Tag: Armenian genocide

  • Holocaust Museum Championing Armenian Cause

    Holocaust Museum Championing Armenian Cause

    By Ferruh Demirmen, Ph.D.

    Make no mistake about it: The U.S. Holocaust Museum is now unabashedly championing the Armenian cause and the Armenian lobby’s efforts to slander Turkey. This became evident when the Houston branch (Holocaust Museum Houston, HMH) announced earlier this year that it would feature Taner Akçam as a speaker on May 4 (2015). The announcement was accompanied by a short paragraph containing the usual genocide accusations. From April 1 to August 7 the Museum is displaying the controversial, prejudice-laden Armin Wegner exhibit. In cooperation with the local Armenian community, in March the Museum hosted a lecture by Peter Balakian.

    The Dallas branch also screened on April 30 the hatred-filled “The Armenian Genocide” pseudo-documentary by Andrew Goldberg.

    Although the Akçam talk at HMH was cancelled (due to “sickness”) at the last minute, the Museum didn’t waste time scheduling a talk by UCLA professor-emeritus Richard Hovannisian, on May 27 (2015). It is the same Hovannisian who, having invited Akçam and two other “genocide” proponents (F.M. Göçek and E. Shafak) to a special “forum” at UCLA in 2005, declared at the conclusion of the meeting that, “a future conference would deal with the issues of reparations and territorial demands from Turkey.”

    The Turkish-American community in Houston, and Texas in general, is not amused by such naked advocacy of the Holocaust Museum.

    The HMH website used to contain a short article entitled “Genocide in Armenia (1915-1923).” The article, in its reference to 1923, and connoting that “genocide” took place in the Armenian territory, is brazenly misleading just by its title alone. That article is now replaced by a longer one, the title of which still carries the 1923 nonsense. The body of the article contains the usual allegations taken from an Armenian script. Ingeniously, the article mentions the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide, but without discussing its substance and caveats.

    The intensity of anti-Turkish events by the Museum is unparalleled. Where is the gratitude for the friendship Turks, from the Spanish inquisition in 15th century to World War II, extended to Jews, one wonders. Thanks to Turkish help, thousands of Jews from Vichy France found their way by train to Istanbul during the war. That memory is still fresh, as there are Turkish Jews settled in Turkey that benefitted from that humanitarian effort.

    And could it be that the Museum is not aware of the Dashnak-Nazi collaboration in World War II, including the Armenian 812th Battalion created by the Wehrmacht in 1941, as revealed by the Nazi-era German magazine Deutsch-Armenischen Gesselschaft? The 20,000-men-strong battalion was commanded by General Dro Drastamat Kanayan, a war criminal on his own from the time he was a guerilla leader in eastern Anatolia and later the army chief in the short-lived First Republic of Armenia in 1919-1920. The whole idea of the Dashnak-Nazi cooperation was to prove that the Armenians were “Aryans.” Armenian recruits also joined the Panzer Corps and Gestapo in France and Germany.

    Interestingly, General “Dro” is one of those “titans” Prof. Hovannisian remarked recently that he had met in his “younger days.”

    After the war “Dro” was arrested by American forces, and soon released. He died in Boston in 1956. Years later his remains were taken to Armenia where he was given a hero’s ceremony. Of Dro’s past deeds in the First Republic of Armenia, “The Jewish Times” wrote (June 21, 1990): “An appropriate analogy with the Jewish Holocaust might be the systematic extermination of the entire Muslim population of the independent Republic of Armenia which consisted of at least 30-40 percent of the population of that republic.” Indeed, according to Russian historian A.A. Lalaian, 225,000 Muslims, or nearly 80% of the resident Muslim population, perished in the First Republic of Armenia over a period of two and half years.

    One wonders whether the professor will reminisce during his talk his younger days when he met his hero “Dro.” Regardless, it will be a deep irony that a Holocaust institution will be featuring someone for whom a prominent Nazi collaborator was a “titan.”

    There is little doubt that the actions of the Houston (as well, Dallas) branches of the Holocaust Museum are reflective of the Jewish lobby’s position in general. The Museum’s stance cannot be divorced from the current realpolitik between Turkey and Israel. But just as in the case of the hideous “Hitler Quote” (a deception!) displayed in the U.S. Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C., one cannot withhold the strong suspicion that generous donations from the Armenian lobby played a major role in shaping the Museum’s attitude toward the Armenian assertions.

    One should never underestimate what such donations can deliver!

    Back in March (2015), I wrote a 5-page long letter to the Managing Director of HMH protesting the Akçam event and suggested that the Museum give “equal time” to a scholar from the Turkish side. The director stonewalled my suggestion and replied with a cliché-type letter. Her reply, and my further comments in bold italics, are reproduced below.

    “Dear Mr. Demirmen,

    Thank you for your e-mail of March 2 regarding our upcoming program with Dr. Taner Akçam.

    As you know, the mission of Holocaust Museum Houston is to educate the public about the dangers of hatred, prejudice and apathy using the lessons of the Holocaust and other genocides. Thus, we feel it is important that we take the 100th anniversary of atrocities during World War I as a time to examine that history and what can be learned from it.”

    The Holocaust Museum’s mission is commendable. But shouldn’t the atrocities inflicted by the armed Armenian bands on the Muslim population likewise be remembered and the lessons there from learned? As I noted in my detailed letter, more than half a million Muslim civilians lost their lives to Armenian terror.

    “We understand that Turkey disputes the use of the word “genocide.” Whatever term is used, it is historically clear that more than 1 million Armenians perished as a result of execution, starvation, disease, the harsh environment and physical abuse.”

    It is not just that Turkey disputes the word “genocide.” In fact, there was no genocide. In the context of 1915 events, the genocidal intent (dolus specialis), as required in accordance with the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide (Article 2), is missing. We must respect the law. In its February 3, 2015 decision (Croatia vs. Serbia), the International Court of Justice underlined the vital importance of dolus specialis for genocide determination. Other points the court made also support the Turkish position.

    “As of 2014, more than 22 countries and 42 of the 50 states in the U.S., have declared those acts “genocide,” according to the International Association of Genocide Scholars. At least 126 leading scholars of the Holocaust have urged western democracies to acknowledge it as well.”

    Political entities and scholars are not authorized to establish the crime of genocide. Only a duly authorized court can. This is what the Convention on Genocide (Article 6) says. For the alleged Armenian genocide, there is no such court verdict. Further, if we take note of the opinion of “126 genocide scholars,” how can we ignore the opinion more than 100 other scholars who disagree? Separate from Holocaust, the two events accepted as genocide under international law are the Rwanda and Srebrenica atrocities.

    “For all these reasons, we will not change our messaging regarding this talk.”

    It is deeply ironic that HMH is sponsoring a program that is distinctly anti-Turkish but supportive of the Armenian position. As noted in my detailed letter, while Turks have extended their warm welcome to Jewish people in their history, Armenians collaborated with the Nazi Germany.

    For your information, I am also attaching a sworn testimony by rabbi Albert J. Amateau, now deceased, who lived the tumultuous days of the Ottoman period just before the 1915 events and observed what the Armenian gangs were doing to local population including Jews.

    “Sincerely, Kelly J. Zuniga, Ed.D., CFRE

    Executive Director, Holocaust Museum Houston”

  • Bernard Lewis Questions The Armenian Genocide

    Bernard Lewis Questions The Armenian Genocide

    Bernard Lewis Questions The Armenian Genocide

    By Jonathan WilsonTue, 01/08/2008 – 23:13

    Dr. Bernard Lewis is a world renowned British-American historian on Islam, the Middle East, and the Ottoman Empire. He was a professor in Princeton University’s Near East Studies department. In this video, Dr. Bernard Lewis through decades of research states that the killings of Armenians during World War I cannot be classified as genocide. He has advised Western Governments on Middle Eastern policies.

    Dr. Bernard Lewis is described as the West’s leading historian on the Middle East.http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/item/2007/0406/ed_distance.html

    In the Encyclopedia of Historians and Historical Writing, Martin Kramer considers that, over a 60-year career, Dr. Bernard Lewis has emerged as “the most influential postwar historian of Islam and the Middle East.”

    Dr. Bernard Lewis on Armenian Genocide – Youtube Video

    Bernard Lewis Armenian Genocide Youtube Video

    It is interesting to note that objective historians like Bernard Lewis are all over the world, but very few have the courage of Bernard Lewis to speak the truth when so many historians are bullied and intimidated by the infamous ANCA (Armenian National Committee of America) and the Armenian American Assembly lobbyists which use hate campaigns, propaganda, and invest a lot of money in scholars, organizations, and politicians to support their crusade of Anti-Turkism. They also organize hundreds of volunteers to protest and flood politician offices to pressure them into following their political agendas.

    Objective historians like Bernard Lewis are what will bring peace to the world and ethics to the field. If you’re a historian, do the research, analyze both sides, go to both Armenian perspective websites as well as Turkish perspective websites, watch all the documentaries from both sides, and I guarantee you the truth will show itself as clear as day that the Ottoman government did not plan out a mass extermination campaign, and only stopped the violence through a relocation order that may have saved hundreds of thousands of Armenian and Turkish lives during World War I.

    Ethnic conflicts are terrible, they cause thousands of deaths (as they did in 1915), and governments struggle in differentiating between who is a rebel and who is a civilian. During World War I, the best solution proposed was to relocate hostile populations; this of course, was not good for the innocent Armenians among the guilty Armenians, but it was a last resort after many amnesties for Armenian revolts and uprisings.

    There are many genocides in the world, but only one gets recognition without any solid proof, that is the Armenian Genocide, yet the subject is debated amongst academics and historians around the world. Through decades of propaganda it has started to settle into peoples minds who did not read books on the issue. This is the same kind of tactics the Islamofacists use to brainwash millions of Muslims to believe in their extreme revision of history and religion.

    Hatred should not be preached on anyone, and no one should preach hatred or oppress other peoples’ views even if they differ from your own.

    Dr. Bernard Lewis’s Books

    • The Origins of Islamism (1940)
    • A Handbook of Diplomatic and Political Arabic (1947)
    • The Arabs in History (1950)
    • The Emergence of Modern Turkey (1961)
    • Istanbul and the Civilizations of the Ottoman Empire (1963)
    • The Assassins: A Radical Sect in Islam (1967)
    • The Cambridge History of Islam (2 vols. 1970, revised 4 vols. 1978, editor with Peter Malcolm Holt and Ann K.S. Lambton)
    • Islam: From the Prophet Muhammad to the capture of Constantinople (1974, editor)
    • History — Remembered, Recovered, Invented (1975)
    • Race and Color in Islam (1979)
    • Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of a Plural Society (1982, editor with Benjamin Braude)
    • The Muslim Discovery of Europe (1982)
    • The Jews of Islam (1984)
    • Semites and Anti-Semites (1986)
    • Islam from the Prophet Muhammad to the Capture of Constantinople (1987)
    • The Political Language of Islam (1988)
    • Race and Slavery in the Middle East: an Historical Enquiry (1990)
    • Islam and the West (1993)
    • Islam in History (1993)
    • The Shaping of the Modern Middle East (1994)
    • Cultures in Conflict (1994)
    • The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2,000 Years (1995)
    • The Future of the Middle East (1997)
    • The Multiple Identities of the Middle East (1998)
    • A Middle East Mosaic: Fragments of Life, Letters and History (2000)
    • Music of a Distant Drum: Classical Arabic, Persian, Turkish, and Hebrew Poems (2001)
    • The Muslim Discovery of Europe (2001)
    • What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East (2002)
    • The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror (2003)
    • From Babel to Dragomans: Interpreting the Middle East (2004)
  • Turkey’s 2015 Plan: Avoid Word ‘Genocide’ at All Costs

    Turkey’s 2015 Plan: Avoid Word ‘Genocide’ at All Costs

    Armenian protesters shout slogans against Turkey during a demonstation near the Turkish Embassy in central Athens, April 24, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Yannis Behrakis)

    By: Orhan Kemal Cengiz for Al-Monitor Turkey Pulse Posted on April 30.

    The groups that call the 1915 events in Turkey “genocide” filled Istanbul Taksim Square on April 24, along with Armenians who came from abroad to remember millions of Armenians who lost their lives and suffered untold agony on this land. Only five or six years ago, it was unthinkable that such an observance could be held in Turkey. These developments encourage optimism, but even as democratic and forward-looking Turkish faces were displayed in Istanbul, we also noticed that the Turkish Foreign Ministry was still repeating the clichés of the last 98 years that we all know so well.

    About This Article

    Summary :

    Turkey is preparing a diplomatic offensive to prevent the US and European countries from recognizing the events of 1915 as genocide, writes Orhan Kemal Cengiz.

    Original Title:

    Turkey 2015: Avoid ‘’Genocide’’ Word At All Costs

    Author: Orhan Kemal Cengiz

    Translated by: Timur Goksel

    Categories : Originals Turkey

    The Foreign Ministry criticized the April 24 statement of US President Barack Obama with a tone bordering on condemnation: “We find this statement that ignores historic realities troubling in all its aspects, and regret it.” What led to this critical tone was Obama’s saying that the Armenians were mercilessly massacred and forced on a death march in the last days of the Ottoman Empire.

    On one hand, Turkey has erased a yearslong taboo and is now debating 1915 freely as never before. In addition to the April 24 observances, people are openly expressing their views by referring to 1915 as “genocide” in print and visual media.

    But on the other hand, looking at the official reactions of the Turkish government, you can’t find the slightest change. Why? Why is Turkey is trying to keep the world from debating an issue that is freely discussed in Turkey itself? Why was Obama’s statement received with such a stiff reaction, even though there was no mention of genocide? Why is Turkey, while taking serious steps to solve major questions such as the Kurdish issue, still repeating its century-old clichés on the Armenian issue?

    All these appear to be part of Turkey’s strategy for 2015. While Armenia and the Armenian diaspora promote 2015 as a milestone for global recognition of genocide, the Turkish state, mobilized by defensive instincts, continues denying everything, just as it has been doing all these years.

    It was known that the Turkish Foreign Ministry was preparing to counter the Armenian diaspora’s 2015 strategy.

    Haberturk, in a report by Sibel Hurtas in September 2011, titled ‘’Foreign Ministry sends coded message to raise 2015 alarm,” said that in a secret message to Turkish embassies worldwide, Turkish diplomats were asked to monitor and prevent Armenian activities related to 2015.

    In an incident in Denmark in December 2012, we noted that the secret message had served its purpose and Turkish ambassadors were acting in accordance with the official strategy. In response to an Armenian genocide exhibit at Copenhagen University in December 2012, the Turkish Embassy immediately opened an alternative exhibit. As you can easily surmise, according to the Turkish Embassy exhibit, the Armenian genocide never happened.

    Barcin Yinanc of Hurriyet Daily News wrote on April 23, probably on information provided by the Foreign Ministry, that Turkey will not stop at developing counter arguments to Armenian genocide claims, but will also make efforts to normalize relations with Armenia before 2015.

    Keeping all this in mind and rereading Turkey’s reaction to Obama’s message, it could be understood that Turkey’s message was not for today, but rather forward looking. It appears that Turkey, by reacting strongly today, was trying to ensure that the US president will not mention genocide in 2015.

    Why is Turkey so worried by the use of this word? Because Ankara thinks that there could be legal ramifications of the US and European countries recognizing genocide.

    From the international-law angle, whether Turkey’s acknowledgement of genocide has legally binding implications is open to debate. Even organizations such as the Elie Wiesel Foundation, which persistently says what happened in 1915 was unquestionably genocide, are saying that international conventions cannot be retroactive, and that is why there cannot be demands for land or compensation from Turkey. But while it looks difficult for the Armenians to win in international courts, that doesn’t rule out the possibility of individual countries taking legal action on their own.

    For example, the cases brought against German insurance company Munich Re in California in 2003 within the framework of the 2000 Poochigan law should make one think. Pursuant to this law, German insurance companies that had insured Armenians in 1915 but did not pay damages were sued in California. The cases were dismissed because a federal appeals court in San Francisco abrogated the law. But the court’s opinion on Movsesian v. Victorai Versicherung AG may make it easier to understand why Turkey is fighting so desperately. The court, while abrogating the law, mentioned that Obama had refrained from using the term “Armenian genocide” and indicated that the law might not be in harmony with US foreign policy. This conceivably could mean that should Obama and the US administration label the events of 1915 as genocide, the judicial system could change its mind accordingly.

    We see that the Turkish government, fearing future sanctions, is continuing with the policy of denial, and this will not change before 2015. Whether Turkey will develop humane and rational policies once the fear of 2015 is past remains to be seen.

    Orhan Kemal Cengiz is a human rights lawyer, columnist and former president of the Human Rights Agenda Association, a Turkish NGO that works on human-rights issues ranging from the prevention of torture to the rights of the mentally disabled.

     

     

    Read more: https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2013/04/turkey-diplomatic-campaign-stop-genocide-recognition.html#ixzz2S1wXDbeH

  • Break or save Franco-Turkish relations?

    Break or save Franco-Turkish relations?

    CONTRIBUTOR
    MAXIME GAUIN

    A new bill criminalizing the “denial” of the unsubstantiated “Armenian genocide” claims was introduced in the French National Assembly with the barely implicit support of Mr. Sarkozy.

    The co-chairmen of the Coordination Council of France’s Armenian Associations, namely Jean-Marc “Ara” Toranian, former spokesman of the terrorist group ASALA, and Mourad Papazian, unrepentant sympathizer of another Armenian terrorist group, the JCAG/ARA, did not expect that anymore, at least not in 2011. The level of knowledge of the MPs supporting the bill is exemplified by Richard Mallie (UMP), who still uses the crude forgeries of Aram Andonian that have been proven to be fakes since 1983.

    The bill is not the result of the Armenian nationalists’ real influence in France; on May 4, 2011 they suffered a humiliating “fiasco”(this is their word) in the Senate after several other failures to obtain any discussion of the old, now defunct, criminalization bill (2008, 2009, 2010). The new bill is not the expression of a wave of anti-Turkish, or still less, anti-Islam sentiment. The Turkish season (2008-2009) in France was a success. According to a recent Gallup survey, 64 percent of the French have a good opinion toward Islam. There is indeed nothing in France like the Protestant fundamentalism in the U.S. and Germany or the vehement anti-Muslim and anti-Turkish demagogy of the so-called “Party for Liberty” in the Netherlands. The French colonial tradition, despite obvious shortcomings, was pro-Islamic and even largely pro-Turkish. The background is so completely different.

    In a sense, the reasons for the bill are sadder than that. Mr. Sarkozy is afraid – not without reason – of losing the presidential election and as a result is ready to do anything to obtain more votes. His initiative is a serious error, even in a strictly electoral perspective. Assimilation leads many French Armenians to vote out of ethnic considerations. Even the majority of the nationalist activists and sympathizers vote traditionally for the same party because they prefer to show an electoral fidelity with the hope of being awarded – at least by subventions – for their associations.

    So, the oldest alliance still existing in the world – the alliance of François I and Süleyman the Legislator, perpetuated in 1921 by the Ankara agreement and again in October 2011 by the Franco-Turkish agreement against terrorism – is not jeopardized by prejudices but prejudices toward prejudices and in addition toward the personal ties of a few dozen Armenian activists with a few dozen MPs. Similarly, the blog opened on the website of Le Monde by the author of this article was censored because of Armenian pressure. This is merely the result of social intercourse of a few Armenians with one or two editors. The failure of French Turkology to produce works comparable to the ones of Edward J. Erickson, Guenter Lewy and Justin McCarthy, or the passivity of most French Turks until very recently, also has something to do with the problem.

    But this is not the time for a blame game. Political irresponsibility can provoke irreversible damages in the context of the Arab Spring – especially the repression in Syria, which makes Franco-Turkish cooperation so desirable – and the unresolved problems in the Caucasus. The French language was studied in Turkey for decades, but especially since the “recognition” of 2001 there has been a dramatic decrease, and that is why this text is written in English. The “recognition” of the “genocide” claims and the irresponsible statements of Mr. Sarkozy about Turkey cost France many contracts and its place in Nabucco. The vote of the liberticidal bill would still be worse. Even if it has nothing to do with any deep anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim feelings in France, the vote on the censorship legislation proposal would be interpreted like that by many Turks and not only by the less educated people.

    Armenian nationalism has been used since its revival in 1965 as a tool by powers which have agendas other than European – or more generally Western – unity. Alas, it is also helped by the miscalculation of some Western politicians. As a result, the French deputies have a heavy responsibility. They can choose to damage irremediably the relations with a rising regional power and as a result seriously hurt the European Union policy, the French economy and their prestige and diplomacy. They can also choose to prefer French and European interests, as well as the value of free speech, to the cries of former supporters of Armenian terrorism.

    *Maxime Gauin is a researcher at the International Strategic Research Organization (USAK-ISRO) and a Ph.D. candidate at the Middle East Technical University department of history.

     

    Hürriyet Daily News

  • CENSORSHIP AT WWW.BOSTON.COM

    CENSORSHIP AT WWW.BOSTON.COM

    If you click on

    To read about “Groundbreaking for Armenian memorial in Boston today” by Globe Staff, September 9, 2010, you will read readers’ comments.

    But you will also see this:

    “We removed Kirlikovali’s comment”

    Twice (so far!)

    Why?

    Were the messages using curse words, insults, slander, lies, deception, falsification, misrepresentation, or anything remotely related to any one of these traits?

    Absolutely, positively not!

    Armenian falsifiers and Turk haters may disagree with me, but that does not make what I write wrong or justify censorship.

    If anyone can prove to me that my message is not substantiated or justified by historic facts, I will stop writing altogether.

    But if my writing have legitimate historical sources and sound evidence, then I want an apology from www.Boston.com, a long overdue one, along with a chance to present my case, perhaps in the form of an unabridged, uncensored op-ed.

    Is that a deal?

    Please read the following message and contemplate. See if you can justify censorship by a major news outlet in a major American city in 21st Century.

    WHY SUCH INTOLERANCE TO DISSENT?

    Is it because the Armenian pressure in Boston, and Massachusetts, is that unbearable?

    Is it because the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, established in 1890 in Tbilisi, Georgia, and involved in many acts of violence and terrorism against Ottoman and Turkish Muslim since then, responsible for the murder of many thousands of Muslims since 19th Century, is now headquartered in Boston?

    Is it because the ABCFM (American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions)—the Protestant missionaries– mentors of Armenian separatism, insurgency, revolts, treason, terrorism, and more, are also located in Boston?

    Is it because the Boston Globe is the first American newspaper to surrender to Armenian intimidation, harassment, and other forms of political, religious, and economical pressure?

    Or is it simply because of the deeply ingrained anti-Turkish, anti-Muslim in Boston Globe?

    Or is it all of the above, some of the above, and/or some other, overt or covert, considerations, too?

    Whatever the reason, www.Boston.com’ s blatant censorship is and shall remain as a shameful stain in America’s record of freedom of speech, enshrined in the U.S. constitution, and legendary accommodation of diversity, and tolerance of dissent. This is an unfortunate lapse and a reflexive return to the “sundown towns” of a dark America when slavery was shamelessly justified in the columns of newspapers, including Boston Globe.

    Boston.com failed in its duty to present all sides of a story to its unsuspecting and trusting readers. It seems Boston.com is quiet at ease with censoring opinions they do not like.

    You be the judge.

    ***

    Here is my message censored by www.Boston .com:

    ***

    A HATE MONUMENT IN BOSTON: WHAT A SHAME!

    Allegations of Armenian genocide are racist and dishonest history. They are racist because they ignore the Turkish dead: about 3 million during WWI; more than half a million of them at the hands of Armenian nationalists. And dishonest because they simply dismiss the six T’s of the Turkish-Armenian conflict:

    1) TUMULT (as in numerous Armenian armed bloody revolts between 1882 and 1920)

    2) TERRORISM (by well-armed Armenian nationalists and militias victimizing Ottoman-Muslims between 1882-1920)

    3) TREASON (Armenians joining the invading enemy armies as early as 1914 and lasting until 1921)

    4) TERRITORIAL DEMANDS (where Armenians were a minority, not a majority, attempting to establish Greater Armenia, the would-be first apartheid of the 20th Century with a Christian minority ruling over a Muslim majority )

    5) TURKISH SUFFERING AND LOSSES (i.e. those caused by the Armenian nationalists: 524,000 Muslims, mostly Turks, met their tragic end at the hands of Armenian revolutionaries during WWI, per Turkish Historical Society. This figure is not to be confused with about 2.5 million Muslim dead who lost their lives due to non-Armenian causes during WWI. Grand total: more than 3 million. Source: “Death & Exile” by Prof. Justin McCarthy.)

    6) TERESET (temporary resettlement) triggered by the first five T’s above and amply documented as such; not to be equated to the Armenian misrepresentations as genocide.)

    VAN REVOLT BY ARMENIANS: IT WAS THE 9/11 FOR THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

    According to the “Dictionary of WWI” by Stephen Pope & Elizabeth-Anne Wheal, 2003, ISBN 0 85052 979-4, page 34, 120,000 Muslims, mostly Turkish, were killed by Armenian nationalists in 1914. And that does not even take into account the infamous Van Rebellion by Armenians in April of 1915 where about 40,000 Muslim inhabitants of the town were cut down by Armenians and the city was turned over to Russian invader.

    The U.S. crossed oceans and continents to wage a trillion dollar global war on terrorism because about 3,000 of its citizens were killed on American soil. Why is it, then, so difficult to understand that the Ottoman Empire, having lost 120,000 of its citizens, resorted to similar , but much lesser, measures of TERESET (Temporary Resettlement) of the arrogantly treasonous perpetrators?

    24TH OF APRIL, 1915: IT IS THE BEGINNING OF OTTOMAN GUANTANAMO, NOT A BOGUS GENOCIDE

    24th of April, 1915, is the beginning of OTTOMAN GUANTANAMO, not the alleged genocide. On that day, some 237 Armenian suspects (not thousands as claimed) of treason and terrorism were arrested and sent to central Anatolia, and subjected to house arrest, which meant they could roam around during the day but had to check into a designated house at night. So it is not exactly even Guantanamo, is it? All of the Armenians were returned in the end, except two. They were murdered but on unrelated matters of money and trade. No matter how one slices it, this does not sound like genocide, does it?

    SINCE WHEN DEFENDING ONE’S HOME A GENOCIDE?

    Turks and Armenians had lived in a relatively harmonious cohabitation in Anatolia for nearly a millennium before the Armenian took up arms against their own government towards the end of that millennium (i.e. 1894-1915). Had the Armenians (and others) not taken up arms against their own neighbors, co-citizens, and government, they would have still been living in Anatolia today, just like the Armenians of Istanbul who mostly stayed loyal to the Ottoman Empire .

    ***

    I posted the following today. Let’s see if the white-hooded fellows at the censorship board at www.Boston.com will allow my messages to stand:

    1917

    “…For fourteen days, I followed the Euphrates; it is completely out of the question that I during this time would not have seen at least some of the Armenian corpses, that according to Mrs. Stjernstedt’s statements, should have drifted along the river en masse at that time. A travel companion of mine, Dr. Schacht, was also travelling along the river. He also had nothing to tell when we later met in Baghdad… …In summary, I think that Mrs. Stjernstedt, somewhat uncritically, has accepted the hair-raising stories from more or less biased sources, which formed the basis for her lecture…”

    Source: H.J. Pravitz, A Swedish officer, Nya Dagligt Allehanda, 23 April, 1917 issue
    (A Swedish Newspaper published from 1859 to 1944)

    1923

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

    Source: Lamsa, George M., a missionary well known for his research on Christianity,
    The Secret of the Near East, The Ideal Press, Philadelphia 1923, p 133

    1928

    “…Few Americans who mourn, and justly, the miseries of the Armenians, are aware that till the rise of nationalistic ambitions, beginning with the ‘seventies, the Armenians were the favored portion of the population of Turkey, or that in the Great War, they traitorously turned Turkish cities over to the Russian invader; that they boasted of having raised an Army of one hundred and fifty thousand men to fight a civil war, and that they burned at least a hundred Turkish villages and exterminated their population…”

    Source: John Dewey, The New Republic, 12 November 1928

    1976

    “… The deafening drumbeat of the propaganda, and the sheer lack of sophistication in argument which comes from preaching decade after decade to a convinced and
    emotionally committed audience, are the major handicaps of Armenian historiography
    of the diaspora today…”

    Source: Dr. Gwynne Dyer, a London-based independent journalist, 1976

    1988

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

    Source: Georges de Maleville, lawyer and a specialist on the Armenian question, La Tragédie Arménienne de 1915, (The Armenian tragedy of 1915), Editions F. Sorlot-F. Lanore, Paris, 1988, p 61-63

    2005

    “…From 1911 to 1923, the Ottoman Empire and the people of Turkey participated in five long, hard, and destructive wars. These were the Tripolitanian War / Trablusgarb Harbi / Türk Italyan Harbı (1911-1912), the two Balkan Wars (1912-1913), World War I (1914-1918), and the Turkish War of National Liberation (1918-1923). To most Turkish people who lived through that era, these wars were really only one, the Seferberlik, or period of mobilization, which went on continuously throughout these years.

    During these wars, the entire infrastructure of life in the Ottoman Empire was destroyed. Fields were left barren and uncultivated; roads and railroad lines were destroyed and their equipment wrecked; harbors and quays were blown up by repeated bombing, and many of the people living nearby were killed; Istanbul and the other great cities of the empire were partially destroyed by bombing, bombarding and great fires. The entire nation, thus, was for all practical purposes destroyed. One of the greatest miracles of Atatürk’s leadership during and after the Turkish War of National Liberation was the manner in which he was able to raise the Turkish people from this wreckage and lead them to revive and reconstruct what became the Turkish Republic.

    In the midst of all this destruction, no fewer than 30 percent, one third, of all the people who lived in the Ottoman Empire at the start of the war died. In the war zones, Macedonia and Thrace, western Anatolia, northeastern Turkey and southeastern Turkey, that percentage was as high as sixty or even seventy percent, much higher than any other country that was involved in these wars. No-one was counting, so it is very difficult to give actual figures, but perhaps no fewer than four million people died in the lands of the Ottoman Empire during these wars, and these were people of all races and religions, all ethnic origins, they were Muslims, Jews and Christians, they were Turks and Armenians, Arabs and Greeks, and many more…”

    Source: From “The Ottoman Holocaust”; a lecture delivered by Stanford J. Shaw (1930-2006, Professor of Modern Ottoman History, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey; Professor of Turkish History, University of California, Los Angeles,) to the First International Symposium on Armenian Claims and The Reality of Azerbaijan, sponsored by the Atatürk Research Center, 5 May 2005, Ankara, Turkey

    ***