Armenian Genocide, did it happen?

zraver · 05-30-2007, 05:46 AM

Did the Armenian Genocide really happen? The Turks seem to say no, most other countries say yes. Lets look at things we can consider "proof" via as unbiased sources as possible. By unbiased I am using soiurces that were not at war with the Ottoman Empire and who have no particular reaspon to fabricate such a story.

QOUTES

German ambassador Count von Wolff-Metternich, Turkey's ally in World War I, wrote his government in 1916 saying: "The Committee [of Union and Progress] demands the annihilation of the last remnants of the Armenians and the [Ottoman] government must bow to its demands."

In its attempt to carry out its purpose to resolve the Armenian question by the destruction of the Armenian race, the Turkish government has refused to be deterred neither by our representations, nor by those of the American Embassy, nor by the delegate of the Pope, nor by the threats of the Allied Powers, nor in deference to the public opinion of the West representing one-half of the world.

Mustafa "Ataturk" Kemal
Founder of the modern Turkish Republic in 1923 and revered throughout Turkey, in an interview published on August 1, 1926 in The Los Angeles Examiner, talking about former Young Turks in his country...

These left-overs from the former Young Turk Party, who should have been made to account for the millions of our Christian subjects who were ruthlessly driven en masse, from their homes and massacred, have been restive under the Republican rule.

Enver Pasha

One of the triumvirate rulers publicly declared on 19 May 1916...

The Ottoman Empire should be cleaned up of the Armenians and the Lebanese. We have destroyed the former by the sword, we shall destroy the latter through starvation.

In reply to US Ambassador Morgenthau who was deploring the massacres against Armenians and attributing them to irresponsible subalterns and underlings in the distant provinces, Enver's reply was...

You are greatly mistaken. We have this country absolutely under our control. I have no desire to shift the blame onto our underlings and I am entirely willing to accept the responsibility myself for everything that has taken place.

Armenian Genocide Quotes - Armeniapedia.org

Talat Pasha

In a conversation with Dr. Mordtmann of the German Embassy in June 1915...

Turkey is taking advantage of the war in order to thoroughly liquidate (grundlich aufzaumen) its internal foes, i.e., the indigenous Christians, without being thereby disturbed by foreign intervention.

After the German Ambassador persistently brought up the Armenian question in 1918, Talat said "with a smile"...

What on earth do you want? The question is settled. There are no more Armenians.

Prince Abdul Mecid

Heir-Apparent to the Ottoman Throne, 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 that they intended to recommence the massacres which had been our shame and disgrace under Abdul Hamid. The only reply I could get from him was: 'It is decided. It is the program.'

Grand Vezir Damad Ferid Pasha

Equivalent rank in the US would be head of the cabinet I think. He described the treatment of the Armenians as...

A crime that drew the revulsion of the entire humankind.

Mustafa Arif

Minister of Interior stated on 13 December 1918...

Surely a few Armenians aided and abetted our enemy, and a few Armenian Deputies committed crimes against the Turkish nation... it is incumbent upon a government to pursue the guilty ones. Unfortunately, our wartime leaders, imbued with a spirit of brigandage, carried out the law of deportation in a manner that could surpass the proclivities of the most bloodthirsty bandits. They decided to exterminate the Armenians, and they did exterminate them.

Most of the quotes of Turkish origin are from Vahakn Dadrian's collections which were published in Genocide: A Critical Bibliographic Review, Vol. 2 (Israel Charny, ed.)

FACT SHEET: ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Armenian Genocide Quotes - Armeniapedia.org

Big K · 05-30-2007, 07:19 AM

Zraver,

so you take "Armeniapedia" as a neutral source?

Let's say the United States of America is on her last legs. The whole world has gotten jealous of this only superpower of the world and has decided to gang up on her, before she really gets too big for her britches. War is being fought on every front. Manpower and resources are at a minimum, the country's infrastructure is crumbling, and famine, disease and poverty face most people every day.

Mexico figures it's about time to pay back the gringos for stealing some southwestern states way back when. Mexico figures an effective strategy would be to hit the embattled U.S. army from the back. Mexico appeals to the sizable Armenian community in California... promising the Armenian-Americans half of California, when California is "liberated"... making it "New Armenia."

The opportunistic Armenian-Americans rejoice. They know the other "New Armenia" which is known as "Armenia" (New, because Armenia barely existed as a non-vassal, independent country before the 20th Century, save for periods of Russian weakness) is turning out to be a disaster as a nation... so many people have been emigrating out of Old New Armenia. Wouldn't it be great to start anew with New New Armenia?

Quickly, the Armenian-Americans arm themselves. Loyal Armenian-Americans don't want anything to have to do with the treacherous plan... after all, they have lived and prospered in the U.S.A., the land they love... but they fully know the historic price for non-compliance with Armenian revolutionaries, so most of the loyal ones also go along (albeit unwillingly).

The revolting Armenians harass the U.S. Army's supply lines, and engage in hit and run tactics... sometimes engaging in full blown battles, the rare times they can stomach facing American soldiers. Meanwhile, Armenian leaders figure it would be wise to clear out Southern California of their fellow Americans, so that New Armenia can be as ethnically pure as possible. With many of the men away at war, villages are easy pickings, as American women, children and older men are mercilessly murdered.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE PEOPLE'S RESPONSE WOULD BE?

Given the dogmatic nature of many Americans... the kind who violently took out their furies on Iranian-Americans during the hostage crisis, say... you can bet the local Americans would get plenty steamed over what their fellow Americans of Armenian origin treacherously decided to embark upon during America's dark hour. You can bet notions of civility would be rare to find among Americans whose beloved family members have been systematically slaughtered by the Armenians.

Let's say the American government realizes something must be done to stem the horrible hemorrhaging caused by the Armenian Benedict Arnolds. The government is aware that the cycle of hatred has grown out of control, as reprisals for each massacre turns out to be yet another massacre.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE WOULD BE?

The government decides to relocate the Armenians far away from the area of calamity. Since so many Armenians are sympathetic to the cause of "New Armenia," it would be impossible for the government to separate the loyal Armenians from the disloyal... especially during desperate wartime, where resources and manpower are scarce. So the American government rounds up all the Californian Armenians and forces them to march part of the way to South Dakota. (Unfortunately, the European and Chinese militias have blown up most of the rails and roadways, and the few operating trains and vehicles need to be prioritized for the war effort.)

With manpower so scarce, few soldiers are assigned to protect the Armenians during the march. Some of them can't find it in their hearts to forgive the Armenians' betrayal, and take it out on the innocent Armenians. However, most of the American soldiers are noble, and do the best they can to give the food and medicine allocated to them, and to protect the Armenians from blood-feuding fellow citizens. It's too bad those gangs from Los Angeles' South side have been coordinating attacks on the marching Armenians, out of revenge for what the Armenians had done to their families.

Luckily, most of the Armenians make it to South Dakota. There have been deaths along the way... famine, disease and massacres at the hands of fellow citizens have taken some toll.

America survives the ordeal, and some seventy years later, Armenians claim 1.5 million of their numbers have been systematically murdered (curiously surpassing the figure of their entire population in California, based on various neutral censuses/sources), in a repulsive act of "genocide"... making up all kinds of reasons in a desperate attempt to find motives, such as the Americans were xenophobic, or that the Americans needed to blame their crumbling empire on a scapegoat, or that the Americans were after their money... while the Armenians took it like lambs awaiting slaughter, just like the Jews of World War II.

Let us all pity the poor Armenian victims!

You don't have to be an American to Imagine the described scenario.... just imagine any ethnic minority in your land turning treacherous during your country's desperate hour of need. Let's say you're from France. (Boy, the French almost unwaveringly support the Armenians.) Let's say it's Germany among France's attacking nations that incites a sizable French ethnic minority to stab France in the back (France has a huge Armenian community, so let us again use them as an example). What if the Germans say, Armenians! We fought side-by-side in WWII as fellow Aryans... come join us! Since Armenians create their own history, and their historians have little regard for the facts, let's say a few historians "discover" France was a real Armenian ancient homeland 7,000 years ago (long before the Armenians were documented as a people, of course), before the Armenians started migrating to the Anatolian region... taking their cue from actual Armenian professors/authors who have claimed Switzerland as their ancient homeland [see "QUOTES" section for source] or that the British are descended from or related to the Armenians [see "Reference" under "Articles"]); French Armenians rise by hitting the on-its-last-legs French Army in the back, and begin to slaughter fellow French, to make room for their New Armenia... with the words of William Saroyan to inspire them. ("When two Armenians meet anywhere in the world, see if they will not create a New Armenia.")

Brrr! How do you think the French government would react? The French people?

The described scenario is almost exactly what took place in the Ottoman Empire

And the Ottoman Turks were clearly at fault for not being able to fully protect the innocent Armenians of the march. Given the desperate circumstances (bankruptcy, famine, disease, limited resources/manpower, war on five fronts), would your country have been able to do better?

Do not forget, the Armenians from other parts of the Ottoman Empire were untouched. Some Turkish soldiers lost their lives defending the relocating Armenians, and some who were caught committing crimes against the Armenians were actually EXECUTED by the Ottoman government (After, and DURING the war. [See "Questions," under "Sections" for sources].) What kind of a "genocide" is that?

Do not forget as well that the causes claiming Armenian lives were the same that claimed Turkish ones, in considerably greater numbers. [See "Census," under "Sections" for sources]

Holdwater does not take the credit for this scenario; he merely
embellished the scenario from an article written in 1923, "Angora and the Turks," which you can find in the ARTICLES section ("West" Accounts).

There is an "end all" argument against the Armenian Genocide...

...That is, one that should have ended the argument many years ago. It's really stupefying how few people pay attention to this absolutely convincing argument.

Big K · 05-30-2007, 07:21 AM

Armenian Genocide

Introduction to Armenian Issue - FORSNET

"It appears obvious that the Turkish authorities, anxious for the safety of their lines of communication, had no other alternative than to order the removal of their rebellious subjects to some place distant from the seat of hostilities, and their internment there.

The enforcement of this absolutely necessary precaution led to further risings on the part of the Armenians. The remaining Moslems were almost defenceless, because the regular garrisons were at the front as well as the greater part of the police and able-bodied men. Already infuriated at the reports of the atrocities committed at Van by the insurgents, in fear for their lives and those of their relatives, they were at last driven by the cumulative effect of these events into panic and retaliation and, as invariably happens in such cases, the innocent suffered with the guilty.

C.F. Dixon-Johnson, British author of the 1916 book, "The Armenians." ("West" Accounts, under "Articles.")"

"I could see that [the Armenians'] well-known disloyalty to the Ottoman Government and the fact that the territory which they inhabited was within the zone of military operations constituted grounds more or less justifiable for compelling them to depart their homes."

Robert Lansing, United States Secretary of State, November 1916

"THE PURPOSE OF TALL ARMENIAN TALE (TAT)
...Is to expose the mythological “Armenian genocide,” from the years 1915-16. A wartime tragedy involving the losses of so many has been turned into a politicized story of “exclusive victimhood,” and because of the prevailing prejudice against Turks, along with Turkish indifference, those in the world, particularly in the West, have been quick to accept these terribly defamatory claims involving the worst crime against humanity. Few stop to investigate below the surface that those regarded as the innocent victims, the Armenians, while seeking to establish an independent state, have been the ones to commit systematic ethnic cleansing against those who did not fit into their racial/religious ideal: Muslims, Jews, and even fellow Armenians who had converted to Islam. Criminals as Dro, Antranik, Keri, Armen Garo and Soghoman Tehlirian (the assassin of Talat Pasha, one of the three Young Turk leaders, along with Enver and Jemal) contributed toward the deaths (via massacres, atrocities, and forced deportation) of countless innocents, numbering over half a million. What determines genocide is not the number of casualties or the cruelty of the persecutions, but the intent to destroy a group, the members of which are guilty of nothing beyond being members of that group. The Armenians suffered their fate of resettlement not for their ethnicity, having co-existed and prospered in the Ottoman Empire for centuries, but because they rebelled against their dying Ottoman nation during WWI (World War I); a rebellion that even their leaders of the period, such as Boghos Nubar and Hovhannes Katchaznouni, have admitted. Yet the hypocritical world rarely bothers to look beneath the surface, not only because of anti-Turkish prejudice, but because of Armenian wealth and intimidation tactics. As a result, these libelous lies, sometimes belonging in the category of “genocide studies,” have become part of the school curricula of many regions. Armenian scholars such as Vahakn Dadrian, Peter Balakian, Richard Hovannisian, Dennis Papazian and Levon Marashlian have been known to dishonestly present only one side of their story, as long as their genocide becomes affirmed. They have enlisted the help of "genocide scholars," such as Roger Smith, Robert Melson, Samantha Power, and Israel Charny… and particularly those of Turkish extraction, such as Taner Akcam and Fatma Muge Gocek, who justify their alliance with those who actively work to harm the interests of their native country, with the claim that such efforts will help make Turkey more" democratic." On the other side of this coin are genuine scholars who consider all the relevant data, as true scholars have a duty to do, such as Justin McCarthy, Bernard Lewis, Heath Lowry, Erich Feigl and Guenter Lewy. The unscrupulous genocide industry, not having the facts on its side, makes a practice of attacking the messenger instead of the message, vilifying these professors as “deniers” and "agents of the Turkish government." The truth means so little to the pro-genocide believers, some even resort to the forgeries of the Naim-Andonian telegrams or sources based on false evidence, as Franz Werfel’s The Forty Days of Musa Dagh. Naturally, there is no end to the hearsay "evidence" of the prejudiced pro-Christian people from the period, including missionaries and Near East Relief representatives, Arnold Toynbee, Lord Bryce, Lloyd George, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, and so many others. When the rare Westerner opted to look at the issues objectively, such as Admirals Mark Bristol and Colby Chester, they were quick to be branded as “Turcophiles” by the propagandists. The sad thing is, even those who don’t consider themselves as bigots are quick to accept the deceptive claims of Armenian propaganda, because deep down people feel the Turks are natural killers and during times when Turks were victims, they do not rate as equal and deserving human beings. This is the main reason why the myth of this genocide has become the common wisdom."

check also these sources...

i will say no more.

neyzen · 05-30-2007, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Did the Armenian Genocide really happen? The Turks seem to say no, mos tother countries say yes.

Your most of the counties say no to Turkish Genocide, right? Pls give me only one objective country's name whois non Armenian PMs know where Armenia is.

Quote:

lets look at things we can consider "proof" via as unbiased sources as possible.

Why do you need such "unbiased" quote "proofs"? We have mass graves, photos of murdered Turks. Armenians still live in Turkey. On the other hand do you know how many Turks live in Armenia. I think none...

Quote:

By unbiased I am using soiurces that were not at war with the Ottoman Empire and who have no particular reaspon to fabricate such a story.

Your genocide sources sucks. 1.5 million of 1.1 million Armenians was killed by Turks!! You should find better facts which confirm genocide...

Same format with different quotes... Kansas used to find this:
And I used to find this:

Quote:

Es war eine Kunst zwischen den vier Fronten, Entlastung Deutschlands, Belastung der Türkei, Reservebedürftigkeit des Amtes und Vertrauensgewinnung der Armenier

You understand it, right? Do you know Germany's Ost Politik in the beginning of 19th century.

Another desperate try and its result (repost):

Quote:

DID TALAT PASHA SEND SECRET TELEGRAMMES ORDERING GENOCIDE?

Mahmut Esat Ozan

Baseless Armenian propaganda claiming that so-called genocide was an Ottoman
government policy requires proof that such a decision was in fact made. For
this purpose the Armenians produced a number of telegrams attributed to
Talat Pasha supposedly found by British forces commanded by General Allenby
when they seized Aleppo in 1918. It was claimed that they were found in the
office of an Ottoman official named Naim Bey, and that they could be
destroyed only because the British occupation came with unexpected speed.
Samples of these telegrams were published in Paris in 1920 by an Armenian
author named Aram Andonian, (38) and they also were presented at the Berlin
trial of the Armenian terrorist Tehlirian, who killed Talat Pasha.
Nevertheless, the court neither considered these documents as "evidence" nor
was involved in any decision claiming the authenticity of them. These
documents were, however, entirely fabricated, and the claims deriving from
them therefore cannot be sustained. They were in fact published by the Daily
Telegraph of London in 1922, (39) which also attributed them to a discovery
made by Allenby's army. But when the British Foreign Office enquired about
them at the War Office, and with Allenby himself, it was discovered that
they had not been discovered by the British army but, rather, had been
produced by an Armenian group in Paris. In addition, examination of the
photographs provided in the Andonian volume shows clearly that neither in
form, script or phraseology did they resemble normal Ottoman administrative
documents, and that they were, therefore, rather crude forgeries.

Following the Entente occupation of Istanbul, the British and the French
arrested a number of Ottoman political and military figures and some
intellectuals on charges of war crimes. In this they were given substantial
assistance by the Ottoman Liberal Union Party, which had been placed in
power by the Sultan after the war, and which was anxious to do anything it
could to definitively destroy the Union and Progress Party and its leaders,
who had long been political enemies. Most of the prisoners were sent off to
imprisonment in Malta, but the four Union and Progress leaders who had fled
from the country just before the occupation were tried and sentenced to
death in absentia in Istanbul. Three other Government officials were
sentenced to death and executed, but it was discovered later that the
evidence on which the convictions had been based was false.

In the meantime, the British looked everywhere to find evidence against
those who had been sent to Malta. Despite the complete cooperation of wome
enthusraztic supporters such as the Ottoman Liberal Union (38) ANDONIAN,
Aram, Documents Qfficiels concernant les Massacres Armmiens, Paris, Armenian
National Delegation, 1920. (39) Daily Telegraph, 29 May 1922. government,
nothing incriminating could be found among the Ottoman government documents.
Similar searches in the British archives were fruitless. Finally, in
desperation, the British Foreign Office turned to the American archives in
Washington, but in reply, one of their representatives, R. C. Craigie, wrote
to Lord Curzon:

"I regret to inform your Lordship that there was nothing therein which could
be used as evidence against the Turks who are at present being detained at
Malta ...no concrete facts being given which could constitute satisfactory
incriminating evidence.... The reports in question do not appear in any case
to contain evidence against these Turks which would be useful even for the
purpose of corroborating information already in the possession of His
Majesty's Government.''(40)

Uncertain as to what should be done with prisoners, who already had been
held for two years, without trial and without even any charges being filed
or evidence produced, the Foreign Office applied for advice to the Law
Officers of the Crown in London, who concluded on 29 July, 1921:

"Up to the present no statements have been taken from witnesses who can
depose to the truth of the charges made against the prisoners. It is indeed
uncertain whether any witnesses can be found." (41)

At this time the "documents" produced by Andonian were available, but
despite their desperate search for evidence, which could be presented in a
court of law, the British, never used them because it was evident that they
were forgeries. As a result, the prisoners were quietly released in 1921,
without charges ever having been filed or evidence produced.

It is useful to reiterate that the main elements in the chain of evidence
constructed in proving that Andonian's "documents" were all patent
forgeries:

1. To show that his forgeries were in fact "authentic Ottoman documents"
Andonian relied on the signature of the Governor of Aleppo, Mustafa
Abdiilhalik Bey, which he claimed was appended to several of the "documents"
in question. By examining several actual specimens of Mustafa Abdülhalik
Bey's signature as preserved on contemporary official documents, it is
established that the alleged signatures appended to Andonian's "documents"
were forgeries.

2. In one of his forged documents, Andonian dated the note and signature
attributed to Mustafa Abdülhalik Bey. Again, by a comparison with authentic
correspondence between the Governor (40) 13 July 1921; British Foreign
Office Archives 371/6504/8519 (41) British Foreign Office Archives
371/6504/E8745

Aleppo and the Ministry of the Interior in Istanbul, on the date in
question, it is proven that the Governor of Aleppo on that date was Bekir
Sami Bey, not Mustafa Abdulhalik Bey.

3. Consistently, Andonian's forgeries attest to the fact that he was either
totally unaware of, or carelessly neglected to account for, the differences
between the Muslim Rumi and Christian calendars. The numerous errors he made
as a result of this oversight are, in and of themselves, sufficient to prove
the fabricated nature of his "documents". Among other things, the errors
Andonian made in this respect served to destroy the system of reference
numbers and dates that he concocted for his "documents".

4. By way of a detailed comparison of the entries made in the Ministry of
the Interior's Registers of outgoing Ciphers, wherein are recorded the date
and reference number of every ciphered communication sent out by the
Ministry, with the dates and reference numbers placed by Andonian on his
forgeries, it is proven that his so-called "ciphered, telegrams" bear no
relationship whatsoever to the actual ciphers sent by the Ministry to Aleppo
in the period in question.

5. Again, by comparing the Turkish "originals" of Andonian's " ciphered
telegrams" with actual examples of contemporary Ottoman ciphered messages,
it is shown that the number groupings he employed bear no relationship to
the actual ciphers the Ottomans were using in that period. Thus, in his
attempt to make his forgeries appear credible, he created a whole series of
unusable, non-existent ciphers. Further, from the dates he affixed to his
forgeries in this category, the Ottomans would have had to use the same
ciphers over a six-month period which was impossible. By publishing a series
of documents instructing officials to change the ciphers they were using, it
is shown that, in fact, the Ottomans were changing their cipher codes on
average once every two months during the war years.

6. By comparing the manner in which the common Islamic injunction, Besmele,
was written on Andonian's two forged letters with numerous examples of the
way in which it appears on authentic contemporary Ottoman documents, it is
suggested that Andonian's clumsy forgery of this term may well have stemmed
from the fact that non-Muslims, even those who knew Ottoman Turkish, did not
employ this injunction.

7. A number of examples from Andonian's forgeries show that it is simply
inconceivable that any Ottoman official could have used such sentence
structures and make such grammatical errors. In the same vein, a host of
expressions; allegedly uttered by prominent Ottoman officials are used,
which no Ottoman Turk would ever have used. Andonian's intention in these
instances was clear: he wanted nothing less than the Turks themselves to be
seeming to confess to crimes which he had manufactured for them.

8. The forged documents, with two exceptions, were written on plain paper
with none of the usual signs found on the official paper used by the Ottoman
bureaucracy in this period. The fact that one of the forged Turkish
originals was written on a double-lined paper, which the Ottomans did not
even use for private correspondence, constitutes an even more serious error
on Andonian's part. Even the two forgeries which appear at first glance to
have been written on some kind of official Ottoman stationery are actually
written on blank telegraph forms, which anyone wishing to send a telegram
could pick up in any Ottoman post office.

9. At a time when the British were frantically searching the world's
archives for anything to be used as "evidence" against the group of Ottoman
officials whom they were holding for trial as being "responsible for the
Armenian incidents", their failure to utilize Andonian's "documents" which
were readily available in their English edition, strongly suggests that the
British Government was fully aware of the nature of these forgeries.

10. Had documents of the nature of those concocted by Andonian ever actually
existed, their confidential nature would have dictated that they be sent by
courier for security reasons; rather than through the easily breachable
public telegraph system. Likewise, had such documents really ever been
written; it is inconceivable that they could have lain around in a file for
three years, instead of being destroyed as soon as they had been read.

11. There are also numerous differences between the French and English
editions of Andonian's book. Indeed, these variations are of such
significance that it is absolutely impossible to ascribe them to printing
errors, or errors in translation.

12. Finally, the fact that even some authors with close links to Armenian
circles, who serve as spokesmen for Armenian causes, have indicated their
own doubt as to the veracity of Andonian's "documents" should not be
overlooked. In short, from start to finish the so-called "Talat Pasha
Telegrams" are nothing more than crude forgeries, concocted by Andonian and
his associates. Moreover the Ottoman archives contain a number of orders;
whose authenticity can definitely be substantiated, issued on the same
dates, in which Talat Pasha ordered investigations to be made to find and
punish those responsible for the attacks which were being made on the
deportation caravans. It is hardly likely that he would have been ordering
massacres on one hand and investigations and punishments for such crimes on
the other.

A letter forged by Aram Andonian with the date, February 18, 1331 (March
2,1916) opens with a "bismillah" (blessing), which would never have been
written by a Moslem. The forger, Andonian, made his most fatal mistake with
the date, however. He was obviously not well enough versed in the tricks of
converting to the Rumi year of the Ottomans, where a difference of thirteen
days between the Rumi and Gregorian calendars must be taken into account.

The date he put on the letter was off by a full year. Instead of 1330
(1915), he wrote 1331 (1916). The contents of the letter are supposed to be
evidence of the long advance planning of the resettlement operation of
1915.(42) (42) Feigl, Erich. A Myth of Terror, 1991, Edition
zeitgeschichten-Freilassing- Salzburg, p. 85

An American aid organization called "the Near East Relief Society" was
allowed by the Ottoman Government to stay and fulfill its functions in
Anatolia during the deportations. Even following the entry of U.S.A. into
war on the side of Entente powers against Ottoman Empire, the same
organization was permitted to remain in Anatolia. This was dealt in the
reports of the American Ambassador Elkus in Istanbul. In this case, if an
order for "massacring Armenians" had been given, would the Ottoman
Government have allowed to an American organization to be witness to the
"massacres". In other words, it is ridiculous to suppose that the Ottomans
said to America: "We are massacring Armenians. Why don't you have a look at
it." Such an allegation could never be a logical explanation of historic
facts. Finally, and in the end most important, when the war came to an end,
the Armenian population still was substantially in place in Western
Anatolia, Thrace and Istanbul. Had the Ottoman government ordered massacres,
evidently they too would have been killed. And for that matter, had the
Ottoman government wanted to eliminate all the Armenians in the Empire, it
could have done so far more easily by killing and disposing of them where
they lived, rather than undertaking a large-scale deportation of those in
the Eastern war zones under the eyes of foreign observers.

The claim, thus, that the Ottoman government ordered and carried out a
general massacre of Armenians in the Empire cannot be sustained and is
disproved by the facts.

zraver · 05-30-2007, 13:19 PM

Quote:

An American aid organization called "the Near East Relief Society" was
allowed by the Ottoman Government to stay and fulfill its functions in
Anatolia during the deportations. Even following the entry of U.S.A. into
war on the side of Entente powers against Ottoman Empire, the same
organization was permitted to remain in Anatolia.

You ar eof course aware that the US and Turkey were never at war? The German ambassador didnt fake his reports, Ataturk didnt fake his quotes why deny the truth and the armenian population prewar was three million.

**Parihaka** · 05-30-2007, 15:44 PM

I would just like to point out spamming the site with thousand word cut and pastes isn't appreciated.
Selected paragraphs that deal with the topic only, including links or references please

Kansas Bear · 05-30-2007, 15:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neyzen

Same format with different quotes... Kansas used to find this:

So the German and Austrian officers attached to Ottoman units throughout the Ottoman empire, that witnessed and reported to their ambassadors, are all lying.

And I supposed Seyed Mohamad Ali Jamalzadeh is lying as well.

All those American and German missionaries are lying too.

Taner Akcam is lying as well, I suppose.

"According to some sources, Dr. Nazim said after the events at Adana:'The Ottoman Empire must be Turkish alone. The existence of foreign citizenship is a tool for European intervention. The empire must be Turkified by force of arm.' " -- "A Shameful Act", by Taner Akcam, p70

"Dr. Ernst Kwiatkowski, the Austrian consul for Trabzon, reported being told by a Turkish officer that in the first days of July 1915, some 132 Armenian soldiers had been killed in the village of Hamzakoy. Between Diyarbakir and Urfa, likewise, in a report dated 3 September 1915, the consul described the killings of hundreds of Armenians who had been forced to work in road construction in his region. Walter Rossler, the consul in Aleppo, reported that a German officer had told of seeing bodies all of young men from the labor battalions, all with their throats slit." --"A Shameful Act", by Taner Akcam, p145

zraver · 05-30-2007, 16:34 PM

Quote:

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE PEOPLE'S RESPONSE WOULD BE?

Given the dogmatic nature of many Americans... the kind who violently took out their furies on Iranian-Americans during the hostage crisis, say...

Big K, do you know how offensive that is? After 9-11 the attacks agaisnt perceived arabs were minimal so don't go saying my country would devour itself in an orgy of bloodhsed and genocide. We were atacked and had thousands killed and we didn't deport anyone.

In WW2 when faced with the percieved threat from Japanese Americans we did relocate a population but it was no genocide. We didn't slaughter thier religious leaders, politcal leaders, and men in uniform and then march the women and children into the most inhospital terrain to watch them starve and freeze.

http://www.armgate.com/genocide/pic18.jpg

http://www.fredsakademiet.dk/library...gifs/naked.jpg

http://www.fredsakademiet.dk/library...ifs/hanged.jpg

http://www.warcrimes.info/shop/html/...genocide_1.jpg

http://www.chgs.umn.edu/Visual___Art...d/armenia7.jpg

http://www.bibleprobe.com/christianbodies2.jpg
Note Turkish offical looking down at the dead baby in its parent sarms and the lack of any fez caps on the victims they were Armenian not Turk

http://content.answers.com/main/cont...s-DSC_0124.JPG

http://www.bibleprobe.com/christianbodies7.jpg
Note the lack of head scarves on the woman, they were not Muslim

http://www.bibleprobe.com/christianbodies4.jpg

Now those victims are conclusively Christian and most of the photos show people starved to death and that takes goverment action.

Kansas Bear · 05-30-2007, 17:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big K

"It appears obvious that the Turkish authorities, anxious for the safety of their lines of communication, had no other alternative than to order the removal of their rebellious subjects to some place distant from the seat of hostilities, and their internment there.

The enforcement of this absolutely necessary precaution led to further risings on the part of the Armenians. The remaining Moslems were almost defenceless, because the regular garrisons were at the front as well as the greater part of the police and able-bodied men. Already infuriated at the reports of the atrocities committed at Van by the insurgents, in fear for their lives and those of their relatives, they were at last driven by the cumulative effect of these events into panic and retaliation and, as invariably happens in such cases, the innocent suffered with the guilty.

C.F. Dixon-Johnson, British author of the 1916 book, "The Armenians." ("West" Accounts, under "Articles.")"

Considering you're using a BRITISH source, that would make you a hypocrite.
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/his...nda-turks.html

From YOUR post;

Quote:

I will not be speaking only of British propaganda tonight, but of the effects of what the British propaganda machine produced in World War I.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big K

"I could see that [the Armenians'] well-known disloyalty to the Ottoman Government and the fact that the territory which they inhabited was within the zone of military operations constituted grounds more or less justifiable for compelling them to depart their homes."

Robert Lansing, United States Secretary of State, November 1916

Using the statement of someone who wasn't even in the country. That's an extremely weak source. Why not Henry Morgenthau, US ambassador to the Ottoman Empire 1913-1916??

"Henry Morgenthau Sr., the neutral American ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, sent a cable to the U.S. State Department in 1915:

"Deportation of and excesses against peaceful Armenians is increasing and from harrowing reports of eye witnesses it appears that a campaign of race extermination is in progress under a pretext of reprisal against rebellion."

Oddly you don't quote him.

Quote:

check also these sources...

The "British propaganda" that you yourself NOW use or the American statesman that wasn't in the empire at the time of the massacres? No thanks, I'll stick with the real world, not some demagogic fantasy world.

Stan187 · 05-30-2007, 17:45 PM

"The revolting Armenians harass the U.S. Army's supply lines, and engage in hit and run tactics... sometimes engaging in full blown battles, the rare times they can stomach facing American soldiers"

So wait you're saying that the US Army would massacre a whole people just because some of them were insurgents? Not in Iraq, not in California, and not in Kansas, Dorothy.

zraver · 05-30-2007, 17:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stan187

"The revolting Armenians harass the U.S. Army's supply lines, and engage in hit and run tactics... sometimes engaging in full blown battles, the rare times they can stomach facing American soldiers"

So wait you're saying that the US Army would massacre a whole people just because some of them were insurgents? Not in Iraq, not in California, and not in Kansas, Dorothy.

Exaclty we've been there doen that and call it exaclty what it was, the American Holocuast. We were a young, prideful people, bigoted and we killed millions. Turkey however was old and established and they killed thier own citizens.

Remarks of
Kevin Gover, Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs
Department of the Interior
at the
Ceremony Acknowledging the 175th Anniversary
of the Establishment of the
Bureau of Indian Affairs
September 8, 2000

In March of 1824, President James Monroe established the Office of Indian
Affairs in the Department of War. Its mission was to conduct the nation's
business with regard to Indian affairs. We have come together today to
mark the first 175 years of the institution now known as the Bureau of
Indian Affairs.

It is appropriate that we do so in the first year of a new century and a
new millennium, a time when our leaders are reflecting on what lies ahead
and preparing for those challenges. Before looking ahead, though, this
institution must first look back and reflect on what it has wrought and,
by doing so, come to know that this is no occasion for celebration; rather
it is time for reflection and contemplation, a time for sorrowful truths
to be spoken, a time for contrition.

We must first reconcile ourselves to the fact that the works of this
agency have at various times profoundly harmed the communities it was
meant to serve. From the very beginning, the Office of Indian Affairs was
an instrument by which the United States enforced its ambition against the
Indian nations and Indian people who stood in its path.

And so, the first mission of this institution was to execute the removal
of the southeastern tribal nations. By threat, deceit, and force, these
great tribal nations were made to march 1,000 miles to the west, leaving
thousands of their old, their young and their infirm in hasty graves along
the Trail of Tears.

As the nation looked to the West for more land, this agency participated
in the ethnic cleansing that befell the western tribes. War necessarily
begets tragedy; the war for the West was no exception. Yet in these more
enlightened times, it must be acknowledged that the deliberate spread of
disease, the decimation of the mighty bison herds, the use of the poison
alcohol to destroy mind and body, and the cowardly killing of women and
children made for tragedy on a scale so ghastly that it cannot be
dismissed as merely the inevitable consequence of the clash of competing
ways of life. This agency and the good people in it failed in the mission
to prevent the devastation.

And so great nations of patriot warriors fell. We will never push aside
the memory of unnecessary and violent death at places such as Sand Creek,
the banks of the Washita River, and Wounded Knee.

Nor did the consequences of war have to include the futile and destructive
efforts to annihilate Indian cultures. After the devastation of tribal
economies and the deliberate creation of tribal dependence on the services
provided by this agency, this agency set out to destroy all things Indian.

This agency forbade the speaking of Indian languages, prohibited the
conduct of traditional religious activities, outlawed traditional
government, and made Indian people ashamed of who they were. Worst of all,
the Bureau of Indian Affairs committed these acts against the children
entrusted to its boarding schools, brutalizing them emotionally,
psychologically, physically, and spiritually. Even in this era of self
-determination, when the Bureau of Indian Affairs is at long last serving
as an advocate for Indian people in an atmosphere of mutual respect, the
legacy of these misdeeds haunts us. The trauma of shame, fear and anger
has passed from one generation to the next, and manifests itself in the
rampant alcoholism, drug abuse, and domestic violence that plague Indian
country. Many of our people live lives of unrelenting tragedy as Indian
families suffer the ruin of lives by alcoholism, suicides made of shame
and despair, and violent death at the hands of one another. So many of the
maladies suffered today in Indian country result from the failures of this
agency. Poverty, ignorance, and disease have been the product of this
agency's work.

And so today I stand before you as the leader of an institution that in
the past has committed acts so terrible that they infect, diminish, and
destroy the lives of Indian people decades later, generations later. These
things occurred despite the efforts of many good people with good hearts
who sought to prevent them. These wrongs must be acknowledged if the
healing is to begin.

I do not speak today for the United States. That is the province of the
nation's elected leaders, and I would not presume to speak on their
behalf. I am empowered, however, to speak on behalf of this agency, the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, and I am quite certain that the words that
follow reflect the hearts of its 10,000 employees.

Let us begin by expressing our profound sorrow for what this agency has
done in the past. Just like you, when we think of these misdeeds and their
tragic consequences, our hearts break and our grief is as pure and
complete as yours. We desperately wish that we could change this history,
but of course we cannot. On behalf of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, I
extend this formal apology to Indian people for the historical conduct of
this agency.

And while the BIA employees of today did not commit these wrongs, we
acknowledge that the institution we serve did. We accept this inheritance,
this legacy of racism and inhumanity. And by accepting this legacy, we
accept also the moral responsibility of putting things right.

We therefore begin this important work anew, and make a new commitment to
the people and communities that we serve, a commitment born of the
dedication we share with you to the cause of renewed hope and prosperity
for Indian country. Never again will this agency stand silent when hate
and violence are committed against Indians. Never again will we allow
policy to proceed from the assumption that Indians possess less human
genius than the other races. Never again will we be complicit in the theft
of Indian property. Never again will we appoint false leaders who
serve purposes other than those of the tribes. Never again will we allow
unflattering and stereotypical images of Indian people to deface the halls
of government or lead the American people to shallow and ignorant beliefs
about Indians. Never again will we attack your religions, your languages,
your rituals, or any of your tribal ways. Never again will we seize your
children, nor teach them to be ashamed of who they are. Never again.

We cannot yet ask your forgiveness, not while the burdens of this agency's
history weigh so heavily on tribal communities. What we do ask is that,
together, we allow the healing to begin: As you return to your homes, and
as you talk with your people, please tell them that time of dying is at
its end. Tell your children that the time of shame and fear is over. Tell
your young men and women to replace their anger with hope and love for
their people.

Together, we must wipe the tears of seven generations. Together, we must
allow our broken hearts to mend. Together, we will face a challenging
world with confidence and trust. Together, let us resolve that when our
future leaders gather to discuss the history of this institution, it will
be time to celebrate the rebirth of joy, freedom, and progress for the
Indian Nations. The Bureau of Indian Affairs was born in 1824 in a time of
war on Indian people. May it live in the year 2000 and beyond as an
instrument of their prosperity.

--END--

This the kind of step Turkey needs to take, denying the truth doenst do anyone any good.

xerxes · 05-30-2007, 22:38 PM

Big K,

I am gonna be real fair and I am gonna stick my head out here .... but first and formost,

the Armeniean genocide DID happen, no matter how you try to justify it or explain it by various quotes. To use one of George Bush '67 greatest quotes incase of Iraqi and Kuwaitis: "They (iraqi) killed Kuwait babies in an attempt to systematically destroy the Kuwaitis". The same quotes applies very much to Turks and Armenieans, in which case the Sublime Porte ordered the systematic destruction of the Armeneans, and the orders came from the
Great Sultan himself. The only difference between Iraqi and Turkish genocide was that the Iraqi genocide of the Kuwaiti was a lie, while the Turkish genocidal attempt to remove the Armeniean is not a lie. The Kurds were also much responsible for the killings, but their massacares were directly controlled and ordered and organized from the Sublime Porte. Infact, if memory serve the Kurdish killings of Armeaniean was turn "on" like a switch and turned "off" like a switch. That directly implies higher authority in control.

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

Now that I said, where I think you are dead wrong, I will say somethings in your favor:

First of all, you Turks are quite unfortunate for several reasons:

1 - The Ottoman empire was a threat to Europe for several centuries and the memories are still very fresh, and so is the venom against Turks in general

2 - Your genocide happened relativly late in the historical timeline. Therefore, the combination of being the Sunni muslim power that threaten Europe, that 'stole' constantinople (Western perspective), that was the bane of the late Easter Roman Empire and that committed genocide against Armenieans (not because they are Armenieans but because they are Christians) makes the whole subject quite touchy in the West. Except in Armenia, where the touchyness of the subject is very much deserved after all the hell the Great Sultan made them go through

3 - Speaking of Iran, we were lucky in some ways. After all we oppose the Sunni Ottomans as well, therefore we we

05-30-2007, 05:46 AM	#1 (permalink)
zraver Contrary by nature. *Military Professional* Join Date: 10-22-06 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,534 Country:	Armenian Genocide, did it happen? Did the Armenian Genocide really happen? The Turks seem to say no, most other countries say yes. Lets look at things we can consider "proof" via as unbiased sources as possible. By unbiased I am using soiurces that were not at war with the Ottoman Empire and who have no particular reaspon to fabricate such a story. QOUTES German ambassador Count von Wolff-Metternich, Turkey's ally in World War I, wrote his government in 1916 saying: "The Committee [of Union and Progress] demands the annihilation of the last remnants of the Armenians and the [Ottoman] government must bow to its demands." In its attempt to carry out its purpose to resolve the Armenian question by the destruction of the Armenian race, the Turkish government has refused to be deterred neither by our representations, nor by those of the American Embassy, nor by the delegate of the Pope, nor by the threats of the Allied Powers, nor in deference to the public opinion of the West representing one-half of the world. Mustafa "Ataturk" Kemal Founder of the modern Turkish Republic in 1923 and revered throughout Turkey, in an interview published on August 1, 1926 in The Los Angeles Examiner, talking about former Young Turks in his country... These left-overs from the former Young Turk Party, who should have been made to account for the millions of our Christian subjects who were ruthlessly driven en masse, from their homes and massacred, have been restive under the Republican rule. Enver Pasha One of the triumvirate rulers publicly declared on 19 May 1916... The Ottoman Empire should be cleaned up of the Armenians and the Lebanese. We have destroyed the former by the sword, we shall destroy the latter through starvation. In reply to US Ambassador Morgenthau who was deploring the massacres against Armenians and attributing them to irresponsible subalterns and underlings in the distant provinces, Enver's reply was... You are greatly mistaken. We have this country absolutely under our control. I have no desire to shift the blame onto our underlings and I am entirely willing to accept the responsibility myself for everything that has taken place. Armenian Genocide Quotes - Armeniapedia.org Talat Pasha In a conversation with Dr. Mordtmann of the German Embassy in June 1915... Turkey is taking advantage of the war in order to thoroughly liquidate (grundlich aufzaumen) its internal foes, i.e., the indigenous Christians, without being thereby disturbed by foreign intervention. After the German Ambassador persistently brought up the Armenian question in 1918, Talat said "with a smile"... What on earth do you want? The question is settled. There are no more Armenians. Prince Abdul Mecid Heir-Apparent to the Ottoman Throne, 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 that they intended to recommence the massacres which had been our shame and disgrace under Abdul Hamid. The only reply I could get from him was: 'It is decided. It is the program.' Grand Vezir Damad Ferid Pasha Equivalent rank in the US would be head of the cabinet I think. He described the treatment of the Armenians as... A crime that drew the revulsion of the entire humankind. Mustafa Arif Minister of Interior stated on 13 December 1918... Surely a few Armenians aided and abetted our enemy, and a few Armenian Deputies committed crimes against the Turkish nation... it is incumbent upon a government to pursue the guilty ones. Unfortunately, our wartime leaders, imbued with a spirit of brigandage, carried out the law of deportation in a manner that could surpass the proclivities of the most bloodthirsty bandits. They decided to exterminate the Armenians, and they did exterminate them. Most of the quotes of Turkish origin are from Vahakn Dadrian's collections which were published in Genocide: A Critical Bibliographic Review, Vol. 2 (Israel Charny, ed.) FACT SHEET: ARMENIAN GENOCIDE Armenian Genocide Quotes - Armeniapedia.org Last edited by zraver : 05-30-2007 at 16:04 PM.

05-30-2007, 07:19 AM	#2 (permalink)
Big K HürGeneral *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 12-11-06 Location: Istanbul Posts: 1,046 Country:	Zraver, so you take "Armeniapedia" as a neutral source? Let's say the United States of America is on her last legs. The whole world has gotten jealous of this only superpower of the world and has decided to gang up on her, before she really gets too big for her britches. War is being fought on every front. Manpower and resources are at a minimum, the country's infrastructure is crumbling, and famine, disease and poverty face most people every day. Mexico figures it's about time to pay back the gringos for stealing some southwestern states way back when. Mexico figures an effective strategy would be to hit the embattled U.S. army from the back. Mexico appeals to the sizable Armenian community in California... promising the Armenian-Americans half of California, when California is "liberated"... making it "New Armenia." The opportunistic Armenian-Americans rejoice. They know the other "New Armenia" which is known as "Armenia" (New, because Armenia barely existed as a non-vassal, independent country before the 20th Century, save for periods of Russian weakness) is turning out to be a disaster as a nation... so many people have been emigrating out of Old New Armenia. Wouldn't it be great to start anew with New New Armenia? Quickly, the Armenian-Americans arm themselves. Loyal Armenian-Americans don't want anything to have to do with the treacherous plan... after all, they have lived and prospered in the U.S.A., the land they love... but they fully know the historic price for non-compliance with Armenian revolutionaries, so most of the loyal ones also go along (albeit unwillingly). The revolting Armenians harass the U.S. Army's supply lines, and engage in hit and run tactics... sometimes engaging in full blown battles, the rare times they can stomach facing American soldiers. Meanwhile, Armenian leaders figure it would be wise to clear out Southern California of their fellow Americans, so that New Armenia can be as ethnically pure as possible. With many of the men away at war, villages are easy pickings, as American women, children and older men are mercilessly murdered. WHAT DO YOU THINK THE PEOPLE'S RESPONSE WOULD BE? Given the dogmatic nature of many Americans... the kind who violently took out their furies on Iranian-Americans during the hostage crisis, say... you can bet the local Americans would get plenty steamed over what their fellow Americans of Armenian origin treacherously decided to embark upon during America's dark hour. You can bet notions of civility would be rare to find among Americans whose beloved family members have been systematically slaughtered by the Armenians. Let's say the American government realizes something must be done to stem the horrible hemorrhaging caused by the Armenian Benedict Arnolds. The government is aware that the cycle of hatred has grown out of control, as reprisals for each massacre turns out to be yet another massacre. WHAT DO YOU THINK THE GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE WOULD BE? The government decides to relocate the Armenians far away from the area of calamity. Since so many Armenians are sympathetic to the cause of "New Armenia," it would be impossible for the government to separate the loyal Armenians from the disloyal... especially during desperate wartime, where resources and manpower are scarce. So the American government rounds up all the Californian Armenians and forces them to march part of the way to South Dakota. (Unfortunately, the European and Chinese militias have blown up most of the rails and roadways, and the few operating trains and vehicles need to be prioritized for the war effort.) With manpower so scarce, few soldiers are assigned to protect the Armenians during the march. Some of them can't find it in their hearts to forgive the Armenians' betrayal, and take it out on the innocent Armenians. However, most of the American soldiers are noble, and do the best they can to give the food and medicine allocated to them, and to protect the Armenians from blood-feuding fellow citizens. It's too bad those gangs from Los Angeles' South side have been coordinating attacks on the marching Armenians, out of revenge for what the Armenians had done to their families. Luckily, most of the Armenians make it to South Dakota. There have been deaths along the way... famine, disease and massacres at the hands of fellow citizens have taken some toll. America survives the ordeal, and some seventy years later, Armenians claim 1.5 million of their numbers have been systematically murdered (curiously surpassing the figure of their entire population in California, based on various neutral censuses/sources), in a repulsive act of "genocide"... making up all kinds of reasons in a desperate attempt to find motives, such as the Americans were xenophobic, or that the Americans needed to blame their crumbling empire on a scapegoat, or that the Americans were after their money... while the Armenians took it like lambs awaiting slaughter, just like the Jews of World War II. Let us all pity the poor Armenian victims! You don't have to be an American to Imagine the described scenario.... just imagine any ethnic minority in your land turning treacherous during your country's desperate hour of need. Let's say you're from France. (Boy, the French almost unwaveringly support the Armenians.) Let's say it's Germany among France's attacking nations that incites a sizable French ethnic minority to stab France in the back (France has a huge Armenian community, so let us again use them as an example). What if the Germans say, Armenians! We fought side-by-side in WWII as fellow Aryans... come join us! Since Armenians create their own history, and their historians have little regard for the facts, let's say a few historians "discover" France was a real Armenian ancient homeland 7,000 years ago (long before the Armenians were documented as a people, of course), before the Armenians started migrating to the Anatolian region... taking their cue from actual Armenian professors/authors who have claimed Switzerland as their ancient homeland [see "QUOTES" section for source] or that the British are descended from or related to the Armenians [see "Reference" under "Articles"]); French Armenians rise by hitting the on-its-last-legs French Army in the back, and begin to slaughter fellow French, to make room for their New Armenia... with the words of William Saroyan to inspire them. ("When two Armenians meet anywhere in the world, see if they will not create a New Armenia.") Brrr! How do you think the French government would react? The French people? The described scenario is almost exactly what took place in the Ottoman Empire And the Ottoman Turks were clearly at fault for not being able to fully protect the innocent Armenians of the march. Given the desperate circumstances (bankruptcy, famine, disease, limited resources/manpower, war on five fronts), would your country have been able to do better? Do not forget, the Armenians from other parts of the Ottoman Empire were untouched. Some Turkish soldiers lost their lives defending the relocating Armenians, and some who were caught committing crimes against the Armenians were actually EXECUTED by the Ottoman government (After, and DURING the war. [See "Questions," under "Sections" for sources].) What kind of a "genocide" is that? Do not forget as well that the causes claiming Armenian lives were the same that claimed Turkish ones, in considerably greater numbers. [See "Census," under "Sections" for sources] Holdwater does not take the credit for this scenario; he merely embellished the scenario from an article written in 1923, "Angora and the Turks," which you can find in the ARTICLES section ("West" Accounts). There is an "end all" argument against the Armenian Genocide... ...That is, one that should have ended the argument many years ago. It's really stupefying how few people pay attention to this absolutely convincing argument. __________________ When i say, there will be no effect but i am not willing to remain silent. -Fuzuli Last edited by Big K : 05-30-2007 at 08:05 AM.

05-30-2007, 07:21 AM	#3 (permalink)
Big K HürGeneral *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 12-11-06 Location: Istanbul Posts: 1,046 Country:	Armenian Genocide Introduction to Armenian Issue - FORSNET "It appears obvious that the Turkish authorities, anxious for the safety of their lines of communication, had no other alternative than to order the removal of their rebellious subjects to some place distant from the seat of hostilities, and their internment there. The enforcement of this absolutely necessary precaution led to further risings on the part of the Armenians. The remaining Moslems were almost defenceless, because the regular garrisons were at the front as well as the greater part of the police and able-bodied men. Already infuriated at the reports of the atrocities committed at Van by the insurgents, in fear for their lives and those of their relatives, they were at last driven by the cumulative effect of these events into panic and retaliation and, as invariably happens in such cases, the innocent suffered with the guilty. C.F. Dixon-Johnson, British author of the 1916 book, "The Armenians." ("West" Accounts, under "Articles.")" "I could see that [the Armenians'] well-known disloyalty to the Ottoman Government and the fact that the territory which they inhabited was within the zone of military operations constituted grounds more or less justifiable for compelling them to depart their homes." Robert Lansing, United States Secretary of State, November 1916 "THE PURPOSE OF TALL ARMENIAN TALE (TAT) ...Is to expose the mythological “Armenian genocide,” from the years 1915-16. A wartime tragedy involving the losses of so many has been turned into a politicized story of “exclusive victimhood,” and because of the prevailing prejudice against Turks, along with Turkish indifference, those in the world, particularly in the West, have been quick to accept these terribly defamatory claims involving the worst crime against humanity. Few stop to investigate below the surface that those regarded as the innocent victims, the Armenians, while seeking to establish an independent state, have been the ones to commit systematic ethnic cleansing against those who did not fit into their racial/religious ideal: Muslims, Jews, and even fellow Armenians who had converted to Islam. Criminals as Dro, Antranik, Keri, Armen Garo and Soghoman Tehlirian (the assassin of Talat Pasha, one of the three Young Turk leaders, along with Enver and Jemal) contributed toward the deaths (via massacres, atrocities, and forced deportation) of countless innocents, numbering over half a million. What determines genocide is not the number of casualties or the cruelty of the persecutions, but the intent to destroy a group, the members of which are guilty of nothing beyond being members of that group. The Armenians suffered their fate of resettlement not for their ethnicity, having co-existed and prospered in the Ottoman Empire for centuries, but because they rebelled against their dying Ottoman nation during WWI (World War I); a rebellion that even their leaders of the period, such as Boghos Nubar and Hovhannes Katchaznouni, have admitted. Yet the hypocritical world rarely bothers to look beneath the surface, not only because of anti-Turkish prejudice, but because of Armenian wealth and intimidation tactics. As a result, these libelous lies, sometimes belonging in the category of “genocide studies,” have become part of the school curricula of many regions. Armenian scholars such as Vahakn Dadrian, Peter Balakian, Richard Hovannisian, Dennis Papazian and Levon Marashlian have been known to dishonestly present only one side of their story, as long as their genocide becomes affirmed. They have enlisted the help of "genocide scholars," such as Roger Smith, Robert Melson, Samantha Power, and Israel Charny… and particularly those of Turkish extraction, such as Taner Akcam and Fatma Muge Gocek, who justify their alliance with those who actively work to harm the interests of their native country, with the claim that such efforts will help make Turkey more" democratic." On the other side of this coin are genuine scholars who consider all the relevant data, as true scholars have a duty to do, such as Justin McCarthy, Bernard Lewis, Heath Lowry, Erich Feigl and Guenter Lewy. The unscrupulous genocide industry, not having the facts on its side, makes a practice of attacking the messenger instead of the message, vilifying these professors as “deniers” and "agents of the Turkish government." The truth means so little to the pro-genocide believers, some even resort to the forgeries of the Naim-Andonian telegrams or sources based on false evidence, as Franz Werfel’s The Forty Days of Musa Dagh. Naturally, there is no end to the hearsay "evidence" of the prejudiced pro-Christian people from the period, including missionaries and Near East Relief representatives, Arnold Toynbee, Lord Bryce, Lloyd George, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, and so many others. When the rare Westerner opted to look at the issues objectively, such as Admirals Mark Bristol and Colby Chester, they were quick to be branded as “Turcophiles” by the propagandists. The sad thing is, even those who don’t consider themselves as bigots are quick to accept the deceptive claims of Armenian propaganda, because deep down people feel the Turks are natural killers and during times when Turks were victims, they do not rate as equal and deserving human beings. This is the main reason why the myth of this genocide has become the common wisdom." check also these sources... i will say no more. Last edited by Big K : 05-30-2007 at 08:08 AM.

05-30-2007, 15:44 PM	#6 (permalink)
Parihaka Moderator Join Date: 11-10-04 Location: Te Ika a Maui Posts: 9,466 Country:	I would just like to point out spamming the site with thousand word cut and pastes isn't appreciated. Selected paragraphs that deal with the topic only, including links or references please __________________ In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz

05-30-2007, 17:45 PM	#10 (permalink)
Stan187 WAB BOUNCER *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 11-24-06 Posts: 2,325 Country:	"The revolting Armenians harass the U.S. Army's supply lines, and engage in hit and run tactics... sometimes engaging in full blown battles, the rare times they can stomach facing American soldiers" So wait you're saying that the US Army would massacre a whole people just because some of them were insurgents? Not in Iraq, not in California, and not in Kansas, Dorothy. __________________ In Iran people belive pepsi stands for pay each penny save israel. -urmomma158 The Russian Navy is still a threat, but only to those unlucky enough to be Russian sailors.-highsea