Top Leaderboard, Site wide
October 30, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


The Missing Women of Afghanistan






Truthdig Bazaar
Losing the News

Losing the News

By Alex Jones
$16.47

more items

 
Report

Chris Hedges: Coveting the Holocaust

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Oct 23, 2006
Armenian protest
AP / EUROKINISI

Armenian demonstrators burn a Turkish flag outside the Turkish Embassy in Athens in 1996 after a march to commemorate the 81st anniversary of the 1915-1923 Armenian genocide by the Ottoman Turks.

By Chris Hedges

Editor’s Note: The former Middle East bureau chief for The New York Times and author of the bestseller “War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning” takes a hard look at the political capital of suffering.

I sent my New York University journalism students out to write stories based on any one of the themes in the Ten Commandments.  A woman of Armenian descent came back with an article about how Armenians she had interviewed were covetous of the Jewish Holocaust.  The idea that one people who suffered near decimation could be covetous of another that also suffered near decimation was, to say the least, different. And when the French lower house of parliament approved a bill earlier this month making it a crime to deny the Armenian genocide I began to wonder what it was she, and those she had interviewed, actually coveted.
 
She was not writing about the Holocaust itself—no one covets the suffering of another—but how it has become a potent political and ideological weapon in the hands of the Israeli government and many in the American Jewish community.  While Armenians are still fighting to have the genocide of some 1.5 million Armenians by the Ottoman Turks accepted as historical fact, many Jews have found in the Nazi Holocaust a useful instrument to deflect criticism of Israel and the dubious actions of the pro-Israeli lobby as well as many Jewish groups in the United States.

Norman Finkelstein, who for his writings has been virtually blacklisted, noted in “The Holocaust Industry” that the Jewish Holocaust has allowed Israel to cast itself and “the most successful ethnic group in the United States” as eternal victims.  Finkelstein, the son of Jewish survivors of the Nazi Holocaust, goes on to argue that this status has enabled Israel, which has “a horrendous human rights record,” to play the victim as it oppresses Palestinians or destroys Lebanon.  This victim status has permitted U.S. Jewish organizations (the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress and others) to get their hands on billions of dollars in reparations, much of which never finds its way to the dwindling number of Holocaust survivors.  Finkelstein’s mother, who was in the Warsaw ghetto, received $3,500, while the World Jewish Congress walked away with roughly $7 billion in compensation moneys.  The organization pays lavish salaries to its employees and uses the funds to fuel its own empire.  For many the Nazi Holocaust is not used to understand and deal with the past, and more importantly the universal human capacity for evil, but to manipulate the present.  Finkelstein correctly writes that the fictitious notion of unique suffering leads to feelings of unique entitlement.

And so what this student, and those she had interviewed, coveted was not the actual experience of the Holocaust, not the suffering of Jews in the death camps, but the political capital that Israel and many of its supporters have successfully gleaned from the Holocaust.  And while I sympathize with the Armenians, while I understand their rage toward Turkey, I do not wish to see them, or anyone else, wield their own genocide as a political weapon. 

There is a fine and dangerous line between the need for historical truth and public apology, in this case by the Turks, and the gross misuse of human tragedy.  French President Jacques Chirac and his interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, said this month that Turkey will have to recognize the genocide before Turkey is allowed to join the European Union.  Most European nations turned their backs on the French, with the EU issuing a statement saying that the French bill will “prohibit dialogue.”  But the French move is salutary, not only for the Armenians who have been humiliated and defamed by successive waves of Turkish governments but for the Turks as well.  Historical amnesia, as anyone who has lived in the Middle East or the Balkans knows, makes reconciliation and healing impossible.  It fosters a dangerous sense of grievance and rage.  It makes any real dialogue impossible.  Nearly 100 years after the murderous rampage by the Turks it can still be a crime to name the Armenian holocaust under Law 301, which prohibits anyone from defaming Turkey.  One of the most courageous violators of that law is the writer Orhan Pamuk, who has criticized his country’s refusal to confront its past, and who just won the Nobel Prize for Literature. But he is a solitary figure in Turkey.

Historical black holes also empower those who insist that the Nazi Holocaust is unique, that it is somehow beyond human comprehension and stands apart from other human activity.  These silences make it easier to minimize, misunderstand and ignore the reality of other genocides, how they work and how they are carried out.  They make it easier to turn tragedy into myth.  They make it easier to misread the real lesson of the Holocaust, which, as Christopher Browning illustrated in his book “Ordinary Men,” is that the line between the victim and the victimizer is razor-thin.  Most of us, as Browning correctly argues, can be seduced and manipulated into killing our neighbors.  Few are immune. 

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
The communists, not the Jews, were the Nazis’ first victims, and the handicapped were the first to be gassed in the German death factories.  This is not to minimize the suffering of the Jews, but these victims too deserve attention.  And what about Gypsies, homosexuals, prisoners of war and German political dissidents?  What, on a wider scale, about the Cambodians, the Rwandans, and the millions more who have been slaughtered by utopian idealists who believe the eradication of other human beings will cleanse the world?
 
When I visited the Holocaust Museum in Washington I looked in vain for these other victims.  I did not see explained in detail the awful reality that Jewish officials in the ghettos—Judenrat—worked closely with the Nazis to herd their own off to the death camps.  And was the happy resolution of the Holocaust, as we saw in images at the end of the exhibits, the disembarking of European Jews on the shores of Palestine?  What about the Palestinians who lived in Palestine and were soon to be pushed off their land?  And, as importantly, what about African-Americans and Native Americans?  Why is the Nazi genocide, which we did not perpetrate, displayed on the Mall in Washington and the brutal extermination of Native Americans ignored?  Why should billions in reparations be paid to Jewish slave laborers and not a dime to those enslaved by our own country?

These questions circle back to the dangerous sanctification of any genocide, the belief that one ethnic group can represent goodness, solely because its members are the victims, and another evil because from its ranks come the thugs who carry out mass slaughter.  Once these demented killing machines begin their work the only thing unique is the method of murder.  The lesson of any genocide is not that one group of human beings is better than another, but that in the intoxication of the moment, gripped by the mass hypnosis of state propaganda and the lust for violence, we can all become killers.  All the victims must be heard.  None are unique.  And all of us have to be on guard lest we be seduced.  We carry within us—German, Jew, Armenian or Christian—dark and dangerous lusts that must be held in check.  I applaud the French.  I hope the French action pushes the Turks toward contrition and honesty.  But I do not wish for the Armenians to covet the Holocaust, to begin the process of sanctifying their own suffering.  When we sanctify ourselves we do so at the expense of others.   


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By truthdig, June 14, 2010 at 9:26 am Link to this comment

??? PLEASE JUST WATCH THIS DOCUMENTATION SHOWN ON VERY NOTABLE
GERMAN TV STATIONS THREE TIMES WITHIN 4 MONTHS. ???

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=B4306054D5680A18

There shouldn’t be anything discussed anymore… it’s absurd!

Report this

By TOM SINAN, December 22, 2009 at 11:03 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

i dont hate Turkish people, but i hate the fn government of Turkey what A fn @ss-wholes,,,turkey needs to do the right thing like Germany

http://i655.photobucket.com/albums/uu278/CichlidsRool/fyou.jpg

Report this

By Turk, August 29, 2009 at 2:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Armenians were supported by some other nations to attack Turkish people including babies, pregnant women and old people. Because Armenian were gonna have their own lands. That was the deal and everybody knows that! Especially Armenian historians! They say 1.5 million Armenian died. They were not even 1.5 million of people during this opposite attack of Turks. If you people have 1 gram of brain then you can ask yourself this question and understand the fact. “What is the point of attacking people who speak your language and who accept your rules. People who are innocent!? Would you kill Armenians who lives in U.S. for no reason? Cuz they live like Americans with peace and there is no point for fight right?” But if those people become traitor bastards and start to kill your innocent people to have their own lands then there will be a good reason to fight back right? This is what Turks done! They did fight back to protect their women, babies and future. They killed Armenians one by one! But remember the point! it was not for fun! and this is why it was not genocide or any other bullshit… Got it?

Report this

By sengun.taygun, May 10, 2009 at 2:47 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

ARMENIANS ARE LIARS.

Russian Sponsored Armenian mobs killed innocent Turkish people during wwI.

Report this

By Tomris Burcu, September 6, 2008 at 1:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’s hard to say how terrible situation between Turks and Armenians. People must realize that we Turks or you Armenians don’t kill each other, Im talking about today. In the past, it happened. There is no need to hate. Yeah many peaople died in the past, it was bad. I believe we both know the real truth actually. In under politics, each govermants didn’t give us some virtual information. But no matter, you know, we are not senators, we are not criminal. And we (Turkish public)are sorry for your losts and on the other hand, for our lost. That’s very simple to blame someone, some state or some politics. I’m aware enough to know how easy to persuade people a partial truth. No, I’m not a lawyer for some belief about past. You all write here another ones’ ideas, belief, truth or etc.
Armenian Genocide is true or not, Turkey must explain it or musn’t. They were in war, in a war! In my opinion already a war seems like a genocide for me, about its affects. Genocide is not acceptable ok, is blaming people for their past acceptable? I accept, in my country have some racist people (like dear Hrant Dink killer(s), I hate all of them. I think they are the main problem, beacuse they are loser! Do u see in tv, afer Dink killed, how many people walked on streets! Don’t think all of them are Armenians. Turks are sorried, really sorried for that. One of us killed him yeah, but don’t blame all of us beacuse we blame these kind of people already. I said “we”. There are too many different people in my country. You know our population.
Whatever you say, whatever historian say(I belive history is partial)whatever govermant say, I know that if people can be understanding, there are not any problems to solve them. Honestly, Armenian people, I do understand you. Not your goverment, yours. and I just want to make u understand there are many people in Turkey who think as me. So I think, if we argue with our defective information we will arrive nowhere, beause in fact we’re partial too. Ottoman people (including Turks, Kurds, Armenian etc.)aren’t live today, they all died before smile everyone will die one day, in war or in home. I know that today there are people who live in Turkey(goverment says that Turkish) who live in Armenia(goverment says that Armenian) so do u see, we are people that living different countries, just all. No need to politics, no need to harsh beliefs, no need to be lawyers.all we need to realise we are just people who want to live in a better life.
With love…

Report this

By Rich, December 20, 2007 at 5:05 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hey Jewish Bostonian,

Your comment to this post gravely incorrect.

Armenians were defending themselves against thousands of Turks as well as Kurds at the time of the Armenian genocide.

Armenians in fact fought along side Turks in many instancses better then Turks as they ran away crying like school yard girls while the Armenian fighters did the heavy lifting.

Armenians who fought in the Turkish army were rewarded for valor and bravery.

Turks in organizing the genocide, disarmed Armenians, forced them into labor, then killed them off.

Make no mistake as denialists have mentioned Armenians were defending there villages from Turkish mass killings now overwhelmingly excepted in the international community as a genocide, anything less then this excepted fact is denial. 

Germans who were allies with the Turks at the time were repulsed by the inhumane killinng of innocent Armenian citizens, this is also well documented.

Report this

By Jewish Bostonian, December 18, 2007 at 10:39 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

No, its not ironic, because the Armenian situation is greatly different than from what the Jewish people suffered.  Jews did not raise a military force of 150,000+ men, fight against Germany in enemy armies, or slaughter hundreds of thousands of Germans!!  In fact, parallels made between the Armenian case and the Holocaust is completely insulting to Jews and degrades the meaning of genocide.  Everyone knows that the Armenians backstabbed the Turks during the Great War.

Report this

By HS, December 16, 2007 at 6:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hipocrisy…......don’t even try to turn the table around here!  It is the state of Israel that has always denied, and to this day, continues to deny the Armenian Genocide.  Isn’t that ironic????

Report this

By Metin, December 15, 2007 at 6:01 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Yalancılar, sahtekarlar! Anadolu’da katliam yapan; bebek, çocuk, sakat, yaşlı demeden öldüren Ermenilerdir! Osmanlı Döneminde Türklerden daha çok itibar gören Ermeniler yedikleri ekmeği teperek Türk Milletini arkadan vurmuştur. Şimdi 1915 aldatmacasıyla tüm dünyayı kandırmaya çalışan Ermeniler daha kurdukları ASALA adlı terörist örgütün katlettikleri Türklerin kanı kurumadan utanmazca Türklere iftira atmaktadırlar.
Ayyıldızlı Bayrağımızı yakan alçakları lanetliyorum!

Report this

By Rich, September 21, 2007 at 12:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Speak English this is America (internet included).

Report this

By ceren, September 17, 2007 at 8:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

zaten butun ulkelerın bızm ulkede gozu var yardım mardım yalan bızı bır kasık suda bogmaya calısan hayvanlar bunlarr ama elde etmek ıstedıklerını hıc bır zaman elde edemezler bizim vatanımız bölünmez.öle tas arkasındanj bayrak yakmalarla olmaz bu sıkıosa gelsınler onumuzde yaksınlarda gorelım

Report this

By Rich, June 23, 2007 at 12:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Onur,

Trust me military might is not right. The Turks can hardly govern themselves. They will likely start canabalizing among themselves.

The International community has rejected Turkey’s agressive, buligerant, and unjustified foreign and domestic policies for decades.

Bravado talk, is just that, talk.

Guess what will happen to you if your turn your neck to look 360 degrees, thats right you’ll break your neck. Look forward with open eyes, I dont wear your blurred glasses. I see just fine.

Armenians were better soldiers in the Turkish Army, they ran like school yard girls when ethnic Armenian citizens serving in the Turkish army did the heavy lifting. We did carry the flag for them, so what we are talking about reality now, not dusty history books.

Report this

By Onur, June 22, 2007 at 7:45 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hey Rich,

I did read all your comments with the others and I could say you have a problem dude !
Why don’t you understand about what they try to tell you ?
Do you know what we say in My Country;for that kind of person ???
‘‘Wear a horse glasses’’ Maybe, you will not ganna get that either.
The meaning is : Both your eye sides are closed and you see only 15 degree in your life.Take this shity thing off…why dont you try to see 360 degree.
Could you try it ?  Is it too much for you ?
Also, you don’t get my message what I’m saying…
Even enemys flag are respectful for TURKS,we did care their flag in the past( You can get it all kind of information about it, if you read but, not with your glasses,as I told you, take it off)
Try dude try, you can do it.

Report this

By armeniancrusader, June 21, 2007 at 10:27 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Im a 100% with crusader. We must unite brothers
and take our chrisian lands back from the barbaric
savage’s. We Greeks, Russians,Armenians, Serbs, Bulgarians, as brothers must unite and take our
lands back

Report this

By Rich, June 15, 2007 at 10:34 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hey Crusader,

I’m Armenian Christian and don’t believe in any crusade unification of the Nations you describe. that is an out of date stradegy that will simply not work.

The Turkey will (if anything) implode as did the former Soviet Union.

Report this

By Crusader, June 10, 2007 at 4:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Christian East will not rest, until the lands that were taken by the barbaric scoundrals are given back. The day will come when the Russians, Greeks, Serbians, and Armenians unite as the Great Crusaders, and wage war upon your pathetic nation heresy

Report this

By Rich, May 24, 2007 at 11:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I don’t think the same individuals who burned the Turkish flag are reading this comment post, so why pose the question?

I don’t see why most Turks have pride in showing the Turkish flag in public anyway.

Report this

By Onur, May 20, 2007 at 2:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I just want to say the armanian guys who burned the Turkish Flag…
Guys or Gays !
It’s soo easy to burned the Turkish flag out off the Turkey.
Do you wanna try to burn that, some where in Turkey ?
Do You ???
I Don’t Think soo…

Report this

By Rich, April 28, 2007 at 3:09 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

to more clearly state I meant Ottoman government, or Ottoman Athority

Report this

By Rich, April 27, 2007 at 10:05 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The word Ottoman refers to the Ottoman authority at the time, the government.

Greeks, Armenians, other ethnicities were hardly in positions of authority to make decisions of mass killings, the Ottoman Turks were and did. 

Keep your so-called facts, they are denialist views anyway, most all scholars agree that it was genocide, why should I have to make you believe somthing you deny.

Go work on convincing the rest of civilized society what you believe, good luck!

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, April 27, 2007 at 4:48 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich, the word “Ottoman” includs all ethnic groups, Turks, Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, etc…Thus, when Turkish sources refer to “civil war” they refer to conflicts between Ottoman Turks and Ottoman Armenians and Ottoman Greeks, etc.  Perhaps since you as an Armenian see yourself as being different from Ottomans, you are misinterpreting use of this term.  Turks did not fight Turks.  Turks were not massacred by Turks.  The eastern war is known to have been fought against Armenians and Russians.  There is ample evidence showing that the mass graves contain Turkish victims, and that these massacres were perpetrated by Armenians. 

You are in complete denial of the fact that Armenians committed atrocities against Turks.  The issue is not just what happened to Armenians; events are not isolated, they effect each other.  How can you discuss whether something was or wasn’t a genocide if you don’t consider ALL THE FACTS?

Oh, sorry, I forgot that for you discussion is equivalent to denial….you don’t want to examine facts, you just want to make everything fit your predetermined conclusion, so you ignore or fabricate as needed.

Ok, you do want you want, but I’m not going to waste my time with you anymore.  Have a great day.

Report this

By Rich, April 27, 2007 at 2:19 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emerhan wrote:

“Now this is the most ridiculous statement you’ve ever written, and shows how completely blind you are not only to truth, but to logic.  Mass graves have been found in Turkish villages, sometimes hundreds of bodies stuffed in a well.  This fact that these are Turkish victims is corroborated with eyewitness accounts, as well as archival accounts.  Even American diplomats such as Bristol have written about Armenian atrocities, and the French knew of the massacres done by Armenians in Southern Turkey (ref. Robert Zeidner, Stanford Shaw).”

Turks themselves say that they were involved in a civil war. If you dont believe your own ancectoral history that is something you must overcome, or stay in denial.

reciting positions from denialist perspectives are just that- denialist perspectives.

American diplomats, French, German and many other third party witnesses cited many instances of mass killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks. Now I would expect a denialist perspective such as yours to be selective and discredit history and archival evidence, this is to be expected and nothing new.

Emerhan wrote:

“Now this is the most ridiculous statement you’ve ever written, and shows how completely blind you are not only to truth, but to logic.  Mass graves have been found in Turkish villages, sometimes hundreds of bodies stuffed in a well.”

I would not expect a denialist perspective to be able to grasp what is truth and logic on this issue. It would defy truth and the Turkish government’s lack of logic in a humanitarian sense to uncover mass graves that were anyone other then of Turkish ethnicity. I dought they are willing to contradict themselves of their current policy of denial and revision of history the Armenian genocide.

The issue here Armenian genocide, a systematic killing by your ethnic ancestors.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, April 27, 2007 at 7:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich wrote:“Also you are making assumptions that historical documnents are forgeries.”

Um, no…I am not making assumptions.  There are historians who have shown that the documents are not consistant with Ottoman Turkish.  For example, Muslims never refer to themselves as “Islamlar”; they call themselves “Muslim” or “Mumin”. Christians used to call Muslims “Islamlar”, so the text is more in line with a Christian writing it.  Their work details more anomilies indicating its false nature.  You should read up on Guenter Lewy and Surreya Yuca.
Recently Edward Erikson has also published an article criticising some of Dadrian’s work, stating that Dadrian has jumped to his conclusions with out using all sources, and analyzed documents disproving some of Dadrian’s claims.

Rich wrote:“Also the point that you state of the Turks being killed was at the hands of Turks themselves, durring the civil war.”

Now this is the most ridiculous statement you’ve ever written, and shows how completely blind you are not only to truth, but to logic.  Mass graves have been found in Turkish villages, sometimes hundreds of bodies stuffed in a well.  This fact that these are Turkish victims is corroborated with eyewitness accounts, as well as archival accounts.  Even American diplomats such as Bristol have written about Armenian atrocities, and the French knew of the massacres done by Armenians in Southern Turkey (ref. Robert Zeidner, Stanford Shaw). 

Turks weren’t fighting a civil war amongst ourselves, we were fighting for liberation against invading Armenian, Greek, British, French and Russian armies.  The primary perpetrators of masssacres, however, were Armenians and Greeks.

Stop denying Armenian atrocities…

Report this

By Rich, April 26, 2007 at 2:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The point that you are missing is that the Turkish government’s current policies of Armenian genocide denial and it’s promotion of its current nationalistic ferver generate it’s current violent acts against it’s minority populations.

Also you are making assumptions that historical documnents are forgeries.

Also the point that you state of the Turks being killed was at the hands of Turks themselves, durring the civil war. Under the excuse of civil war the Turkish government and there agents refute the killing of Armenians for the same excuse, but contrary to this propoganda excuse the killing of Armenians were planned and systematic from the Ottoman authority.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, April 26, 2007 at 10:25 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I believe in previous posts several Turks, including myself, have already made it clear that we do not condone any kind of violence or verbal attacks in regards to this issue.

It is unfortunate that people like Ogun Samast resort to violence and murder, rather than voicing protests in civilized matters.

The Turkish government is not responsible for such extreme actions; nor is the Armenian community free from such extremists themselves.

Operation Nemesis was an Armenian terrorist network which murdered former Turkish officials who they blamed for the relocations during the 1920s - they killed as they pleased, regardless of the fact that many assassinated were found innocent of any wrong doings.

In the 1970s, Armenian terrorist organizations like ASALA and JCAG again murdered Turkish diplomats across the global, planning hundreds of bombing and terrorist plots, such as the Orly bombing in France, which claimed many innocent French and Turkish cilivian lives.  Their campaign included the bombing of the home of American professor Stanford Shaw, simply because he wrote that Armenian allegations of genocide were untrue.

As a result, they (unforuntately sucessfully) created a climate of fear in the Turkish community for speaking out against their wrong accusations.

Today, Turks are still victims of hate crimes in this regard.  For example, I know a Turk in Nevada whose car tires were slashed because he spoke against Armenian lobbying.

I am sure there are many reasonable Armenians who do not condone such actions, just as reasonable Turks do not condone the murder of Hrant Dink.  Again, we need to look at the facts.

That over 100,000 Turks were massacred by Armenians BEFORE ANY SINGLE ARMENIAN WAS RELOCATED is a documented fact.  At the end of the day, over 500,000 Turks would loose their lives to Armenian violence.  On all fronts, including disease and famine, over 2.5 million Turks died.  It is also a fact that a disputed number of Armenians also died due to massacre, disease, and famine.  There is no evidence to indicate a government policy for genocide; a relocation was ordered, not an extermination.

These are the facts of the case.  The main problem with the Armenian thesis is that they rely on forged documents and completely ignore Turkish victims.  The violence was not one-sided.  In fact, there are even statements of Armenian Revolutionaries from the time which are testament of their intent to provoke inter-communal strife and reprisals so that the Allies would intervene on their behalf.  The Dashnak party too has culpability for the calamity that befell the Armenians.  Rather than using today’s Turkish community as a scapegoat, Armenians would do well to weed out the criminals in their own community.

Unfortunately, the fact that the LA Armenian community raised over 400,000 to try to free convicted terrorist Hampig Sassounian does not bode well for the prospects of reconciliation.

Report this

By Rich, April 25, 2007 at 3:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Yea, the Turks that killed the missionary’s in Turkey were peace loving nationalists, along with the one who shot the Pope, and those who instigated and followed through with the killing of Hrant Dink.
Turkey’s policies perpetuate hate which leads to these senseless killings.

I find much hate in these words:
“france and armenia go to hell motherfucker i f*** your head - germany is the best f*** of the rest - f*** europe f*** america - germanyyyyy 4 life - DONT BELIEVE ARMENIAN LIES - SHUT UP FRANCE”.

Natalie is not right for her statements afterall many Turks do acknowledge the Armenian genocide and a number of Turks did save Armenians durring the mass killings of the Ottoman era.

Sadly we do have denialists still lingering in ignorance, it is not intirely there fault, if Turkey would change it’s denialist policies these nationalists would have no where to turn to but the truth.

Until then I will expect agents of denial to desicrate humanity, out of pure ignorance.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, April 25, 2007 at 9:23 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There are people who make inappropriate comments on both sides.  Here’s a sampling from an educated Armenian fanatic, who has at least avoided using expletives while issuing her death threats:

“I am an Armenian born in America. My parents were raised in America. I am proud to say that I am happy that we dont convert to “AMERICANS” we preserve our culture and RELIGION. Why should I? Afterall after I receive my degree I’m going to live in Armenia. I am very offended by your remarks. You made one good move, didn’t expose your identity, because I guarantee you, you would have been tortured and killed. I hate turks, I will always hate turks, I will teach my children to teach their children to hate turks. I will get along with those that hate turks…I encourage all ARMENIANS to hate turks because they are worthless people that are just a waste of space on the world.”  - NATALIE

I do not know any Turks who try to raise their children with hate against Armenians, however, this example Natalie provides is not so uncommon in the Armenian American community.  Just the other day a Turkish-Armenian joint concert at an American university had to be CANCELLED due to THREATS made against the musicians by fanatical ARMENIANS…There are those who don’t want reconcilliation, and it is the job of moderates (regardless of their opinions) to make sure debates do not turn into more inter-ethnic hatred.

Report this

By Rich, April 24, 2007 at 9:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The previous post was a perfect example a finatic similar to the stripe that oppresses humanity, but more-so ignorant of history, ignorant of the truth, ignorant of what is properly called the Armenian genocide.

Report this

By dont believe armenian lies and shut up france, April 23, 2007 at 6:45 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

france and armenia go to hell motherfucker i f*** your head - germany is the best f*** of the rest - f*** europe f*** america - germanyyyyy 4 life - DONT BELIEVE ARMENIAN LIES - SHUT UP FRANCE

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 23, 2007 at 1:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

3.  As far as you calling me an extremist for questioning the timing of the murder.  What is so extremist about that?  Hrant Dink has been voicing his opinions for YEARS.  His article about “poisonous blood” came out a long time ago.  There is nothing new about that.  Ogun Samast is just a high school kid who didn’t even do well in his classes.  Do you really believe that a young boy, who hadn’t even been to Istanbul before, did this horrible crime by himself.  Or what about that Yasin guy…do you think he is alone in directing Samast?  I don’t.

I believe there are more sinister forces behind this murder - don’t be naive.  Yes, individuals can hate, and there may very well be many people who hate Hrant Dink.  But there is more than hate behind this crime.  Other journalists that were murdered in Turkey were killed for more than just “hate.”  For example, Ugur Mumcu was killed for investigating the “derin devlet” - people in the government who abused their positions for their own ideological or monetary purposes.

You have to ask yourself, why would anyone kill a man like Hrant Dink, who despite believe that the events were genocide, was a MODERATE.  He opposed the Armenian diaspora’s emphasis on trying to force legislative “recognition.”  He opposed the French bill limiting free speech and punishing those who oppose the genocide allegations.  His paper was one the first (if I am not mistaken) Armenian paper to be published in Turkish, because he valued dialogue. 

I mean, if hate is the only motivation here, there are many more extreme-minded Armenians in Turkey…why kill a moderate? 

To draw attention to Armenian issues, create chaos for Turkey?  Pressure repealing of 301?

Whoever murdered Hrant Dink for sure doesn’t care about Turkey or have the Turkish people’s best interests in mind…

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 23, 2007 at 12:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Wow, Rich, you seem to have gone totally nuts in your last comments, calling me ultranationalist every other sentence as thought that (wrong) label makes what you say correct.  Without stooping to your low level of name-calling, let me address some of the main issues here.

1.  You wrote:  ” I suggest you diversify your sources of information from the ultranationist views..”

Turkish newspapers such as Radikal and Hurriyet, which I follow, hardly qualify as “ultranationalist.”  In fact, Radikal is a leftist paper…so I would refrain from labelling without knowing what you are talking about.

2. In regards to Dink’s requesting but not receiving protection.  I see your newspaper source says otherwise.  Here are what some other newspaper sources say:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21095981-2703,00.html
Mr Guler rejected accusations that the Government did not do enough to protect Dink, saying the journalist had not asked for help. “Because he didn’t request protection, he didn’t get close protection,” Mr Guler said. “Only general security precautions were taken.”

http://www.indymedia.org/es/2007/01/878740.shtml
The New Anatolian
Hrant Dink’s lawyer Fethiye Cetin: He got threats; he was painted as an enemy of Turks because of the case against him. He didn’t feel safe. Now what we feared has happened. This serves nobody. He didn’t ask for personal bodyguards, although he submitted the very last threatening letter to the public prosecutor’s office.

http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=8281&theme=1&size=A
In a television interview broadcast shortly after the shooting, his friend and fellow journalist, Aydin Engin, who had been sentenced together with Dink on the basis of the same article 301 of the Turkish penal code, recalled how just yesterday the two had spoken on the telephone about their six-month sentence, which had simply been postponed indefinitely, but had not been definitively suspended.  And how Hrant said that he was not afraid and was ready for anything.  Aydin had urged him many times to accept the bodyguard that police had promised him after the latest threats made against him, but Hrant once again refused saying that he did not want to be defended in his freedom and that he did not fear the dangers he faced.

So before you go around calling me an “ultranationalist” using “ultranationalist” sources, and implying that everything I say is unreliable, perhaps you should have at least had the decency to ask for my sources…

Report this

By Kadir, January 22, 2007 at 11:15 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich wrote: “Kader make no mistake on this this stemed from Dink’s opposition to Turkey’s denialist policy of the Armenian genocide. This comes from news paper publications I have read from Turkish writers as well.”

I don’t agree. I am reading about this for many days and I have been reading about this before his murder as well. Of course his views on genocide had an effect but the main trigger was the “poisonous blood” statement that some idiots took the wrong way…

I was also hopeful to read many people standing side by side and denounce this murder. They shouted “we are all Hrant, we are all Aremanians” in front of Agos.

Report this

By Rich, January 22, 2007 at 9:23 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emerhan wrote:

“For your information, Hrant Dink was offered protection by the government on numerous occasions because of concerns over the hate mail he received, but Dink refused such protection everytime.”

For a change, get your facts straight. If you can’t get this recent tragedy right how can you justify your denialist postiions of the Armenian genocide? 

“In his final column, Dink wrote about the increasing amount of hate mail he was getting, including one letter that scared him enough that he went to the local prosecutor to ask for protection, although without any luck.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0122/p06s01-woeu.html

Report this

By Rich, January 22, 2007 at 8:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emerhan wrote:

“I find it interesting that he is killed now, just when this issue is getting hot in the US Congress.  Such political assassinations are not coincidental, and is the work of darker forces, who actually have something to gain from using his death to pressure Turkey.”

Read this before you jump to your non-sense ultranationalist views. I suggest you diversify your sources of information from the ultranationist views that do not help anyone paticularly the Turkish people.

Refering to the killing of Hrant Dink, Yasin Hayal stated “...I planned the murder four months ago.”

Four months ago was BEFORE the U.S. mid-term elections, And you find it “interesting” now that the issue is getting hot in Congress.

The murder of Hrant Dink AND U.S. congressional politics has a “0” connection, is far fetched speculation with absolutly no credibility.

I suggest read something thats aligned with mainstream think rather then seemingly ultra-nationalist fringe ideology.

Report this

By Rich, January 22, 2007 at 5:13 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Turkey would be better off working on keeping it’s people from ignorance on the subject of the Armenian genoicde to have less people of hate like Ogun Samast, and his elik.

Read Ogun Samast statements regarding Hrant Dink’s killing.

http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/5817465.asp?gid=74

I was hopeful to read many thousands of Turks stood “shoulder to shoulder to denounce fascism” to denounce Dink’s slaying.

Kader make no mistake on this this stemed from Dink’s opposition to Turkey’s denialist policy of the Armenian genocide. This comes from news paper publications I have read from Turkish writers as well.

Even argueing that he did or did not request police protection as a result of his academic position speeks volumes of the atmosphere of hate generated by the Turkish government that is prevelent in Turkey.

Emerhan your logic is demented to think why didn’t Hrant Dink get killed sooner if Turkey promotes hate.

Many people hate things, people, opposition to idiology etc… the next step for a fringe nationalis group is to kill.

Emerhan wrote:

“My point is that he has been around saying the same things for a long time now - if there was so much “hate” then he would have been killed long ago.  I find it interesting that he is killed now, just when this issue is getting hot in the US Congress.  Such political assassinations are not coincidental, and is the work of darker forces, who actually have something to gain from using his death to pressure Turkey.”

Emerhan you are an extremist to think something like this. This statement speaks volumes to your moronic sense of logic, lack of candor, and common sense.

You seem to be numb to humanity, including your own people, who feel much differently.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 22, 2007 at 1:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich wrote:  “The Turkish government has brought on the atmosphere of hate.”

Nice to see you’re continuing your trend of blaming the Turkish government everytime something bad happens.  For your information, Hrant Dink was offered protection by the government on numerous occasions because of concerns over the hate mail he received, but Dink refused such protection everytime.

The government is not responsible for his death, nor did the government do anything to generate an “atmosphere of hate.”  But Armenian diaspora with their continual false accusations, combined with backlash over the French law, and the fact that the EU has used this issue to block Turkey’s membership has fuelled interest on this subject, as well as nationalist sentiments.

Hrant Dink has been talking and speaking his views for a long, long time now.  He may have believed that the events were genocide (which is his right, of course), but the fact remains that he sought dialogue as a solution, not using political resolutions to perpetuate the conflict.  He was against the French law for example.

My point is that he has been around saying the same things for a long time now - if there was so much “hate” then he would have been killed long ago.  I find it interesting that he is killed now, just when this issue is getting hot in the US Congress.  Such political assassinations are not coincidental, and is the work of darker forces, who actually have something to gain from using his death to pressure Turkey. 

Turks have nothing to gain from his murder…

Report this

By Kadir, January 22, 2007 at 12:11 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich wrote: “He was killed because he believed in telling the truth of the Armenian genocide which spurred the onslot of daily threats to his life.”

Actually he did not talk about events of 1915 much. As I wrote in my previous post, his main thought was for the Armenians to deal with Armenia instead of the Turks. The reason he was convicted because of the Article 301 is an essay he wrote about Armenians’ preoccupation with Turks. He said the Armenians should get rid of the poison in their blood (which was the thoughts of the Turk) and instead concentrate in the well-being of Armenia and fill their veins with this noble blood. The stupid judges thought that he meant “Turkish blood is poison” where he was actually writing about the poisoning nature of the hatred of the Turk in the Armenian blood… He was opposed to hatred. He was a man of understanding.

Report this

By Kadir, January 22, 2007 at 11:31 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich wrote: “This crime goes beyond the actual perpetrator(s). The Turkish government has brought on the atmosphere of hate.”

I agree. I was dismissing your comments about Article 301 by saying “nobody was jailed” but now somebody is “killed” because of the atmosphere generated by his trial. I hope Turkey will look at the Article 301 again and get rid of it.

His vision was dialog. He thought the events of 1915 were genocide but he thought the diaspora shouldn’t keep pushing on this subject as if this was the defining theme of Armenian identity. He thought there was much more to Armenian identity than this (with his words) “poison”. And he called on to the Turkish people to be conscientious about the sufferings of Armenians. He thought genocide/non-genocide debate was not useful. He liked living with Turks and as I am reading many Turkish columnists who knew him for the last couple of days, the Turks liked living with him. I have a friend who knew him and she told me that he was a very charismatic and nice person. As I said, a great loss for Turkey.

Report this

By Rich, January 22, 2007 at 1:26 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

He was killed because he believed in telling the truth of the Armenian genocide which spurred the onslot of daily threats to his life.

This crime goes beyond the actual perpetrator(s). The Turkish government has brought on the atmosphere of hate.

Go see the movie “Screamers” Hrant Dink was in the movie.

God will rest his sole and give strengh to those who will move his visions forward.

Report this

By Kadir, January 19, 2007 at 4:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I am very sorry, too. I read that there are 3 suspects in custody. I hope the police will be able to find the murderer(s). When some people (like Hrat Dink) are pushing for more and more understanding and dialog, it makes me so sad that some idiots only can think of violance. I hope this horrible event won’t stop the people who are pushing for mutual respect and dialog but become a catalyst for these initiatives. I hope we can turn this horrible event into a step for reconciliation.

If you know of any Armenian church in San Francisco area that will have a prayer service for Hrat Dink, let me know. I am sure many Turks would like to join you in remembering him.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 19, 2007 at 1:23 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I can’t believe it!  Someone murdered Hrant Dink!  My father-in-law in Turkey first told me the news, but I am still in shock.  Hrant Dink was one of the Turkish-Armenians who supported dialogue between the ethnic groups, his was one of the more moderate voices.  This is a great loss for all of Turkey, and an very ill omen.
Allah rahmet eylesin…(may he rest in peace).

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 18, 2007 at 10:30 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH wrote:  “What you have related has convinced me more than ever that all this maneuvering was just a ruse to confuse the Europeans. Ditto the annihilation of the whole Christian population. There were two sets of policy directives, one public the other limited to the top Ittihadist leaders.”

You statement above is pure conjecture, fabrication inconsistant with the evidence.  I am sorry that you have such trouble dealing with the plain facts of this case, and are groping in the dark to find evidence to support your accusations.

Because I am not familiar with his case, I can’t say whether the Ottomans were justified in courtmartialing him or not.  Even if his court-martial were unjust, however, that is a far cry from murder, and an even farther leap to accuse the government of genocide.

Report this

By Kadir, January 18, 2007 at 7:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH weote: “You have yet to state why he was being tried. It is peculiar that instead of his trial being conducted in Istanbul, he was moved around from city to city and was to be tried in Diarbekir which was under the tutelage of the madman, and Dr. Mengele clone, Dr. Mehmed Reshid.”

There has to be a reason for taking him to Diyarbakir. If you think Ottoman Empire did this to kill him there, it does not make sense. Many people were executed in Istanbul as well. If Talat wanted to kill him, he would have killed him easily in Istanbul, too. Also, I don’t understand how the fact that his murdereds were hanged had no effect on you.

WWH wrote: “What you have related has convinced me more than ever that all this maneuvering was just a ruse to confuse the Europeans. Ditto the annihilation of the whole Christian population. There were two sets of policy directives, one public the other limited to the top Ittihadist leaders.”

How come you are more convinced? I couldn’t follow your logic. Would you explain more? Europeans were already agitated by the deportations in the east. But the killing of Krikor in Istanbul would have been very important for Europeans, is this what you think? Do you think that is why he had to be taken to Diyarbakir and killed somewhere on the road? Again, I don’t understand given his murdereds are executed, how can you suggest his killing was ordered by Talat. Can you elaborate on what you meant by “There were two sets of policy directives, one public the other limited to the top Ittihadist leaders.”

By the way, I finished Lewy’s book. It was a really good one. I thought it was objective. I don’t know what you would think but I strongly suggest you read it. I will write about it more later.

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 17, 2007 at 6:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emrehan,

You have yet to state why he was being tried. It is peculiar that instead of his trial being conducted in Istanbul, he was moved around from city to city and was to be tried in Diarbekir which was under the tutelage of the madman, and Dr. Mengele clone, Dr. Mehmed Reshid.

What you have related has convinced me more than ever that all this maneuvering was just a ruse to confuse the Europeans. Ditto the annihilation of the whole Christian population. There were two sets of policy directives, one public the other limited to the top Ittihadist leaders.

Report this

By Ermrehan Delibas, January 17, 2007 at 1:38 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear WWH;  in regards to your note about Krikor Zohrab.

I did an little bit of searching on the internet to see what folks are saying about who he was and more importantly, how he died.  The results are very interesting.

http://www.armenianchurch.net states:  “One of the outstanding Armenian political leaders of his era, he was murdered by the Ottoman Turkish government in 1915 at the onset of the Genocide…”

A Turkish language website for a publisher that prints Zohrab’s literary works, http://www.arasyayincilik.com, states that as part of the Young Turk regimes policy of relocation, Zohrab was sent first to Konya, then Adana and Halep.  He was last heard from in a letter to his wife dated 15 July 1915, and was killed while being transfered to Diyarbakir by the gang leader Cherkez Ahmet and Nazim.”

Hmm, there is a BIG DIFFERENCE between being “murdered by the government” and killed in a rogue attack by gangs!

But let’s read yet a third opinion, this time Wikipedia:

“Ordered to appear before a court martial in Diyarbakır, together with Vartkes Hovhannes Serengülyan (below), both went to Aleppo by train, escorted by one gendarme, remained in Aleppo for a few weeks, waited the results of infructuous attempts by the Ottoman governor of the city to have them sent back to the capital (some sources mention Cemal Pasha himself intervening for their return, but Talat Pasha insisting on them to sent to the court martial), and then dispatched to Urfa and remained there for some time in the house of a Turkish deputy friend, taken under police escort and led to Diyarbakır by car -allegedly accompanied on a voluntary basis by some notable Urfa Armenians, and with many sources confirming, they were murdered by the [well-known] band of brigands led by Cherkes Ahmet, Halil and Nazım, at a locality called Karaköprü or Şeytanderesi in the outskirts of Urfa, some time between 15 July and 20 July 1915. The murderers were tried and executed in Damascus by Cemal Pasha in September 1915, and the assassinations became the subject of a 1916 investigation by the Ottoman Parliament led by Artin Boshgezenian, the deputy for Aleppo.”

So it looks like he was NOT murdered by the government; he was NOT EXECUTED, as you’ve claimed in your note.  Furthermore, the perpetrators were EXECUTED by the same Young Turk regime [whose leaders were Enver, Talat and Cemal Pasha] that ordered the relocations.  Doesn’t sound at all like genocide, huh.  The Ottoman government didn’t execute Krikor Zohrab - they executed his murders!  Em, so this is what the ArmenianChurch.Net calls genocide???

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 17, 2007 at 12:09 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

My grandfather’s friend Krikor Zohrab was removed from Istanbul and executed near Mardin. Are you claiming that this man, who is noted to have earlier saved Talaat’s life was justifably executed upon orders of the very man whose life he had saved?

Report this

By Kadir, January 16, 2007 at 8:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emrehan,

I read it in many places in Lewy’s book. He also gives sources for this. For example, page 176 writes this:

“..., in August the Porte decided to exampt Catholic and Protestant Armenians from the deportation decree.*”

* The orders of the minister of interior, issued on August 3 and 15, 1915, are reprinted in Orel and Yuca, ‘The Talat Pasha Telegrams,’ p. 122.

Taner Akcam’s book also has the same information in page 175-77. This decision comes after pressures from Germans and Americans. But still, Ottoman Empire did not have to listen to them if she did not want to do so.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 16, 2007 at 1:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear WWH:

You wrote:  “Perhaps the lure of stealing their wealth had something to do with it as the governor of the eastern vilayet imediately moved into my grandparents’ home.”

During a period of war, it is very easy for officials at all levels to abuse their power.  But surely you must recognize that there is a difference between individual misdeeds, and the Ottoman government ordering those deeds.

This is where you must separate your emotional family experiences from facts.  Yes Armenians suffered, bad things happened.  Those actions should be condemned - but that does not prove in anyway that the government ordered massacre, i.e. genocide.

To give a modern example, consider the Iraq war.  There are some in the Middle East who accuse the US of massacre and genocide.  However, I am sure that you can see that any crimes committed by soldiers, including massacre, rape, and torture, are most definitely NOT the POLICY of the US GOVERNMENT, and thus it is WRONG to accuse the US government of any complicity.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 16, 2007 at 1:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear Kadir;

I have never heard of a distinction being made in Ottoman policy towards Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox Armenians.  Would you please tell me your source on this point?

As far as some Armenians being exempted from the relocations;  on that point you are right.  Armenians in Istanbul, Izmir and some other cities were not relocated.  In fact, there are many Armenians who fled to Istanbul to avoid the relocations.  And when the Greeks occupied Izmir in 1919, the sizeable Armenian population there welcomed the Greeks with much joy.

The relocations were NOT motivated by racism.  Prior to the relocations, Armenian militants together with Russians massacred over 100,000 Turkish civilians between 1914-1915 in Kars, Ardahan and Van.  The relocations were a reaction to the very real threat the Armenian revolutionaries posted with their assistance to the Allies.  The situation was made worse by reports of Ottoman Armenians aiding the revolutionaries and allies, using churches and homes to stockpile weapons, hold secret meetings etc.

Of course, this does not mean that every single Ottoman Armenian was a traitor.  But when you consider that even Ottoman Armenian parlementarians like Pasdermadjian joined the Dashnak party, and engaged in subversive activity, then you can image the extent of the complicity.  The United States initiated the Japanese interment after the bombing of Pearl Harbor.  The Ottomans ordered the relocations only AFTER over 100,000 Ottoman citizens had been murdered.  Now, you can criticize the decision, but the main cause behind that decision was CLEARLY NOT RACISM.

Report this

By Kadir, January 16, 2007 at 11:08 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH,

I wrote most of the non-gregorians lived through those events in Eastern Anatolia. You still did not write the name of the vali. Non-Gregorians were excluded from relocation in August of 1915 after the relocation has already started. So, some of them may have already relocated at that time. And of course some of them were killed for money probably. I repeat, I wrote MOST, not ALL.

But your asserion about Istanbul is totally incorrect. They lived through the war without nothing happening to them except for the ones that were members of revolutionary organizations. And even those executions were not that many. Same in Izmir. It would have been the same in Urfa if they did not revolt. There were many cities spared from relocation.

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 15, 2007 at 11:40 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Kadir wrote:

“How come the Armenians in Istanbul, Izmir, and most of the protestant and catholic Armenians in eastern Turkey lived through the events without nothing happening to them? The hostilities was againts the Gregorian Armenians who were more symphatethic to the revolutionary seperatist groups.”

LIES!LIES! BLATANT LIES!! My family was not Gregorian and they were decimated both in the Eastern vilayets and the men who were taken to be executed from Istanbul. These were not revolutionaries of any sort, but loyal merchants and their families. Perhaps the lure of stealing their wealth had something to do with it as the governor of the eastern vilayet imediately moved into my grandparents’ home.

Report this

By Rich, January 15, 2007 at 4:48 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Sounds like from Emerhan’s and Kader’s posts they agree that “Holdwater’s” purpose as written on his web site TallArmenianTale.Com is a person who holds racist views.

Even Emerhan has distenced himself from this web site but yet used similar denialist arguements.

Kader wrote:

“There was no racism in Turkey against Armenians. How come the Armenians in Istanbul, Izmir, and most of the protestant and catholic Armenians in eastern Turkey lived through the events without nothing happening to them? The hostilities was againts the Gregorian Armenians who were more symphatethic to the revolutionary seperatist groups. Also there were the muslim Balkan refugees who hated Christians because of the things they lived (and died) through. It was a complex mosaic of feelings.”

You have got to be kidding

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 15, 2007 at 11:01 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich wrote:  “Nobody is changing anything, go back and look at how many times this this web site has been sourced.”

I don’t recall having every cited that website myself.  In fact, all of my posts have cited books or articles written by historians, or historical documents from the period in question.  For some reason, however, you never seem to get around to giving a real response to those very real academic sources.  My most recent post with the excerpt from Prof. Robert Zeiden is just the most recent example.

So I repeat:  The opinions of Holdwater on TallArmenianTale.Com are irrelevant, although it may be useful to independently read and research some of the historical sources he cites and form your own opinion.

So perhaps we should get back to Zeiden’s comments, which clearly show the flaws in Armenian historiography and how these issues are not a “done deal”, as you have tried to assert in previous notes.

Report this

By Kadir, January 15, 2007 at 10:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich wrote: “No wonder, committing genocide against the Armenians was an act of an ultimate form of racism.”

There was no racism in Turkey against Armenians. How come the Armenians in Istanbul, Izmir, and most of the protestant and catholic Armenians in eastern Turkey lived through the events without nothing happening to them? The hostilities was againts the Gregorian Armenians who were more symphatethic to the revolutionary seperatist groups. Also there were the muslim Balkan refugees who hated Christians because of the things they lived (and died) through. It was a complex mosaic of feelings.

Just by looking at a page, how can you extract the racism 90 years ago? Bravo.

Report this

By Kadir, January 15, 2007 at 12:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I usually rate a page according to the information in it. I don’t care about the commentary (if I don’t know who the writer is and his/her background). I find that page helpful in putting together the relevant information (you might argue it is all in the Turkish point of view but there are thousands of sites with all Armenian point of view, too). I have enough background to see which commentary is factual, which is not. I don’t think it is helpful for somebody to get all his/her information from a webpage or from similar webpages. As I said before, I like the color gray.

Rich, you have to admit that most of the Armenian pages are similar in terms of attitude.

Report this

By Rich, January 14, 2007 at 10:56 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emerhan wrote:

“Dear Rich, is this yet another attempt by you to change the subject? 

TallArmenianTale.Com is not the subject of our discussions here.  That website gives the analysis of one guy (Holdwater) of a range of relevant sources.  It would be more fruitful to discuss the sources than to debate Holdwater’s view of the world.

So, please, let’s stick to the subject.”


Nobody is changing anything, go back and look at how many times this this web site has been sourced.

Pure racism at it’s worst. I think a clear picture is being drawn from a denialist perspective.

No wonder, committing genocide against the Armenians was an act of an ultimate form of racism.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 14, 2007 at 7:29 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear Rich, is this yet another attempt by you to change the subject? 

TallArmenianTale.Com is not the subject of our discussions here.  That website gives the analysis of one guy (Holdwater) of a range of relevant sources.  It would be more fruitful to discuss the sources than to debate Holdwater’s view of the world.

So, please, let’s stick to the subject.

Report this

By Rich, January 13, 2007 at 3:23 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

continued from previous post.

THE PURPOSE OF TALL ARMENIAN TALE (TAT)

http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/scholars.htm

“...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.”

This web site speaks volumes of its lack of objectivity, and caters to the ethnocentric nationalist stripe prevelent among poeple who like to attack advocacy of the Armenain genocide.

I wouldn’t mind the attempt at denying the Armenian genocide, but doing so with racial hatred and denial is very sad.

The readers who do not see the unobjectivity of this web site, need to take a racial tolerance class.

This is blatently a racist web site.

Report this

By Rich, January 12, 2007 at 9:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emerhan/Kader do you believe the information on this web site?

I believe Kader likes to quote from it, so I assume he believes in the “purpose” of the information.

I can almost find humor in it, but stop short when I realize people buy into this type of extremists views. 

http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/toynbee-ozdemir.htm

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…(continued on next post)

Report this

By Rich, January 12, 2007 at 5:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emerhan,

I have said this countless times before in my previous posts but obviously you refuse to except it. And Prof. Robert Zeidner’s quote does not justify this point. What the Ottoman/Turkish government did is considered a genocide against the Armenians. The killing of Turks was not a good thing but DOES NOT negate the genocide of the Armenian people.

Also Prof. Robert Zeidner’s quote fails to mention that it is not only Armenian scholars but but others as well Turkish, German, American who have come to the obvious conclusion of genocide. It would not make sense that these scholars would buy into a so-called “ethnocentric” course over the Turkish people.

You can keep Prof. Robert Zeidner’s quote in your scrap book because it does not serve your arguement, becasue this is not solely Armenian scholarly arguement but others as well (as I mentioned) that agree this was a genocide.

Armenians were provolked into defending themselves and the numbers are obviously overinflated, and they did not have an organized army to cause such mass killing.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 11, 2007 at 8:19 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich wrote:  “Scholars have researched the complexities of the Armenian genocide and uncovered the “truth” as you put it.”

Really?  Here’s what Prof. Robert Zeidner has to say about this claim of yours:

“It is most unfortunate that the bulk of the vast literature available in this field comes form the pens of such authors [i.e. Armenian apologists], almost all of it bent on an ethnocentric course to demonstrate the supposed superiority of Christian Armenian culture over that of the “unspeakable” Muslim Turk…

Worst yet, Armenian scholars have consistently dwelled on Turkish massacres of their compatriots in all their grisly details WITHOUT SO MUCH AS A WORD on the EQUALLY SAVAGE measures taken BY THE ARMENIANS of the Transcausasus and eastern Anatolia AGAINST THE LOCAL TURKIC POPULACE from 1905 to 1920.  Indeed, when questioned on such episodes, they even dismiss them as Turkish propaganda.  Yet the evidence for accepting them as fact is overwhelming…

More significant perhaps is the considerable body of evidence which indicates that Armenian revolutionists DELIBERATELY FOMENTED MASSACRES OF THEIR COMPATRIOTS IN TURKEY FOR THE PURPOSES OF TURNING THEM AGAINST THE PORT AND OF INVOKING INTERVENTION BY THE GREAT POWERS.  On the other hand, it was thanks to prompt action by local Turkish authorities, so often maligned for incompetence, corruption, and bad faith by Western travellers and diplomats, that Cilicia proper and Elazig-Harput were spared from slaughter during the massacres of 1894-96.  During the episode of April 1909, Mersin and areas outside Cilicia proper were similarly spared, with the one notable exception of Latakia on the northern Syrian coast…

[Re. the 1915-1916 relocations]:  The vast litarture available on these episodes, on the other hand, is inconclusive as to whether they began spontaneously or were triggered by orders from Istanbul.”  (Tricolors over the Taurus, pp. 44-46)

Rich wrote:  “Frankly Britain, France, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaks) did not commit genocidal, talking about them is irrelevant.”

Wrong, my friend.  Britain, France, and the Dashnaks have lots of Turkish blood on their hands, WE DON’T FORGET.  Furthermore, to pass TURKISH VICTIMS off as being irrelevant is not only disrespectful, but logically incorrect.

Would it be fair to call the U.S. “an imperialistic invader of Iraq”, ignoring the 9/11 attack and the many Americans that were killed?

Or what if a Japanese army was invading the U.S., burning American towns, massacring her people…do you really expect the U.S. for instance to just sit around and try to figure out which Japanese are innocent, and which were guilty of treason?  The bombing of one Hawaian island was sufficient cause for the U.S. to shove all its Japanese-American citizens into concentration camps.  I am not justifying their move, but I am merely showing that every action gets a reaction, and Turkey took a lot more beating by the Armenian revolutionaries before deciding on the relocation, then did America when it decided to round-up the “Japs.”

In 1914, in the Kars-Ardahan vincinity ALONE, THIRTY THOUSAND (30,000) Turkish people were massacred by Armenians.  In Van, in 1915, tens of thousands more were massacred, again by Armenians.  WHAT WOULD AMERICA DO IF 50,000 - 100,000 AMERICANS WERE BUTCHERED IN WITHIN TWO YEARS!!???

You can’t IGNORE Armenian activities, and expect to be able to pass a fair judgement on the Ottoman government!

Rich wrote:  “Somehow the Turks being killed is suppose to negate the Armenian genocide? No way!”

Of course it doesn’t NEGATE Armenian deaths.  But the point is that you CAN’T IGNORE TURKISH DEATHS.  There is no proof of the Ottoman government ordered the massacre of any Armenians.  What the Ottomans did was more like what the U.S. did to Japanese-Americans.  The government is only guilty of failing to protect their citizens, Armenian and Turkish alike, from attack.

Report this

By Rich, January 10, 2007 at 7:05 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Kader wrote:

Rich,

Turkey will never accept genocide claims even if EU wants us to do so. I can see other concessions like opening our border with Armenia and giving more freedom to the Turkish Armenian community (which are good things) but not accepting genocide. Don’t count on EU on this subject. By the way, who knows there will be an EU 10 years from now?”

—-

I think Turkey must come to terms with it’s past from within, but also knowing what the rest of the international community already has shown to it.

The word “never” is too extreme for a government policy. Interests change they never remain constant. I believe it is possible that Turkey will make a pragmatic choice to recognize the Armenian genocide.

As for opening the borders Armenia is open for dialoge on the subject it is Turkey’s policy to have it closed, not Armenia.

I don’t see any indication that the EU will not be around in 10 years, either way the Armenian genocide issue will still be as candid in 10 years as it is today.

Hopefully Turkey will make it’s pragmatic choice that will also seem to be a moral choice, and except it’s past.

Maybe then in regards to this issue it can look toward the future with a better partnership with it’s geographic neigbors, as well as the international community.

Report this

By Rich, January 10, 2007 at 4:25 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emerhan wrote:

“I would hope that rather than trying to force genocide charges on Turkey, and trying to oversimplify a complex situation, you would be more interested in learning the truth. 

But it seems like pegging Turks as a scapegoat is much easier than taking a hard look at the misdeads of Britain, France, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaks)...and putting into proper proportion the misdeads of individual officials and Kurds, recognizing that hundreds of thousands of Turks were murdered too.

While continuing your present policies may seem wise in terms of trying to get land or reparations, it only makes healing these deep old wounds harder, and won’t bring the two communities together.”

No one said the Armenian genocide issue is “oversimplfied”.

Scholars have researched the complexities of the Armenian genocide and uncovered the “truth” as you put it.

It would not matter what ethnic group committed the Armenian genocide, but in this case it was perpetrated by the Ottoman/Turkish government policies which resulted in genocide.

Frankly Britain, France, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaks) did not commit genocidal, talking about them is irrelevant.

Working on getting two comunities together Armenians and Turks will happen eventually (that is secondary) The issue stems with the GOVERNMENT OF TURKEY’S current policies not directly with it’s citizens, OR Turks per se.

The larger picture is not only for recognition for Armenians also for humanity.

Somehow the Turks being killed is suppose to negate the Armenian genocide? No way!

What happend to the Turks is unexceptable but two wrongs does not negate what happend to the Armenian civil populations.

Report this

By Rich, January 10, 2007 at 3:15 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Kader this is in response to your post #46573

Children as Victims of Genocide:The Armenian Case by Vahakn N. Dadrian

Subtitle: Trabzon: A Microcosm of Multi-Level Child-killings

The Drowning Operations and Serial Rapes

Excerpt:

“One of the ghastliest features of child-killing in Trabzon province was the method of drowning them en masse, utilizing Trabzon’s river, Degirmendere, but mainly that port city’s coastlines on the Black Sea. The most poignant testimony on these latter drowning operations was provided by the Turkish deputy of that province, Hafız Mehmed, who by profession was a lawyer. In a postwar speech (December 11, 1919) in the Chamber of Deputies of the Ottoman Parliament, he revealed that he personally saw how, one day, Armenian women and children were loaded onto barges at the port city of Ordu in Trabzon province and drowned on the high seas. He then stated that the local people were lamenting with the words, “God will punish us for what we did.” At the 15th sitting of the Trabzon trial series, Turkish Ordu merchant Hüseyin, appearing as a witness, confirmed this very drowning operation. In its Verdict, the Tribunal with emphasis referred to these operations of mass drownings targeting as they especially did “male and female infants” (zükur ve inas çocukları) with the help of “repeat criminals” (cerayimi mükerrere). Deputy Hafiz Mehmed in his above-mentioned speech also indicated that Trabzon’s governor-general Djemal Azmi was reported to have applied the same method of drowning in the rest of the province. This attribution to the governor-general was confirmed by General Mahmut (Cürüksulu) who at about the same time in a speech in the Ottoman Senate declared that Djemal Azmi had authorized the procedures of wholesale extermination for the entire province.”

Report this

By Kadir, January 9, 2007 at 11:09 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I wrote: “I don’t remember the names now, I’ll write it when I get home.”

He is the text from the book (Lewy’s book):

The German consul in Trebizond. Heinrich Bergfeld, was able to track down one of the many false stories that flourished in a time of great stress and uncertainty. Soon after the first convoy of Armenians had left Trebizond rumors spread that the deportees had been murdered right after leaving the town and that the river Deirmendere, running parallel to the road taken by Armanian convoy, was full of corpses. [...] he decided to check out their [stories] veracity. On July 17, accompanied bt the American consul as a neutral witness, he rode for four hours along the river but found only one dead body. [...] In the meantime news was also received that the first group of deportees had reached Erzinjan without losing a single person. (page 145 of Lewy’s book).

Report this

By Kadir, January 9, 2007 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emrehan wrote: “Now, after her death, to make such allegations that she’s not even around to directly respond, is just plain wrong.  That is why so many in Turkey were up in arms about this. ”

Actually not a lot of people cared. It was written about for a couple of days as far as I remember. When looked at from USA, things sometimes grow out of proportion. But it is funny that someone will say she was her aunt when it is not the case… Weird…

A lot of “facts” about relocation is also like this. Someone throws something in the air and everybody accepts it without question and then even the person who lied about it in the first place starts believing in his/her lies… I read something about one of the “corpses in the river” stories in Lewy’s book. It is written that some foreign observers in a region heard about this story from many people and then they went to see if it was true. They only saw 1 dead body in the 4 hours they walked near the river… I don’t remember the names now, I’ll write it when I get home.

I also do it sometimes actually. I hear something that I want to believe and I start believing it even though I know that it might not be true. Of course my mistakes are of smaller scale usually smile And after I realized that I am doing it, I am more careful now. It is so easy to see thing in black and white. But you you usually are wrong when you see with two colors.

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 9, 2007 at 3:28 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emrehan,

You are doing the same thing again. I respond to your argument that I am obsessed with my family by mentioning the larger problems of Turkish historiography, re: its Armenian citizens, and you respond with your last post which has nothing to do with what I responded to.

Same games from you again and again!

No wonder that the leaders of the ROA refuse Erdogan’s offer to discuss the issues. You only want to play word games!

Report this

By Kadir, January 9, 2007 at 2:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH,

Many Armenian’s views of the past is as distorted as the Turks. Both sides lie and try to cover up their mistakes. I don’t accept the accusation that Turkey is the only party that distorts the past.

However, most of your criticisms about Turkey are fair. Unfortunately, there has always been a group in Turkey that is supported by the west to cause problems. It was Greeks at first, then Armenians, and now the Kurds. This effects the democratic progress of a country for sure. You must look at USA and see how the pillar of free speach and democracy can change in the presence of a threat. Turkey lives with similar threats for decades. And it only strengthens the ultra-nationalists. You have to think about why things happen the way they do while you are criticising a country. We don’t have the genes of oppression. The circumstances are not helping the democratic people in Turkey right now, that’s all. But still, I am with you on many of your points. And I know Turkey will progress. After Ocalan was caught, there was a cease-fire. In that time, Turkey passed many laws that increased the freedom of the Kurds. If you see the webpage of Diyarbakir, you will see that it has a Kurdish page. And many thing like this happened. Turks don’t want to oppress anyone. We just want to do things in our own timetable without somebody pushing us. When we are pushed, we tend to not do something… This is stupid actually but this is how we are… I don’t think this will change any time soon. You are away from East now so you don’t understand this. But this is the eastern way of thinking unfortunately.

The same thing is happening all over again about eastern Turkey. 90 years ago, most western eyes saw the Armenians as pure good and now you see the Kurds with same eyes. You should remember the thousands killed by PKK and how they are supported by N. Iraq before extending your symphathy to them.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 9, 2007 at 1:04 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH wrote:  “Why was there hysteria in Turkey when it was revealed that the aviatrix adopted daughter of Ataturk is an Armenian?”

This is a great example of how you take an idea put forth by Armenians, and then state it like it were fact.

In fact Sabiha Gokcen is not Armenian, she is the daughter of Hafiz Mustafa Izzet Efendi.  That was a debate started by the Armenian Agos newspaper publishing such a claim went an Armenian lady claimed that Gokcen was her aunt.  The paper also claimed that Gokcen was raised in an orphanage.

Neither claims are true.  Gokcen was born and raised in Bursa, living with her family, when she had the opportunity to meet Ataturk, and telling him of her desire to study, was taken under his wing and educated.  I have read Gokcen’s autobiography, and this is what she herself says.

Now, after her death, to make such allegations that she’s not even around to directly respond, is just plain wrong.  That is why so many in Turkey were up in arms about this. 

We have many famous Turks that are known to be of Armenian origin, and no one has a problem with this.  In fact, a Turkish friend of mine in college would openly state that both his grandmothers were Armenian, and it was not even an issue.

We do have a problem, however, with false reporting, such as was the case with the Gokcen incident.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 9, 2007 at 12:49 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH wrote:  “I am getting really tired of all this skewing of the argument that is coming from your direction.”

An interesting reaction to work published by non-Turkish historians…

That is a very standard Armenian reply to any information that is contrary to their theories.  Either attack it as propaganda, or say its “skewed.”  I shouldn’t be suprised, however, considering that you are evidently deeply involved in Armenian lobbying, and Rich has himself stated that he is an activist, participating in demonstrations against Turkey.

WWH wrote:  “Let’s just say that we will see you in the halls of Congress and in the international arenas.”

Actually, no, you won’t see me in Congress.  I am not a lobbyist or activist.  Furthermore, I am deeply opposed to the politicization of history.  It is unfortunate that you believe that the solution to Turkish-Armenian problems is lobbying in a foreign government, as though this were a popularity contest.

Such lobbying does nothing to solve the very read divide that separates Armenians and Turks.  On the contrary, it just adds fuel to the animosity and makes possibilities for a future together even more remote.

Judging by the list of questions you offered Kadir, I think you are the one who is trying to duck from the real issues, and distract everyone by debating unrelated isues.  On any issue relating to Turkey, you take an opposite stance.  You make no effort towards understanding all sides of an issue.  Furthermore, you are completely blind sighted in regards to Armenia, who herself has a pretty pathetic human rights record. (torture, due process violations, attacks on freedom of the press, occupation of neighboring Azerbaijan…) 

Not to mention terrorism.  And I am not talking about the 1970s Armenian terrorism directed at Turks.  In May 2005, an Armenian tossed a hand grenade at President Bush while in Tiblisi, Georgia.  In March, another Armenian citizen was charged with weapons trafficking.

I suggest you stop debating unrealated issues, solely with the aim of defaming Turkey, and try to actually discuss the legacy of very real historical problems which divide Turks and Armenians.

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 8, 2007 at 11:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Kadir,

I see that you are the one who is more amenable to viewing the big picture.

The problem with Turkey is what is occuring today. It is this that is fueling the Armenian diaspora.

Is there religious freedom in Turkey today?

Are all her citizens treated equally?

Is her history honestly displayed?

In America we can honor George Washington, Abraham Licoln, FDR, JFK, etc. and yet appreciate their foibles.

Why do you have a cult of the personality for Ataturk to such an extent that his wife’s memoirs are supressed with claims that it is for national security purposes - almost 70 years after his death. Why is this poor woman held in such low regard in Turkey?

Why was there hysteria in Turkey when it was revealed that the aviatrix adopted daughter of Ataturk is an Armenian?

When Turkey becomes a more benevolent nation many of the problems that we are discussing will begin to improve.

Right now she had better be ready for an independent Kurdistan in Iraq. If she attacks this new nation, the Middle East will be engulfed in flames. I know that the US will not allow the Turkish nation to obliterate the Kurds.

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 8, 2007 at 11:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emrehan,

You seem to focus upon irrelevant specifics and conveniently ignore the larger points that I am trying to make. You use this to turn the argument in another direction. What a game you are playing! The same game that has been played for 90-odd years.

It does not matter that this is my family. What matters is that Turkey distorts history. She presents a picture of the past that is bogus.

Most histories focus mainly upon the key players in a society with the common man/woman as background players. Turkey ignores and distorts the Armenian role in her history.

I am getting really tired of all this skewing of the argument that is coming from your direction. Let’s just say that we will see you in the halls of Congress and in the international arenas.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 8, 2007 at 9:49 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Kadir wrote:  “I think WWH is trying to show his family’s history being erased when he mentions his family.”

Yes, I understand his mention of his family from that angle - your point is well taken.  But what I hope is that equal sympathy and regard is given for Turkish families who faced ethnic cleansing and massacre. 

I have been reading some of the research by Robert Zeidner on events in Cilicia, with the French Army, Armenian Legion, etc.  Apparently the French deported tens and thousands of Turks from Cilicia to northern Anatolia during that time.  Armenians did take revenge, killing many Turks in Cilicia.  In fact, some suggest that the French knowingly tried to drive out the Turks to create a French-protectorate Armenian state in southern Turkey.  Armenians during the time were petitioning for Cilicia to be joined with the Republic of Armenia, under a foreign mandate. 

Turks suffered from many other atrocities as well, including seizure of their homes and properties, false imprisonment, rape, and massacre.  Armenian excesses even resulted in the pillaging, burning and destruction of Iskenderun after the WWI cease-fire.  France did little to stop the vengeful Armenians.  In fact, they may have even turned a blind eye to the terror as a way of driving out Turks from the region. 

In any case, my point is that there is much amnesia here, on both sides, and Europe is most definitely NOT a bystander, or independent third party.

Report this

By Kadir, January 8, 2007 at 5:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emrehan wrote: “Yes, this did fuel hatred, but it also fueled fear.”

Yes, fear and hatred usually go hand in hand. As you say, the events in Balkans were for sure a thing that made both the local population and also the government afraid that it might happen again in East Anatolia. It is widely accepted that the harsh responses to the Bulgars by the Turks fueled Western assistance to the Bulagrs and lead to their independence. This is an argument in favor of the theme that Armenians by choice did things that they knew will increase hatred and cause bloodshed of innocent Armenians by the Turks which eventually will provide Western help to Armenians in their cause of independent Armenia (like the case in Bulgaria).

The reason for why some of the local Muslim community was ready to retaliate to any provocation is their memories of what they lived through (many couldn’t live it through actually) in Balkans.

Actually, if you look at what happened after 1916, you will see that Armenians actually took their revenge. There are many foreign missionary accounts about how Armenians killed the Muslim population of the cities they went in with the attacking Russian/French armies mercilessly. Rape, murder, all sorts of torture… To say that Armenian genocide occured between 1915 and 1923 is ridiculous as you (Emrehan) say.

Whatever definition you put forward, for me the real issue is premeditation and government involvement. And I see no proof of that in this case. It is a shame the way the local population and some local officials in Eastern Anatolia behaved during relocation. That whole episode makes me sad and I symphatize with Armenians. But it was not the first “genocide” of 20th century or the last. It was one of many sad chapters for human race in the bloody 20th century.

Rich,

Turkey will never accept genocide claims even if EU wants us to do so. I can see other concessions like opening our border with Armenia and giving more freedom to the Turkish Armenian community (which are good things) but not accepting genocide. Don’t count on EU on this subject. By the way, who knows there will be an EU 10 years from now?

Report this

By Kadir, January 8, 2007 at 3:29 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emrehan,

I think WWH is trying to show his family’s history being erased when he mentions his family. I think it is justifiable when someone finds out that the contributions of ones family forgotten/erased and gets sad about this. WWH, have you ever been to Turkey and seen these buildings?

I think it is sad that in Turkey, history such as WWHs, is not openly shown. I think it is a history to be proud of. To have many non-muslims contributing to the the well-being of the Empire is a good thing. By suppressing these things, we put a hole in our history. However, the current events have something to do with this. I don’t think this would happen if the relations between Armenians and Turks were normal.

About concealing the identities, I am sure that the discussing parties (Rich, me, Emrehan, and WWH) are civilized people. But there are lots of idiots on both sides who might do harm.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 8, 2007 at 3:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Kadir wrote:  “He mentions this as a source of hatred against Armenians which was instrumental in their killings.”

I think we need to sort out who was killed when here a bit.  The Balkan wars, and the ethnic cleansing of Turks from the Balkans, resulted in a huge number of deaths, and refugees fleeing to Anatolia.  Yes, this did fuel hatred, but it also fueled fear.

When Armenian revolutionaries instigated revolts JOINTLY with the Russians, it formed a very real threat against Ottoman rule in the East.  In the past, Turks had always been cleansed from areas that were conquered by Christians.  Thus, the government feared for what would happen if the Russo-Armenian onslaught were successful.  The horrendeous massacre of Muslims in Van, followed by the Russian occupation, was the trigger for the relocations.  Military correspondences from the period show that commanders viewed relocation as the only way of stopping the massacres against Muslims.  Here I should point out that the first massacres by Armenians against Muslims began in 1914.

Revenge surely was a factor in the attacks by Kurdish and other nomadic bands on the migrating Armenians.

But remember that these relocations occurred primarily during 1915 and 1916.  In fact, in 1918 the government cancelled the relocation order and instead made a tremendous effort to bring Armenians back to their old homes and cities.  Here, they became faced with a new problem, as Turkish refugees from the Balkans were often the new residents.  Returning Armenians clashed with these Turkish refugees, and the onslaught of Allied occupation forces - corroborating with Armenian militants - sparked the intercommunal warfare. The Armenian Legion in Cilicia, and Armenian regiments attacking from the Caucasus inflicted great massacres on the local Muslim population.  The subsequent conflicts resulted in many Armenians to choose to leave Anatolia.

Many Armenian websites allege that genocide occurred from 1915-1923.  In fact, the relocation is only a small part of that period.  Turko-Armenian clashes continued until the 1920 peace treaty with Armenia (not 1923) and any deaths during that period most surely cannot be attributed to the government. 

As I’ve mentioned before, Armenian deaths were not solely due to any attacks during relocation, but were also from intercommunal warfare, hunger and disease.  To take the entire Armenian losses from all these causes, and to lump them together like it was the government that did it, is not only untrue to history, but unjust, glossing over the dark side of the Armenian movement.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 8, 2007 at 1:08 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH wrote:  “Our identitites are concealed for different reasons.”

First of all, I don’t care why you conceal your identity.  This is an internet forum, no one is required to reveal real names.  Secondly, what is important to me is what you say, not who you are.

As for why I don’t write with my real name:  I have to protect my family, you know.  When I was new to the internet I used my real name, and some nuts actually called my university, found out my telephone and address and for about two years sent me mail.  That was relatively benign, because the fellow didn’t have bad intentions, he was just a bit obsessed.

Not everyone is like that though.  I had a Turkish friend who worked for a TV station in Canada.  Since he was invovled with broadcasting, some Armenians who came to the forum he was moderating decided to try to hunt him down, sending him threatening emails, saying they would get him fired and report him to some anti-defamation league or whatever.

You don’t strike me as the type to do those kinds of things, but, the internet is open to all, and anyone can be reading this forum.  I have received hate mail in the past, so I prefer for my family’s own safety to remain anonymous.

WWH:  “When I happened to tell a fellow worker, a Turkish-American, who my great-grandfather’s brother was he was flabbergasted.”

Dude, you really need to get over this “my family was so wealthy, so important, such high positions” thing.  News flash:  before God, all human life is equal.  Your family’s story, their suffering, and testimony is not more (or less) valuable than that of a poor, Turkish refugee family.  The high position of your family does not make their situation more valuable than that of a Turk who was murdered by Armenians.

To quote Shylock,

“I am a Jew [Muslim].  Hath not a Jew [Muslim] eyes?  Hath not a Jew [Muslim] hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions?  Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is?  If you prick us, do we not bleed?  If you tickle us, do we not laugh?  If you poison us, do we not die?  And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?”

Both sides have horror stories.  You’ve got to step back from personal stories and see the big picture.  Your family is not the only one that suffered…

If reconciliation is what you want, let me be frank:  the only way is for both sides to mourn ALL victims.  Monuments erected in both Turkey and abroad should commemorate both Armenian and Turkish victims.

Report this

By Kadir, January 8, 2007 at 12:13 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

When I mentioned the Muslim sufferings in Balkans, WWH told me that that is a seperate issue and those people should fight for recognition of what happened to them as the Armenians are doing. But these events were not as unrelated as I thought. I am reading Guenter Lewy’s book and he mentions that many people who were kicked out of Balkans and whose families were killed were sent to East Anatolia starting from late 1800s. And these people had big hatred and mistrust agains the Christians because of what has happened to them in the hands of Bulgarians, Serbs, Greeks. He mentions this as a source of hatred against Armenians which was instrumental in their killings. Nothing in history is unrelated really. Probably Armenian hatred towards the Turks were instumental in what they did to Azerians. Some food for thought. I am really enjoying the way Guenter attacks the allegations (both Armenian and Turkish). I will write more about the book later.

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 6, 2007 at 7:52 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emrehan wrote:

“No, I am not Justin McCarthy, but just as you conceal your identity, so do I conceal mine.”

Our identitites are concealed for different reasons.

The Turkish govenment has slandered our people for decades.

When I happened to tell a fellow worker, a Turkish-American, who my great-grandfather’s brother was he was flabbergasted.

He knew absolutely nothing about Ottoman history. He knew nothing about the contributions of Armenians to the well-being of the Ottoman state. His immediate response was “Are you going to kill me?” This was a non-sequitor for if he knew anything at all about that period he would have reacted totally the opposite. When is the Turkish government going to stop brainwashing its people for nation-building purposes against its Armenian citizens and the Republic of Armenia?

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 6, 2007 at 6:29 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Here is an interesting statement that I read in today’s paper.  Its from Patriarch Karekin Bekciyan in Germany:

“Bazıları, Anadolu’da ‘Bugün Ermeni var mı, yok mu?’ sorusuna karşı, sanki biliyorlarmış gibi ‘yok’ deyip çıkıyorlar. Ama Kemal Yalçın’ın kitabını okursanız bugün yarım milyondan fazla ismini değiştiren Ermeni var Anadolu’da.”

Here is a translation:

“Some, in reply to the question, “Are there any Armenians in Turkey?” say “no” as though they knew the answer to this question.  But if you read the book of Kemal Yalcin, you will see that in fact today there are over 500,000 Armenians in Turkey who have changed their names [to Turkish names].”

Some food for thought for those genocide theory advocates…

There is much you all aren’t aware about in regards to what happened to the Anatolian Armenian population.  Some were relocated, some came back, some left again, some died of hunger and disease, yes, some were massacred, and more than you probably expect still live in Anatolia.

I would hope that rather than trying to force genocide charges on Turkey, and trying to oversimplify a complex situation, you would be more interested in learning the truth. 

But it seems like pegging Turks as a scapegoat is much easier than taking a hard look at the misdeads of Britain, France, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaks)...and putting into proper proportion the misdeads of individual officials and Kurds, recognizing that hundreds of thousands of Turks were murdered too.

While continuing your present policies may seem wise in terms of trying to get land or reparations, it only makes healing these deep old wounds harder, and won’t bring the two communities together.

Report this

By Kadir, January 5, 2007 at 7:31 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH,

As far as I understand from his posts, Emrehan is Turkish. Justin MacCarthy is not Turkish.

Report this

By Rich, January 5, 2007 at 3:16 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH there is no case to be opened in the first place. It is up to the deniers to blur the truth and to make the black and white, look grey.

More importantly they do not give creedence to Turkish historians, thinking that “third party” historians or western historians have more credibility. What is evident is that Turkish historians who have researched the Armenian genocide are discredited and cowed down by the Turkish government laws (article 301) and nationalists. The rest of the Historians in Turkey more likely do not want to touch the subject becasue if there conclusions contradict Turkey’s policy of denial they may be prosecuted and also face a negative public discourse from the nationalist stripe of the country. 

Give me examples of debatable human rights issues such as genocide that have been settled (willingly) by a perpetrator government, or even academically.

As of today looks like this will be settled pragmatically by Turkey when they have no alternative but to acknowledge the Genocide by necessity. Turkey has it’s self-interest to protect.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 5, 2007 at 3:08 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The fact is that Turkish accounts were even supressed in the Ottoman newspapers by Allied censors after Mondros.  While European and American newspapers were publishing exaggerated accounts largely based from Armenians, Turks could not even in their own country tell about what atrocities they experienced.

After our liberation in 1923, many memoirs were published recounting these agonizing years.  Unfortunately, virtually none of them have been translated into English, thus contributing to Westerners being completely unaware of the Turkish suffering.

Just today the Zaman newspaper reported about French and Armenian atrocities in southern Turkey during that time.  One Turk wrote the following comment to the news item:

“The father of my grandfather was killed and tossed in a river by Armenian militants in Adana.  How and from whom will I get justice for this deed?”

The 500,000 Turks massacred by Armenians, and the 2.5 million Muslims killed in all, will not be forgotten…

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 5, 2007 at 3:04 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich wrote:  “You are assuming that history of the Armenian genocide has more then one version, this is not the case.”

I have made no such assumption.  Have you ever bothered to compare Turkish and Armenian history books?  Have you noted the points on which they differ? 

1.  Armenians quote sources shown to be faked or forged.

2.  Atrocities committed by Armenians on Turkish population is largely ignored, as is the impact of the Armenian revolutionary movement and the quest for land and independence.

3.  Eyewitness testimony is used selectively, with contrary testimony ignored.

Reconciliation must involve a comprehensive accounting of the period, not selective reporting, which is what most accounts suffer from.

Rich wrote:  “our history/culture before the attrocities were committeed is very rich and something to be proud of as in any other culture.”

Absolutely.  No one here is debating Armenian culture.  Everyone should be proud of their culture.  Nor are we debating Armenian history as a whole.  We are questioning the period from mid 1800s to 1920.

Rich wrote:  “I would bet anything that any child who was different from the rest in a school yard would eventually be singled out.”

We are not talking about cliques that are common among kids.  We are talking about a Turkish child, perfectly accepted by American children, being beaten by Armenian kids.

“So the point is this: The infiltration of Dashnaks and their ideology has changed the perception of history, encouraged ethnic hatred and makes reconciliation harder.”

Rich wrote:  “What can I say your interptation “propoganda” is different from human rights advocacy.”

Submitting forged documents to Europeans in a vain attempt to implicate the Ottoman government in atrocities is immoral propaganda, not human rights advocacy.

The Dashnak part is in control in Armenia, and many diaspora organizations have their roots in that party, so naturally their view of the world is widely disseminated in the Armenian community.  This is what I am refering to by the role they play in the Armenian community.  The Dashnaks are the same ones guilty of leading the revolt against the Ottomans and who killed Turks.  So it is not suprising that they ignore and deny their own crimes, and mislead even the Armenian community about the history of the period.

Rich wrote:  “Come on do you believe academics base history by a political organization.”

That is not what I said.  What I said is that Dadrian cites as evidence of government involvement documents which were forged by the Dashnak party.

Rich wrote:  “These academics researched more then one, in fact numerous sources to come to the conclusion of genocide.”

How do they conclude?  By research, or by desire?  Have you read about the Malta trials?  Are you aware that the British were very eager to convict Turks of war crimes, but were unable to gather evidence, and thus had to let them go?

Furthermore, your European sources which seem independent in fact are not.  Many Europeans relied on Armenian sources, like Dashnaks or Armenian Patriarch for their information, and witnessed nothing themselves, sometimes even ignoring contrary reports.  So your sources are like incest, not truly separate or independent.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 5, 2007 at 2:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH, you’re a really funny guy.

You ask:  “Are we to assume that “Emrehan Delibas” is a pseudonym and that he and Justin McCarthy are one and the same?”

No, I am not Justin McCarthy, but just as you conceal your identity, so do I conceal mine.

As for the reference, Prof. McCarthy’s statement was published in the Turkish Forum.

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 5, 2007 at 11:13 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Emrehan,”

You have not produced a reference to your lastest post, and only signed the post as Prof. Justin McCarthy, Univ. of Louisville.

Are we to assume that “Emrehan Delibas” is a pseudonym and that he and Justin McCarthy are one and the same?

Some Armenians, such as myself, whose parents assumed Anglo-Saxon names, are quite familiar with this. My surname is an Irish one. Is Justin MCarthy’s real name “Jemal Mustafa” or “Emrehan Delibas?” or is “Emrehan Delibas” truly “Justin McCarthy?” Just wondering!

Report this

By Rich, January 5, 2007 at 4:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emerhan wrote: 

“What I am saying is that the Dashnaks are leading Armenia today, and they are the ones who established many of the diaspora organizations in Europe and America…”
 
You are assuming that history of the Armenian genocide has more then one version, this is not the case. The Armenian genocide is something that you have chosen not to except, and to deny that is your choice. 

Emerhan wrote:

“This has led to the Armenian community having a very utopic view of their own history; suffering is amplified, and any atrocities committed by Armenians, even the reality that there was a very real, widespread rebellion, and that Armenian population was a minority even in Eastern Anatolia, is denied.  A complicated history with many grey areas is presented as black and white.”

There is nothing utopic about the Armenian genocide, our history/culture before the attrocities were committeed is very rich and something to be proud of as in any other culture.
It is your challenge to make the history “grey”, debatable, and removed from the truth.

“Turkish youth are not raised to hate Armenians, despite the fact that Turks have suffered.  But as AYF website describes, Armenian youth are being raised with a very defined goal, and political mission.  Clearly you can see how this negatively effects today’s politics and chances for reconciliation.”

Reconciliation is something that will take it’s normal course but can’t be excepted in the current political policies that Turkey holds. It would be premature to reconcile with Turkey without admitting they committed genocide.

Emerhan wrote: 

“Look I used to live in the New England area, where there are high concentration of Armenians.  Armenians there would speak Turkish among themselves, but when I approached them, they would start speaking Armenian as soon as they knew I was Turkish.  Armenians who wished to have solid friendships with Turks was discouraged to do so. One Turkish elementary school student was beaten up by Armenian kids just for being Turkish (he was the only Turk in that school)...”

I would bet anything that any child who was different from the rest in a school yard would eventually be singled out. Also, We would not even have this discussion if they Armenian school kids were displaced by the Turkish government. Given the current state of political affairs I wouldn’t want to converse with a number of Turks or feel compfortable doing so especially if they have like minded ideas of “Armenians filled with hate” as you state. I hope you have a minority view on this.

Emerhan wrote:

“So the point is this: The infiltration of Dashnaks and their ideology has changed the perception of history, encouraged ethnic hatred and makes reconciliation harder.”

Dashnaks did not infiltrate anyone, either you choose to be a part of it, or not just like any other organization in the world, or political group.

Emerhan wrote:

“The other point, is that during and after the war, the Dashnaks engaged in very specific propaganda to try to get their views accepted in the West.  I still see many websites containing their claims, which are repeated largely unchecked as though it were true.  Also, there is that important issue of fabricated documents.”

What can I say your interptation “propoganda” is different from human rights advocacy.

Emerhan wrote:

“Historians like Dadrian may not be Dashnak - I am not saying they are - but if they base their writings on sources that are of Dashnak origin, with out any questioning, or continue to cite those sources as true even when they’ve been shown to be forgeries, then you get into problems.”

Come on do you believe academics base history by a political organization.

These academics researched more then one, in fact numerous sources to come to the conclusion of genocide.

That leaves the opposing view which is denial of the Armenian genocide.

Report this

By Kadir, January 4, 2007 at 11:58 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Who is ITCJ? Are they God? It is not new that a hypocritical western body condemned Turkey for genocide. It is that kind of prejudice we are fighting. If you accept their definition (given below) as the definition of genocide, you can not possibly say that what hapened to Armenians was the first genocide of 20th century.

There is no mention of government involvement. According to this definition, yes that governer committed genocide together with other officials who killed Armenians. But according to this definition, you have to conclude that what Armenian militia did in Erzurum, Van, and some other Eastern Turkish cities were also genocides. As long as you have more than one event against a group, killing more than one people, you have a genocide… Then it is also genocide what Armenia did to Azerians in Nagorno-Karabakh and what Greeks did to Turks in Balkans and what US did to Iraq at the beginning of the war. When you drop bombs, people will be killed, they will be all Iraqi arabs, and the bombs were dropped to destroy a part of that group… What a silly definition. What a silly organization.


http://www.armenian-genocide.org/Affirmation.244/current_category.5/affirmation_detail.html

Genocide definition used by ITCJ: “As it has been developed by the International Criminal Court (whose Statute adopts the Convention’s definition of genocide), the crime of genocide has four elements: (i) the perpetrator killed one or more persons; (ii) such person or persons belonged to a particular national, ethnical, racial or religious group; (iii) the perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that group, as such; and (iv) the conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed against that group or was conduct that could itself effect such destruction.”

Report this

By Rich, January 4, 2007 at 8:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear WWH,

I know we are getting nowhere with Emerhan.

It wasn’t my purpose anyway to get through to him. Let him stay where he is, it seems he is compfortable with his current positions.

From reading his replies I think he sees it more of an attack against Turks then anything else.

The best anyone can hope is for him and others to re-read the reasons behind denialist postitions in my previous posts.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 4, 2007 at 2:58 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It must first be understood that the ICTJ statement that the word “genocide” can be applied to what happened to the Armenians is true. They applied the UN Genocide Convention definitions to the history of one group, the Armenians, during World War I. Note what ICTJ states as defining the so-called genocide:

i) The perpetrator killed one or more persons.

ii) Such person or persons belonged to a particular national, ethnical, racial, or religious group

iii) The conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of
similar conduct directed against that group.

All of those statements were true of the so-called “Armenian Genocide.” There were indeed many Muslims of Eastern Anatolia who killed Armenians. That fulfills the definition. Indeed, the definition is fulfilled whenever two “national, ethnical, racial, or religious groups” fight each other.

The basic problem is that the UN definition of genocide is essentially meaningless. It can be applied to almost any conflict. The most dangerous problem is that, once the word genocide is used, people do not think of the UN definition. They think of what Hitler did to the Jews. Those who read that the ICTJ has decided that the Turks committed genocide will seldom read the quasi-legal document produced by the ICTJ. Often they will not even know there is a UN Genocide Convention. Instead, their prejudices will be reinforced. Their knowledge will not be increased. They will blame
the Turks without knowing anything of the real history of the events.

By the UN definition there indeed was a genocide of the Armenians. There also was a genocide of the Muslims and a genocide of the Turks. When the Armenian Nationalists killed the Muslims of Van, was that not genocide? When they rounded up the villagers around Van, herded them into the great natural bowl in Zeve, then killed them, was that not genocide? Was the Armenian murder of the innocent and unarmed Muslims of Erzurum,
Erzincan, Tercan, and so many other places not genocide?

Beyond the fact that the UN definition is meaningless there are some extremely troubling facets to the ICTJ analysis: They state, “This memorandum is a legal, not a factual or historical analysis.” How, one might ask, can anyone make a decision on the events of World War I without an historical analysis? Of course, ICTJ does make an historical analysis. Indeed, they also make a “factual analysis,” using a very selected group of facts. While a number of what may be called the standard works of the Armenian Cause are cited, only one brief book published by Turkish Government and some Government web sites are cited (thus reinforcing the erroneous view that only the Turkish Government objects to the Armenian version of history.) Reading the text, it is obvious that the authors completely adopted the Armenian Nationalists’ view of history. They do not seem to have attempted to consider the other side. Had they done so, they would have seen that applying the word “genocide” only to the Turks was anything but a neutral statement of fact.

If one only utilizes the fabrications in sources such as the Bryce Report or the missionary reports, then “genocide” is a foregone conclusion. Those books contain few dead Turks. The only suffering mentioned is Armenian suffering. Using only such sources results in a complete distortion of history. World War I propaganda becomes modern propaganda, dressed in a
legalistic package.

—Prof. Justin McCarthy, Univ. Lousiville

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 4, 2007 at 2:51 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear Whitewashed:

As I mentioned myself in the last post, I am aware of the fact that the ICJT believed that the events constituted genocide.

That is not the point.

The point is that the ICJT was NOT commissioned to independently research Armenian claims, to research the history of that period, or to try to resolve the conflicts between Armenian and Turkish historians.

To quote your excerpt:  “this legal memorandum is not intended to definitively resolve particular factual disputes.”

The case will be closed when Armenian and Turkish historians put their heads together and resolve the factual discrepancies that cause them to come to differing conclusions.  When issues about the authenticity of key documents, ALL eyewitness accounts, and an accounting of Armenian atrocities are also considered, then the case will be closed.

The fact that Turkish suffering at Armenian hands is ENTIRELY IGNORED by Western politicians, and historians is, together with the authenticity issues, THE MAIN REASONS for why Turks and Armenians are STILL arguing over this issue.

I WANT JUSTICE FOR MY DEAD TOO, YOU KNOW!

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 4, 2007 at 1:31 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

CASE CLOSED!!

Here is the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) conclusion:

D. Conclusion

                The crucial issue of genocidal intent is contested, and this legal
memorandum is not intended to definitively resolve particular factual disputes.
Nonetheless, we believe that the most reasonable conclusion to draw from the various
accounts referred to above of the Events is that, notwithstanding the efforts of large
numbers of “righteous Turks”[59] who intervened on behalf of the Armenians, at least some
of the perpetrators of the Events knew that the consequence of their actions would be the
destruction, in whole or in part, of the Armenians of eastern Anatolia, as such, or acted
purposively towards this goal, and, therefore, possessed the requisite genocidal intent.
Because the other three elements identified above have been definitively established, the
Events, viewed collectively, can thus be said to include all of the elements of the crime of
genocide as defined in the Convention, and legal scholars as well as historians,
politicians, journalists and other people would be justified in continuing to so describe
them.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 4, 2007 at 12:22 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH wrote:  “Are you claiming that these rotting corpses were those of Turks?”

1.  I never made such a claim, so don’t stuff words in my mouth.

2.  In regards to corpses in the Tigris:  there are many embellished Armenian accounts if this.  Interestingly, there are also accounts of people who went their and found nothing other than “misery.”  Oral testimonies of this nature are generally unreliable, how much is truth, and how much is exaggerated through retelling is hard to know. 

I have already posted several documents from American archives which show that the number of dead claimed by Armenians is over exaggerated.  We also know that many Armenians did leave Syria, alive and well, and immigrated to other countries.  Plus, there is still a sizeable Armenian population in Lebanon and Syria.

Thus, while it is possible for some Armenians to have been killed there, how many, and whether the Tigris really was “overflowing with corpses” - to quote your poetic description - is unknown.

3.  Even if it is true that a massacre took place there, that is not proof of government involvement.  As I mentioned before, there is a difference between individual Ottoman officials committing atrocities, and the government ordering these officials to do so.  There is no proof of such a government order.

4.  I understand your interest in concealing your identity.  That is fine.  But if you don’t state your sources, then I hope you understand that it is not possible for me to respond further than what I have just done. 

You claim your sources to be “unimpeachable.”  Well, a few posts ago you also linked to a long list of Armenian militants and revolutionaries, as though they were “survivors” or “victims”, so I’ll take that declaration with a grain of salt, if you don’t mind.

WWH wrote:  “As for any Turkish families killed, I am concerned whenever any atrocity occurs.”

Really?  That is wonderful news, but in that case, why did you in a previous post unilaterally discount the eyewitness account of the Armenian swinging raped Turkish girls’ nipples like worry beads, saying with such confidence that no Armenian could have raped or killed?  Why don’t you spend the same energy and zeal you have for Armenians, on Turks?  Why do you deny that over 500,000 Turks have been murdered by Armenians?  Perhaps you are not so concerned, or you are only reading Armenian sources, or you don’t want to accept this reality.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 4, 2007 at 12:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear Rich;

Unfortunately, the Turkish community has been victim of hate crimes by the Armenian community.  I comments in this regard are not taken from the AYF website, but from personal experience, and from the experiences of other Turkish friends.  Beatings, verbal abuse, attempts to get Turks fired from their jobs, tire slashing…these are all things that I, or people I know, have been subjected to.

I surely do not believe that all Armenians do these kinds of hate-motivated acts.  My childhood best friend, as I have mentioned before, was Armenian.

As far as the Greywolves are concerned:  they are an ultranationalist Turkish organization whose main actions were during the 1960s/70s, when Turkey became embroiled in violent clashes between the Communists and the Greywolves.  Their actions may very well have saved Turkey from a communist takeover, but, I don’t condone their tactics, nor do I consider them “great fighters.”  I also don’t see their relevancy to our current discussion.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 4, 2007 at 11:57 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH, if by TARC you mean the Turkish Armenian Reconcilliation Commission, that was disbanded in September 2002, when Armenians decided to not take part in it anymore.  To quote the Armenian National Committee press release:  “TARC generated world-wide Armenian opposition in both the Diaspora and the Republic of Armenia for its role in interfering with international efforts to gain recognition of the Armenian Genocide.”

As for the ICTG, the “Center for Transitional Justice”:  the moderator of the TARC, David Phillips, asked the ICTG to investigate the applicability of the Genocide Convention in the case of Armenians, to which the ICTG replied that it didn’t apply.  Again, quoting the ANC:

“The report alleged that the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide could not be retroactively applied to the Armenian Genocide.” 

Thus, I don’t believe that the ICTG actually analyzed the question of whether there was a genocide or not, but started from the assumption that the events were genocide, and looked into whether Armenians could claim reparations based on the Genocide Convention.

WWH, please be more careful in how your word your statements, otherwise you can be very misleading.

Report this

By Kadir, January 4, 2007 at 11:52 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

WWH,

Gunduz Aktan, who is in TARC said this:

“None of the Turkish participants [in TARC] considered the events of 1915-16 as genocide.”
Source: “Turkish Armenian Dialogue”,
Turkish Daily News, July 11, 2001

I don’t know what ICTG stands for. But TARC definetely did not accept genocide as a body.

For that governor who killed your ancestors, what was his name? I want to read about this guy. I have hard time believing this guy was ordered by Istanbul to do what he did. Governors were very free in what they were doing. Ottoman Empire was an empire in name only. In 19th centrury, the governor of Egypt took up arms and marched to Istanbul. It was only the help of Russians (what an irony) that saved the Sultan.

I think reconciliation will happen with compromise. The truth lies between what you claim and what Turks claim. I think there should be a recognition of wrong-doing against some of the Armenians in that region and it should be tried to compensate their losses to a fair extent. But you should drop the word genocide and call the events a tragedy.

Good luck to you in your hearing. Maybe I’ll see you on C-SPAN smile I think fairness is the key to reconciliation. I hope you keep this in mind. I hope congress will bring in some people who will explain the Turkish side of things as well.

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 3, 2007 at 11:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Rich,

Our dialogue with Emrehan is going nowhere. TARC, comprised of prominent Turks and Armenians, had an independent agency, ICTG, assess the situation and they determined it to be genocide. These were highly-trained analysts who came to that conclusion. Why are we arguing this situation again here?

Report this

By Rich, January 3, 2007 at 4:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emerhan wrote:

“You ever wonder why there is so much hate?  Because through organizations like this, Armenian children are TAUGHT to hate…Dashnaks are still playing their old game, with their same objectives as in the WW1…only now they are using history, because the genocide card is the only way they can achieve their “united Armenian” dream.”

“That is why the Dashnak lead Armenia attacks Azerbaijan, occupying Nagorno-karabakh, and why Armenia even has land claims against Georgia, trying to bite off any bit of land that has Armenians living there…”

Again you manufacture words not included in your bias views of Armenians in your previous post. It does not mention that they speak for the entire Armenian population, nor did I read one word of hate.

Armenians do not speak under one entity, organization, nor are they brianwashed as you may simply believe.

The ultimate form of hate is what happened to the Armenians called, you guessed it genocide.

Painting the victimized ancestors of the Armenian genocide as hate filled is insulting to humanity more-so then Armenians themselves.

They have something in common that the Ottoman/Turkish government did.

Let our readers of Truthdig educate themselves on the Greywolves, do you boast of how great fighters they are?

Report this

By Whitewashed History, January 3, 2007 at 3:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Emrehan,

If I get any more specific, it would reveal my identity. Suffice to say that the documentation is from an unimpeachable source. I will be distributing this documentation to the Congresspersons when we have our hearings on Capitol Hill.

The Tigris was so filled with rotting corpses that it was not usable for other purposes. Are you claiming that these rotting corpses were those of Turks?

As for any Turkish families killed, I am concerned whenever any atrocity occurs.

Report this

By Emrehan Delibas, January 3, 2007 at 3:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Dear Rich;

Rich wrote: “Thanks for elaborating your point further but it still does not make sense…”

Rich, I did not say that all historians were Dashnak, or that they had Dashnak ideology etc.  You are again (unfortunately) misunderstanding - or I am not explaining myself well enough.

What I am saying is that the Dashnaks are leading Armenia today, and they are the ones who established many of the diaspora organizations in Europe and America.  Especially organizations like the AYF I just posted about has served for Armenian community to be largely influenced by THEIR VERSION of history, lead by their goals and aims.  This has led to the Armenian community having a very utopic view of their own history;  suffering is amplified, and any atrocities committed by Armenians, even the reality that there was a very real, widespread rebellion, and that Armenian population was a minority even in Eastern Anatolia, is denied.  A complicated history with many grey areas is presented as black and white.

This is part of the divide that exists between Turks and Armenians.  And the fact that Armenian youth are being raised with hatred, along the lines of Dashnak ideology, continues the legacy of conflict that the Dashnak’s initiated in the first place.

Turkish youth are not raised to hate Armenians, despite the fact that Turks have suffered.  But as AYF website describes, Armenian youth are being raised with a very defined goal, and political mission.  Clearly you can see how this negatively effects today’s politics and chances for reconciliation.

Look I used to live in the New England area, where there are high concentration of Armenians.  Armenians there would speak Turkish among themselves, but when I approached them, they would start speaking Armenian as soon as they knew I was Turkish.  Armenians who wished to have solid friendships with Turks was discouraged to do so.  One Turkish elementary school student was beaten up by Armenian kids just for being Turkish (he was the only Turk in that school).  Armenian students give presentations saying Erzurum is part of Armenia, but currently “occupied” by Turkey etc.  Just like in the AYF website.

So the point is this:  The infiltration of Dashnaks and their ideology has changed the perception of history, encouraged ethnic hatred and makes reconciliation harder.

The other point, is that during and after the war, the Dashnaks engaged in very specific propaganda to try to get their views accepted in the West.  I still see many websites containing their claims, which are repeated largely unchecked as though it were true.  Also, there is that important issue of fabricated documents.

Historians like Dadrian may not be Dashnak - I am not saying they are - but if they base their writings on sources that are of Dashnak origin, with out any questioning, or continue to cite those sources as true even when they’ve been shown to be forgeries, then you get into problems.

Report this

Page 1 of 4 pages  1 2 3 >  Last »

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook