high can you count?

Here is a typical example of a cliché used by a typical Armenian lobbyist:

"...Most people in Turkey are ignorant of the Armenian Genocide because they were not taught the barbaric past of the Ottoman Government genocidal policies to kill innocent Armenians, and the Turkish policy of denial continues today...

First, most people in Turkey are aware of the colossal suffering caused by backstabbing Armenians and others, but choose to forgive and forget.

Second, how can one be ignorant of something that doesn't exist? Genocide is an Armenian invention and allegation; not a historical fact. Not all killings, all sufferings, all man's inhumanity to man qualify as genocide. "Intent" must be proven at a "competent court" by a "due process". Am I going too fast for you?

Jewish Holocaust is a fact, not because of media frenzy, Hollywood movies, or other such endeavors, but because of the Nuremberg Tribunal which allowed te accused, the German Nazis, to cross examine the evidence and witnesses and introduce their own. Only after such a proper, fair, due process, can the label Holocaust be used without any objection. Armenian allegations of genocide were never put to test at a court of law (save the Malta Tribunal 1919-1921 attempted by the British Crown Courts and abandoned due to lack of evidence.)

Third, what you are referring to as "Ottoman Government genocidal policies" are, in actual fact, wartime measures taken in self defense by a country.

Since when TERESET (temp. resettlement) considered genocidal? The U.S. used it, the French used it, the Brits, the Russians, the Japanese, Chinese used it. And they all used it years, decades after the Ottomans! It is a military necessity during a wartime when some elements in the community aid and abet the enemy openly or covertly. It is wartime measure carried out in self defense. The Ottomans were defending their country under a vicious military attack by the allies and the Armenians were backstabbing their fellow Ottomans by joining the invading enemy armies. What part of this don't you get?

Fourth, who are you kidding by "...Innocent Armenians..."?
It is like saying innocent Nazis or innocent terrorists...

Do terms like backstabbing, armed revolts, terrorism, treason, propaganda, agitation, tumult, killing neighbors, scheming, secession, and more mean anything to you? I know I explained them plenty in the past (see above) but did you get any of it? Did you think I made those up? I gave you Armenian sources, American sources, British sources...

Fifth, note that I have not even been quoting the Turkish sources yet, which are more numerous and detailed than any of the Armenian and Western sources on this topic... by far.

Since you have dismissed the Armenian, U.S. and U.K. sources listed previously refuting the Armenian claims of genocide, perhaps you would believe the French sources.

It is be my pleasure to list a few for your benefit, my Armenian lobbyist friend who is too scared and ashamed to list his Armenian full name and who hides behind an Anglicized fictitious first name.

***

Legend:

AFATH = Armenian Falsifiers and Turk Haters

AAG = The alleged Armenian genocide

WWI = The First World War

UFO = Unidentified flying object

***

FRENCH SOURCES THAT REFUTE THE AAG

One of the most fervent supporters of the AFATH and the AAG seem to be the French. The French parliament passed a one sentence, strange, and "vichy-ous" law in 2001, recognizing the Turkish-Armenian civil war during WWI as genocide. This law, playfully and correctly dubbed a "U.F.O." by the U.S. ambassador to Ankara, not only has no teeth, but also will not stand to scrutiny in courts, although it was not yet put to test at any litigation anywhere. It is more political than legal, historical, or factual in nature. It seems to be designed to appease the French-Armenians. Recent election of Sarkozy as the president may cause the Turkish-Armenian conflict to poison even overwhelm the Turco-French relations.

As one can clearly see by the U.N. definition of genocide (see my previous postings above), the term describes a crime first and foremost, then a historical event. As such, the determination of whether an event is a genocide has to be done at a court of law, by competent lawyers specializing in this field, and within the confines and norms of due process. Such legal determinations are not within the jurisdiction of politicians and, therefore, can not be made by partisan votes in a parliament. If they could be, then we would not need laws, lawyers, judges, prosecutors, or courts. The politicians would raise their hands to pass a law; then raise their hands again to apply that law to convict some one, some institution, or some country; and bypass international laws. They could end any and all the disputes easily with a show of hands, without needs for due process.

Other countries could also do the same, however, and convict France for many genocides, pogroms, ethnic cleansings, slavery, and other cases of man's inhumanity to man, in which the French colonial past is quite rich. (French excesses in Algeria during 1954-1962 readily come to mind) .

In fact, all the nations could do the same to resolve their disputes with any other nation. Can you imagine the chaos and tragedy this kind of world, run by "elected lynch mobs", would create for the entire humanity?

Unfortunately, The French parliament acted very irresponsibly, like a posse in the old West or a lynch mob, creating this unfortunate precedent for the international community. If I were a cartoonist, I would draw the French parliament as a bunch of unshaven, drunk, lawless mob of drifters in the old West, where the leader (speaker of the French parliament) shouts "Get the rope!" and the native American (the Ottoman Empire) they are chasing evinces fear and panic by grimacing while he runs.

French law also totally bypasses the scholarship of history. At a time when historians and researchers are still debating this issue and new information is discovered all the time, the French politicians showed incredible disrespect for the scholarship of history and attempted to legislate history. They might as well shut down the colleges and universities in France, as the parliament can easily decide on any and all academic matters by a simple show of hands.

Wait, it gets even worse. While most archives in the U.S., the U.K., France, Turkey, and elsewhere in the West are open for the use of researchers, most of the archives in Russia and Armenia are still closed. The archives of the Armenian revolutionaries in Boston, USA, and elsewhere and Armenian church documents are also closed. The entire body of Armenian archives, that this writer would like to call "the evil papers" are still closed to researchers. Until they are opened and studied, we will never know what kind of descpicable plans were hatched to devour the Turk and put into effect by the likes of the Ottoman-Armenian revolutionaries, clergy, leaders, and their non-Ottoman co-conspirators (Armenians of Europe, America, and Armenia, as well as the French, the Russians, the British, and others).

Thus, by passing that bizarre and ignorant law, the French parliament not only bypassed lawyers, judges, prosecutors and the entire legal system, but also the historians, scholars, researchers and the entire academia, as well as international diplomacy. Ironically, it can even be said, that the French parliament broke the law when passing this law. They voted for chaos and tyranny by the elected few! Now, here is a great French invention, don't you think?

I doubt that the French have any access to some secret information about which the English or the Americans don't know anything as the latter two do not grant genocide status to the obvious civil war between the Turks and the Armenians.

To make matters even more burlesque, the French parliamentarians do not seem to even know about their own French records that clearly refute the AAG, a small collection of which is presented below.

Why are they doing it then? One reason could be the fact that the French sense of guilt for using Armenians to advance France's causes in and designs on the Ottoman Empire's vast lands spanning three continents. This could be the awkward French way of apologizing to the Armenians for drawing the Turkish wrath on account of France. But the people that the French owe apology to is not the Armenians, it is the Turks. France, along with Britain and Russia, helped destroy a millennium of peaceful co-habitation between Turks and Armenians in Anatolia, causing neighbor to kill neighbor. What a shame!

Another reason could be appeasing of the French-Armenian voters, but I really doubt it. The real reason may be the deep sense of hate they are traditionally taught to feel against the Turk and a desire to avenge the Turk for shattering the French designs on the Ottoman Empire after the WWI. What a pity, because the French enjoyed the unique status and capitulations in the Ottoman Empire for centuries and prospered beyond imagination. As a thank you to the Turks, the French used the neighbors of the Turks, the Armenians, to attack the Turks during WWI and assaulted the Dardanelles, as well as Syria, Lebanon, and southeast Turkey. What a bunch of ingrates!

The French parliamentarians who passed this absurd one-sentence-law have made a mockery of the freedom of speech in general, the French parliament in particular and caricatured France. What can I say? Merci beaucoup?

*******************

Legend:

AFATH = Armenian Falsifiers and Turk Haters

AAG = The alleged Armenian genocide

WWI = The First World War

UFO = Unidentified flying object

*******************

FRENCH NATIONAL ARCHIVES

Archives du ministere des Affaires entrangeres, Quai d'Orsay, Paris.

1) Documents Diplomatiques: Affaires Armeniens: 1895-1914 Collections

2) Guerre: 1914-1918: Turquie: Legion d'Orient.

3) Levant, 1918-1929: Armenie.

*******************

"...In the lapse of six months, from Mersin to Adana, all Cilicia was occupied, pacified, reorganized by the Armenian troops remained excluded from any other army until March 28th, 1919. It is, then, on February 1st, 1919, under the command of Colonel Flye Ste-Marie and later on April 8th, 1920 of the Major Beaujard, that the Legion of East was named the Armenian Legion..."

Lieutenant-colonel L'Hopitalier, Historique des Anciens Combattants Volontaires Arméniens (History of Armenian Volunteer War Veterans), Armenian Institute of France

*******************

"...The intrigues of the foreigners, their encouragements, their promises pushed all the Christians to the uprising, to the liberating murder. Europe, which manipulated them in secret, congratulated itself on it; it sang them with Byron and Hugo, painted them with Delacroix; by romanticism, when the romantic school triumphed, it saw in the Greekbandits who were the guerillas of the heirs of Praxitele and Socrates. She did no doubt consider the Armenians but as pawns to move on the chessboard and eventually abandoned them, even at the cost of speaking of genocide, crying with them, listening to their admirable propaganda. More skillful than Greek propaganda, it wrapped the Turks in a bloodstain intended to defile even the Republic, while at any case it should have splashed only Ottoman Empire : no one ever looked at it very closely. This Europe which de-christianized wanted to see only Christianity groaning under the opprobrium of Islam..."

Jean-Paul Roux, L'Histoire des Turcs, (The History of the Turks) Fayard, Paris, 1984, p 304

*******************

"The Armenians are the voluntary victims of their sympathy to the Allies and, proportionally to their number , are the most affected by the present war. From the first hour, they attached their fate to that of the Allies and, depending on their possibilities, gave all that they could put in the service of the great cause and this without any bargaining; in placing their faith in the justice of the Allies, they are persuaded that at the time of the settlement of accounts they will be rewarded according to their sacrifice."

French newspaper Le Soleil du Midi, February 9, 1916

*******************

"...I shall keep the immortal to recollection of your bravery and your ardor. Generous France will proudly remember that it had the honor to entrust the Sons of Armenia with a batch of bayonets which they handled with enthusiasm : may the blood shed and the public heroism not remain sterile..."

The Commander-in-chief of the Occupation Forces of Levant Djihan, August 19, 1920, Gen. Gouraud, Armenian Institute of France. (The blood here the Armenians spilled with great enthusiasm was none other than that of the ancestors of this book's writer.

*******************

"...It is important, however, to underline that the Armenian communities are not the only ones to have been ground down by the plague of the war. In the spring of 1915, the tsarist army moved to the region of the lake of Van, dragging behind it battalions of volunteers composed of Caucasus and Turkish Armenians. (...) For each of the provinces which suffered from the Russian occupation and from the Armenian militias' acts of vengeance, an important demographic deficit appears in the statistics of the post-war years - adding up to several hundred thousands of souls due largely to the massacres committed by the enemy..."

Histoire de l'Empire Ottoman (History of the Ottoman Empire), supervised by Robert Mantran, Editions Fayard, Paris, 1989, p 624

*******************

French newspaper Excelsior, August 22nd, 1914 issue

*******************

"...The Russian government made a decision which will be welcomed with pleasure and enjoyment by all the Armenian circles : it chose Aram Manoukian, the leader of Armenian revolutionary movement for governor of the province of Van. Aram Manoukian was born in 1877, in the Caucasus, in the city of Chousta. (...) At the beginning of this war, Aram took up arms and became the head of the insurgents of Van. Russia which possesses at present this province named Aram governor for it, wishing to satisfy the Armenian element which so brilliantly participated in the war against Turkey...."

French newspaper Le Temps (Paris), August 13th, 1915 issue

*******************

"...From the declaration of war, Zeytoun region has been a home of rebellion so important, as in February, 1915, that the Russia's ambassador in London will make an action with the English to furnish, with provisions, the 15,000 listed insurgents by a landing to Antakya (let us indicate - to underline the gravity of the matter - that at the same time, the Ottomans were already on the defensive in the Dardanelles).

From November 23rd, we are informed about the training of guerillas in the region of Van. On February 21st, a revolt burst in Bitlis and in Mush, where it is reported (not by mere chance) the presence of the representative of Van, Papazian, who will pass to the Russians.

On March 20th, we have already said, the governor of Van indicated 2000 rebels in the region.

On April 22nd, the governor of Sivas cabled that ' the Armenians armed 30 000 persons. 15 000 are enlisted in the Russian army and it is definitively established that 15 000 others are going to attack the Turkish army on its rear '.

On April 27th, more than 1000 deserters stopped at Diyarbakir, et cetera... All these facts are established with General Staff's official telegrams. And in these conditions, while the entire oriental Anatolia is in uprising, efforts are made to attribute crime to the Ottoman government to have taken counter-measures to assure the safety of its armies and the population remained loyal.

The propagandist of the Armenian cause know well that they can not do it. And that is why, in their stories of facts, they slide carefully on these revolts.

The Ottoman Greeks stayed quiet. So nothing evil happened to them until the armistice of October, 1918. If the Armenians had done so, the deportation, and murders which accompanied it, would simply not have taken place.

In all the countries, under all the regimes, the staff of the armies in the field evacuate towards the back the populations which live in the zone of fights and can bother the movement of the troops especially if these populations are hostile. Public opinion does not find anything to criticize to these measures, obviously painful, but necessary: during winter 1939-1940, the radical - socialist French government evacuated and transported in the Southwest of France, notably in the Dordogne, the entire population of the Alsatian villages situated in the valley of the Rhine, to the east of the Maginot line. This German-speaking population, and even sometimes germanophil, bothered the French army. It stayed in the South, far from the evacuated homes and sometimes destroyed until 1945. And nobody, in France, cried out for inhumanity.

Besides, the purely strategic character of the deportation ordered in the Ottoman Empire results from the fact that the Armenian population of big cities, and notably that of Istanbul, could easily be controlled and was not aimed by the measures taken. The intention which guided the decisions taken by the Ottoman government is perfectly legitimate. No one can honestly formulate on this subject any criticism. But the execution of these measures itself, was disastrous and dramatic..."

Georges de Maleville, lawyer and a specialist on the Armenian question, La Tragédie Arménienne de 1915, (The Armenian tragedy of 1915), Editions F. Sorlot-F. Lanore, Paris, 1988, p 61-63

( Writer's note: Here is a thoughtful argument that powerfully makes the point that a wartime measure taken by a nation to secure to survival of that nation, against a group of known rebels and fifth columnists, can not be characterized as genocide, even if the execution of those measures themselves were disastrous and dramatic..." Calling such events genocide, if not based on ignorance, is committing the serious crime of ethocide.)

*******************

"...Certainly by ordering to transport somewhere else these people, who lived in an extremely exposed frontier region and colluded with the enemy, the Ottoman State carried out only an act of self-defense. But the execution of this order provoked a dreadful tragedy and indescribable sufferings..."

N. de Bischoff, La Turquie Dans le Monde, (Turkey In The World), Paris, in 1936

*******************

"...Tracking down in the multitude of usual papers on both sides about the question of inaccuracies, questionable assertions, even forgeries, do not present difficulties. In particular, it seems established today, that some of the essential objects put in the file by the accusation [that is, the Armenians] - for example, the Blue Book prepared for the British government by Bryce and Toynbee or the Memories of Na'îm Bey published with the aid of Aram Andonian - can not, in any way, be considered as irrefutable documents. Didn't Toynbee himself admit the Blue Book had been 'published and spread only as war propaganda' ?..."

Histoire de l'Empire Ottoman (History of the Ottoman Empire), supervised by Robert Mantran, Fayard, Paris, 1989, p 624

*******************

"...Go and try to open the eyes of some French bourgeois , who, from father to son, are mesmerized into idiotic stupor, do I dare say, about the alleged ferocity of my poor friends, the Turks..."

Pierre Loti, The Massacres in Armenia, Paris, 1918, page 4

*******************

"... The Turk is the noblest of nobles. This high nobility is not artificial or showy - -it is the gift of nature..... The Orient is the land of dreams and legends. The Turk is the eye, the tongue, the light, and the truth of that magic land. One should be blind to history not to understand the Turks. The dignified silence of the Turks against the mounting unjustified attacks and mean slanders can only be explained by their pity for the blind...."

Pierre Loti, Fantome d'Orient; Paris, 1928; ( French naval officer, journalist, novelist and world traveler; spent several years in Turkey and knew Turks quite well)

*******************

"...A historian can only underline the constant tendency of the defenders of the Armenian cause to isolate the drama which they defend the memory of, from the whole of its historic context, to disembody it, to make it, not what it was -a historic disaster resulting from multiple responsibilities-, but a mythological scene, an assault of the forces of the evil against the forces of the good, outside any time and of any space. This plan is received as is, without criticism, by most of our fellow countrymen, including in the mass media and political class, often miles away from historic and geographic realities, assuredly complicated enough and distant, from which it was cut. Transplanting itself on ignorances and secular prejudices, this plan is generative of authentic anti-Turkish racism, as inadmissible (is it necessary to clarify it ?) as any other racism..."

"...The reality of the massacres, and even their dimension are not questioned by anyone, including in Turkey. In fact, controversy concerns three principal points, of very different nature. First of all, the figure of a million and a half victims which appears on the commemorative monument of Marseille, and which is ritually repeated, is today thrown rejected by numerous historians, close or not to the official Turkish theses. Far from being most minimalist, the American demographer Justin McCarthy, for example, estimates that the total of the Armenians of Anatolia did not exceed a million and a half persons on the eve of the world conflict, and that, considering the figure of the survivors, about 600 000 Armenians would have died in Anatolia in 1915, nearly half of the community.

...Second point: there were also very numerous victims among the Moslems throughout the war, not only because of the fights but also through actions led against them by Armenians, in a context of ethnic and national rivalry. If there are forgotten victims, they are well those ones, and the current Turks are entitled to denounce the partiality of the Occidental opinion in this regard. Is it because it was only about Moslems that one neglects them, or because one would estimate implicitly that the final success of their congeners deprives them of martyrs' status? How would we look at these same facts, if things had gone otherwise, if the Armenians had finally founded, on Ottoman rubbles, a durable State in Anatolia ?

...But the last point, crucial, of the debate, by the legal and political implications, is to know if massacres against the Armenians were committed on order of the government Young-Turks, if transfers were only a bait for a systematic campaign of extermination, implemented according to different, but decided, planned modalities, remote-controlled at government level, or if Young-Turks were only guilty of having carelessly started movements which ended in bloodbaths. The simple fact of asking this question can seem absurd and scandalous. It is true that state implication is a preliminary of the full application of the word genocide to the Armenian tragedy, such as it was forged in 1944 and defined by the lawsuit of Nuremberg and the 1948 United Nations convention.

... It is necessary nevertheless to admit that we do not have, as yet, proof of this governmental implication. Documents produced by the Armenians, Talaat Pasha's orders, Interior secretary, and other higher Ottoman officials ordering explicitly the massacre of the people, the women, and the Armenian children, referred to as 'Andonian documents', derived from the name of the author were only fakes, as the historic criticism doubtlessly proved afterward. We find in the indictment of the court martial charged to judge the members of the government

... Young-Turks after their fall, in Istanbul in 1919, overwhelming charges against their 'special groups' of which the Armenians were, besides, not the only victims among others, including the Turks themselves. One can not ignore these precise denunciations, or either take them at their face value, considering the excellently political character of this lawsuit: It was instituted against a revolutionary government which had driven the country to disaster, by its opponents succeeding in power and, besides, under the cup of the Allies. McCarthy speaks about two millions and a half of Moslem victims (mainly Turkish) for the whole war in Anatolia from 1914 till 1922, of whom a million only were from the zone of 'Armenian vilayets'.

For lack of conclusive evidence, the historians defenders of Armenian theses advance several contemporary testimonies, emanating from survivors, from diplomats and from foreign missionaries of different previous origins. They are far from being unimportant and are even in the best irreplaceable cases. For all that, every rigorous historian knows the limits of a testimony - all the more susceptible to express a point of view 'engaged' in a context of generalized conflict."

Gilles Veinstein, historian and professor in Collège de France, Article published in the magazine L'Histoire, n°187 of April, 1995

*******************

"... I am surprised that London should possess information which no one here is aware of and is unable to document. As a result, it has been impossible until now to determine exactly that Armenians have been massacred in any area. There is much talk about it but no one was able to give me certain and exact information. In particular, the Armenian losses in Marash appear to be absolutely false. Apparently, the Armenians took part in the struggle of our troops in this city and had casualties like all the fighters. A serious study of the figures shows that these Armenian casualties do not exceed 1000..."

Prime Minister Mitterand, Archives des Affaires Etrangeres de France, Vol 9, Folio 3

*******************

"...One can easily understand the Armenians' bitterness to have been the only ones to have been unable to take advantage of such a big disaster (collapse of the Ottoman Empire). One would smile maybe of their utopian dreams if they were not so sad and so bloody and, it is necessary indeed to admit, if they had not set up the stake on which they finally burned, especially by helping the Russians with all their forces in the war against the Turks with whom they had lived in harmony during centuries, and not without taking immense profits..."

Jean-Paul Roux, The History of the Turks, Fayard, Paris, p 306

*******************

"... Armenians burned and destroyed many Muslim villages in their advance and practically all Muslim villages in their retreat from Marash..."

G. Hamelin, Les Armees Francaises au Levant, February 2, 1919, Vol. 1, p. 122.

*******************

Summary: Wartime tragedy that devastated all of the peoples of Anatolia, not genocide only affecting the Armenians as baselessly claimed.

You stated:

"First, most people in Turkey are aware of the colossal suffering caused by backstabbing Armenians and others, but choose to forgive and forget."

Only some educated people in (of Turkish and Armenian decent) Turkey know that the Armenian Genocide occured of those who make it public are are publically riddiculed by people such as yourself, met with death threats and even killed! Some Freedom of speech Turkey has, ehh?

Our readers can quickly find the draconian style of freedom there is in Turkey. Much like the abuse of freedom we see in our previous post, mischaractorizing the victims as victimizers is worse then the killing itself. Not a shred of human descency toward human suffering.

As I stated before, Most people in Turkey are ignorant of the Armenian Genocide because they were not taught the barbaric past of the Ottoman Government genocidal policies to kill innocent Armenians, and the Turkish policy of denial continues today.

You stated:

you stated:

"Second, how can one be ignorant of something that doesn't exist? Genocide is an Armenian invention and allegation; not a historical fact. Not all killings, all sufferings, all man's inhumanity to man qualify as genocide. "Intent" must be proven at a "competent court" by a "due process". Am I going too fast for you?"

Your assumptions are as I stated misdirected and illconcieved Turkish propoganda built on denial.

you stated:

"Jewish Holocaust is a fact, not because of media frenzy, Hollywood movies, or other such endeavors, but because of the Nuremberg Tribunal which allowed te accused, the German Nazis, to cross examine the evidence and witnesses and introduce their own. Only after such a proper, fair, due process, can the label Holocaust be used without any objection. Armenian allegations of genocide were never put to test at a court of law (save the Malta Tribunal 1919-1921 attempted by the British Crown Courts and abandoned due to lack of evidence.)"

This is the MOST IGNORANT statement thus far. Your misdirected views lead the readers to falsly believe that if the Houlocaust was not brought before a court then it would not have exhisted??

A court system does not make an occurance of the Holocaust true or untrue. The holocaust occured thats a fact, just as the Armenian genocide.

You stated:

"Since when TERESET (temp. resettlement) considered genocidal? The U.S. used it, the French used it, the Brits, the Russians, the Japanese, Chinese used it. And they all used it years, decades after the Ottomans! It is a military necessity during a wartime when some elements in the community aid and abet the enemy openly or covertly. It is wartime measure carried out in self defense. The Ottomans were defending their country under a vicious military attack by the allies and the Armenians were backstabbing their fellow Ottomans by joining the invading enemy armies. What part of this don't you get?"

Your Turkish propoganda only serves to justify the killing of innocent Aremenian civilians, nothing more.

Not suprisingly you continue to be misdirected in you thinking and logic, but more-so proport Turkey Armenain genocide policy of denial.

Villify the victims to justify killing, your positions are a classic case of Nazi propoganda.

You continue to integrety in honesty and truthfulness in spoonfeeding our readers into believing the justifications for the Armenian genocide which occured at the hands of the Ottoman Turkish policies.

I find humor in that you need to try to "cut and paste" your denialist positions.

Your desperate and need to spoon feed Armenian genocide denialist propoganda to the public, good luck.

Keep posting...

correction

You continue to ((make a mockery of)) people with integrety, honesty, and truthfulness by spoonfeeding our readers into believing the justifications for the Armenian genocide which occured at the hands of the Ottoman Turkish policies.

-------

Your standard issue statement of "stabbing" people in the back is not immune to the Govorner of California Arnold Schwarzenegger, you stated:

"...the Turkish people are particularly upset with Schwarzenegger, whom they believed was "one of our guys," because of his Austrian ancestry.

"He turned around and stabbed us in the back," Kirlikovali said.

As I mentioned in my previous posts your misdirected thinking assumes this is a race based issue. Your race based thinking also assumes that Govorner Schwarzenegger is suppose to take a denialist postion because of his Austrian ancestry??

This further justifies my point that your views are purely race based and bigoted and misdirected.

Keep advocating a Turkiish denialist policy, so Western Civilized Society can see how bigoted and racist your motives are against anyone who advocates human rights, even the California Govorner.

The only perverbial back stabbing is your right hand in the back of humanity toward human life, and the victims of the Armenian genocide.

keep posting...

Here is an article for our readers. I am sure our readers will figure out who strikingly fits the descriptions in this article.

TURKISH DAILY NEWS

Culture of fear, hate and denial= Santoro, Dink, Malatya

May 11, 2007

Orhan Kemal Cengiz

I will be very straightforward from the outset. I fear that (I wholeheartedly wish to be wrong), it is very possible that these murders will continue. Murders may take a different path targeting different people from different circles but, unfortunately, it seems that they will continue. It is really painful to say something like this. It hurts making such an annoying speculation. But unfortunately, three strong wake up calls were not enough for the Turkish society and the government to be alarmed and reflect upon what is going on in Turkey.

If we look at the anatomy of these murders (Santaro, Dink and the Malatya massacres) we see the following common denominators:

They were committed by very young people; in two incidents the perpetrators were even younger than 18. The perpetrators are ultra-nationalist and they believe they did what they did to save the country. They acted in gangs. In all cases security forces had some intelligence and prior knowledge about the perpetrators and their plans, but somehow they did not follow up on the signals and warnings. Before each incident there had been relentless campaigns against the victims in nationwide and local media. No criminal charge was brought against any of these hate speech campaigns or their campaigners. In all three cases these young people have some "elder brothers" who have some other "relations".

My theory is very simple. What we are confronting in Turkey is a new phenomenon. We have gangs all over the country who are organized in a kind of al-Qaeda model, which means that they have unity of ideology (racist ultra-nationalism) but they are not directly connected to any one single center. They are open to manipulation and they are manipulated by some circles that have links with the illegal paramilitary groups.

These gangs are operating within and feed from an atmosphere of fear, hate and denial. To understand what exactly is going on in Turkey we need to look at the different layers, which are linked together and reinforce each other.

First of all, we have a general atmosphere of fear created by many different political and bureaucratic circles and sometimes by the media: "Turkey will be fragmented." "We are encircled by external and internal enemies." "The EU will cause the disintegration of Turkey." "Turkey is being invaded by foreigners." "Missionaries occupy Turkey". Opposing reforms and the joining the EU has become a dominant factor used in the creation of this fear.

We also have a general atmosphere of denial and nonconfrontation: "These murders were planned and commissioned by foreign intelligence services". "Some external sources are provoking these young people in order to destabilize Turkey". "We do not have a Kurdish problem; the only problem we have is terror". "There was no Armenian genocide; it is imposed on us by Western powers". "External enemies etc..."

There are relentless hate speech campaigns reproduced everyday in Turkey. There had been a lot of "news", "comments" and "notes" about the victims before they were killed. Local media have a special role in these "public information" campaigns.

Has anything changed in Turkey since these murders were committed? Nothing actually. We have the same interior minister who is untouchable. We have the same statesmen who declared that "anyone who does not say how happy he is for being Turk is the enemy of Turkey". Hate speech campaigns by the press, media and countless of web servers continue. These websites keep targeting intellectuals and academics on a daily basis, and they face no charges. No gang members have been arrested.

I will finish this hopelessly pessimistic article with a gloomy comment. If there is a serious danger in Turkey now it is not Islam or Sharia but it is extreme nationalism (From Turks and Kurds), racism, intolerance, xenophobia, hatred of other religions and you know what happens when they all come together. A quote from the Supreme Court of Canada: "the Holocaust did not begin in the gas chambers. It began with words. These are the chilling facts of history --the catastrophic effects of racism."

Q&A:

International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

Article I

In this Convention, the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.

See you next week with hopefully encouraging news!

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=72568

You stated:

"Only some educated people in (of Turkish and Armenian decent) Turkey know that the Armenian Genocide occurred of those who make it public are publicly ridiculed by people such as yourself, met with death threats and even killed! Some Freedom of speech Turkey has, ehh?"

Nothing in this statement is true. And coming from someone who hides behind a fictitious first name to hide his identity, it is quite understandable. I bet you would be shocked to find out how many books in Turkish are published by the Armenian lobby and their proxies in Turkey advancing the official Armenian government position on the Turkish-Armenian conflict. You would also be surprised to realize how many articles appear in Turkish media, usually by disgruntled Turks who have a beef with Turkey or Turks (i.e Akcam, Berktay, Gocek, Zaragoza, etc. etc.). In fact, you just posted one from Tyrkish press. Add to that the panels, discussions, exhibits, by the Armenian lobby and you get the picture that freedom of speech is not an issue in Turkey. So, your remarks: " Freedom of speech Turkey has, ehh?" fizzle out by default.

In contrast, try to have Turkish views published in America. Boston Globe decided in 2004 to stop using the qualifier "alleged" before the phrase "Armenian genocide". Why? Was there a court decision, a verdict, that caused them to make such a drastic change in their editorial policies? No, absolutely not. The only change was that the Armenian lobby turned up the pressure on them so much that they the BG people could not handle it anymore: many Armenian letters, phone calls, emails, even face to face meetings. So, public pressure, not historic truth, brought about a change in a major US newspaper. (Would you like me to document these for you? It would be my pleasure.)

This was followed closely by New York Times (2004) and then Los Angeles Times. They all have the same policy now of doing away with the qualifier "alleged" and not allow the Turkish side of the story to be heard. I wrote many letters to all three (still do) and none get published. You may agree or disagree with me; you may like or dislike me; but if you are a respectable newspaper, you must allow my side of the story heard. This is not happening in America as I write these lines.

When I confronted an American staff writer from LAT recently, she said she was not an expert on the Turkish-Armenian issues but that she always thought there was consensus on the factuality of Armenian genocide. That's when I wrote to her that history is not a matter of belief, gut feeling, conviction, or media consensus; rather, history is a matter of research, peer review, and reasoned debate.

One LAT editor from Glendale even sent me an email (2002) saying that he will not publish my views. I still keep that email and my responses (I even put them all in my upcoming book). Imagine that! The editor tells me my views will not be published before he can read them. Well, last time I looked it up in the dictionary, this behavior was described as "censorhip".

And current row at LAT over Mark Arax' biased diatribe shows how militant, abusive, and harassing the Armenian lobby can be. LAT manager Frantz tells Arax his article would not get published because he is a partisan on this issue, thus violating the LAT policies and procedures. The Armenian lobby mobilized its propaganda troops, flooded the LAT with emails and wanted Frantz' resignation. Just like that. What is even more shameful is the revelation that 5 Armenian staff writers sign a letter "reminding" the LAT its policy!!!

Now hang on a minute... I don't know which is more repulsive? That a major newspaper like LAT would have a written policy on passing judgment -- clearly reserved for "competent tribunals" and "due processes" -- on a controversial event in history? Or that staff writers belonging to an ethnic group that is a party to the conflict may dictate terms to LAT with thinly veiled threats?

PBS cancelled last year, again after organized pressure from the Armenian lobby, a "debate" after airing a one-hour Armenian-financed propaganda film? A debate, for God's sake, a debate! What are Armenians so afraid of in a debate? If they know all there is to know about the issue and if they really believe it is an open-and-shut case of genocide, then what could frighten, anger, and outrage the Armenians like that? Why not allow the Turks tell their side of the story? Especially after a one-hour Armenian propaganda film? (Because the Armenians know a simple Turk like me can dismantle their 90+ year propaganda effortlessly with a few facts censored by them in the West along with deeply heartfelt statements of personal effect. The Armenian lobby knows their honeymoon is over and that they are now on borrowed time before the world finally realizes the greatest deception of the 20th Century, the alleged Armenian genocide.

And you ridicule freedom of speech in Turkey? Where is your objectivity? Fairness? Balance? Are you this blinded by the Armenian propaganda that you cannot see Armenian complicity in the WWI tragedy of all Ottomans ? This devoid of logic that you cannot see how freedom of speech is curtailed for Turks hiding behind concepts like "editorial freedom", "concensus", "collective sensibilities", "denial", "revisionism", etc. etc. etc.?

The freedom of speech in America only exists if you do NOT challenge the consensus. I am amazed that Fresno Bee did not censor me up until this point. Frankly, I am cautiously optimistic that Fresno Bee may start a new trend towards true freedom of speech (not like the lip service the Boston Globes, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times of this world pay). But I would not be surprised if my views are prevented from getting posted some day soon. I am not cursing, insulting, threatening, or advocating any form of censorship, propaganda, or violence. I am only expressing my thoughts here. In my opinion, the Armenian lobby since 1915 duped the world into believing the embellished and/or fabricated Armenian tall tales and the West swallowed it lock, stock, and barrel because of deep-rooted anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim bias as well as Western interests that dictated the destruction and sharing the spoils of the Ottoman Empire. The allies attacked the Turkish homeland (not vice versa); the allies used the Ottoman-Christians as fifth column and proxies to destroy the Ottoman Empire from within (and succeeded); Otoman-Muslims, mostly Turks, defended their homeland in the face of a vicious and multi-prong series of foreign invasions facilitated and/or aided by treasonous domestic elements, all of which cause unspeakable tragedy and loss to all the people of the Ottoman Empire. To dress this human tragedy as "Turks killed Armenians" is a travesty of truth, justice, fairness, and humanity. Such a one-way simplification, caricaturization, and/or stereotyping of a calamity, while may satisfy the Western and Armenian bias and egos by absolving them of their crimes and sins, cannot and will not stand as long as there are people who care about the truth, fairness, and honesty. (Hiding behind a fictitious first name all these months spewing Armenian propaganda to dupe unsuspecting readers, you may not think much of the last attribute, BUT I DO!)

So, there is your "freedom of speech" comparison... Food for thought anyway...

***

You stated:

"... Most people in Turkey are ignorant of the Armenian Genocide because they were not taught the barbaric past of the Ottoman Government genocidal policies to kill innocent Armenians, and the Turkish policy of denial continues today...."

In the order you raised them, your contentions are baseless, not-applicable, argumentative, incorrect, misleading, and false. How did you manage to pack so many flaws into one sentence? Here is the truth:

How can anyone in 21st Century make comments like "Most people in.....are ignorant"? Do you really believe that? If you do, then you are simply a prejudiced person.

When I say Armenian community supports terrorism, I am basing my judgment on the :Dink Test" which goes like this:

In the first act of hate crime in Turkey, Turkish people denounced the killer in protest marches and the killer was caught in 36 hours with the help of killer's family, friends, and ordinary Turkish citizens. Turkish leaders issued messages of condolences to the victim's family and funeral of the Christian-Turkish-Armenian victim was attended by tens of thousands of sympathizing Muslim-Turks. This was a clear rejection of violence. No doubt about it.

The Armenian communities from from 1860s to 2000s (that is for almost 150 years) not only NEVER CONDEMNED ARMENIAN TERROR OR TERRORISTS but also took up collections in churches to finance their legal defenses. Some of those Armenian assassins and terrorists are still hailed as national heroes in Armenian and Armenian Diaspora. This is a clear embracing of violence, hate crimes, and terrorism. (Also no Armenian to date, that includes you - the Armenian lobbyists who hides behind a fake first name-, has ever expressed concern or compassion for the terrible misery inflicted upon one million Azeri refugees by the Armenian aggression and the ethnic cleansing campaign followed it since 1992.)

Going back to your statement, Armenian Genocide is an Armenian invention, not an irrefutable historic fact.

"...barbaric past of the Ottoman Government...?" You must stop reading the Armenian propaganda material and start reading some real history books. Have you ever heard of the "millet" system? If you did, you would know that you owe the centuries-long harmonious co-habitation with Turks and prosperity to that millet system. When Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror took over Constantinople (today's Istanbul) in 1453, Muslims could have overrun the city and put all "infidels" to sword. They didn't. Not only they didn't, but also, the Sultan re-organized them in self-governing millets. The Greeks, the Jews, and others already had their religious structure and hierarchy, but the Armenians didn't. They were dispersed over a wide area and abused by the Byzantium which considered them more or less heretics. The Turkish Sultan brought the Armenian priest from Bursa to Istanbul, the new capital of the Ottoman Empire, established the Armenian church and put this priest in charge of all the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. Thus were the Armenians elevated to the status of other "millets". Without this arrangement, we would not be talking about Armenians today; they would be like Inkas or Aztecs... Gone and mostly forgotten. The Ottoman Empire made you what you are today, you ingrate! Is this how you thank the Turks? By backstabbing them? By joining the invading enemy armies?

Let me tell you one more thing. I have the lowest opinion about ingrate traitors. Turks and Russians fought more than 200 wars in history. Each side won some, lost some. Each side lost lots of their own sons and daughters due to wars. I, as a proud Turk, have the greatest respect for them, because they were honest, brave, and fought like a man in the filed. Turks mostly love good warriors. That's probably an assessment you will not hear any objections to. What Turks don't like are those whining, crying, bitching, nagging, double-talking, blaming, scheming, back-stabbing, betraying, defaming, demonizing, lying, cheating, ingrates... Who does?

"...Innocent Armenians..."? Since when 150 years of terrorism, joining the invading enemy armies, killing your neighbors, staging armed uprisings, and condoning and embracing hate crimes considered "innocent"? What dictionary are you using? The one written by "Andonian"?

"...Turkish policy of denial..."? Perhaps that is the best offense against "Armenian policy of falsification" !

*********

I have already provided the Armenian, American, British, and French sources that refute the Armenian claims of genocide. Since you seem to dismiss all of them, perhaps you only trust Russian sources. Today, I will provide some Russian sources for you read perhaps for the first time in your life (knowing how Armenians censor all sources that refute the Armenian claims.)

What follow are perhaps the most damning documents that chronicle and detail the atrocities committed by the Armenian revolutionaries during WWI, about which the Armenian lobby do not want you to know. Here, one can clearly see the motives and modes of operation of the Armenian revolutionaries, bent on devouring the Turk and setting up a greater Armenia on Turkish soil. The Armenians believed the Russians could help the Armenians achieve the Armenian dream, or shall we say, utopia.

Russians , on the other hand, had totally different ideas and plans. The Russians wanted to reach the warm waters of the Mediterranean, take Istanbul, and expand towards the South of Russia permanently and from both sides of the Black Sea. The Russians used the Ottoman-Armenians, as well as Russian-Armenians, towards this end only to achieve the Russian aims, which did not exactly include any kind of Armenia, greater or smaller.. Once the Russian plans were achieved, the Russians reasoned, Armenian communities could easily be made happy with some smaller gifts of lands and perhaps autonomy of sorts, all under strict Russian control, of course.

So, before anyone jumps for convenience onto the AAG bandwagon, which is no more than an ethocidal campaign designed to vilify Turkish heritage at all cost and demonize the Turk, one is urged to read the following carefully .

It is because of these Armenian excesses that the Muslims of Anatolia (mostly Turks and Kurds, but also Circassians, Arabs, and others) felt compelled to retaliate.

Ignoring the Armenian atrocities and treason, while misrepresenting the Muslim reactions is a disservice to public, the scholarship of history, and the truth.

Such lopsided treatment of 90+-year-old controversial issues do not help heal the wounds, only fester them.

***************

"In 1895 and 1896, the Armenian revolutionary committees have created such a suspicion between local and Armenian populations that it has become impossible to apply the slightest reform in those regions. The Armenian priests preferred to spread nationalist ideas, sticking them on the walls of the monasteries rather than applying themselves to religious education, and to set the Christians against the Moslems rather than carrying out their religious tasks. The revolts that took place in 1895 and 1896 in several Turkish provinces have not been induced by some extreme poverty of the Armenian countrymen, nor by the Moslem attacks. Actually, these countrymen were considerably richer and more prosperous than their neighbours."

General Mayewski, Russian consul general in Bitlis and Van, Statistics of the provinces of Van and Bitlis, p 11-13

***************

"(.....) The activity of the committee, Tachnaktzoutioun is quite related to the excitement of the Armenian public opinion. This committee is working obstinately to create animosity between Armenians and Moslems to turn to good account the misfortune which could result from it, to provoke a Russian intervention and the occupation of the country by our Army.

(...)To arrive at this end, Tachnakistes use various means and try hard to bring the Armenians to collisions with the Moslems and especially with the Ottoman troops. So, Tachnakist committees of Bitlis and Mush, in order to arouse panic among the population, urged the Armenians of the bazaars to close their shops. Besides,they armed a revolutionary group which, having gone through, in October and in November, the caza of 'Hizane', murdered some Kurds to avenge 'Raphaël's' death, an Armenian school inspector and supporter of Tachnaktzoutioun . All this had no other purpose than bringing up fighting between Moslems and Tachnakists. If it occurred, the Moslems, naturally, would attack the Armenian villages, which would have as a consequence a Russian armed intervention. The leading Tachnakists of Bitlis declare that they would commit a big mistake if they do not take advantage of the current situation to bring the Russians here.

(.....) The Armenians of cities, those of the countryside, as well as their religious leaders, always gave evidence of their tendency and their affection for Russia and declared repeatedly that the Turkish government here is incapable to reign order, law and prosperity. Many Armenians promise from now on to offer their churches to the Russian soldiers to be converted in armed orthodox temples.

(...) The Tachnaktzoutioun committee, morally deprived to the eyes of the quiet and peaceful population, tries to get back the faith of the Armenians and, as I explained here above, try hard to bring shocks among Armenian and Kurdish, and, generally among Armenian and Moslem, to blurr the situation and to create an excuse for a Russian intervention. (...) The attitude of the members of Tachnaktzoutioun toward the Armenians and the authorities, and their sympathies for Russia, are adjusted and are steered by the instructions of their central office in Constantinople..."

Report number 63 on December 24th, 1912, sent by the Russian Consul to Bitlis to the Amb. of Russia in Istanbul

***************

"... The atrocities and massacres which have been committed for a long time against the Muslim population within the Armenian Republic have been confirmed with very accurate information, and the observations made by Rawlinson, the British representative in Erzurum, have confirmed that these atrocities are being committed by the Armenians. The United States delegation of General Harbord has seen the thousands of refugees who came to take refuge with Kazim Karabekir's soldiers, hungry and miserable, their children and wives, their properties destroyed, and the delegation was a witness to the cruelties. Many Muslim villages have been destroyed by the soldiers of Armenian troops armed with cannons and machine guns before the eyes of Karabekir's troops and the people. When it was hoped that this operation would end, unfortunately since the beginning of February the cruelties inflicted on the Muslim population of the region of Shuraghel, Akpazar, Zarshad, and Childir have increased. According to documented information, 28 Muslim villages have been destroyed in the aforementioned region, more than 60,000 people have been slaughtered, many possessions and livestock have been seized, young Muslim women have been taken to Kars and Gumru, thousands of women and children who were able to flee their villages were beaten, raped and massacred in the mountains, and this aggression against the properties, lives, chastity and honour of the Muslims continued. It was the responsibility of the Armenian Government that the cruelties and massacres be stopped in order to alleviate the tensions of Muslim public opinion due to the atrocities committed by the Armenians, that the possessions taken from the Muslims be returned and that indemnities be paid, that the properties, lives, and honour of the Muslims be protected..."

Basar, H. K. (ed.); Muslim and Russian Documents on the Genocide Committed by the Armenians Against the Muslims, `981. p. 22.

***************

"... RUSSIAN OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM. The Retreat of the Russian Army. Memorandum of Lt.-Col. Twerdokhleboff concerning the Armenian attacks on the Turkish population of Erzerum and its neighborhood from the beginning of the Russian Revolution to the reoccupation of the town by the Turkish troops on February 27th 1918.

INTRODUCTION. The enmity known throughout Europe to have existed for a long time between Turks and Armenians has revealed itself during the War in a manner that passes all description. It is a commonly recognized fact that the Armenians cannot stand the Turks; in spite of this they have always managed to pose as martyrs, and to convince the world that on account of their high state of civilization and their faith they have been the object of the most ghastly cruelties.

The Russians, who of all Europeans have necessarily been in closest touch with the Armenians, have a different conception of the manner in which this nation understands civilization and morality. They have learnt to know them as miserly, avaricious, parasitical, only able to exist by preying on others. The Russian peasant has seen into this nation's soul. I have often heard from Russian soldiers such expressions as: " The Turks have used the Armenians badly, but they should have done it in quite a different way and left not one of them alive."

From a military point of view the Armenians are worthless. The Armenian soldiers of the Russian Army play a very insignificant role; they always prefer service in the rear of the Army, however menial, to the firing line. The persistent desertions and cases of self-wounding confirm the opinion which has been given of the bravery of the Armenians. But the course of events, from the beginning of the Russian Revolution to the reoccupation of Erzerum by the Turkish troops, surpasses anything that could have been expected from this nation. I have witnessed some of these occurrences partly with my own eyes; others I have heard of from eyewitnesses.

When, in 1916, Erzerum was taken by the Russians, not a single Armenian was allowed to enter the town or its neighborhood. So long as General Kalikin was at the head of the 1st Army Corps, which occupied the town and surroundings of Erzerum, not a single unit, which contained Armenian elements, was sent there. After the Russian Revolution these measures were discontinued, and the Armenians took advantage of this to attack Erzerum and its neighborhood, and then the plundering of houses and villages and the massacres began.

During the Russian occupation the Armenians did not dare to indulge openly in deeds of violence; the looting and murder was committed in secret. In 1917 the Armenian Revolutionary Committee, which consisted chiefly of soldiers, instigated general house-searchings on the pretext of disarming the population. But, as they were conducted without any control, they soon developed into systematic lootings, which were carried on by the soldiers on an even more extensive scale. The worst looters among the Armenian soldiers were usually those who had shown themselves the most cowardly in face of the enemy.

One day, as I was riding through the streets of the town, I saw a group of Russian soldiers who, egged on by an Armenian soldier, were dragging along two old Turks of seventy. The Armenian soldier seemed to be in a state of frenzy and lashed the poor devils with a wire whip. I tried, without success, to induce the soldiers to treat the old men a little more humanely. The Armenian stepped up to me, threatened me with his riding-whip, and shouted: " You dare to protect our murderers? " Other Armenians who came up took his part, of course, and my position with regard to the Russian soldiers, who would seize any opportunity to beat and, if possible, kill their officers, began to look critical. The appearance of an officers' patrol, however, changed the situation: the Armenians vanished into thin air and the soldiers led off the two old men without further violence.

With the return home of the Russian front-line troops, the danger arose that the Armenians remaining at the front, or flocking to Erzerum, would take the opportunity, before the arrival of units of other nationalities, to commit outrages on the Turkish population. The influential Armenians, of course, gave assurances that nothing of the kind would happen; they asserted their anxiety to bring about a reconciliation of the two peoples, and their conviction that the adoption of suitable measures would ensure success.

At first events seemed, indeed, to justify these assertions. The mosques, which had been converted into barracks, were cleared and cleaned out and no longer used as military quarters. Militia units were formed, comprising Turks and Armenians, and the Armenians even clamored loudly for the setting up of a court martial to deal with the crimes that had been committed against the Turks.

Not until later did it become known that all these maneuvers were nothing but bluff and cunningly concealed treachery. The Turks who joined the militia soon had enough of it when they observed that the majority of those who were told off for night patrol did not return, and no news of their fate could be obtained. The Turks who were taken to work in the fields disappeared in like manner without a trace. Also, the members of the court martial, when they finally met, dared not enforce any penalties for fear of their own lives. Murder and looting multiplied; between January and February. Bekir Hadji Effendi, one of the most respected notables of Erzerum, was murdered in his own house. General Odichelidze thereupon issued an order to the officers in command of the troops that the murderer must be found within three days. This order produced no result.

The Commander-in-Chief sent severe reprimands to the headquarters of the Armenian detachments on the intolerable lack of discipline among their men. He also appealed to the Armenian notables, pointing out the atrocities that had been committed by the troops-e.g., that of the Turkish land workers who had been ordered to the fields less than half had returned-and explained to them that if the Armenians desired to obtain control of the occupied territory they would have to prove themselves worthy of it. He added that these crimes were a blot on the fame of the Armenian nation. The war is not yet over, he said, and the Peace Congress has not yet assigned this territory to the Armenians; it behooved them, therefore, to conduct themselves thenceforward as a nation worthy of freedom.

The answer of the Armenian leaders was to the effect that the honor of a whole people could not be prejudiced by the crimes of an insignificant minority; they gave assurance that the reasonably-minded Armenians were doing their utmost to put a stop to these acts of vengeance for the Turkish tyranny of the past; they observed, further, that they were engaged in framing the sternest measures, which they would enforce without delay, justly and equitably. Shortly after the receipt of these oft-repeated assurances we learned of the massacre of Turks at Erzindjan. The following details I heard from the mouth of the Commander-in-Chief, Odichelidze. The massacre was no instigated by bands, but by the doctor of the town and the army contractor. As I do not know the exact names of these Armenians I cannot give them.

The report runs: ' More than 800 unarmed, defenseless Turks were murdered. The Armenians had dug gigantic trenches into which the poor Turks were throw after being slaughtered like a herd of cattle. An Armenian who directed the execution counted the unhappy victims. ' That's seventy,' he roared, ' there still room for ten more; hack away! ' And another ten wretches were slaughtered to fill up the gap, which was then filled in with a little earth. The army contractor wanted to provide a little diversion for his own benefit. He locked into a house eighty wretched victims, and then had them let out one aft another while he smashed in their skulls with his own hand.'

After the massacre at Erzindjan the Armenians, well armed, made their way to Erzerum. A Russian officer who, with the aid of a few guns, was protecting the line of communication of the retreating force from the attacks of the Kurd one day attempted to lead an Armenian detachment into the firing line. The men, however, had no stomach for real fighting; instead, they set ii to the house in which the Russian officers were and tried to get rid of them this way. The officers narrowly escaped death and lost all their possessions.

The Armenian bands, swarming from Erzindjan to Erzerum, destroyed their way all Mohammedan villages and annihilated the inhabitants. During the retreat of the Russian troops to Erzerum Kurds and other peaceable inhabitants of the district were recruited as drivers of ammunition transport. Not a man of these possessed a weapon. As they approached Erzerum Armenians seized the moment when the Russian officers had turned in to rest to kill the drivers. The Russian officers, brought up by the shrieks of unhappy wretches, were received by the Armenians, arms in their hands, and threatened with a similar fate if they dared to interfere. These murders were carried out with the direst cruelty.

In the Officers' Club at Erzerum a Russian artillery officer, Lieuten Medivani, publicly stated that he had witnessed the following scene: ' One of the Armenians had mortally wounded a Kurdish driver; he fallen on his back in a dying condition. The Armenian then tried to drive the stick he held in his hand into his victim's mouth, but the poor fellow's teeth were so tightly clenched in his death agony that the murderer could not carry out his horrible design, and in his fury he dispatched the dying man with kicks in the stomach.'

Odichelidze has himself told me that in the village of Ilidja all Turks who were unable to escape were massacred; he saw numbers of corpses of children whose heads had been hacked off with blunt axes.

Lieutenant-Colonel Griaznoff, who returned from Ilidja on the 28th February, three weeks after the slaughter, related to me what he had seen.

' In the courtyard of the mosque the corpses lay heaped to a depth of two lance-lengths. There were bodies of men, women, children, old people, people of every age. Lieutenant-Colonel Griaznoff told a couple of young Armenian girls, who were employed with the Armenian troops to serve the telephones, to accompany him to the courtyard. He showed them the atrocities committed by their countrymen, and said bitterly they had something to be proud of. Griaznoff was both astonished and enraged at being forced to realize that the spectacle, far from rousing the disgust of the young women, merely moved them to loud laughter. Overcome by his anger, he began to abuse them, telling them that the Armenians, the women included, were the most cowardly and barbarous of all the nations, and the fact that educated, well brought-up young girls could laugh at a spectacle that even made the hair of an officer stand on end was proof of the barbarity of the race. At these words the girls thought it advisable to appear impressed, and said that their laughter was hysterical; but the witness was not deceived.'

An Armenian contractor to the line-of-communication forces at Aladja told me the following:

' On the 27th February, the Armenians crucified a Turkish woman-still alive -on a wall after tearing out her heart; she was hung head downwards.'

On the 7th February the great massacre at Erzerum began. Armenian artillery soldiers had captured 270 people in the street and, after stripping them of all their clothing, shut them into a bath to sate their perverse lusts upon them. After superhuman efforts I succeeded in saving a hundred of these unhappy wretches who were still alive; they are alleged to have been released by the soldiers. The ringleader of these horrors was an Armenian non- commissioned infantry officer named Karabedoff, serving with the artillery. On the same evening several Turks were done to death in the streets of the town.

On the 12th February the Armenians shot ten peaceful, unarmed peasants at Erzerum station; the officers, who tried to interfere, were threatened with death.

At this time I had under arrest an Armenian who had killed a Turk without any plausible pretext; the Commander-in-Chief had ordered him to be brought before the court martial. According to an old-established law murderers are executed. An Armenian officer informed the murderer that he would be hanged for his crime. ' What! ' exclaimed the man, amazed.

' Hanging an Armenian for a Turk! Who ever heard of such a thing! '

In Erzerum the Armenians had set fire to the Turkish bazaar. On the 17th February I heard that the inhabitants of the village of Tepe Koj, in the district of the artillery regiment, had been completely exterminated-men, women, and children. The same day I met Andranik, who had been sent to Erzerum by the Caucasus Government to restore order. I informed him of the butchery, and urged him to find out who was responsible. I have never heard the result of my request. In the casino of the artillery officers Andranik publicly promised the restoration of order, but in spite of the two envoys of the Caucasus Government, Andranik and Dr. Zawrieff, this promise has never been fulfilled.

In the town the disturbances have, comparatively speaking died down; in the villages where all the inhabitants had been slain complete quiet reigned of course. The imprisonment of Turkish inhabitants in Erzerum began afresh when the military movements of the Turks proclaimed their approach from Ilidja; these arrests were particularly numerous on the 26th and 27th February.

In the night of the 26th-27th the Armenians eluded the vigilance of the Russian officers and perpetrated another massacre, but at once took to their heels at the first approach of the Turks. This massacre was no impromptu affair-it had been planned beforehand; all captured Turks were collected and put to death one by one. The Armenians reported with pride that the night's toll reached a total of 3,000.

The Armenians who had to defend the town were numerically so weak that they fled before a Turkish army of 1,500 men with two guns. Nevertheless, the number of murders committed by them on the night of the massacre was very great.

As the educated classes of the Armenian population could very well have prevented the massacre, it is to be concluded that these classes played a greater part in the crime than the bands, and that, in any case, the chief responsibility rests with them. The humble people are very sensitive to the influence of the higher classes. My regiment, which is officered exclusively by Russians, consisted entirely of Armenian soldiers; although we had no means at hand of using force against them, we were able to make them obey all our orders; they have never ventured to indulge in open looting. On the night of the massacre not one of the Kurdish grooms was murdered in the barracks, where several detachments of the regiment were quartered, although only one Russian officer was on duty and forty Kurdish grooms were amongst hundreds of Armenians.

I do not, of course, wish to maintain that the elite of the Armenian nation without exception had a hand in the crimes. I have met Armenians who deeply deplore these crimes; others who have protested not only in words, but by action. Yet I must confess that these are a very small minority and are in ill odor with their compatriots; they are accused of treason against the national ideal. Others, again, posed as enemies of these bestialities, but condoned them in secret. Some Armenians maintained an attitude of silence in face of all reproach, but the majority had the same answer ready on their lips: "You are Russians. You cannot understand the ideal of the Armenian nation." Sometimes they tried to defend themselves in such speeches as: "Have the Turks behaved otherwise towards the Armenians? What we are doing is merely revenge." These incidents prove how bloodthirsty this ideal of the Armenian people and upper classes is.

It lay in no man's power to prevent these lamentable happenings. The Armenians have sown the wind without taking thought that they would reap a storm.

ERZERUM. 16th April 1918.
(signed) LIEUTENANT-COLONEL TWERDOKHLEROFF,
Commandant ad interim of the garrison of Erzerum and Neveboyun, O.C. 2nd Engineer and Artillery Regiment.

Djemal Pasha, Memories Of A Turkish States Man, 1913-1919, New York: Arno Press, 1973, Reprint of the 1922 ed. Published by Doran, New York

***************

OFFICIAL DIARY OF THE SECOND RUSSIAN GARRISON ARTILLERY REGIMENT IN ERZERUM

The Russian Army of the Caucasus evacuated the stations they had previously occupied towards the middle of December 1917, and, without having received orders from G.H.Q. or any of the Army Commanders, began their withdrawal. The Garrison Artillery Regiment brought up the rear of the Army. Of the detachments from the Deve-Boinu fortresses and the Artillery Regiment from Erzerum only 4° officers remained behind. Deserted by their men, they remained by the guns from a feeling of duty. In the fortresses were more than 400 guns, left behind for lack of means of transport. The officers, inspired by feelings of honor and duty, waited permission from G.H.Q. to leave the guns or for reinforcements to carry on the defense. With the officers of the first Regiment the cadre of the second Artillery Regiment was formed.

After the withdrawal of the Russian Army an Armenian Revolutionary Committee was set up in Erzerum, calling itself " The Armenian Military Union." At the same time the Army Commander sent to the Second Garrison Artillery Regiment 400 untrained Armenians, of whom the majority deserted and the remainder could only be used to guard the batteries of the fortresses.

Shortly before the withdrawal of the Army, when touch had been lost between Russia and the Trans-Caucasus, a provisional Government had been formed in Tiflis, which was called "The Trans-Caucasian Commission." This Commission announced that there was no intention of instituting an independent Trans-Caucasian Government, as before Trans-Caucasia belonged absolutely to Russia, but until the restoration of order the Commission would undertake to represent the central administration.

On the 18th December, 1917, the Commission issued a proclamation that in place of the scattered Russian Army, a new Army would be raised on a national basis, consisting of three Army Corps-one Russian, one Georgian, one Mohammedan-and some detachments of smaller nationalities, such as Cherkesses, Ossets, etc. Only the artillery in the fortresses of Erzerum and Deve-Boinu retained their old character (i.e., comprised troops of various nationalities) until a decision should be arrived at as to the nationality of this unit, consisting of Russian officers and Armenian men. It was clear that this unit, whose cadres and leaders were in Russian hands, could not be claimed as Armenian. Moreover, we had received no orders with regard to the Armenian character of the formation, which was still regarded as Russian, being led by Russian officers who had actually served in the Russian Army and drew their pay from the Russian Treasury. The fact that the Army possessed no Armenian, but only a Russian church, conducted by Russian priests, was a further proof of the complete Muscovite character of the unit.

Since the withdrawal of the Army, begun some two months before, order could not be re-established among the soldiers, who deserted, looted, and threatened their officers, and were in a state of complete mutiny. Colonel Torkum, alleged to be an Armenian Bulgar, was appointed Commandant of Erzerum.

Towards the middle of January 1918, some Armenians of the infantry detachment murdered a Turkish notable of Erzerum in his dwelling and looted the house. Commander-in-Chief Odichelidze mustered all detachment commanders and summoned them to discover the perpetrator of this horrible crime within three days at most. He then turned to the Armenian officers and told them that the honor of the Armenian nation was at stake in this matter; it was therefore their duty to leave no stone unturned to discover the guilty person if they were to clear their reputation in the eyes of the world.

" If these outrages of which the Armenians are guilty do not cease, I shall find myself compelled to distribute arms to the Mohammedan population so that they can defend their lives and property," he added. To these accusations Colonel Torkum retorted in an injured tone that it was unjust to lay the crimes of a few individuals at the door of a whole nation. The detachment commanders proposed the setting up of a court martial, which by military law could punish murder with death. Odichelidze replied that he had already taken the necessary measures.

Colonel Torkum, if I am not mistaken, organized on 25th January a review of the troops and had twenty-one guns fired to impress the population with his military power. On this occasion he made a speech in Armenian. In this speech, which is directed against General Odichelidze, he asserted Armenian independence, and mentioned that he was taking over the reins of authority as head of the new State. After hearing this grotesque statement the General had the new head of the State, Colonel Torkum, removed from Erzerum.

This measure was sufficient to show that the Russian Government intended to prevent at all costs the founding of an independent Armenian State. I have learnt that the Russian General Staff has reminded the Armenians repeatedly that all arms, ammunition, and other war stores, partly from the depots at Erzerum, partly from other depots, had only been handed over to them provision- ally because no other troops were available. These arms, therefore, were only loaned to the Armenian and had to be handed back at any time on request.

In these days the Armenians were perpetrating indescribably cruel murders among the poor Turkish inhabitants of the neighborhood of Erzindjan; the Turks were unarmed and without any means of self-defense. On hearing that the Turkish troops were approaching, the Armenians, committing fresh crimes, fled in the direction of Erzerum.

According to the reports of the Commander-in-Chief, confirmed by officers who were actually present at the scene of the crime, the Armenians slew more than 800 Turks in Erzindjan, and so avenged one of their miserable accomplices who had been killed by a Turk in justified self-defense. Furthermore, the Armenians massacred the unhappy Mohammedan population of Ilidja, in the neighborhood of Erzerum, without sparing the women and children.

On February 7th the following incident came to my notice: I ascertained that the Militia and the Armenian soldiers of the town were carrying off some hundreds of Mohammedans to an unknown destination. When I inquired into the reasons for this, I received the answer that these men were being recruited to clear the railway of snow. I expressed myself satisfied with this explanation.

The following story will prove how unsatisfactory it was:

About three o'clock 2nd Lieutenant Lipsky, an officer of my regiment, reported to me over the telephone that some Armenian soldiers had attacked five Turks in the streets; they had driven them into a corner of the barrack yard, beaten them mercilessly, and would certainly kill them. The intervention of the Russian officer in favor of the unfortunate men was met with threats, where-upon an Armenian officer, who was also present at the scene, took the part of the bandits and joined in preventing Lipsky from intervening. On hearing this I hurried, accompanied by three officers, to the scene of the outrage. On the way I met the officer who had telephoned to me and the Mayor of Erzerum, Stawrosky, looking for one of their Turkish friends who had been captured by the Armenians. Lipsky told me that the soldiers were holding the entrance to the barracks by force of arms. I went on my way. As I came near the barracks I saw twelve Turks leaving; they were running away, obviously panic-stricken. I stopped one of them, but, as I did not understand his speech, it was impossible to know what he said. Finally, with great difficulty, I entered the barracks. I immediately inquired about the Turks who had been captured in the street. The soldiers affirmed that there was no civilian of the town in the barracks. I began a personal search of every nook and corner of the barracks, and finally discovered in the bathroom seventy Mohammedans, victims of the most ghastly horrors. I immediately instituted an inquiry and had six Armenians who were responsible for this crime arrested. I also learned in the course of the inquiry that an Armenian, whose identity I could not establish, had shot an unfortunate Mohammedan who had shown himself on the roof of a house near the barracks.

Naturally I at once set at liberty the unfortunate victim of this horrible outrage. The minutes of this inquiry, together with my own records, including the list of the Mohammedans whom I had succeeded in rescuing, were lost during the reoccupation of Erzerum by the Ottoman troops on February 27th. But the incident can be confirmed by questioning the Turks, who, whenever we meet, are profuse in their gratitude. In addition, Ali Bey Pepeoff, the Secretary of Mayor Stawrosky, who drew up the list and the protocol, would certainly recognize the parties concerned.

The inquiry revealed that Karaguedoff, an Armenian cadet of the artillery regiment, was the instigator of the outrage. In the course of ruthless house-searchings in Turkish homes, which he had conducted in the company of Armenian soldiers accustomed to such methods, he had appropriated furniture and other domestic property. Karaguedoff was arrested, together with other Armenian soldiers. The incidents were reported the same evening to the Commander-in-Chief in the presence of Government Commissioner Zetaloff and his assistant. On the same day the Armenians murdered other Turks and set fire to the Turkish bazaar. It was generally known that during these days several murders were committed in Erzerum and its neighborhood. I personally arrested an Armenian who had killed Turks in the neighborhood of Tafta and handed him over to the Commandant. It was said in the town that the Turk who had been told off to work in the fields never returned from their work, and that nothing could be learnt as to their whereabouts. The magistrates reported the disappearance of these men to the Commander-in-Chief.

In a report which we handed to the Commander-in-Chief on the occasion of an officers' conference we requested his permission to leave the fortress of Erzerum in view of our complete uselessness and the impossibility of preventing the Armenian crimes. We were afraid of besmirching our reputation. Odischelidze told us of the arrival of a wireless message which he had received from General Wehib Pasha, in command of the Ottoman troops. The General informed him that his troops had received orders to garrison Erzindjan and to advance until they had established touch with the Russian troops. Wehib Pasha further remarked that this was the only means of paving the way for the suppression of the barbarous cruelties practiced by the Armenians upon the Turkish population.

After this the Trans-Caucasian Commission made offers of peace to the Ottoman Government. In the telegram of reply the Commandant of the Ottoman troops expressed his readiness to accept the proposal, and added that he had communicated the proposal of the Trans-Caucasian Commission to his Government, recommending its acceptance. In accordance with a petition from us, General Odichelidze got into communication with Gueguetschkoni, the President of the Trans-Caucasian Commission, and General Lebedinsky, the Commander-in-Chief.

The reply contained the announcement that an ultimatum had been dispatched to the Armenian National Assembly, demanding the immediate cessation of all Armenian atrocities in order to put an end finally to these lamentable occurrences, and that Dr. Zavrieff and Andranik had been sent as delegates to Erzerum. As to the request of the officers, the advice of the Commissaries was that they should remain at their posts until the expected answer to the peace overtures had been received from the Ottoman Government. The Council expressed their thanks to the officers for the service they had rendered, and declared that if Russia were faced with any fresh danger they were sure that the officers would be found at their posts to the last minute.

The Commander-in-Chief of the Army also issued an order of the day in which he recommended officers not to leave their posts, adding that to shield their honor and protect their lives he would enforce the most stringent measures against the Armenian criminals. On these conditions we remained at Erzerum with the sole object of safeguarding the interests of Russia, and under the sole command of the Commander-in-Chief. We learned that the Ottoman Government had received the proposal of the Trans-Caucasian Commission with favor and replied to this effect, and that peace negotiations would be opened on February 17th in Trebizond.

Our Army Commander informed all officers that there was no intention of stirring up enmity against the Ottoman troops in Erzerum and the neighborhood and that accordingly they were to remain in Erzerum until the conclusion of peace, when arms and other war material, according to the peace conditions, would cither be transported to Russia or handed over finally to the Ottoman Government. In case of any attempt on the part of the Ottoman troops to occupy Erzerum before the signing of peace, all guns were to be put out of action and the troops and officers withdrawn to Russia, definite orders for which would be promulgated at least seven days in advance.

The necessity for defending ourselves against the attacks of the Kurds until the final decision as to our remaining grew more and more obvious, for during the Armistice the Ottoman Government had declared that the Kurds were subject to no orders and would act on their own initiative. The Army Commander had, therefore, decided as early as the end of January to strengthen the Erzerum-Erzindjan line-of-communication by an appropriate number of guns to keep off the attacks of the Kurds, who were trying to loot our line-of-communication depots. An officer and two guns were ordered to each strategic point. On the withdrawal of the Armenians from Erzindjan and Erzerum the guns were withdrawn with them. On February 10th two guns were placed in all the positions from Buyuk-Kiremidli along the road from Trebizond as far as Erep-Michan, as at all other important strategic points of the town, with the same object in view. In view of the probability of a Kurdish attack from the direction of Palan-Dongno, guns were to be placed also between the Kars and Charput gates. These guns, which were only to be used against a possible attack by the Kurds, and were scarcely adequate for this object, would have been useless against a regular army with artillery: a few shots would suffice to put them out of action. Towards the middle of February the sights of the guns in the outlying positions were collected and delivered to the central depot; the same measure was now to be carried out also in the case of the guns in the nearer positions. This order was also given for the guns in Palan-Dongno, but was never carried out. Only the guns, which remained in the positions to be used against the Kurds, retained their sights. However, no immediate offensive on the part of the Ottoman troops was expected, as the Turks were regarded as demoralized and not in a position to undertake any movements before the summer. On February 12th some Armenian bandits, armed to the teeth, had openly shot ten or twelve Turks in the neighborhood of the station. Two Russian officers, infuriated by these impudent outrages, had tried to interfere, but had been compelled to give way before armed threats and to leave the victims to their fate.

On February 13th the Commander-in-Chief proclaimed a state of siege and convened a court martial, which was to enforce the death penalty according to the old regulations. Colonel Morel was appointed Commandant of the fortress of Erzerum, and an Armenian as president of the court martial. On the same day the Commander-in-Chief and General Gerassimoff left the town; they wished to fix a rendezvous in case the artillery had to withdraw. I remained in Erzerum in command of the Garrison Artillery. Colonel Morel's staff consisted exclusively of Russian officers, and the Adjutant of the regiment was Staff-Captain Schnauer.

After the departure of the Commander-in-Chief, Colonel Morel at once changed his attitude. He declared that Erzerum was to be defended to the last moment, and forbade all officers and inhabitants capable of bearing arms to leave the town. When I submitted to the court martial the wishes of some of the officers to avail themselves of this permission, one member, an Armenian named Sokhonnyan, replied brutally that he would himself cut down all who showed any intention of quitting the town, and would have any man who should dare to attempt flight seized by the Armenian forces in Kopri-Koj and Hassan-Kale, and taken before the court martial unless they were provided with permits. These permits, however, were issued solely by him. I realized that we were in a trap, escape from which would be extremely difficult, and that the court martial and the state of siege were directed less against the bandits than against the Russian officers.

The outrages continued in the town, and the unhappy Turkish population, unarmed and defenceless, was continually attacked by the Armenians. Their only refuge was the Russian officers, who, however, could only offer them very limited protection. A few officers under my command had been obliged to use force to save the lives of a couple of Turks who were being robbed in the street. A military engineer, Karaieff, shot down with his rifle an Armenian who was taking to his heels after robbing a Turk in the street in the middle of the day. The promise to punish the bandits who murdered peaceful, unarmed Mohammedans remained, as usual, a dead letter.

>From fear of Armenian revenge, the court martial did not dare to sentence one single Armenian, in spite of the fact that it had been set up chiefly at Armenian request. The Turks, moreover, had prophesied that a court martial of Armenians would not condemn a single one of their compatriots. We could now see the truth of the proverb that the wolves do not prey on one another. All fit Armenians immediately escaped with their wives on the pretext of being obliged to protect them.

I learned that a non-commissioned officer, Karaguedoff, had been freed from prison without my permission. I made inquiries of Colonel Morel as to the reason for this, and was told in reply that Karaguedoff's innocence had been established at a new inquiry. In spite of the fact that two of my officers and I bad been the principal witnesses on this occasion, neither of us had been summoned to this very extraordinary inquiry. I expressed my dissatisfaction with the reply received from Colonel Morel, reported the matter again, and handed over the minutes to Colonel Alexandroff. The murderer I had captured in Tafta likewise went unpunished.

Colonel Morel feared a mutiny of the Turkish troops in Erzerum. On February I7th Andranik arrived in Erzerum, accompanied by Dr. Zavrieff, Assistant Commissioner for the occupied area. As we had not been instructed on Armenian questions, we did not know that Andranik was one of the criminals condemned to death by the Ottoman Government. I first learned these details on March 7th, in a conversation with the Turkish Army Commander. Andranik appeared in the uniform of a Russian brigadier-general. He was wearing the Order of Vladimir, Fourth Class, and the Cross of St. George, Second Class, as well as the Military Cross of St. George, Second Class. He was accompanied by his Chief-of-Staff, the Russian colonel, Zinkewitsch. In the evening before his arrival Colonel Morel informed us that, according to a telegram received from Andranik at Kopri-Koj, machine-guns were to be employed to shoot down all cowards who attempted to escape from Erzerum. Immediately after his arrival Andranik took over the command of the fortress; Colonel Morel was subordinate to him, and we to Morel.

On the day of Andranik's arrival the whole of the inhabitants of Tepe-Koj, which belonged to my command, were massacred-men, women, and children. The officer on duty in this section communicated the tragic news to me, and I immediately reported it to Andranik in our first conversation. In my presence he gave orders for twenty horsemen to be dispatched to Tepe-Koj to bring back at least one of the criminals. Up to the present day I have never heard the result of this step.

Colonel Torkum turned up again in the town, and at the same time the Armenian artillery colonel, Dolukhanoff, made his reappearance in Erzerum. His first announcement was that he, an Inspector of Artillery, would henceforward rank as my superior officer. I replied that I held the rank of a Divisional Commander and did not require a superior officer; otherwise, I added, I should leave the service. It was thereupon announced that Colonel Dolukhanoff would carry on the administrative work of the Garrison Artillery, and that consequently his instructions to me would not be issued under his own name, but, as before, under that of Andranik. One day the Armenian lieutenant, Djanbuladion, who commanded the artillery battalion under my orders, also made an attempt to interfere with my affairs. When I directed that all guns, searchlights, and dynamos were to be transported towards the rear, he replied that he would not allow any withdrawal of material, as the Armenians intended to take all the administrative posts in the command into their own hands, and might only use the Russian officers as executives; they also wished to use them, without their realizing it, in establishing Armenian independence. Had the Russian officers grasped the purpose they were intended to serve the majority of them would have resigned, and the Armenians would have been left with an inadequate number of officers. The following statements of Captain Peliat, temporary O.C. of the 7th Battalion of Caucasian Mountain Artillery, show how gravely the Armenians feared the resignation of the artillery officers. When the Armenians learned that the 7th Battalion Mountain Artillery were holding themselves in readiness to withdraw to San Kamisch on February 7th, they seized the commanding officer on the 5th of that month; and although at the orders of the Army H.Q. they were obliged to set him at liberty, they repeated the attempt three times. The Armenians of Erzerum threatened H.Q. to drown the town in blood if the guns were withdrawn. The Army Commander was consequently forced to cancel the order for the withdrawal of the artillery. An attempt had to be made to come to an understanding with the officer commanding the 7th artillery Battalion. We agreed secretly that, in case the Armenians should attempt to force the hands of the Russian artillery officers and officially propose that they should ally themselves with the Armenian cause, we would help one another mutually. We possessed considerable war material, guns,machine-guns, and officers. The officers of the Mountain Artillery tried to find billets as near as possible to one another in the town, and we of the Garrison Artillery collected as far as possible in the Turkish quarter, where our headquarters had been situated since the occupation of the town.

Since Andranik's arrival at Colonel Morel's side the fears of a rising of the inhabitants of Erzerum had greatly increased. The Colonel ordered that an efficient Russian officer should be put in command of Fort Medjedie to direct the bombardment in the event of a rising, which might follow the arrest of the instigator of the unrest. We all received the order to leave the Turkish quarter and transfer ourselves to the Armenian quarter. As we had lived in this quarter for two years, and were always in sympathy with the Mohammedan population, we thought this suggestion, to say the least of it, remarkable.

The Russian artillery officers unanimously declared that they had remained in the service to fight a worthy foe, and would never agree to fire on women and children, for it was quite clear that the Armenians would use a threatened Turkish rising as a pretext to open a bombardment of the Turkish quarter. As to the transfer to the Armenian quarter, it was impracticable for three reasons: Firstly, it was impossible to effect the removal in the time given; secondly, the withdrawal of the Russian officers from the Mohammedan quarter would of course, be followed by a fresh massacre; and thirdly, in view of the strained relations that had existed for some time between them and the Armenians, it would have been risky for the Russian officers to venture into their midst.

The officers of the Mountain Artillery Battalion who did not belong to the cadre of the Garrison Artillery also rejected the proposal. Finally the Armenians, who were left with no choice but to do their own dirty work, began to arrest some alleged agitators.

As Colonel Morel's proposal to bombard the town was very significant, I considered it necessary to call together all the officers under my command. We met twice in the course of three days. The first meeting was attended by all artillery officers in Erzerum, as well as by two English officers who had arrived a few days before; also by Colonels Morel. Zinkewitsch, Dolukhanoff and Torkum, Andranik and Dr. Zavrieff. Our object in inviting the English officers was to let them see the relations existing between the Russian officers and the Armenian Command. It would also give them an opportunity of finding out what resources the Russians had at their disposal to prevent Armenian atrocities, so that on their return they might support their observations by tangible proofs. As I had no telephonic or telegraphic connections under my personal control, I was convinced that telegrams sent by me would never reach their destination. I therefore seized the opportunity of this meeting to describe in the greatest detail all that I had myself observed and heard from reliable sources as to the atrocities and horrors perpetrated by the Armenians. I described to my hearers the degree of insubordination that prevailed among the Armenian troops, and cited examples I had heard from the lips of General Odischlidze himself. I concluded with the words: " We Russian officers who have remained in Erzerum have not done so with the object of placing our uniforms at the service of the Armenians as a cloak to conceal their ghastly crimes, but simply and solely in obedience to our superiors and to protect Russia. Unless the Armenian atrocities are suspended during our stay in Erzerum," I added, " every Russian officer will insist on leaving the town and resigning his post." Some other officers, speaking after me, emphatically confirmed what I had said.

In his reply Andranik intimated that the Armenians would be eternally grateful to Russia, that the Armenians formed an integral part of the population of Greater Russia, and that they had no other end in view than that of serving Russian interests. As to the so-called massacres committed by the Armenians, they were the result of the enmity existing between Armenians and Turks. He added that the principal object of his mission in Erzerum was to put down such crimes, and, should he fail to bring the Armenians to reason, he would be the first to leave the town. The business of the meeting was carried on through the medium of an interpreter. Questioned as to his views on allowing officers who wished to do so to leave the town, Andranik replied that he considered it desirable that all those who were not too confident of their own courage should leave the town, and he would himself assist their departure as far as possible. Colonel Zinkewitsch declared before the whole meeting that, once convinced that the continued presence of the Russian officers in Erzerum would serve the interests of Russia, he would remain solely for that reason. In the end all officers decided to remain ten days longer and to regulate their conduct by the future course of events, according as these might confirm or refute Andranik's pledges.

The meeting had been held on February 20th or 21st. Shortly afterwards Colonel Dolukhanoff expressed to me and other Russian officers his astonishment at the contempt and even horror with which the Russian officers regarded the Armenians. On the next day Andranik proclaimed, on large wall-posters written in Turkish, that any man who killed either Armenians or Mohammedans would be arrested and punished by death; further, that the Turks might resume their occupations without fear, and that, in the event of anyone of the Mohammedans engaged in labor in the fields failing to return from his work, he would hold the entire detachment in charge of the supervision of the work responsible. As I was riding through the streets the following day, accompanied by the Armenian captain, Djanbuladian, we noticed many people reading the posters. Djanhuladian assured them in Turkish that provided the Mohammedan population refrained from revolt, they would have nothing to fear from the Armenians. The r

The reply was that for two years the Mohammedans had committed no crimes, and that there was no intention of doing so in the future; all they asked was that the Mohammedans, who were unarmed and without any means of defense, should not be killed, without reason. I asked the captain to tell the people that I was the Russian artillery commander, and to state that I and my Russian comrades were sympathetic towards the Mohammedan population, and would continue, as before, to look after these poor people, Some of the Turks present, two or three especially, confirmed my words, saying that I had with my own hand saved their lives during the massacre of February 7th. Djanbuladian, who acted as interpreter, was himself a member of the Armenian Committee.

At the second meeting Russian officers were present, the only foreigner admitted being Dr. Zavrieff. The following points were discussed: That an attempt should be made to define clearly the status of the 2nd Garrison Artillery Regiment of Erzerum, in the sense that this regiment was not, as the Armenians imagined, an Armenian artillery regiment, but a Russian regiment; not one of its officers had voluntarily enlisted in Armenian service, not one of us had made any agreement to do so. If the regiment was Russian we insisted on preserving Russian status; if Armenian, we desired the right to leave the town at will in order to serve with the Russian Army. The state of siege had only served to prevent the departure of those officers who wished to leave in order to serve on another than the Caucasus front. If, on the other hand, the current rumor materialized and the Trans-Caucasus had split off from Russia, it would certainly be necessary to grant leave of absence to the Russian officers if we were not to find ourselves strangers in a foreign land.

After prolonged discussion we reached the conviction that, according to the circular we had received, every officer had the right to apply for transfer to a Russian Army Corps or to be placed at the disposal of the War Ministry. I therefore consented to forward all such applications to the proper authorities.

During the meeting the experience of Lieutenant Yermoloff, of the 7th Battalion Caucasus Mountain Artillery, was brought up as a striking example. He had asked to be transferred from the new Armenian battalion to which he had been assigned. Colonel Morel had first tried to dissuade him, then, in face of this officer's fixed determination, he had added to the written form of application that the officer in question had shown himself incompetent for his duties, that he would therefore be placed at the disposal of the General Staff of the Front, and would receive orders to leave Erzerum within twenty-four hours. Thus was the honor of an efficient officer attacked, for the sole reason that he refused to serve Armenian interests and had been indiscreet enough to declare that Colonel Morel had allied himself to the Armenian cause.

Dr. Zavrieff repeated word for word Andranik's statement given above. He said that by remaining in Erzerum until the conclusion of peace we should be serving Russian interests. Officers belonging to a civilized nation had no right to adopt such a line of reasoning as, for example: "Let the Armenians and Turks settle their own quarrel! Let them cut each other's throats! Why should we Russians interfere with their affairs? Let them go to the devil!"

At the conclusion of his speech, which had not made the desired impression, Dr. Zavrieff said that if we wished to serve humanity it was our duty to remain in Erzerum to prevent butchery of the Turks.

Andranik's promises were not fulfilled, nor had the Mohammedan population ever placed any faith in them. Shops remained closed and terror continued to reign. Not a living soul showed himself in the Mohammedan quarters. Only a few shops in the neighbourhood of the Town Hall opened their shutters, and there a few Mohammedans collected during the day.

Not a single Armenian was punished. To keep up the pretence of Armenian innocence the question was asked whether the innocent were to be punished for the sake of Andranik's promise. But when the Russian officers replied that they had themselves handed over various Armenian offenders and accused them before the authorities, this irrefutable argument was received in silence. Murder still went on and was merely concealed. It was practiced in the more remote villages, no longer before the eyes of the Russian officers. The Turkish inhabitants of the villages round Erzerum disappeared, and nothing was heard as to their fate.

Arrests in the town increased in number on the excuse of a possible rising. To my ironical question, what happened to the prisoners, and whether they all ran the risk of being slaughtered, Colonel Morel replied that some would be taken to Tiflis under adequate escort, others would be kept in Erzerum as hostages. In the streets Armenian bands, formed of Armenian deserters, murdered the passers-by--partly from fear, partly to rob them of their possessions; in any case, robbery was the chief motive. Before Andranik's arrival the companies refused to go into the front line. Afterwards they obeyed the order, but only to desert in the most craven fashion. Andranik, on horse-back, tried to drive them back with his sword and fists. To have him at their head was the dearest wish of all Armenians of the Russian artillery. They were apparently incapable of grasping that the Garrison Artillery required the services of trained artillerymen and an adequate number of infantry. But it was easy to guess their secret thought: when the moment came for withdrawal, to escape under cover of the guns. Subsequent events have proved the truth of this.

The opening of peace negotiations at Trebizond was delayed. We learned through the General Staff at Erzerum that the negotiations fixed for February 17th had been postponed until the 20th or 25th. As my Staff was separated in opposite ends of the town, and the telephonic communication was in an inefficient state, I was compelled to make the journey twice a day.

According to information I received from Colonel Morel and his Staff in the course of an official visit, there were no regular Ottoman troops in the neighborhood of Erzerum; we were fighting Kurdish bands and villagers, together with a few regulars, relics of the Turkish Army of 1916. It was understood that these bands bad been raised by some Ottoman officers who had come to the neighborhood to protect the population. These troops had only two mountain guns, which had been left in Erzindjan by the Armenians. They could advance by the Erzindjan-Olti- Jeni road, or from the other side from Kars and Palan-Dogno. Colonel Morel, on what grounds I do not know, assumed that the attack would be made from Olti. The intelligence service was conducted by the Armenians most inefficiently. They were chiefly occupied in murder in the villages and driving off any herds of cattle they came across. Their reports were lies from beginning to end. If they reported that the patrol had been attacked by an enemy force of 2,000 men, one could be sure that there had actually been 200 at most. They were not ashamed to admit having fled before an attack by 300-400 men, in which their sole loss was one killed and one wounded. One day an Armenian officer reported over the telephone that his detachment had been attacked by 400 of the enemy; it transpired that two unarmed men had emerged from a neighboring village and immediately withdrawn into their houses. From the evacuation of Erzerum until the Turkish occupation the Armenian Scout patrols only once succeeded in making a capture -a single Turkish horseman. He was probably suffering from frozen feet or was prevented by some other reason from escaping.

After our second officers' meeting some officers had applied for transfer to other posts. When these applications were submitted to Colonel Morel he was very angry, and said that he would refuse to permit their departure on the grounds of a court martial decision. When I pointed out that the guns were still in the hands of the Russian officers, who could reply to such unjustified severity with artillery fire, and, moreover, that as the applications were absolutely legal and could not be stigmatized as an attempt at desertion, it was necessary to comply, he retorted that, if the officers insisted, he would give them, as he had done in the case of Captain Yermaloff, papers which would compromise their records. I replied to Colonel Morel that, as Colonel Dolukhanoff had justly declared in Tiflis and Batum, officers who were forced to remain at their posts against their will could not be expected to give good service. He replied that for this reason he had asked for sixty English officers to be sent to Erzerum, and had already received formal consent. On this occasion I also heard of another incident: a Russian or Polish soldier who was acting as stationmaster in Erzerum had refused to continue his duties. He had been at once arrested and forced to carry on. Under the pretext of facilitating a more rapid circulation of orders I ordered my officers to billet themselves as near to one another as possible; in reality my object was that we might be in a better position to help one another in case of need.

Captain Yermoloff had departed on February 25th. I had asked him to break his journey at Sari-Kamieko to inform Generals Wischinsky and Gerassimoff, artillery commanders. of the serious position in which we were placed in relation to the Armenians, and to urge him to free us as quickly as possible from this cul-de-sac.

On February 24th I sighted a Turkish aeroplane reconnoitering, and concluded that the enemy was at Erzindjan or even Mama-Khatum. The same day Colonel Morel informed me that he had received the Turkish proposal regarding the evacuation of Erzerum. After the Turkish occupation I learned from Corps Commander Krazim Bey that this proposal had not been a worthless scrap of paper, but an official document bearing his own signature, whereas Colonel Morel had deliberately led me to believe that this official ultimatum, signed by the Officer Commanding the Army Corps, was mere bluff. The General Staff of the fortress announced on February 24th and 25th that no danger was imminent. Only a band of Kurds had been seen in the neighbourhood of Teke-Deressi, and their advance had been checked by a detachment sent out against them. It was also stated that a detachment sent out from Erzerum had thrown back the enemy a few kilometers beyond Ilidja. Meanwhile we heard that on February 26th the Armenian detachment at Teke-Deressi had been attacked, and that

********

The Russian sources cited above are, by no means, all we have. Most of the Russian archives are currently being studied by Turkish scholars. You would be amazed to read what kind of dirty scheming, backstabbing, and treason were in the works as evident in letters written by Armenian revolutionaries and clergy to the Russian Czar, governors, military commanders, and others. I would not have to add a single comment on any of them as they are so revealing... and so disgusting.

How can a neighbor do this to another neighbor?

And then cry genocide when the neighbor defends self and retaliates?

How long can the Armenians sustain their blatant lies?

You stated:

You are again assuming you speak for Turkey. Your views are not the consensus of the Turkish citizens. More-so as I stated above, they were not educated on the Armenian genocide so they can not formulate there own opinions based on Turkish propoganda which you advocate.

Contrary views that oppose your denialist positions are hardly welcome in Turkey from the Turkish Government.

Scholars, authors, humanrights advocates, minorities and even people of Turkish decent know this to be true.

As I stated before they have been subject to persecution, threats, and death!

----

keep posting...

Thankfully, denialists are getting smaller in number, facing the truth of their barbaric history they have little alternative then to realize it is a State grown from the ashes of over a million Armenian genocide victims. A state grown from the pillage, and plunder of it's own citizens. A State grown out of a false sense of pride when realized they have little to be proud of during it's founding, continuing to denying it's attrocities.

There is more hope when overlooking the lack of human decency by denialists. As I stated before more people of Turkish decent are expressing their sympathy toward the survivors of the horrible genicidal crimes committed by their Turkish ancestors more specifically the policies of the Ottoman Turkish government.

Attacking the victims as victimizers and blaming Armenians for killing millions of Turks, goes beyound the pale of any moral fiber humanity! An increasing number of Turks have been acknowledging recently the facts of the Armenian Genocide and openly expressing their sympathy toward the survivors of the horrible crime committed by their ancestors. These acts of acknowledgement contribute to humanity unlike the denialists who are proudly without compassion killing the victims of genocide twice, also known as a double killing.

The Turkish denialist agents are thankfully becoming less in number, however more misdirected and stubborn in their refusal to face the facts of their bloody history.
Most are blinded by ultranationalistic pride, which shileds them from coming to terms with its past attrocities.

The Turkish parliament has even adopted new laws that criminalize the acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide, and denialists proport that they have freedoms of speech on the subject. This flies in the face of "censorship" in the United States by agents of Turkey's denialist policies!

Turkey is hardly a a democracy. The citizens of Turkey have very little influence on the policies of their government.

The following very touching article by Ahmet Altan, a righteous Turkish writer, reflects how much Turkey must evolve before it can be classified among the ranks of civilized European nations. This article, translated into English, is simply titled "Genocide.":

I would like to ask you a very simple, ordinary question. Would you wish to have been an Armenian in 1915? No, you wouldn't. Because you now know that you would have been killed.

Please stop arguing about the number of murdered or the denials or the attempts to replace pain with statistics. No one is denying that Armenians were murdered, right? It may be 300,000, or 500,000, or 1 million, or 1.5 million. I don't know which number is the truth, or whether anyone knows the exact number.

What I do know is that there are dead people and suffering behind these numbers. We forget that we are really talking about human beings when we are passionately debating the numbers. Those numbers cannot make us understand the murdered babies, women, the elderly, the teenage boys and girls.

If we leave these numbers aside, and if we allow ourselves to hear the story of only one of these murders, I am sure that even those of us who get enraged when they hear the words "Armenian Genocide" will feel the suffering and have tears in their eyes. Because they will then realize that we are talking about human beings.

When we hear about a baby snatched from a mother's lap and killed by being smashed against the rocks, or a youth shot to death beside a hill, or an old woman strangled by her tender neck, even the most cold- hearted among us will be ashamed to say, "Yes, but they killed Turks too."

Most of these people killed no one. These people became the innocent victims of a crazed government -- established on murder -- whose ruthlessness is only matched by its incompetence. This bloody insanity was so barbaric that we can neither take pride in nor be a part of. This was a slaughter that we should be ashamed of, and, if possible, share in the pain.

I understand that the word "genocide" has a damningly critical importance, based on the fact that the Armenians, leaving aside the tragedy of their ancestors, continuously exclaim, "Accept the Genocide," and similarly, the Turks, while acknowledging that hundreds of thousands were killed, say "No, it was not at all a genocide."

And yet, this word is not that important for me, no matter how significant it is in politics and diplomacy. What is more important for me is the fact that many innocent people were killed so barbarically.

When I see the shadow that this great tragedy casts on our times, I see another great injustice done to the Armenians.

Our guilt today is, not allowing the Armenians even to grieve for their cruelly killed relatives and parents. Which Armenian living in Turkey today can openly grieve and commemorate a murdered grandmother, grandfather or uncle?

I have no part in the terrible sin committed by the Ittihadists, but the sin of not allowing grief for the dead belongs to all of us today. Do you really want to commit this sin?

Is there anyone among us who would not shed tears for a family attacked and killed at home in the middle of the night, or for a little girl having lost her mother is left all alone in the hell called "deportation," or for her white-bearded Armenian grandfather shot to death?

Whether you call it genocide or not, hundreds of thousands of human beings were murdered. Hundreds of thousands of lives were extinguished.

The fact that some Armenian fighters also killed some Turks cannot be an excuse to mask the truth from our eyes.

Every human being of conscience is capable of grieving for the murdered Armenians, Turks, and Kurds. If you ask me, we all should. Babies died; women and old people died. They died tormented, crying and horrified.

Is it really so important for you what religion or race these murdered people had?

Even in these terrifying times there were Turks who risked their lives trying to rescue Armenian children. We are as much the children of these rescuers as the children of the murderers.

Instead of siding with the barbarism of the murderers, why don't we side with the rescuers' compassion, honesty, and courage? There are no more victims left to be rescued today, but there is grief to be shared and supported. What's the use of a bloody, warmongering dance around a deep pain?

Forget the numbers, forget the Armenians, forget the Turks. Just think of the babies, teenagers, women and the elderly with broken necks, slashed bellies, and mutilated bodies. Think about these people, one by one.

If nothing moves in you when you hear a baby wail as her mother is murdered, I have nothing to say to you. Add my name then to the list of "traitors."

Because I am ready to share with the Armenians the grief of so many people killed. Because I believe there is something yet to be rescued from all these meaningless and callous arguments. That something is called "humanity."

------

With that I will no longer dignify your fruitless denialist campaign with anymore responses, most of which were assumed racially charged, bigoted opinions which did not dignify any response.

Our readers (I'm sure) by now have accuratly gathered an assesment of your views, and mine.

I dought your book will come out with any interesting revelation which many have not heard before from the denialist camp.

Now you stand to profit from your denialist campaign, by writing a book.

Whos going to buy it, the same ones who bought Hitlers book "Mein Kampf" I would imagine. I'm sure they have similar like minded views of blinding pride.

-
Publishers believe that more than 100,000 copies have been sold in the past two months in 2005.

-----

keep posting...

My Armenian lobbyist friend who loves duping the public by hiding behind a fictitious "Anglicized" first name repeated his previous charges. Responding to them is to bring the level of my writing down. I will continue to explore new horizons and offer new data to fair-minded truth-seekers.

I have already presented above Armenian, America, British, French, and Russian sources all of which categorically reject the baseless Armenian claims of genocide. They all seem to point to Armenian terrorism and fifth column activities along with armed revolts scattered over a wide territory for decades leading up to 1915 TERESET (temporary resettlement).

Today, I will produce a stunning letter from SWEDISH archives and show you how a Swedish officer traveling with the Armenians during the height of TERESET , up and down the Euphrates river, saw nothing of the kind of mayhem Armenians are known to tell about to anyone who will listen. It is absolutely shocking because, listening to Armenians, " Euprates river was red with corpses and the fish were spitting out Armenian eyes..." The Swedish eyewitness aays he did not even see a single corpse in the two weeks in the fall of 1915 when he was traveling with the Armenian resettlers.

This revelation is followed by exposing of yet another Armenian falsification, this time foiled in Sweden. There is an ageless, timeless Turkish saying: " Even water may sleep, but enemies, never". This phrase must have been about the Armenian Diaspora.

The Swedish archives below are one more nail in the coffin of the Armenian lies and deception.

And I haven't even scratched the surface yet in the past six months. I was just warming-up......J

***

Dear Readers, if you think you have seen and heard all, think again!

Fasten your seat belts for what follows below, as it will be revealed here for the first time, quite possibly in the whole world, since the original piece was published in 1917, and almost certainly will blow the A.F.A.T.H. lobby away...

The entire credit for this incredible piece of research goes to my good friend Dr. Erdal, a Turkish-American scholar. My hat is off to this gentleman. I am proud to know Dr. Erdal from my high school years in the late 1960s at the Robert Academy of Istanbul, Turkey, and lucky to have caught up with him again many years later in America.

While I am proud to be Erdal's school mate, I am embarrassed and ashamed to be Orhan Pamuk's classmate (1966-1970), who chose to sell his soul -- and heritage -- to get the Nobel Prize. While Pamuk insulted the entire Turkish nation without knowing the first thing about the facts surrounding the Turkish-Armenian civil war during WWI, Dr. Erdal went out of his way to unearth this magnificent piece of evidence single handedly, which literally buries the ethocidal campaigns of the A.F.A.T.H. community.

A Swedish officer, WHO ACTUALLY TRAVELED UP AND DOWN THE EUPHRATES RIVER WITH THE ARMENIAN REFUGEES DURING THE FALL OF 1915, the highlight of the so-called genocide, saw absolutely no Armenian bodies floating in the river or the river reddened due to Armenian blood, as usually told by the sensation-seeking AFATH crowds to the unsuspecting media. I will not spoil the wonderful surprise by telling you all about this article; you must read it in its entirety below...

Please note that the Swedish officer does say that he had witnessed hunger, starvation, and suffering among the Armenians, which no one in the Turkish camp, including this writer, disputes. What we, in the Turkish camp, are saying is that the Christian suffering described here or elsewhere in the AFATH literature, can not be viewed as separate from what was experienced by the Muslim inhabitants of the area and era, which was, tragedy-for-tragedy, casualty-for-casualty, loss-for-loss, four times worse than the Armenian suffering. If one takes into account, as any decent, self-respecting, and fair-minded individual must, this "simple-but-rock-solid fact", then one can not talk about a genocide. Case closed!

What's more, the suffering that befell on all the inhabitants of Anatolia, without discrimination as to the race, ethnicity, color, or creed of the inhabitants, was the direct result of the greed, terror, armed uprisings, brutal betrayals, and supreme treason by the Armenian revolutionaries, which were passionately supported and viciously manipulated by Russia, France, and Britain, for their own selfish imperialist interests. Those European powers had themselves been locked in a three way contest, to see who will pick up the largest slice of the pie that was the vast lands of the tri-continent Ottoman Empire.

Europe rained death and destruction on Anatolia during WWI and conducted at least part of this unspeakable campaign of death and destruction using proxies, like the Ottoman-Armenians, (and Ottoman-Greeks, among other Ottoman-Christians), causing neighbor-killing-neighbor, and destroying a millennium of peaceful co-habitation by the Turks and Armenians, or Muslims and Christians, in Anatolia. The U.S. Protestant missionaries also contributed to this human tragedy first with their anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim teachings during 1860-1915 and then with their biased reports of Armenian suffering from Anatolia during 1914-1918, which the NYT gladly printed word-for-word, without once checking their validity or seeking inputs or rebuttals from the Turkish side for balance and fairness. While the missionaries filed and the NYT printed 145 anti-Turkish stories in the year 1915 alone, for example, there was not a single report mentioning the four times worse Muslim suffering ... or a single refutation or rebuttal by the Turks... Some journalistic ethics! Some war coverage! (This anti-Turkish bias, unfortunately, seems to continue, at some level, even today.)

And if those wartime measures were not taken when they were, then the undersigned would probably not be writing these lines today or there would not be half million Turkish-Americans... or Five million Turkish-Europeans... or Seventythree million Turkish citizens of Turkey... As most of us Turks would have met the same tragic end as my paternal and maternal grandfathers did at the hands of the Ottoman-Armenians and Ottoman-Greeks, namely, extermination and burial in unmarked mass graves of unknown location (as in the village of "Kirlikova."!)

Don't think for a moment that my suffering is unique; not at all. There is no family in Turkey today whose grandparents had not been devastated by the WWI. Our last names tell our tragic stories and we need no lessons from anyone about man's inhumanity to man. I am a product, like many Turks, of an ignored and untold genocide; that of the Turks. Yet, in all these years, I have not read a single word about my suffering in any of the AFATH accounts... All I see is an unfortunate and relentless barrage of typical Crusader bias, constantly parroting the Armenian side of the tragedy, and drilling into the hearts and minds of unsuspecting readers the notion of "poor, starving Armenians" and "barbarous Turk" clichés, with zero respect for fairness, balance, or truth. And then they wonder: "Why is this issue not resolved in 90 years?" You tell me!

"The situation of the Armenians: By one who was among them. A Swedish officer, H.J. Pravitz, takes a deeper look at the statements by Mrs. Marika Stjernstedt", Nya Dagligt Allehanda, a Swedish Newspaper published in the period 1859-1944, 23 April, 1917.

Original was traced in the Swedish Royal Library, copied, and translated by Dr. Per A. Nordlund, a Swedish national, upon a personal request by his friend, Dr. Erdal, a Turkish-American, who had seen this newspaper article mentioned in a pamphlet published by the Turkish Prime Ministry: Armenians in Ottoman Documents (1915-1920), Ankara, 1995, page 179. The original newspaper clip in Swedish language along with its translation into Ottoman-Turkish can be found in the Turkish archives. But this is the first English translation.

This clipping, perhaps an old clipping from the original Swedish paper, which probably yellowed and all too brittle by now, was used as an appendix to the document number 205 in that pamphlet.. There is an Ottoman translation attached to this clipping which is further translated into today's Turkish by Mr. Mehmed Munir, the legal counselor to the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Dr. Erdal obtained and carefully guards the photocopies of the entire newspaper issue of 23 April, 1917, in case the AFATH sends a team of "seek and destroy" agents to Sweden to steal and destroy this document which very damaging to the AFATH claims of Ottoman Army excesses during the relocation.

Dr. Nordlund, the translator, was a believer in Armenian claims of genocide until he read this article. He was so moved by the fairness and truth in this article which he translated from Swedish into English, that he told Dr. Erdal that he changed his position now.

The writer sends his heartfelt thanks to both Dr. Erdal and Dr. Nordlund for their selfless work which will revolutionize our task of exposing the ethocidal behavior of some of those A.F.A.T.H.-owned-and-operated "genocide scholars".
*******************

Legend:
AAG = The alleged Armenian genocide
AFATH = Armenian Falsifiers and Turk Haters
NYT = The New York Times
WWI = The First World War
Ethocide = Extermination of ethics via pre-meditated and malicious mass deception for political, economic, social, and/or moral gains (this term is created for the Armenian attempts to deceive the world since 1915)

*******************

THE SITUATION OF THE ARMENIANS: BY ONE WHO WAS AMONG THEM

By H.J. Pravitz , Nya Dagligt Allehanda , 23 April, 1917

H.J. Pravitz takes a deeper look at the statements previously had been made by Mrs. Marika Stjernstedt, Nya Dagligt Allehanda, a Swedish Newspaper published in the period 1859-1944.

..............................

"...Recently returned home from abroad I have right now - i.e. somewhat late - had the opportunity to look at two Swedish booklets on the Armenian issue. "Sven Hedin - adelsman" [Sven Hedin -a nobility], by Ossiannilsson and "Armeniernas fruktansvärda läge" [the terrible situation of the Armenians], by Marika Stjernstedt. The former book went immediately in the waste basket. In all its poorly hidden appreciation of the title character, it annoyed me more than a main article in Dagens Nyheter. The latter, which seemed spirited by the compassion for the suffering Armenians, I have read repeatedly, and it is really this and its inaccuracies that my article is about.

I dare to claim, that hardly any other Swede has had the opportunity like me, to thoroughly and closely study the misery among the Armenians, since I now for about a month have traveled right among all the emigrating poor people. And this, during the right time, fall 1915, during which the alleged brutalities, according to both writers, were particularly bad.

I want to hope, that what I am describing below, which are my own experiences, will have the purpose to remove the impression of inhumanity and barbarity from the Turkish and German side, which is easily induced by the reading of the two booklets mentioned above.

If I understand the contents of the books correctly, both writers want to burden the Turks as well as the Germans with deliberate assaults or even cruelties.

My position as an imbedded eyewitness gives me the right and duty to protest against such claims, and the following, based on my experiences, will support and strengthen this protest.

Despite the fact that I was and am such a pronounced friend of Germany and its allies, which is consistent with the position of a servant of a neutral country, I started my journey from Konstantinopel (Istanbul - EK) through the Asian Turkey, with a certain prejudiced point of view, partly received from American travelers, about the persecution of the Armenians by their Turkish masters. My Lord, which misery I would see, and to which cruelties I would be a witness! And although my long service in the Orient has not convinced me that the Armenians, despite their Christianity, are any of God's best children, I decided to keep my eyes open to see for myself to which extent the rumors about Turkish assaults are true and the nameless victims were telling the truth.

I sure got to view misery, but planned cruelties? Absolutely nothing.

This is precisely why it has appeared to me to be necessary to speak up.

To start with, it is unavoidable to state, that a transfer of the unreliable Armenian elements from the northern parts of the Ottoman Empire to the south was done by the Turkish government due to compulsory reasons.

It should have been particularly important to remove, from the Erzeroum district, all these settlers, who only waited for a Russian invasion to join the invading army against the hated local legal authority. When Erzeroum fell in February 1916, an Armenian, with whom I just shared Russian imprisonment, uttered something I interpreted as 'It would have fallen way earlier if we had been allowed to stay'. That a country like Turkey, threatened and attacked by powerful external enemies, is trying to secure itself against cunning internal enemies, no one should be able to blame her.

I think it points to a misconception when one claims that the Armenians are living under the uninterrupted distress of some sort of Turkish slavery. There are peoples that have it worse. Or what about Indian Kulis and Bengalis under British rule, and the Persian nationalists in Azerbaijan under the Russians' - "penétration pacificue", and the negroes in Belgian Congo, and the Indians in the Kautschuk district in French Guyana. All these, not to mention many others, seem to me, are victimized to a higher degree and more permanently than the Armenians. I guess technically, one can say that a longer lasting but milder persecution is less bearable to endure than a bloody but quick act of despotism, as in (Ottoman) assaults of the kind that from time to time put Europe's attention on the Armenian issue. Apart from these periodical so-called massacres, the reason of which could to a large degree be ascribed to the Armenians themselves, I do think that the (Armenians) are treated reasonably well.

The (Armenians) have their own religion, their own language, both in speaking and writing, their own schools etc.

As far as the much discussed major Armenian migration is concerned, I am the first to agree that the attempts of the Turkish side to reduce the difficulties of the refugees left a lot to be desired. But I emphasize again, in the name of fairness, that considering the difficult situation in which Turkey, as the target of attack from three powerful enemies, was in and it was, in my opinion, almost impossible for the Turks, under these circumstances, to have been able to keep up an orderly assistance activity.

I have seen these poor refugees, or "emigrants", to use Tanin's words, seen them closely. I have seen them in the trains in Anatolia, in oxen wagons in Konia and elsewhere, by foot in uncountable numbers up in the Taurus mountains, in camps in Tarsus and Adana, in Aleppo, in Deir-el-Zor and Ana.

I have seen dying and dead along the roads - but among hundreds of thousands there must, of course, occur casualties. I have seen childrens' corpse, shredded to pieces by jackals, and pitiful individuals stretch their bony arms with piercing screams of "ekmek" (bread).

But I have never seen direct Turkish assaults against the ones hit by destiny. A single time I saw a Turkish gendarme in passing hit a couple of slow moving people with his whip; but similar things have happened to me in Russia, without me complaining, not then, nor later.

In Konia, there lived a French woman, madame Soulié, with family and an Italian maid. They lived there, despite the war, and the Turks did them no harm. And as far as the Germans stationed in the town are concerned, she called them 'our angels'. 'They give all they have to the Armenians!'. Such evidence of German readiness to sacrifice I established everywhere the Germans were.

In Aleppo, I lived by the Armenian Báron, the owner of a large hotel. He did not tell me about any Turkish cruelties, although we talked a lot about the situation of his fellow citizens. We also talked about Djemal Pasha, who would come the day after and with whom I would meet. Báron expressed himself very positively about this man, who by the way, least of all seemed like an executioner.

In Aleppo, I hired an Armenian servant, who then during a couple of months was my daily company. Not a word has he told me about Turkish cruelties, neither in Aleppo nor in his home town of Marash or elsewhere. I must unconditionally believe in exaggerations from Mrs. Stjernstedt's side and I do not put one bit of confidence in the Armenian authorities she claims to refer to.

On page 44, Mrs. Stjernstedt writes about (the town of) Meskene and an Armenian doctor Turoyan. I was in Meskene right when he was supposed to have been there. I looked carefully around everywhere for historical landmarks, since Alexander the great crossed the Euphrates (river) here, and the old testament also talks about this place. There was not a sign of Armenian graves and not of any Armenians either, except for my just mentioned servant. I consider Mr. Turayan's evidence very questionable, and I even dare to doubt that this man, if he exists, was ever there during the mentioned time. If the conditions in Meskene really were as he claims, will anyone then believe that the suspicious Turks would have sent an Armenian up there with a "mission from the government"?

For fourteen days, I followed the Euphrates; it is completely out of the question that I during this time would not have seen at least some of the Armenian corpses that, according to Mrs. Stjernstedt's statements, should have drifted along the river en masse at that time. A travel companion of mine, Dr. Schacht, was also travelling along the river. He also had nothing to tell when we later met in Baghdad.

In summary, I think that Mrs. Stjernstedt, somewhat uncritically, has accepted the hair-raising stories from more or less biased sources, which formed the basis for her lecture.

By this, I do not want to deny the bad situation for the Armenians, which probably can motivate the collection initialized by Mrs. Stjernstedt.

But I do want to, as far as it can be considered to be within the powers of an eyewitness, deny that the regular Turkish gendarme forces, who supervised the transports, are guilty of any cruelties.

Later on, in a different format, I want to impartially and neutrally like now treat the Armenian issue, but at the moment, may the adduced be enough.

Rättvik, April 1917

HJ Pravitz.

*******************

The following is a summary translation focusing on the AAG only and not a word for word translation. Please note that there is an Armenian behind this plot, too, like in every other case.

If one cares to research all the resolutions in all the states or countries which recognize the AAG, one will see that ALL of the cases involve Armenian activists, lobbysists, financiers, politicians, and/or pressure groups behind them, no exceptions!

This is because no reasonable person, in his right mind, would go out of his/her way to ignore the suffering of one side and totally grieve the suffering of the other, especially if the former is four times worse and the whole tragedy was caused and started by the latter.

.....................

"SWEDISH PARLIAMENT CORRECTS ITS EARLIER DECISION; SAYS GENOCIDE DID NOT HAPPEN"

By Serkan Demirtas, Cumhuriyet, 27 March 2002

Cumhuriyet is a Turkish daily newspaper published since 1923 in Ankara, Turkey

"... Swedish Parliament admitted that they made a mistake in the year 2000 by recognizing the AAG and basing their decision on the UN resolutions of similar recognition . They have since determined that the UN had never had such resolutions.

The Swedish Parliament declared that no pronouncements can be made on the alleged, pre-1948 genocide of Armenians, Assyrians, and Keldanis, and the issue should be left up to the historians. By resolving that the genocide convention of 1948 is not retroactive, the Swedish Parliament also gave support to the Turkish position.

The resolution was introduced by Murad Artin, an Armenian member of the Swedish Parliament, Foreign Relations Committee, who belongs to a leftist party. After deliberations, the committee offered the following recommendations to the general assembly:

· No official Swedish position has ever been formulated which recognizes the events during the Ottoman Empire as genocide;

· Our committee, during its deliberations of the resolution dated and numbered 1999/2000:U651, made a reference to a UN resolution in 1985, recognizing the treatment of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire at the beginning of the 20th century as genocide. Later, it was determined that no such U.N. resolution was passed in 1985 or in any other year. Consequently, our committee should have never formulated their statement the way it did.

· Our committee is of the opinion that it is important to discuss these events openly. For this to happen, unconditional historical researches must be conducted.

***

There is another saying in Turkish: " Liar's candle lights until dark." It is getting dark for the Armenian liars and there will be no light for them...

The politics of discrimination and mass deception

Turkish suffering caused by Armenians and Armenian armed revolts, treason,
and terrorism all ignored to substantiate charges of genocide. Armenian writers consistently show how little diaspora Armenians and their
sympathizers know and understand Turkey and how biased and bigoted they can
be about Turkish history. The articles posted above by one Armenian (though hiding behind an Anglicized name and a fake personality) simply regurgitates same old,
bogus Armenian claims from one angle or anothetr. Instead of trying million
different angles, Armenians should try the one angle that counts: a verdict
by a competent tribunal, after due process, where Turkish views are also
taken into account, as clearly set forth in the U.N. definition of the word
genocide.

I am the son of a sole survivor of a Turkish village. My father, as a one
year old baby, was whisked at the last minute to the relative safety of
Istanbul, the capital of the Ottoman Empire. All we know about his past is
what was hastily scribbled on a piece of crumpled, old paper , pinned on his
tiny baby clothes: "Akif's son Ratip. Born Kirlikova. 1911." We still do
not know where his parents, relatives, and the rest of the entire population
of the village is buried, although we suspect it has to be around the
village of Kirlikova, somewhere in northern Greece, hence my last name.
That's my father's side. My mother's story is just as tragic. She is the
daughter of Turkish survivors who escaped from certain death in Skopje,
Macedonia, in 1912, with just the clothes on their backs. This makes me the
son of survivors on both paternal and maternal side. Those Turkish refugees
who escaped the horrors of ethnic cleansing and systematic massacre at the
hands of Ottoman-Christians during the Balkan wars (1912-1914) and Czarist
Russia during the World War One (1914-1918) were met with yet another cycle
of Christian violence at the hands of the Ottoman-Greeks in Western Anatolia
and the Ottoman-Armenians in eastern Anatolia. The "civilized West" openly
and actively encouraged and supported the Ottoman-Christians and
shamelessly and arrogantly looked away when the latter savagely spilled
Turkish blood, at least some of which belonged to my very own family. Just
because I or other Turks do not tell these stories often enough or at all,
it does not mean that Turkish pain, suffering, and losses stop existing.

If you think my story is unique, think again. Take my story, multiply it by
72 million (current population of Turkey) and you will hear the collective
Turkish side of the story of the World War I. All told, around 3 million
Muslims, mostly Turks, lost their lives during WWI -- as Prof. Stanford
Show of UCLA once said: "Nobody was counting." No less than 523,000 of
those Muslim dead met their tragic ends at the hands of brutal and murderous
Armenian nationalists, militarily and financially supported by Russia,
Britain, and France. Those "allies", invaded my country, Anatolia, and
rained death and destruction on my people, the Turks, between 1914-1918.
Most Ottoman-Armenians, Ottoman-Greeks, and others helped the "allies".
Consequently, there is not a single Turkish family today which is not
devastated by this calamity in some way, let alone not touched.

Note that Turks did not invade France or Britain or Russia; the allies came,
uninvited, to Anatolia. The invaded, occupied, and killed. Turks were only
defending themselves, like any self-respecting citizen anywhere would do.

Among the parties responsible for this man's inhumanity to man, I must place
two unlikely sources near the top: the U.S. Protestant missionaries and
U.S. media. Former were supposed to help all humans, but instead, they
divided and polarized them. In the end, the managed to destroy a millennium
of Christian-Muslim harmonious co-habitation in Anatolia and they did it all
"in the name of God". They did it by using the Ottoman-Christians to kill
their Ottoman-Muslim neighbors. They embellished Christian suffering, while
totally ignoring Muslims', my grandparents', suffering. And the U.S. media
published their stories without questioning or checking as if they were
gospel, fanning the flames of hatred towards Turks further (as some still
seem to do today.)

Non-combatant Ottoman-Muslim civilians in Eastern Anatolia have been rounded
up, beaten, raped, tortured, thrown down water wells, packed into mosques
and burned alive, regardless of their age or sex, by well-armed and supplied
Armenian militia. Gory photos of Ottoman-Muslim women, children, and
elderly, butchered and dismembered by Armenians, carefully archived
documents listing times of their death and locations of their mass graves,
along with survivors' eye-witness accounts, and more clearly point to an
inter-communal war between the Ottoman-Armenian and Ottoman-Muslim, mostly
Turkish, irregular forces. In other words, a civil war!

Yet, while we are bombarded with Armenian losses every single day, we hear
not a peep about the even more colossal Muslim and Turkish suffering;
body-for-body, loss-for-loss, more than four times worse than Armenian
suffering. All we hear is that Turkish government (not Turkish people)
denies the alleged Armenian genocide. Armenian armed revolts, mass murders
of Ottoman-Muslims by Armenian nationalists, Armenian terrorism that even
victimized those Ottoman-Armenians who chose to stay loyal to the Ottoman
Empire, and worst of all, supreme Armenian treason (as in joining invading
enemy armies) are all brushed aside, ignored, dismissed. And this two-way
human tragedy is reduced to one way genocide.

Why such a lopsided coverage and erroneous characterization of Christian
Armenian-Muslim Turk civil war? Could it be religious discrimination? Or
ethnic discrimination? Or both?

Truth shall endure Armenian propaganda!

Ergun Kirlikovali

Go to Turkey and try to convince the Prime Minister of Turkey of your denialist positions, before we cry over your story telling.

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

The Prime Minister of Turkey Receb Tayyip Erdogan has reportedly issued a confidential decree (No. 2007-18) on July 3 banning the use of the term "sozde" (alleged or so-called in Turkish) when referring to the Armenian Genocide. The news of this "secret" directive was made public on July 19 by Turkish "Ulusal Kanal" TV and its website and reposted on several other news sites since then. Turkish denialists reacted angrily to this decree, accusing the Prime Minister of undermining their efforts against the congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide. Turkish officials and reporters never fail to refer to the Armenian Genocide as the "so-called" or "alleged" genocide, thus casting doubt on the mass killings of Armenians by the Turkish government from 1915 to 1923. According to Erdogan's decree, henceforth the Armenian Genocide should be described in official statements and public discourse as the "events of 1915" or "Armenian allegations regarding the events of 1915".

The Prime Minister's office has reportedly sent this decree to all state institutions, including all ministries, governors, mayors, universities, courts, and the General Chief of Staff. Erdogan is said to have stated in his decree that he was taking this action on the basis of a resolution adopted by the Council of Europe in February 2005. This probably is a reference to a recommendation by several Turkish non-governmental organizations in February 2005 to "cleanse Turkish textbooks of xenophobia and ultra-nationalism". The proposal was the result of a three-year study funded by the European Commission. Ulusal Kanal explained that the Council of Europe had called on Turkey to refrain from using certain disparaging words and phrases in referring to Armenians and Greeks in Turkish textbooks.

If you believe Erdogan issued a decree like that, then you can believe the world is flat.

This is the problem with you fanatics. You take any Armenian propaganda to heart and kill for it.

Just like you lied aboiut Ataturk interview,

and the Ataturk photo doctored to replace the dogs at his feet with some severed heads claimed to belong to Armenian victims,

and the pyramid of alleged Armenian skulls which was a painting by Russian painter Vershagin and hangs in a museum in Moscow since 1870,

and the faked Talat Pasha telegrams,

and the faked Musa Dagi episode (Armenian terrorists conducting hit-and-hide first followed by hit-and-sail-away in French ships,

and a long list of lies, exaggerations, fabrications, falsifications, too long to list here...

I would not believe you Armenians if you told me 2 + 2 is 4.

You lied too much and simply destroyed your credibility...

Go cry, beg, backstab, nag, complain, bitch, demand, curse, insult, misrepresent, somewhere else.

I have had it with you liars!

The core of your words are filled with hate, no one is suprised.

Previous posts filled with just as much vitriol as the last.

I appreciate your painting of a perfect picture where the seeds of hatred originate from.

This is something of little tolerance in our society, thank God.

If you believe a Turkih Prime Minister would hint the Armenian propaganda is correct, let alone say it, much less decree it, then you can believe the world is flat.

The problem with Armenian fanatics is that they create a world around their lies and prejudices and they prefer to live in it...

I'm sure our readers are thankful to know who the fanatic is simply by reading your previous posts.

You have fallen on your proverbial sword, yet again.

How soon you forget the Armenian terrorism in our midst?

How soon you forget how you cultivate hatred by teaching Armenian children as young as seven years old, to recite hateful poems for candy money, where they utter words like "kill Turks"...

People like you, condoning hatred and terrorism on the one hand and try to rise above water like olive oil in every argument without responding to even one simple question posed (like how many Turks did Armenian kill during WWI) will never impress me...

In my view, ignoring Turkish dead at the hands of Armenian makes you racist.

Dismissing Armenian armed revolts between 1894-1915 makes you a dishonest propagandist.

Belittling and downplaying Armenian terrorism in Anatolia during 1890-1920 and in Amewrican and around the world from 1973 to present makes you a terrorist sympathizer.

Finally, denying Armenian treason (when the Armenian joined the invading enemy armies during 1914-1920)makes you a bigot.

What does one expect from a sneaky writer who hides behind a fictitious name, in the true tradition of Andonian, the-Talat-Pasha- telegram-falsifier?

A "stick man" argument of terror falls on deaf ears for people who know of the centuries of oppression and mass killing Turkey (and Ottomans) had (and has) on it's minorities.

Ottoman and current Turkish oppression of Turkeys minorities makes your points irrelevant, laughable, and blatently disgusting.

I have little hope for deniers of your ilk who continue to deface humanity.

Your denial is purely race driven. No one can find anywhere under your name, that you have a just cause for humanity if you do not help other poeple other then your own race.

This can be evidenced by searching your name finding your race based single issue denialist campaign.

Your only challenge falls within yourself, as it stands your motives are misdirected only having audience of like minded ultra-nationalists, as seen in the web sites happy to publish hate speech.

Your arguments are a detriment to civil society, and only further polarize Turkic nationalist views of Armenian genocide denial.

That was worth stating in the name of humanity and in your words, for "candy money".

I am the son of Turkish survivors, from both paternal and maternal sides, of ethnic and religious cleansing conducted in the Balkans by the Ottoman-Christias during 1911-1914.

My father's side is totally wiped out. My mother's side was lucy: only half of the family was wiped out. The other half, who barely managed to survive the Ottoman-Christian excesses in the Balkans, were met with yet another cycle of Ottoman-Christian terror and destruction in Anatolia: by Ottoman-Greeks in the West and by Ottoman-Armenians (your folks) in the East.

Please, don't talk to me about suffering, loss, death, and destruction. We learned it only too well at the hands of the likes of you... (see my column at www.turkla.com for more on Armenian art of cultivating hatred, betrayal, terrorism,falsification, self interest, lies, and more)

Take that for your candy money!

You have proved my point in your sympathy story.

Your arguments seem to be more accurately portrayed if it were Muslum vs. Christians.

It would be difficult for you to make a Muslum vs. Christian distinction in your arguements in Westernized society especially America becasue of the terrorism label. You would clearly put yourself on the wrong side of public opinion given the current violence in the Middle-East against Americans.

Al Caida more-so then Western civil society may have a sympathetic ear to your story telling.

It is clear your intentions is to combat and oppress Chiristianity just as the Ottomans and current Turks have done for centuries.

Your living in a public relations nightmare with your story telling.

You need to lead the "Sick Man of Europe" to hospice facility, he ate too many gummy bears with my candy money.

I see that my deep personal loss, pain and suffering meant nothing to you. (Why am I not surprised?)
Why should others sympathize with your "perceived" loss then?

My story is shared by most everyone in Turkey today. Go to any town, talk to any Turk, and you will hear more or less similar family tragedies. In fact, I would not be stretching the truth if I told you that you can multiply my story by 72 million and get Turkey's story. But you would not understand.

Your ignorance and bias come through in your writings. First, the Ottoman Empire was based on religion, not nationalities. There were Muslims, Christians, and Jews. Second, any attack by the West, which is predominantly Christian, on the Ottoman Empire, a predominantly Muslim empire, could, therefore, be considered a religious war, whether it was fought for land, loot, revenge, or other reasons. Third, WWI could not be considered a Christian versus Muslim, because both religions were represented in both sides of the conflict: Germans, Austrians, and Bulgarians fought on the Ottoman (Muslim side as you wish to label) and Arabs and Ghurkas (some segment of Indian Muslims) fought on the Allied side (or the Christian side as you would put it.) There is more, but I think EVEN YOU got the point... Why do you insist on misinformation when these are readily available facts?

What we saw in the Balkans was a religious war. Balkan-Ottoman-Christians (mainly Greeks, Serbs, and Bulgarians) waged a violent campaign of driving "the Turk" out of the Balkans. They killed, tortured, and otherwise terrorized the Balkan country side dotted with thousands of Turkish villages and towns (Kirlikova being one of them.) A mass exodus of Ottoman-Muslims ensued.
It was, both in scope and severity, much worse than the Ottoman State ordered, protected, unintentionally ineptly executed 1915 Armenian TERESET -temporary resettlement- still resulting in more than half a million survivors out of some 644,000 teresetters.) The Balkan-Ottoman-Christians used the term "Turk" interchangeably with the term "Muslim". Bosnians, Albanians, Pomaks, and others, were example, were not Turk by blood, but were called Turks. The Balkan-Ottoman-Christians planned to expel all the Muslims out, like Spain (and later Portugal) expelled Muslims and Jews in 1492, as a means to attain 100% Christianity in Iberia. Armenia did the same to its Muslims and Jews in both periods 1918-1920 and n 1991-2007 (and counting...) which is why Armenia is dubbed terrorist by the late Christian scholar, Samuel A. Weems in his 2002 book "Armenia: Secrets of a Christan Terrorist Nation", St. John Press, available at www.turkishforum.com. Ethnic cleansing, religious intolerance, and terrorism both at home and abroad are now the trademarks of Amenia.

Now these are the simple facts, whether you like them or not...

If you want to know what Armenians did to Jews during WWI and then again in the last 15 years, please read on:

________________________________

TURKEY AND ARMENIA: WHAT JEWS SHOULD DO
LENNY BEN-DAVID , THE JERUSALEM POST

Sep. 4, 2007
________________________________

As one of the first authors and editors of Myths and Facts, a Record of the Arab-Israeli Conflict I know what it means to instinctively jump to defend Israel's reputation. In the face of barrages of canards and accusations, we countered that Israel did not expel millions of Palestinians, did not commit wanton massacres, and did not use an omnipotent Washington lobby to subvert American interests in the Middle East.

I was one of the founders of HonestReporting.com, where we encouraged tens of thousands of activists to leap to Israel's defense when publications and networks failed to label terrorists correctly, blamed Israel unfairly or distorted Israel's defensive campaign to stop suicide bombing attacks.

Israel's defenders intuitively denounced and challenged the Ahmadinejads and David Irvings of the world, who denied the fact of a genocidal campaign against the Jews that we call the Holocaust. We recognize that these anti-Semitic deniers seek to delegitimize the Jewish state of Israel and lay the groundwork for another attempt to wipe out the Jewish people.

All nations have sacred memories and traditions surrounding their creation and their sacrifices. These are national legends that take on mythic proportions about the nations' founding fathers and the circumstances of the nations' formation. Sometimes, and often after difficult introspection, citizens recognize that their histories and heroes are not all black-and-white, and that a true national narrative involves a rich palette of greys as well. But that realization requires a national maturation, one that also demands the cognitive involvement of all parties to the narrative.

SUCH AN introspection took place among Americans in their historical narrative some 35 years ago. The publication of Dee Brown's Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee in 1970 upset a nation used to Hollywood's version of valiant and white Indian-fighters taming the Wild West. The slaughter of Native Americans - "Indians" - and the military campaigns against the Navajos, Apaches, Sioux and Cheyenne tribes between 1860 and 1880 were eventually woven into the American historical tapestry. Finally in 2004 the National Museum of the American Indian opened on the National Mall of Washington D.C.

A similar museum to the African-American experience is still missing on the Mall. While the American public obviously knew of the history of slavery in the United States and Abraham Lincoln "setting slaves free," it probably wasn't until the release of Alex Haley's Roots and its romanticized television version in the 1970s that many Americans came to grips with the nation's racist, supremacist past.

Indeed, American historians still debate the nature of the relationship between the iconic Founding Father Thomas Jefferson and his quadroon slave and purported mistress, Sally Hemings. It is difficult for some Jefferson idolaters to fathom such a pairing. Two hundred years after Jefferson and Hemings spent time together, Hemings's descendants underwent DNA testing to determine whether Jefferson sired Hemings's children.

National legends and myths are not easily shaken.

IN ISRAEL, some of our national beliefs were stirred by the so-called new historians, who challenged many of our basic historical narratives. Perhaps the Israeli public is mature enough to examine the country's origin, but the rejection of the new historians' broad-stroke claims also reflects the failure of our Palestinian interlocutors to accept the notion that our intertwined histories are not black-and-white. Most Palestinians see no grey.

"There comes a stage in any revolutionary process when the movement relaxes its hold on the official narrative," historian Benny Morris told The Washington Post earlier this year. "The difference is that when that moment came in Israel, our long struggle with the Arabs remained an existential threat, as it still does today."

For the Palestinians, their nakba is their Truth; their "right of return" is their messianic vision; and their concept of any Jewish history in the land is that it is a total fabrication. To confront such absolutist, irredentist claims, Israel's defenders cannot afford to equivocate.

AS AN adviser for five years to the Turkish embassy in Washington, until earlier this summer, I understood why the Turkish government and people jump to deny claims that their ancestors committed a "genocide" against Armenians some 90 years ago.

It occurred during a maelstrom of battles and massacres. It was allegedly carried out by founding fathers who were bringing their country into an enlightened 20th century. And it was waged against an enemy guilty of the still unspoken crime of massacring hundreds of thousands of Muslims and thousands of Jews.

Armenians and Turks see no shades of grey, and for now, at least, demands are made only of Turkey to change its monochromatic narrative.

Israel's government and Jews in the United States must be careful when treading through the minefield of Armenian claims against Turkey. Jewish leaders in Armenia reported that they have heard local claims that Jews organized the 1915 massacres of Armenians (www.eajc.org/program-art-e.php?id=39).

There are accounts of Armenian massacres, between 1914 and 1920, of 2.5 million of Armenia's Muslim population (www.cs.utah.edu/~kagano/ermeni.htm).

Recently, Mountain Jews in Azerbaijan requested assistance in building a monument to 3,000 Azeri Jews killed by Armenians in 1918 in a pogrom about which little is known (www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000730.html).

AND WITHIN our own lifetime - just some 15 years ago - Armenian troops massacred hundreds of Azeri Muslims. This from Newsweek, March 16, 1992:

"Azerbaijan was a charnel house again last week: a place of mourning refugees and dozens of mangled corpses dragged to a makeshift morgue behind the mosque. They were ordinary Azerbaijani men, women and children of Khojaly, a small village in war-torn Nagorno-Karabakh overrun by Armenian forces on Feb. 25-26. Many were killed at close range while trying to flee; some had their faces mutilated, others were scalped."

Both Turks and Armenians have their grisly tales of persecution and their vehement denials of genocidal designs. It is the task of the Jewish community to express sympathy for all the victims and outrage at all the perpetrators on both sides of the conflict. The US Congress and the Jewish community should encourage historians on both sides to objectively examine what took place.

Nations mature when they can look at themselves in the mirror and see the grey, the wrinkles and the blemishes.

The writer served as Deputy Chief of Mission in Israel's Embassy in Washington.

http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1188392527835&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Your the one who is trying to gain sympathy through story telling.

Feeble attempts to gain the sympathy does not raise crediblity to the reasons why your attempting to deny the Armenian genocide.

The facts remain although they are raising misdirected voices in your head.

Armenians did not kill your family.

Your rambling has yet to make sense.

The Balkins and the Caucuses are unrelated geographically, as well as ethnically.

Tieing various ethnicities together by religion shows that your agrueing a religious war.

In todays politics you would be seen as more of an Al Caida sympathizer.

The Ottoman Empire is long lost and has failed to take root in the Middle East as did other empires. It stands to reason why various Countries in the Middle East and the West antagonized the Ottomans in WWI.

-----------

Also, what do the Jews have to do with your misdirected adventures of Armenian genocide denial?

Why do you fail to feel compassion for other people's very real, very tragic losses?

Why do you consider my tragedy "story telling"?

If you are so cruel to my sensitivities, why should I care about yours?

Armenians did not only kill Turks and other Muslims during WWI, but also Jews. That was the point made in the article above which you pretended to have read but couldn't have, given your quick and meaningless response.

You,like most diaspora ARmenians, obviously seem at ease with your bias, bigotry, and hatred for all things Turkish.

That is why Armenia is doomed to stay as the poverty stricken , corrupt, and violent country of terrorists, beggars, and backstabbers.
Armenia's top exports: Armenian mafia and illegal aliens;top imports foreign aid and Russian guns.

It is a story isn't it?

Multiply your story by 72 million? How credible is that? Your justifing this point is an illustration of how polarized your thinking is from reality.

Your 72 million comment only further diminish your credibility, please keep posting your justification of this.

Go to Western European Countries and see what type of class your fellow Turkic people live under, before you hurl insults toward others outside your ethnicity.

As it stands your story has nothing to do with Armenians harming your family. You have yet to draw any credible reason between the Balkin conflicts and the Armenian genocide committed by the Ottoman Turkish Government.

How can you try and gain sypathy when you do not care of any race other then your own?

You are not a human rights activist. You belittle other ethnicities other then your own. You have not helped any other ethnic group undergoing genocides of today as well as years past.

You hardly seem to be "sensitive" in any way toward humanity by your words and actions.

You can hardly be sincere in gaining value toward human life if you can not go beyound the values of others outside your race.

Find "sensitiviy" on websites happy to publish your nationalist views as can be evidenced by web searching your name.

You seem to unwittingly be working against humanity then for it.

You have not responded to my simple questions:

Why do you fail to feel compassion for other people's very real, very tragic losses?

Why do you consider my tragedy "story telling"?

If you are so cruel to my sensitivities, why should I care about yours?

Genocide claims are bogus. You know it, I know it. You can fool others, but not me or any other victims of ARmenian terrorism and violence: Turks, Kurds, Azeris, Georgians, Jews, and more...

Human tragedy? Yes.

Genocide? No.

You are describing a story so a decription of it is "story telling", plain and simple. Your filters see something more or less then what I describe, that's your challenge to overcome.

I never asked you to be sensitive to anything. Nor do I expect you to be sensitive to human rights issues.

I have not disclosed personal tragedy stories to gain sympathy from readers as you have attempted.

You feel the need to gain sypathy from our readers, that's your perogative.

Most would have to question your sencerity toward human life when you deny killing of people outside of your own race.

I don't think you understand the blatent hypocracy your living, and I don't expect you to learn anything new either.

Compassion, understanding, and sensitivety have no meaning from your perspective, they are just words. I'm sure our readers have come to this conclusion many posts ago.

See how quickly and insensitively you dismiss others' pain and suffering?

Other human suffering appaently is just meanignless "story telling" to you... It is "seeking sympathy"... It is soemthing to be ignored and ridiculed...

I did not expect any different from you, anyway. Really. My point was to prove to third party readers, if there are any, jut how cruelArmenians can be to others. We, Turks, know all too well how Armenian double standards, selective morality, and selfish interests outweigh any human consideration... Case closed.

Next, I would like to offer the following thoughts in the hopes of showing how American interests and Armenian interests diametricaly oppose each other in the "alleged" genocide resolution, HR 106, currently rammed through the congress by irresponsoble politicians:

**************

JUDGMENT TIME : Should America recognize an Armenian Genocide?
By Barbara Lerner
National Review Online, September 7, 2007
Calls for America to recognize the Armenian tragedy of 1915 as genocide, and to condemn the Turks for it, grow louder, more insistent, and more varied by the week.
The Armenian lobby, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), and a handful of other longtime congressional supporters are no longer the only people calling for this recognition. They are joined not just by the usual old secular human-rights crusaders of the Left like Noam Chomsky and Robert Fisk, but also by new voices from the Right -- including some I respect. Should we do it? Is it really beyond dispute that the Ottoman Turks were guilty of genocide in World War I?
Most Europeans have already decided that Turkey is guilty as charged. In France, arguing that the Turks might be guilty of anything less inhuman than a deliberate, calculated, genocide is considered a hate crime; Princeton historian Bernard Lewis was convicted of it and fined a nominal sum. Here in America and in Britain, other historians and scholars who argue that the facts don't justify the genocide label -- men like Guenter Lewy, Edward J. Erickson, Andrew Mango, Justin McCarthy, Stanford Shaw, Norman Stone, and Michael Gunter -- are regularly compared to Holocaust deniers like David Irving and Ernst Zundel, and dismissed as "genocide deniers."
On many blogs and websites, Armenians often accuse these scholars of being part of a Jewish and/or Zionist conspiracy, because Israel has always steadfastly rejected the genocide charge, as Turkey's own Jewish citizens do. In America, all of the existing long-established Jewish organizations also reject it (that is, until last month when one major American Jewish organization capitulated under mounting pressure).
Not all Turks reject the genocide charge. A few transnationally acclaimed Turks, like Nobel prize-winning novelist Orhan Pamuk, pride themselves on accepting the judgment that Turkey was guilty of genocide in World War I, butthe vast majority of Turks reject that label. They don't deny the fact that hellish things were done to Armenians in their country in the hellish World War I years, when much of Anatolia became a bloody battleground and mass graveyard for everyone caught up in it, civilians no less than soldiers. No honest Turk or legitimate scholar denies that. The fight is about whether genocide is an accurate or fair characterization of the Turkish response to the situation that confronted them in 1915.
Turks say it's neither fair nor accurate, and feel they are the victims of a well-orchestrated, one-sided, Western smear campaign. They see the accusation of genocide as an attempt to resurrect old stereotypes about "the terrible Turk," to demonize their early 20th-century Ottoman forbears, and to pin a badge of inferiority on Turks today. Turkey's newly reelected AKP government has long been committed to meeting Europe's standards for Turkey's admission to the European Union. It has already accepted many other allegedly superior European standards and judgments, some gladly, others reluctantly. So far, it has refused to bow on this one.
In the United States, the Bush adminstration has also refused to bow to the European judgment, but support for Senate and House Resolutions recognizing the Armenian genocide is building. The growing numbers of Americans who campaign for genocide recognition claim that if we are to retain any moral credibility in the world, it is past time for us to join the international moral consensus against Turkey; shameful of us to hold back for prudential reasons. They argue with great passion, that a fundamental moral principle is at stake here because the Turks in World War I were, in all essential respects, comparable to Germans in World War II; and that Armenians then were comparable to the Jews of the Holocaust, a quarter of a century later. The inescapable conclusion, they insist, is that common decency requires us to condemn the Turks as we condemned the Nazis.
Americans who take a public stand against the increasingly popular genocide recognition movement, arguing that it would be a serious mistake for us to endorse it, generally prefer to sidestep the moral question altogether. Their focus is on the geo-strategic significance of such a move, and its implications for our national security. In fact, there is a strong moral case to be made against the genocide resolution, because there are major differences -- between Nazis and Turks, and between Armenians and Jews -- that any fair-minded judge would feel honor-bound to take into account before passing moral judgment on the Turks.
First, though, I want to present at least a brief, partial summary of the geostrategic argument, because genocide zealots who indignantly refuse to even consider the geostrategic argument are not displaying a higher morality. Rather, they are being irresponsible. There are times when we should give moral considerations precedence over prudential ones, but there is never a time when we should do so blindly, without estimating the cost and deciding if we are honestly willing to pay it. The risk here is that endorsing the genocide resolution will turn what is already a growing rift between America and Turkey, into a historic parting of the ways between our two nations.
To make even a rough estimate of the cost -- to our position in the world and our national security -- of such a radical realignment, Americans need to know more than many zealots seem to know about Turkey today: about her geostrategic position, and about what the longtime alliance between our two countries has meant, to us, to the Turks, and to the world.
Turkey today is an 84-year-old republic with a population of some 75 million, and a rapidly expanding modern economy; an economy based on the growing education, skills, and know-how of its people, not the luck of oil.
Turkey has one of the biggest, best-trained militaries in the world. It is a long-time NATO ally -- the only NATO ally with a population that is 99-percent Muslim. Geographically, it sits atop a strategic-ally, vital world crossroads. For half of a century, it has held the line with us against both Communist and Islamist aggression, sending its soldiers to fight and die alongside ours, on battlefields from Korea to Afghanistan. Unlike our other NATO allies, Turkey did all this with the Soviet Union, as well as a number of Islamist states, sitting right on her borders.
For many decades, Turkey's alliance with America was an especially close one, not just in NATO but in areas far beyond it, to our mutual benefit, in the Middle East and elsewhere. Today, that alliance is seriously strained and in danger of breaking apart altogether. Many Americans know that part of the tension between us stems from the fact that Turkey opposed our invasion of Iraq in 2003. Many Americans feel that we have as much reason to be angry about that split as they do.
Many fewer Americans understand that ordinary Turks aren't simply nursing a grievance over past disagreements about Iraq. Their anger and pain is a response to what is going on in their own country today -- to the reality that members from the PKK, a Kurdish terrorist group that finds sanctuary in Northern Iraq, keep sneaking across the border, blowing up innocent civilians in Turkish cities and killing Turkish soldiers on Turkish soil.
Turks are angry that our Kurdish allies in Iraq refuse to restrain the PKK and sometimes even threaten to unleash further PKK violence if Turkey balks at Kurdish government demands. They are angry and hurt that we refuse to seriously pressure the Kurds, even when the weapons the PKK uses to kill Turks are American weapons. They are angry and frustrated that our diplomats repeatedly warn the Turkish military against taking any cross-border military action to put an end to the aggression themselves.
Popular grief and anger builds as the Turkish death toll rises, week after week, feeding into a growing Islamist trend in Turkey, as witnessed by the fact that Turkey is no longer governed by any of its old secular parties. It is now instead governed by what the EU and trans-nationals everywhere are pleased to call "a moderate Islamic party." This party not only embraces the EU, but also has much closer relations with the Arab world than any previous government of the Turkish Republic Ataturk foundedin 1923.
All this leaves our traditional, longtime Turkish friends -- pro-American, Ataturk-style, secular Republican nationalists -- between a rock and a hard place. They strongly oppose the growing power of Islam in Turkey, as well as Turkey's increasing turn to the East, but they are as dismayed as other Turks at our unwillingness to do what needs to be done to stop PKK attacks, or to allow the Turkish military to stop them.
They are equally dismayed by the growing western attempt to brand Turkey as a genocidal nation. Still reeling from the AKP's latest electoral victory, the enthusiastic embrace of the AKP government by the EU and much of the American press, and by widespread western attempts to portray the AKP's Turkish opponents as anti-democratic elitists, they feel betrayed abroad and on the defensive at home. All things considered, this doesn't look like a propitious moment for America to take a stand on the Armenian genocide question.
This is a serious argument that deserves to be taken seriously, but the moral argument is equally serious and deserves to be addressed in an equally serious way. To do that, we cannot focus only on the main similarity between Jews in Germany and Armenians in Turkey: the terrible tragedies both groups endured at the hands of their countrymen. We must take an honest look at the main differences as well.

**************
-- Barbara Lerner is a frequent NRO contributor.

Your the one who uses defamatory, slanderous remarks toward others outside your race.

I believe you forgot what you previously posted:

"...poverty stricken , corrupt, and violent country of terrorists, beggars, and backstabbers."

Your filled with hate yet you are trolling for sympathy? You can not have it both ways.

-----------

You're reverting back to your old ways, cutting and pasting, again.

Are you attempting to build some sort of credibility, as well as sympathy?

We have clearly established here, from your own pen, that other human suffering is meanignless "story telling" to you... It is no more than "seeking sympathy"... It is something to be ignored and ridiculed. You must live with this shame now...

Here is some food for thought:

**************

From www.yunesx.com, an appeal to the journalist, politicians and the non-governmental organisations.

A PROPOSED FIRST STEP FOR SOLVING THE ARMENIAN ISSUE AND
THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE DECEITFUL AND HURTFUL HOUSE RESOLUTION – 106

9 September 2007

It seems that Turkey is up against the whole western world in trying to convince their people that the death of Armenians, following their rebellions before and during the First World War and during their re-location in 1915, cannot be labeled as genocide and that hundreds of thousands of Moslems were also killed by the Armenian guerrillas during the conflict. Many conferences were held over the years on all aspects of this issue, including several at the Turkish Grand National Assembly, without really discussing and reaching a consensus on how to respond to the allegations, although most Turks believe that this issue was solved with the signing of the Kars, Gumru, Moscow Agreements in the early 20s and the Lausanne Treaty in 1923 and therefore do not get concerned on the recognition of this issue abroad.

During a symposium held in Kayseri in 2006, Turkish Armenian Patriach Mesrob Mutafyan II stated that both the Armenians and Turks should acknowledge each other’s responsibilities. He then criticized the great powers of the time since they all had a part in the creation and the continuation of this issue. To this criticism, one should also add the Armenian Church itself, the Near East Foundation, and the Missionaries, who were also responsible for the infusion of nationalism among the Ottoman Armenians and the encouragement of their uprising. This is what a former teacher from a high school established by the Missionaries stated a few years ago in response to an article ‘’The Armenian Allegations and the Mythical genocide’’:

‘’Thank you for being willing to share your article with us. You’ve addressed a very difficult question as well as anyone we know. Congratulations from both of us. We agree that all of us—including Christian missionaries to the Ottoman Empire and to Turkey—need to acknowledge that wrongs were done to all sides during the early 20th century. We need to ask forgiveness of each other. Then we need to find ways now to be friends. None of these is an easy step; the hurts are real, even if some of the causes may be dubious. For us, the greatest reason for friendship and healing is that the alternative is grossly destructive.’’

In addition to the Armenian Patriarch and the former (American missionary school) teacher, many organizations and individuals have also stated that western powers and certain civic organizations had a lot to do with the creation of the Armenian issue and the firing of the ‘’First Shot’’ by the Armenian guerilla fighters for an independent (Armenian) state on lands where (Armenians) were not the majority. Prof. Dr. Justin McCarthy has presented detailed information on the first uprisings of some Armenian groups as early as in the 17th and 18th centuries and published his findings in an article ‘’First Shot’’, often ignored by the Armenians and their supporters around the world. As concerned Turkish-Americans, who have been following this issue in the US with frequent visits to Turkey since 1965 when the first commemoration of the alleged Armenian genocide took place at the Riverside Church in New York City, and visiting the many sites in Turkey where Armenian atrocities took place, such as Saimbeyler (Hacin) near Adana, we would like to summarize what has been proposed in the past to solve this issue and what the alternatives are.

Alternative Approaches for a Solution of the Armenian Issue

Over the years, mainly two alternatives were proposed in dealing with the Armenian issue, which in itself is a misnomer since this is not strictly an Armenian or Turkish issue only:

1. Petitioning the case to an International Court
2. Bringing together Turkish and Armenian historians to study the issue, including others from (relevant) countries.

Many writers, including Dogu Perincek in his latest book ‘’Ermeni Sorununda Strateji ve Siyaset – Strategy and Politics in the Armenian Issue’’, and Semih Idiz in his Milliyet columns (1/9/2007 and 3/9/2007), have argued that the option in the first alternative is really not viable since the courts are heavily influenced by the western powers and therefore (could not) would not rule objectively.

Armenian side has not agreed to the plea by the Turkish Prime Minister and others for forming a commission of Armenian and Turkish historians to study this conflict in depth by going through archives, since the world has yet to see a full review of the historical record. It is naive to believe that the Armenians will one day sit across the table with the Turkish side, probably knowing well that (Armenians) do not have a case, which has already been proven in the past. Therefore the option in the 2nd alternative may never be exercised.

There is a 3rd alternative which these writers believe could be pursued:

3. Holding an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations with the representatives of the following countries and organizations:

1. Turks
2. Armenians
3. Germans
4. Russians
5. British
6. French
7. Americans
8. Armenian Church
9. The Missionaries
10. The Near East Foundation
11. Others willing to come forward

First, the conference could tell the world that there are more than two parties to the Armenian issue, not just the Armenians and the Turks. Representatives of the above entities could be present at the conference, and if they refuse, credible individual alternates could attend to tell truthfully their role in the creation and the continuation of the issue.

Second, the conference could be broadcast live on television channels worldwide, with the issuance of a concrete resolution at the end and in front of the entire world, since many countries have already adopted the mythical Armenian genocide resolution wrongfully and unjustly. Historians could produce the evidence and the lawyers could review these and provide input to the resolution.

Third, the conference could convince the skeptical journalists and the politicians, who often make too easy judgments and have the most influence on public opinion, that there is another side to the tragic events which has been ignored for too long. Extensive information on the (behind the scene) activities of the Armenian church and the missionaries has been published recently which sheds light on their responsibilities.

Then there is of course the fourth alternative; that is doing nothing; accepting what cannot be changed; and suffer the consequences: living with the unfair, bogus, genocide label, as mentioned by Mehmet Ali Birand in one of his latest columns, ‘’Change or acceptance’’ (Aug 25/26, 2007, Turkish Daily News) which would allow writers such as Shelomo Alfassa to boldly state that ‘’Turks unfairly remain a hated people’’ (August 22, 2007, http//israelijewishnews.blogspot.com).

Armenian Resolutions Adopted by Countries and the States in the USA

Over 15 western countries and close to 40 states in the USA have adopted resolutions under the heavy pressure of Armenian organizations and their supporters, some without knowing much about the issue, including the Chilean Senate. However, the Chilean President Michelle Bachelet has sent a letter to the Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer, confirming that a document, which was adopted in the Chilean parliament on June 2007 and referred to the incidents of 1915 as ‘’Armenian genocide’’ was not legally or politically binding. Furthermore, in a later statement, the Chilean President has confirmed that the resolution would not be adopted by the Parliament. Therefore, what is the purpose of these resolutions which are totally one sided, arrogantly ignoring the facts, and willfully misleading the people in these countries?

The origin of the allegations and the anti-Turkish propaganda

During a conference last year at Bosphorus University on ‘’The Turkish-American relations: 1833 – 1989’’, the late Ahmet Ertegun began his keynote speech through video by stating that, in the beginning of the 20th century, the US Ambassador Henry Morgenthau at the time had to make a plea against the Turkish massacres of Armenians, suggesting that an investigation of this dreadful event should be undertaken by the historians with the purpose of reconciliation whatever the outcome may be. No one is denying the occurrence of the dreadful events, but Ambassador Morgenthau never mentions the killing of the Turks by the Armenians and (Armenian) ulterior motives in his book ‘’The Murder of a Nation’’. As Thomas J. Raleigh wrote in his article ‘’America’s Amateur Ambassadors’’ (June 16, 2006), unfortunately there were some who did not tell the true facts in the countries where they were serving. Abraham Foxman, announcing the ADL’s reversal on the Armenian issue, also referred to Ambassador’s book as the source of his knowledge along with Samantha Power’s book, ‘’A Problem from Hell’’ where she writes about Morgenthau in Chapter one, ‘’The Race Murder.’’

None of these books and hundreds of others like them mention the uprisings and the rebellions of the Armenian committees across eastern Anatolia which resulted in the death of tens of thousands of Ottomans, including Turks, Kurds and even Jews. In order to understand this issue, one needs to read also the books such as ‘’The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey – A Disputed genocide’’, by Guenther Lewy, ‘’The Armenian rebellion at Van’’, by Justin McCharty, ‘’The Armenians in the Late Ottoman period’’ by The Turkish Historical Society, edited by Prof. Dr. Turkkaya Ataov, and others.

An appeal by the Turkish Parliament officially made to the British Parliament in 2005, demanding that the ‘’Blue Book’’ was nothing more than a war propaganda full of falsified information on the tragic events, including input from Ambassador Morgenthau, fell on deaf ears. Those who follow the developments know that the Armenians and their supporters resort to distortions, fabrications and outright lies to convince the world of their allegations. The most recent example of such falsification is the doctoring of an Ataturk photo replacing puppies in front of his foot with dead children and presenting it to the unsuspecting public at the University of Los Angeles in 2006 as ‘’The Face of denial’’. This , a disgusting manipulation of truth has been mentioned in Andrew Finkel’s article, ‘’Touting History‘’ in Today’s Zaman recently.

The Deceitful and Harmful House Resolution 106 Should be Withdrawn

No other resolution has come close to the falsification of history and misrepresentation of facts as the latest U.S. House Resolution 106, which was submitted in March of this year, which some believe will pass. The resolution presents the tragic events through forged 1920 documents, such as the Andonian papers and the stillborn Sevres agreement which was never ratified by the Ottoman government, categorically rejected by the Turkish nation which fought a war of independence over it to replace it with the Lausanne Treaty in 1923. The resolution discriminates against the Turkish-Americans. Many individuals such as Holdwater (www.tallarmeniantale.com ) and Ergun Kirlikovali (www.turkla.com) in the United States have evaluated the statements in the Resolution and showed that they contain errors, omissions and fabrications. We do not believe that the House of representatives will dare to accept such a resolution that can only bring shame and discredit to the Congress. Hopefully, such partisan, deceitful, and unfair manipulation of history will never again be brought to the floor of the great institution for recognition. The Armenian diaspora will continue nagging about this resolution, but the proposed international conference would put an end to this utter nonsense.

Actions to be Taken by Those concerned on the Armenian Issue

If you believe, after reading the commentary above, that an international conference could (should) be a first step in solving the Armenian issue, please write to the Speaker of the Turkish Parliament and the President of Turkey to formally ask the secretary General of the United Nations to call for the conference as soon as possible to rid the world from a disgraceful act and to the US Congress to withdraw the House Resolution 106.

Yunus, Wellington, Kansas, USA
Nusret, Adana, Turkey
0 532 346 0243

************

You come to your conclusions from your own "story telling". Yes I quoted myself, so you can double quote that.

YOU concluded that it is "meaningless" so you obviously live in your own shame.

-----

This is not quite the forum for your misguided cut and paste posts of denial.

Your a living example of "Mans in Humanity to man".

Shame on everyone who denies the Armenian Genocide. History cannot be revised (even if we passionately want to), but lessons from it can easily be learnt.