An armenian, Arash Shamsian, threatens a UCSB professor with death

Covered by the Daily Nexus (UCSB's daily paper) Arash Shamsian threatened a UCSB professor with an email posing "..will kill you.." statements.

"A former UCSB student wanted on charges of e-mailing threats to a university chemistry professor was arrested on Monday at Los Angeles International Airport.

University of California Police Dept. detectives arrested Arash Shamsian at LAX after he cooperated with the investigation and surrendered himself to authorities on hand. In response to the e-mailed threats, a campuswide warning was issued through the UCSB Alert System on Feb. 28, and the chemistry facility, as well as its surrounding areas, was placed under heightened surveillance"

"The best turk, is the dead turk!"

Here are couple quotes left by some Armenians (contemporary) at HyeForum:

"The best turk, is the dead turk!" gamavor

" If Turkey were an honorable nation, there would be no ASALA." America-Hye

"Once this Iraq mess is cleared Turkey will be isolated as never before." arpa

"Most of the time the dog turks were meticulously gunned down, often without a trace or evidence. Very clear job." gamavor

"Armenian terrorist eliminated Turkish officials with the sole purpose to bring the Armenian question to the mass media." gamavor

"Killing innocent people (Turkish officials) is bad. I, for one, am sorry about that and apologize on behalf of Armenians like me who are remorseful about it." phantom

ASALA-"Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia"

ASALA-"Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia"

ASALA is the most talked-about Armenian terrorist organization, in the new period of the Armenian terrorism between 1973 and 1985. The firm information about its foundation, organization structure and activities are yet to be published. Various Armenian sources and publications give some information about some people and ASALA, and they often announce the results obtained from the publications of this organization and terrorist group. The information includes those desired to be disseminated or those which are not found inappropriate to announce. From one standpoint, ASALA's foundation is attributable to incidents emerged in Lebanon, it is regarded as part of activities of Palestinian Liberation Organizations in Lebanon, and it is supported that it is these activities which have inspired its foundation. On the other hand according to some publications, several Armenians gathered and founded a new terrorist organization which created the most striking and efficient terrorist activities in a short period of time. All of these are far from fully explaining the foundation of ASALA. The existing hesitations will continue for a long time unless the conditions under which ASALA has emerged as an organization, is known and the gap it has filled has been satisfactorily clarified.


First of all, it must be known that the first movements of the Armenian terrorism in the new period have emerged as a requirement of the policies and objectives of the Tashnak Armenian terrorist organization. It has been clarified with various evidence that Tashnaks have completely supported the western view in the historical process and in the described period and that they have pursued a policy based on the Turkish objectives and implementing terrorism at a limited level. Actually, neither their structure nor their historical development is suitable to display any approach and conduct other than above. There is a gap in this environment. An attractive future, closely concerning the Marxist and new revolutionary generations and called new Armenian resistance organizations in particular as put in France, is presumed to be a gap related to the Soviets and the Eastern countries. In fact, this field has been already filled long time ago by Hınchaks. And since 1960, Hınchaks have been paving the ground for the new terrorism with various views. However, Hınchaks do not appear around, and a new terrorist organization called ASALA emerges with the desire to be seen as new in every aspect. Considering the preparatory factors of the new Armenian terrorism and reviewing in particular Hınchaks' goals, policies and objectives may lead us to think that Hınchaks constitute a terrorist group. Nevertheless, the conditions in Lebanon, new developments caused this group to appear before the world public opinion as a new Armenian Terrorist group, and this organization has become known with the terrorist incidents for which it has claimed responsibility. Actually, there is no remarkable change in the situation. In the historical process, both terrorist organizations are on the stage. One is more evident with its terrorist groups and teams, while the other is invisible with all manpower, experience in addition to the immaterial and psychological support remain under a cover of an Armenian terrorist group, and this group performs terrorist acts through groups and teams of lower level.


1. Foundation and Organization Structure


ASALA was founded in 1975. Of its founders comprised of 6-7 members, Agop Agopyan, one of the two most active members of the terrorist organization, was the known leader. The other was Agop Tarakçıyan who performed the murder acts himself and terrorist incidents and who made the organization survive while Agop Agopyan was absent. The latter died in 1981. The former remained as the leader of the organization except the periods of various injuries and treatments. He came to be known as a worker of the Palestinian Liberation Organizations. He bore the name Mucahit.
The structure of the organization was suitable for the model of the Armenian terrorist organizations.


The Lebanese Central Committee assumed the top management of the organization. In particular, in 1980, this committee took an important shape in Lebanon. And it got the air of Büron.


Some of the assigned affiliated sub-institutions and bodies to the Central Committee were the Political Committee-Financial Committee Propaganda and Publication Committee-Intelligence Committee and Military Committee. The military committee was a body to which also the act teams were affiliated.


2. Goals and Objectives


ASALA published to the world public its political program declared in 1981 with its goals and objectives. Accordingly, the goal of ASALA was to found a democratic, socialist and revolutionary Armenia united under the leadership of the Government. It was clearly understood where this defined Government was. The Soviet Union and socialist states were requested every kind of assistance and the Soviet Armenia was regarded as a base for the long war of the public.
The enemies fell under two groups in the political program. The first of these was called local reactionaries who were the Armenians against ASALA or not for ASALA, being Tashnak Armenian terrorist group, while the second was shown as the Turkish Imperialism supported by the international imperialism.


ASALA accepted and proclaimed that the basic way for rescuing the Armenian territory (?) is to commit revolutionary violent acts. Under the program, ASALA would support those who refused the hegemony of the upper classes and make efforts to set up and strengthen coalitions within the international revolutionary movement. For which violence and terrorism were the bases.


In order for the objectives to be achieved within ASALA, it did not matter if the terrorist acts were committed particularly against Turks or friends of Turks or if official or distinguished people were selected. "Terrorism was an incident and what mattered was the dimension of it. The objectives might be given secondary importance. For this reason, massacres, killings which would cause great repercussions and bombings were prioritized, and not much emphasis was placed on the casualties being a child, woman, Turk or being of any other nationality. However, every tine, Turks and Turkey were prioritized for the terrorist acts. The reasons of the attacks and massacres at the Ankara-Paris Airports, Istanbul and Kapalıçarşı and Orly attack were simply the effect and repercussion that the dimension of such incident would bring.


3. Strategies, approaches and conducts


The basic strategy in ASALA was to gather all the progressive Armenian movements all over the world at one point in Lebanon and to guide them from a center. . In short, the progressive Armenians would unite under one roof and initiate the "ASALA Public Movement". This would consequently enable the progressive Armenian powers to engage in a formal cooperation and to combine their powers.
ASALA tried to implement this part of its strategy by calling for a meeting in Lebanon for all the progressive Armenians in the world. The wording "progressive" meant "socialist-Marxist".


The second stage of the strategy was to spread terrorism through this union of power along with the assistance of the socialist governments, and start the war period. The Armenian terrorism was a part of the liberation struggles in the Middle East, and could unite with any movement against the integrity of Turkey. The cooperation between ASALA and PKK occurred as a result of this strategy.


The approaches and conduct in ASALA reflected a full terrorism. Terrorism at every level of administration and implementation was considered to be symbol of this organization. Leaders killed one another and liquidated those whom they did not like and made them kill. Apart from these, every terrorist team was attempted to be introduced to the world public as a new terrorist organization and every kind of propaganda was made in this regard. The responsibility for the murders were claimed by various, newly-known organizations. Attached is a list at the end of the study regarding the efforts how the death-killing-bombing-rebel teams was shown as an organization under different names. The reader may carefully follow through this list what such a great number of Armenian organization may do. However, none of these could go beyond being a team or group, and remained as the machines of murder affiliated to and guided by ASALA.


4. Political developments


Regarding ASALA, which had been accepted to be founded in 1975, the political developments became effective in two phases. It was strengthened with new powers it had been provided during the Paris Armenian Conference held in 1979. It was reinforced in 1981. It was divided into two in 1983.


The terrorist organization, which had been founded in 1975, performed its first act by assassination of the first secretary of the Turkish Embassy in Beirut, Oktay Cerit by one of its founders Agop Tarakçıyan in 16 February 1976. It was involved in the conflicts among Palestinians until 1979. Contacts were initiated with the Armenian terrorists in France during the Armenian conference held in Paris in 1979. And the organization gained new members; new blood. The most well-known ones among these were Alex Yenikomşiyan and Monte Melkiyan. In 1981,many terrorist acts were committed by these new groups. ASALA started to threaten Switzerland on one hand and France on the other hand. The New Armenian Resistance Organization in France announced that "Azad Hay" in Canada and "Gaitzer" in United Kingdom joined ASALA: The terrorism continued with great efficiency and became common during these years and conflicts started in the central staff In particular, the terrorist acts performed by ASALA, targeting also the innocent people discredited it in various public opinion polls. Following the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the ASALA executives were compelled to leave Lebanon along with the Palestinians. The organization was divided into two in July 1983.


The Agop Agopyan Group were settled in Greece and the Middle East. It continued terrorism without discriminating between the Turkish and foreign people or woman or child. Orly continued massacres and attacks.


In the Western Europe, it got the name "ASALA Revolutionary Movement". It followed a policy which was based upon a more moderate approach and targeting only Turkish people. The two leaders of this movement were Monte Melkoyan and Ara Toranyan. Toranyan led a Paris-based group called Armenian National Movement. This group qualified the Orly attack as a completely Fascist attack.
Melkonyan, on the other hand, stated that they aimed at establishing the political ground for the Armenian struggle. According to this, the movements had two aspects: (1) activate the Armenians (2)Cooperate with other powers which are taking action against Turkey. Melkoyan who was born in Iran put forward the strategy to forge alliances at the second stage. Agopyan continued his activities, too.


5. Support and relations


ASALA is provided a triple support as a result of its aims and ongoing policies: (1) Support by the Soviets-Eastern Block and Socialist countries (2) Support of countries, with a policy based upon weakening Turkey through internal and external threats and terrorism, as required by their geopolitical expectations: Greece, Syria etc. (3) Support provided by communist parties, indirectly from Hınchak Armenian terrorist organization and its sympathizers, and from the Armenian churches, though they hold counter-views.


ASALA's relations were arranged, in line with the strategy they were implementing, by giving a priority to the non-Armenian terrorist organizations, which were in an attempt to pose a threat, and use terrorism against Turkey. These included at the stage between 1975 and 1980, the Palestinian Liberation Organization, communist parties, activist groups and secret organizations of some states. In April 1980, ASALA expanded its relations with the joint act agreement signed with PKK in Sidon, Lebanon. It is by this way, a unity in view and act was established between ASALA and PKK.

In actuality, both organizations share the same aims, and have similar structure and views. At the stage starting after 1983, ASALA developed its relations in compliance with the strategy of Monte Melkoyan. The basis of the strategy was to focusing on the use of terrorism in Turkey, and establishing relations with every organization which was directly or indirectly capable of implementing this strategy in the form of acts. Some of the leading ones are PKK, similar institutions, TKP and other communist organizations.


6. Publications and means of communication


The most important and official publication of ASALA is "HAYASTAN".

Besides, the magazines "Haykar", "Armenia" and "Kaytzer" published in London are included among the leading publications.

ASALA started its radio broadcasts in Beirut in 1981, and made broadcasts one hour a day with the title "Voice of Lebanese Armenians". Apart from these, the communication means and public communication systems of the countries with which it has relations, are providing ASALA with support in broadcasting.

Russian Tsarist official complained in December 1914: Armenians are making bad image of us by killing peaceful Turks

The following is from Dr. Michael Reynolds' doctoral dissertation at Princeton University

***

The initial Russian strategy for defeating the Ottoman army and conquering Eastern Anatolia involved the mobilization and arming of Armenians, Assyrians, and Kurds. As discussed earlier, the Russians distributed arms and money to these groups and even formed special volunteer regiments of Armenians. Russian officials well before the war had tagged these groups as valuable allies in any war due to their knowledge of Anatolia’s terrain and ability to operate behind Ottoman lines.

The Russians evidently hoped to control the inter-communal strife and direct it only in service of their goals. At the very beginning of the war Vorontsov-Dashkov clearly instructed the Caucasus Army that it was to relate to all nationalities the same way, that Muslims were to enjoy the precisely the same privileges as Christians, and that violence was to be directed only against armed formations, not the civil population.47 These principles, however, were grossly violated already by the beginning of 1915 when Cossack and Armenian forces under Russian command committed atrocities against the Muslims of Kars, and Ardahan, and later elsewhere.

The problems inherent in employing ethnic militias became evident at the very outset of the war. As one Tsarist official complained in December 1914:

"The behavior of the Armenians is producing a negative impression in that both the Armenian volunteer regiments and the Armenian population of the locales abandoned by the Turkish forces abandon themselves above all to the looting and destruction of the homes of the peaceful Muslim population, thereby settling their centuries old scores. As is now becoming clear this behavior possesses a general national character, as mass incidents of Armenians deserting from the ranks of the regular forces and mass incidents of intentional self-mutilation (against which measures are being taken) have been demonstrated."48

The Foreign Ministry advisor K.N. Gul’kevich, however, responded to such doubts about the wisdom of maintaining the volunteer regiments by arguing that “the Armenian druzhiny should be used by us.” He suggested that the establishment of tighter supervision might curb such “excesses.”49



References:
47 AVPRI, Order to the Caucasus Army No. 106, 31.10.1914 [13.11.1914] f. Politarkhiv o. 482 d. 3490 l. 48.

48 AVPRI, Secret Telegram from the diplomatic official ‘Stolitsa’ under the Viceroy of the Caucasus, 19.11.1914 [1.12.1914], f. Politarkhiv o. 482 d. 3490 l. 150.

49 AVPRI, Secret Telegram from the Advisor of the Second Political Section to the diplomatic official under the Viceroy of the Caucasus 21.11.1914 [3.12.1914], f. Politarkhiv o. 482 d. 3490 l. 151.

Barbara Lerner: History speaks on why the armenian genocide resolution is NOT moral

Here's an excellent review of the whole armenian genocide/massacre issue:
(Here's another link)

"History Speaks
The moral case against the Armenian Genocide resolution.

By Barbara Lerner

Prudential arguments against the Armenian genocide resolution pending in Congress are gaining traction; odds for passage in November that looked overwhelming last month look more like a toss-up today. But in the court of public opinion, genocide proponents are still winning. Most Europeans and transcultural multinationals have already proclaimed it an indisputable historical fact that the Armenian tragedy in Turkey in World War I was a genocide, perpetrated by the Turks — a deliberate government attempt to wipe out all Armenians — and growing numbers of Americans think we have a moral duty to join them. The problem, in this arena, is that prudential arguments have nothing like the emotional power and widespread popular appeal of the moral case for condemning the Turks.

We must do it, Armenian genocide proponents tell us, because the Armenian tragedy was the original Holocaust: Armenians in World War I were like the Jews in World War II; Turks in 1915 were like the Germans in the 1940s. Thus, the only moral choice is to condemn the Turks, as we condemned the Nazis. The logic here is inescapable: it is the only moral choice, if the charge is true, if Armenians really were helpless scapegoats like the Jews, and if Turks really were deliberate, genocidal monsters like the Nazis. But an analogy is only an emotional appeal, not a rational argument — let alone a moral one — — unless it actually fits the historical facts. To judge whether the Holocaust analogy does, we can’t just look at Jews and Germans in World War II, then at dead Armenians in World War I, and extrapolate the rest. We have to look at live Armenians and Turks in 1915; at the desperate, multi-front war Turkey was submerged in, in that bloody year; and at how ordinary people and government leaders reacted.

We know what life was like for ordinary people and government leaders in Germany in 1942-43, when the mass killing of Jews reached industrial scale. It was orderly and safe; the Nazis were still mostly winning abroad, and in full, unchallenged control at home. Jews aside, no one starved to death in Germany then, and no German civilians were massacred or raped by enemy forces. There were no enemy forces on German soil in those years. The only enemies at home were the Jews, and they were never a real threat. They were scapegoats, not objective enemies, and they were being methodically eliminated, without exception, in all German-controlled territory. Life in Turkey in 1915 was very different, but, genocide accusations aside, most Americans know nothing of it. Here, to remedy that lack, a little history. First, the backdrop to 1915 — a one-paragraph review of how Turkey got to where she was in that critical year. Then, the foreground — what was happening in Turkey in 1915, and how Turks and Armenians responded.

Turkey wasn’t a country in 1915; it was an empire in dissolution, reaching the climactic endpoint of a century-long decline in wealth, power, and control over territory. The Ottomans tried many reforms to halt the slide; all proved too little, too late. By 1915 they had already lost great swathes of territory in Crimea and the Caucasus, in a series of losing wars with their giant rival to the east, Imperial Russia. In the west, they lost most of their European territories in another series of losing wars against a rising tide of nationalist uprisings in Greece and the Balkans.

In all these lost lands, Turks and other Muslims had been at least a substantial minority; in many, a clear majority, and everywhere, they were driven from their homes in large numbers, and often brutalized. Massacres and rapes were especially common on the eastern front. Czarist troops and their local allies were no less brutal to conquered Muslim civilians than their Communist successors were to Christian civilians in the Ukraine and Eastern Europe, a few decades later. All this sent millions of Muslim refugees flooding into the Ottoman core we now know as Turkey in the years before World War I, overwhelming the Ottoman’s waning power to provide even minimal assistance to many, and seriously eroding their ability to maintain order in areas farthest from the government in Istanbul. Then, on November 2, 1914, Imperial Russia declared war on the Ottomans again, and this time, Imperial Britain and Imperial France followed suit, three days later.

That’s the backdrop to 1915. Here’s the foreground. In January, the French, the British, and Britain’s colonial troops — Australians and New Zealanders—mounted a major attack on Turkey’s western front at Gallipoli, the gateway to Istanbul. Fighting there was fierce, and continued until January 1916, but, on this front, there were relatively few civilian casualties, and no massacres.

On the eastern front, the situation was grimmer. The czar’s army had broken through the Ottoman defense lines in the Caucasus, and was laying waste to cities and villages in Anatolia, sending old refugees fleeing in terror once more, and adding millions of new refugees to the mounting toll. Once again, the invading Russians and their local allies often treated conquered Turkish civilians with great brutality; massacres and rapes were not rare events. In much of Anatolia, death and destruction was omnipresent, and for millions of homeless survivors, clean water and food was scarce to nonexistent. Starvation killed many; raging epidemics of dysentery, typhus, and cholera killed more. In refugee-flooded areas behind the ever-changing front lines and on the roads leading to them, chaos ruled. There was no one to keep order: all available men were needed at the fronts.

That’s what the Turks were struggling with in 1915, and some Armenians struggled with them, serving in the Ottoman government, and fighting side-by-side with Turks in the Ottoman army. Most Armenians who demonstrated this kind of loyalty to the Ottoman state came from Istanbul, Izmir, and Aleppo; the wives, children, and elderly they left behind when they went off to war were not driven from their homes or subjected to massacres. After the war, these men collected their veteran’s pensions, just as other veterans did; some of their descendants live there still.

But Armenians were hardly immune to the fierce currents of nationalism sweeping the region in the late 19th and early 20th century. In eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus, especially, many Armenians on both sides of the border saw the Russian invasion as their great chance to recreate their ancient Christian kingdom in Anatolia, with the aid of the Czar’s mighty Christian army. Armed Armenian nationalist groups — the Dashnaks, the Hunchaks, and others — saw Armenians who fought for the Turks as traitors to the Armenian cause; many still do. Nationalist Armenians were at war with the Turks in 1915, and the Armenian generals and guerilla leaders who commanded them are still honored as Armenian heroes today. Military leaders like Generals Andranik Oznanian, Garegin Nzhdeh, Drastamat Kanahyan (“General Dro”), and Garo Pasdirmaijan (“Armen Garo”) are largely unknown to Americans whose knowledge of Armenian history is limited to the orthodox genocide literature, but well-known by Armenians. Here, again, the analogy to the Jews of the Holocaust simply does not fit. There are no statues to the Jewish generals who fought the Nazis in Germany in 1942-43, because there were none.

In 1915, Armenian generals were in the forefront of the Russian invasion: some led Russian troops; others led special Armenian battalions, made up of Armenian volunteers from both sides of the border; still others organized Turkish-Armenian military units be-hind the lines, capturing Anatolian cities like Van, even before the Russians arrived, joining the Russians in capturing Bitlis, Mus, and many other Turkish towns and villages, massacring Turks in a number of those places, before Ottoman reinforcements recaptured them in a long, bloody series of seesaw battles that raged throughout eastern Anatolia in 1915. Some Turkish civilians responded by massacring Armenians, and wild, outlaw tribes of Circassians and Kurds preyed on hapless civilians in both groups.

Of course, nothing justifies any of these massacres, but the claim that Ottoman government leaders ordered any of them is belied by the frequency with which, when they could, they tried and punished men responsible for them: not just Armenians, but many Turks, too, including government officials and military men found guilty of failing to protect civilians. But the Ottoman government in 1915 was no fount of wisdom. It was the product of a series of mutinies, coups, and countercoups that began in 1908, deposing one Sultan and installing another, most of whose rapidly eroding powers were seized in 1913 by three rebel leaders, Talat, Cemal and Enver. And in 1915, that triumvirate made a decision that resulted in many civilian deaths. They decided to deal with the civil war in eastern Anatolia by ordering Ottoman soldiers to march all Armenians out of the area, and resettle them in the Ottoman city of Aleppo, in what is now Syria.

Orders were given to distribute food and water as needed, and to protect the marchers. But, due to the chaos of war, the dearth of supplies, the critical shortage of troops needed at the fronts, and the competing tragedies playing out all around them, there was no chance that the transfer plan could be carried out humanely. It turned into a death march, comparable to the one our soldiers endured on Bataan in World War II, but made worse in the Armenian case by the fact that many of the marchers were the women, children, and old people left behind. Many did not survive the horrors of the trip. Still, we don’t call the Bataan death march a genocide, and there is even less reason to claim the Armenian death march was intended as such. If the Ottomans wanted to kill all Armenians, they would not have exempted Armenians from Istanbul, Izmir, and Aleppo from the transfer order, along with others serving in government and the military. Mustafa Kemal, the hero of Gallipoli who founded the modern Turkish Republic in 1923, had a more cogent view: he saw the triumvirate as incompetent, and Enver, especially, as a dangerously unrealistic commander whose poorly conceived plans resulted in the slaughter of many Ottoman soldiers; and he saw the Armenian transfer plan as more of the same.

The bottom line here is that in actual historical fact, Turks were not like Nazis; Armenians were not like Jews; and attempts to convince Americans that they were are propaganda, not history. The Armenian tragedy was real and terrible, but it was not the only terrible tragedy in Turkey in 1915 and it wasn’t genocide; it was that in the midst of a wider war that brought death and destruction to millions on all sides, nationalist Armenians fought a war to claim a piece of Turkey for a country of their own, and lost. Later, they got a state of their own, but its development has been stunted from that day to this by high levels of poverty, corruption and political violence. If Armenians would accept their share of responsibility for the tragedies of 1915, trade with their increasingly prosperous Turkish neighbors could do much to alleviate that poverty. Some in Armenia have long wanted to do that, but most government leaders — and the powerful Armenian diaspora community those leaders rely on — have always insisted, instead, on demonizing Turks and whitewashing all Armenian actions in World War I. And, although they proved incompetent at governing, they achieved great success as propagandists. In this, Armenians are very similar to Palestinians; very different from both Jews and Turks.

And the urgent questions that these facts raise for us are these: How did a narrative so far from the facts gain such wide currency and power in contemporary America? What can we do to make ourselves less vulnerable to specious narratives, promoted by other groups who fail at governing, but excel at propaganda?

— Barbara Lerner is a frequent NRO contributor.

"

Source: National Review Online

1878: British Ambassador Henry Layard says Russia is teaming up with Ottoman Armenians

"I am informed, on good authority, that Russia is already commencing her usual intrigues among the Armenians of Asiatic Turkey. Russian agents are being sent into the provinces inhabited by them with the object of stirring up discontent against the rule and authority of the Porte. A Russian party is being formed in the capital amongst the Armenians, which already includes some leading and influential members of that community."

Sir Henry Layard, British Ambassador, in a July 14, 1878 message to British Foreign Secretary Lord Salisbury (British Foreign Office 424/72, pages 160-161, No 211)

Prof. Norman Stone: "Armenian story has another side"

Commentary appeared in Chicago Tribune

***
Armenian story has another side
By Norman Stone, a historian and the author of "World War I: A Short History"

October 16, 2007

All the world knows what the end of an empire looks like: hundreds of thousands of people fleeing down dusty paths, taking what was left of their possessions; crammed refugee trains puffing their way across arid plains; and many, many people dying. For the Ottoman Empire that process began in the Balkans, the Crimea and the Caucasus as Russia and her satellites expanded. Seven million people -- we would now call them Turks -- had to settle in Anatolia, the territory of modern Turkey.

In 1914, when World War I began in earnest, Armenians living in what is now Turkey attempted to set up a national state. Armenians revolted against the Ottoman government, began what we would now call "ethnic cleansing" of the local Turks. Their effort failed and caused the government to deport most Armenians from the area of the revolt for security reasons. Their sufferings en route are well-known.

Today, Armenian interests in America and abroad are well-organized. What keeps them united is the collective memory of their historic grievance. What happened was not in any way their fault, they believe. If the drive to carve out an ethnically pure Armenian state was a failure, they reason, it was only because the Turks exterminated them.

For years, Armenians have urged the U.S. Congress to recognize their fate as genocide. Many U.S. leaders -- including former secretaries of state and defense and current high-ranking Bush administration officials -- have urged Congress either not to consider or to vote down the current genocide resolution primarily for strategic purposes: Turkey is a critical ally to the U.S. in both Iraq and Afghanistan and adoption of such a resolution would anger and offend the Turkish population and jeopardize U.S.-Turkish relations.

Given this strong opposition, why would Congress, upon the advice of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, make itself arbiter of this controversy? What makes the Armenians' dreadful fate so much worse than the dreadful fates that come with every end of empire? It is here that historians must come in.

First, allegedly critical evidence of the crime consists of forgeries. The British were in occupation of Istanbul for four years after the war and examined all of the files of the Ottoman government. They found nothing, and therefore could not try the 100-odd supposed Turkish war criminals that they were holding. Then, documents turned up, allegedly telegrams from the interior ministry to the effect that all Armenians should be wiped out. The signatures turned out to be wrong, there were no back-up copies in the archives and the dating system was misunderstood.

There are many other arguments against a supposed genocide of the Armenians. Their leader was offered a post in the Turkish Cabinet in 1914, and turned it down. When the deportations were under way, the populations of the big cities were exempted -- Istanbul, Izmir, Aleppo, where there were huge concentrations of Armenians. There were indeed well-documented and horrible massacres of the deportee columns, and the Turks themselves tried more than 1,300 men for these crimes in 1916, convicted many and executed several. None of this squares with genocide, as we classically understand it. Finally, it is just not true that historians as a whole support the genocide thesis. The people who know the background and the language (Ottoman Turkish is terribly difficult) are divided, and those who do not accept the genocide thesis are weightier. The Armenian lobby contends that these independent and highly esteemed historians are simply "Ottomanists" -- a ridiculously arrogant dismissal.

Unfortunately, the issue has never reached a properly constituted court. If the Armenians were convinced of their own case, they would have taken it to one. Instead, they lobby bewildered or bored parliamentary assemblies to "recognize the genocide."

Congress should not take a position, one way or the other, on this affair. Let historians decide. The Turkish government has been saying this for years. It is the Armenians who refuse to take part in a joint historical review, even when organized by impeccably neutral academics. This review is the logical and most sensible path forward. Passage of the resolution by the full House of Representatives would constitute an act of legislative vengeance and would shame well-meaning scholars who want to explore this history from any vantage point other than the one foisted upon the world by ultranationalist Armenians.

Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

Prof. Stanford Shaw: "Armenians of 1535 accused Jews for slaughtering a young Armenian boy and using his blood at the feast of Passover"

CHRISTIAN ANTI-SEMITISM IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE
Prof. Stanford Shaw

"Blood libel accusations were made against Jews by Ottoman Christian subjects starting in the sixteenth century, most frequently in the Arab provinces, first at Jerusalem in 1546. The most famous Christian assault on Ottoman Jews in medieval times came in the central Anatolian town of Amasya some time between 1530 and 1540, when a blood-libel accusation against local Jews was spread by local Armenians who said that an Armenian woman had seen Jews slaughter a young Armenian boy and use his blood at the feast of Passover. Several days of rioting and pillaging and attacks on Jews followed...Later, however, the Armenian boy who supposedly had been murdered was found and the Ottoman governor punished the Armenian accusers, though nothing could be done about the Jews who had suffered."[1]

"There were literally thousands of incidents in subsequent years, invariably resulting from accusations spread among Greeks and Armenians by word of mouth, or published in their newspapers, often by Christian financiers and merchants who were anxious to get the Jews out of the way, resulting in isolated and mob attacks on Jews, and burning of their shops and homes [2]. The attacks were brutal and without mercy. Women, children, and aged Jewish men were frequently attacked, beaten and often killed."[3]

[1] Stanford J. Shaw, "Christian Anti-Semitism in the Ottoman Empire", Belleten C. LIV, 68, p.1103 (1991).
[2] Abraham Ben-Yakob (Jerusalem), "The Immigration of Iraki Jews to the Holy Land in the 19th Century", paper delivered to the First International Congress for the Study of Sephardic and Oriental Judaism, 27 June 1978.
[3] Stanford J. Shaw, "Christian Anti-Semitism in the Ottoman Empire", Belleten C. LIV, 68, p.1129 (1991)

Truth about "Armenian Genocide"

Truth about "Armenian Genocide" Episode 1:



Truth about "Armenian Genocide" Episode 2:



Truth about "Armenian Genocide" Episode 3:



Truth about "Armenian Genocide" Episode 4:



Truth about "Armenian Genocide" Episode 5:



Truth about "Armenian Genocide" Episode 6:



Truth about "Armenian Genocide" Episode 7:

"I killed Muslims by every means possible. Yet it is sometimes a pity to waste bullets for this" An Armenian (Vampire)

"I killed Muslims by every means possible. Yet it is sometimes a pity to waste bullets for this. The best way is to gather all of these dogs and throw them into wells and then fill the wells with big and heavy stones. as I did. I gathered all of the women, men and children, threw big stones down on top of them. They must never live on this earth."

A. Lalayan, Revolutsionniy Vostok (Revolutionary East) No: 2-3, Moscow, 1936.
Quoted from Richard Hovannisian, Armenia on the Road to Independence, Berkeley, 1967, p. 41-42.

***

Doesn't this sound like Hitler?

This is A MUSLIM GENOCIDE CONFESSION AT BEST!!!

Norman Stone: "Famous American historian, Stanford Shaw's car was booby-trapped and his house was fire-bombed"

"... there are other frankly well-qualified authorities in the USA, better-qualified in terms of academic record than anything to be found on the Armenian side.

Guenther Lewy (who has just retired from a Chair at Amherst) has a recent book that is clearly fair-minded ('A disputed genocide') and it does material damage to the scholarly performance of the chief diaspora historian, Dadrian. Justin McCarthy, an Ottoman demographer, can also usefully be consulted. In Paris, at the College de France, there is Gilles Veinstein, who wrote a telling summary of the whole question in L'Histoire of 1993. These are frankly in the top flight of scholars, and this subject is an extremely difficult one, requiring knowledge not just of modern Turkish but Ottoman, which is obsolete. There are other scholars who also question the 'genocide' account, for instance a young man at Harvard, Michael Reynolds, who can handle both the Ottoman archives and the records of the Russian military administration, which took over eastern Anatolia in 1915. The Russian documents, I gather, support what the Turks have claimed about 1915 - that there was a tremendous Armenian-nationalist provocation, followed by a cruel deportation of the population.

I might add that each of these men has faced vicious attacks, and attempts to stop publication - for instance, the manipulation of peer review tactics, vastly exaggerating the number and significance of slips. In the case of one celebrated American historian, Stanford Shaw at UCLA, his car was booby-trapped and his house fire-bombed."


Professor Norman Stone
23 August 2007

Pick you own number, it doesn't have to be true

Many of the facts regarding numbers, locations, and the context of forced relocations are disputed by reputable experts on both sides.

The basic facts supporting a legal standard are far from established.

For example, the resolution asserts that 1.5 million Armenians perished, but documents in the archives of our own State Department conflict with this number.

The preliminary Peace Conference report of March 29th 1919 (attended by Secretary of State Lansing) cites 200, 000 Armenian deaths by massacre. The report of G.R. Montgomery of December 29, 1922 states a pre-war Armenian population of 1,600,000 and a post-war Armenian population of 1,104,000 meaning only 496,000 perished of all causes (not proportionately out of line with all other population losses in the region of all causes).

If the numbers are that much in error or dispute in our own US records, what other facts are in error?


***
This material is distributed by The Livingston Group, LLC on behalf of The Republic of Turkey. Additional information is available at the Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.

"USA invaded the wrong country, it should have invaded Turkey!"

This is what a pro-Armenian Genocide says upon the death of 12 Turkish citizens:

"Let them (Turks) be killed. USA invaded the wrong country, it should have invaded Turkey, and it may well be forced to!

Signed by: Anonymous

October 22, 2007 12:45 PM" From PostGlobal

What is left to be said?
They obviously like the idea of killing and watching people get killed.
Such atrocity is within them.

"I was confused by their (Armenian Americans) hatred for the Turks"

Taspar:

...
I just want to add something about Armenian Americans. After meeting a few of them, I was confused by their hatred for the Turks. It was like standing in front of an open pizza oven so to speak. After talking to a half Armenian half Israeli girl, I saw that Orthodox Church and especially the Hatred against the Turks are binding power for the American Armenian community. This is especially encouraged by the community elders. They don't care about Armenia or denial or acknowledgment of genocide by the Turkish government. It government acknowledged it they would want compensation. If given compensation they would ask for annexation or some other absurd thing. I would like to say this was my personal observation and though I'm hesitant to include whole community I'm afraid that I'm right about it.

Sorry for the long post...

Cheers,

October 22, 2007 3:06 PM

From PostGlobal

The odd puzzle Dr. Leon Picon couldn't solve

The following is an excerpt from Dr. Leon Picon, reviewing the book, "THE ARMENIAN FILE":

How successfully the Turks could have warded off the resultant stigma through counter-propaganda will never be known. But it is certain that in 1922 Sultan Mohammed Vl put it quite succinctly and pointedly, when he told the American writer E. Alexander Powell:

“If we sent one, your newspapers and periodicals would not publish an article written by a Turk, if they published it, your people would not read it, if they read it, they would not believe it. Even if we sent a qualified person to America, to convey to you in your language, the Turkish point of view, would he find an impartial audience?” [Gurun, File, p. 37]

It's amazing that whenever the "Armenian Genocide" is referred to in Western media, journalists seem to fall all over themselves in presenting the perspective totally from the Armenian propaganda machinery. Whenever there is an attempt to present "the other side," the passage is usually preceded by "The Turkish Government claims..." Keeping in mind we all know how dishonest spokespeople from any government can be.

Cyrus Hamlin: Armenians are preparing the way for Russia’s entrance to Asia Minor to take possession

A Dangerous Movement Among the Armenians

by Cyrus Hamlin

The Congregationalist,

December 28, 1893



An Armenian “revolutionary party” is causing great evil and suffering to the missionary work and to the whole Christian population of certain parts of the Turkish Empire. It is a secret organization and is managed with a skill in deceit which is known only in the East.

In a widely distributed pamphlet the following announcement is made at the close.

"HUNTCHAGIST REVOLUTIONARY PARTY

This is the only Armenian party which is leading on the revolutionary movement in Armenia. Its center is Athens, and it has branches in every village and city in Armenia, also in the colonies. Nishan Garabedian, one of the founders of the party, is in America, and those desiring to get further information may communicate with him, addressing Nishan Garabedian, No. 15 Fountain Street, Worcester, Mass., or with the center, M. Beniard, Poste Restante, Athens, Greece.

A very intelligent Armenian gentleman, who speaks fluently and correctly English as well as Armenian, and is an eloquent defender of the revolution, assured me that they have the strongest hopes of preparing the way for Russia’s entrance to Asia Minor to take possession.

In answer to the question how, he replied: “These Huntchagist bands, organized all over the empire, will watch their opportunities to kill Turks and Kurds, set fire to their villages and then make their escape into the mountains. The enraged Moslems will then rise and fall upon the defenseless Armenians and slaughter them with such barbarities that Russia will enter in the name of humanity and Christian civilization and take possession.”

When I denounced the scheme as atrocious and infernal beyond anything ever known, he calmly replied: “It appears so to you, no doubt, but we Armenians are determined to be free. Europe listened to the Bulgarian horrors and made Bulgaria free. She will listen to our cry when it goes up in the shrieks and blood of millions of women and children.”

I urged in vain that this scheme will make the very name of Armenian hateful among all civilized people. He replied, “We are desperate; we shall do it.” “But your people do not want Russian protection. They prefer Turkey, bad as she is. There are hundreds of miles of conterminous territory into which emigration is easy at all times. It has been so for all the centuries of the Moslem rule. If your people preferred the Russian Government there would not be now an Armenian family in Turkey.” “Yes,” he replied, “and for such stupidity they will have to suffer.” I have had conversations with others who avow the same things, but no one acknowledges that he is a member of the party. Falsehood is, of course, justifiable where murder and arson are.

In Turkey the party aims to excite the Turks against Protestant missionaries and against Protestant Armenians. All the troubles at Marsovan originated in their movements. They are cunning, unprincipled and cruel. They terrorize their own people by demanding contributions of money under threats of assassination—a threat which has often been put in execution.

I have made the mildest possible disclosure of only a few of the abominations of this Huntchagist revolutionary party. It is of Russian origin, Russian gold and craft govern it. Let all missionaries, home and foreign, denounce it. Let all Protestant Armenians everywhere boldly denounce it. It is trying to enter every Sunday school and deceive and pervert the innocent and ignorant into supporters of this craft. We must therefore be careful that in befriending Armenians we do nothing that can be construed into an approval of this movement, which all should abhor.

While yet we recognize the probability that some Armenians in this country, ignorant of the real object and cruel designs of the Huntchagists, are led by their patriotism to join with them, and while we sympathize with the sufferings of the Armenians at home, we must stand aloof from any such desperate attempts, which contemplate the destruction of Protestant missions, churches, schools and Bible work, involving all in a common ruin that is diligently and craftily sought. Let all home and foreign missionaries beware of any alliance with, or countenance of, the Huntchagists.

TESTIMONY OF REV. CYRUS HAMLIN: Armenian Revolutionists (VAMPIRES) Caused THE SASSOUN MASSACRE, New York Times 1895

The New York Times letter dated August 23, 1895 describes what is behind the Sassoun massacres.
The facts may disturb you and your stomach. Proceed with caution.


"THE SASSOUN MASSACRE;
Proof of the Assertion that Armenian Revolutionists Caused It.

TESTIMONY OF REV. CYRUS HAMLIN

A Protest Against Americans Helping England to Realize Political Aspirations in the East.

August 23, 1895, Wednesday
Page 12, 2665 words

In our previous letter we affirmed that the Sassoun troubles were brought about by the criminal efforts of Armenian revolutionary committees, and that no reliance whatever ought to be placed on Armenian testimony and assertions. We now propose to prove these two affirmations, not by Turkish -- that is to say, Mussulman -- testimony, but by American and European -- namely, Christian testimony.

First - The man who, above all, gave the most explicit and true account of the Armenian revolutionary movement is the Rev. Cyrus Hamlin himself. On the 23rd of December, 1893, or, in other words, only a few months before the revolt of Sassoun, he published in The Congregationalist a truly prophetic statement, the perusal of which is absolutely necessary for an impartial understanding of the case. Here is this statement:

"An Armenian 'revolutionary' party is causing great evil and suffering to the missionary work and to the whole Christian population of certain parts of the Turkish Empire. It is a secret organization, and is managed with a skill in deceit which is know only in the East. In a widely distributed pamphlet the following announcement is made at the close:

" ' This is the only Armenian party which is leading on the revolutionary movement in Armenia. Its centre is Athens, and it has branches in every village and city in Armenia, also in the colonies. Nishan Garabedian, one of the founders of the party, is in America, and those desiring to get further information may communicate with him, addressing Nishan Garabedian, 15 Fountain Street, Worcester, Mass. or with the centre, M. Beniard, Poste Restante, Athens, Greece.'

"A very intelligent Armenian gentleman, who speaks fluently and correctly English as well as Armenian, and is an eloquent defender of the revolution, assured me that they have the strongest hopes preparing the way for Russia's entrance into Asia minor to take possession.

In answer to the question as to how, he replied: 'These Huntchaguist bands, organized all over the empire, WILL WATCH THEIR OPPORTUNITIES TO KILL TURKS AND KURDS, SET FIRE THEIR VILLAGES, and then make their escape into the mountains. The enraged Moslems will then rise and fall upon the defenseless Armenians, and slaughter them with such barbarities that Russia will enter, in the name of humanity and Christian civilization, and take possession.'

"When I denounced the scheme as atrocious and infernal beyond anything ever known, he calmly replied:

'It appears so to you, no doubt, but we Armenians are determined to be free. Europe listened to the Bulgarian horrors, and made Bulgaria free. She will listen to our cry when it goes up in the shrieks and blood of millions of women and children.'

I urged in vain that this scheme would make the very name of Armenian hateful among all civilized people. He replied: 'We are desperate; we shall do it.'

"But your people do not want Russian protection. They prefer Turkey, bad as she is. There are hundreds of miles of conterminous territory into which emigration is easy at all times. It has been so for all the centuries of Moslem rule. If your people preferred the Russian Government, there would not now be an Armenian family in Turkey.'

" 'Yes,' he replied, 'and for such stupidity they will have to suffer.'

"I have had conversations with others who avow the same things, but no one acknowledges that he is a member of the party. Falsehood is, of course, justifiable where murder and arson are.

"In Turkey the party aims to excite the Turks against Protestant missionaries and against Protestant Armenians. All the troubles at Marsovan originated in their movements. They are cunning, unprincipled, and cruel. They terrorize their own people by demanding contributions of money under threats of assassination - a threat which has often been put into execution.

"I have made the mildest possible disclosure of only a few of the abominations of this Huntchaguist revolutionary party. It is of Russian origin; Russian gold and craft govern it. Let all missionaries, home and foreign, denounce it. Let all the Protestant Armenians everywhere boldly denounce it. It is trying to enter every Sunday school and deceive and pervert the innocent and ignorant into supporters of this craft. We must, therefore, be careful that in befriending Armenians we do nothing that can be construed into an approval of this movement, which all should abhor. While yet we recognize the probability that some Armenians in this country, ignorant of the real object and cruel designs of the Huntchaguists, are led by their patriotism to join with them, and while we symphatize with the sufferings of the Armenians at home, we must stand aloof from any such desperate attempts, which contemplate the destruction of Protestant missions, churches, schools, and Bible work, involving all in a common ruin that is diligently and craftily sought. Let all home and foreign missionaries beware of any alliance with, or countenance of, the Huntchaguists."

We do not really know whether the Rev. Cyrus Hamlin is considered to be a prophet in his own country, but his prophetic faculties as far as the last Armenian revolt is concerned are not denies in Turkey. They are simply marvelous - for months before the occurence of the Sassoun troubles the Rev. Cyrus Hamlin had exactly and minutely shown what they would be. And yet, after the fulfillment of this own prophecy, the Rev. Cyrus Hamlin was bold enough to say that the above statement was written by him only "to show the absurdity of 'the revolutionary plotters'." The reverend gentleman must have a candid and innocent soul. Otherwise he would not have attempted to prove to fair-minded Americans that the "bloodthirstiness" of the Armenian revolutionary plotters is synonymous to their "absurdity". We suppose that the Rev. Cyrus Hamlin will also attribute to the "absurdity of revolutionary plotters" the following statement, showing his past guilty interference in Turkish affairs. One of these Armenian "plotters" made some time ago to The Boston Herald this extraordinary admission, which, for the honor of Robert College, if not for his own, the Rev. Cyrus Hamlin ought, if he can, to contradict:

"Several years ago," writes the Armenian, "I heard him lecture at Amherst, Mass. How proud he was to tell his audience the important part taken by the Bulgarian graduates of Robert College in securing the freedom and independence of their country! I ask the Rev. Cyrus Hamlin if he was not aware of the existence of patriotic societies among his Bulgarian students," &c

But in order to show that the Rev. Cyrus Hamlin's prophecy holds good, let American readers reflect on the following passage of a letter written by the special correspondent of the Associated Press, who visited Turkey after the Sassoun revolt, and who, although bitterly opposed to the Turkish government, wrote as follows:

"It is a fact that certain of the Armenian conspirators arranged to murder the Rev. Edward Riggs and two other American missionaries at Marsovan and fasten the blame upon the Turks, in order that the United States might inflict summary punishment upon the Turkish Government, thereby making possible Armenian independence. One will search a long time in the pages of history for a more diabolical plot than that. Moreover, the missionaries would have been murdered had not an Armenian friend warned them. Dr. Riggs has unselfishly given his life to the education of Armenian youth in the missionary schools, and done more than any Armenian has ever tried to do toward making Armenians worthy of autonomous government. Yet the revolutionary conspirators appearently gave that fact little thought. *** It is, of course, impossible to say to what extent radical ideas prevail among the revolutionary propagandists, but the plans of some of the leaders are shocking in the extreme.

"In brief, their plans are to commit atrocities upon Turks, in order that the infuriated Turks shall shock the Christian world by the flendish outrages of their retaliation. When remonstrated with in regard to these un-Christian plans, the men who are responsible for them merely say: 'It may seem to you cruel and barbarous, but we know what we are doing, and why we are doing it.'

"The financial methods of these men are almost as ingenious as their plans of political agitation. Certain Armenians of a lower grade of mental ability are required to furnish so many thousand piastres to the committee, and the means of obtaining the money are plainly reapped out. Here is a case in point:

"A wealthy Turk in the service of the Government in Constantinople received a letter one morning, saying that unless he deposited 12,000 piastres in a certain place within twenty-four hours he would be killed. An investigation led to the discovery of the fact that the letter was written by an Armenian who had been in his employ as a trusted servant for several years. The servant confessed his guilt, but he asserted in self-defense that revolutionary agitators had compelled him to write the letter under penalty of death. It was a case of choice of wills, and the poor wretch saved his life at the expense of a long term of imprisonment. It is believed that a great deal of money is raised in this way, but whether or not this money gets beyond the pockets of the revolutionary agitators, no man pretends to know. There is a theory that this money is used in the purchase of rifles and ammunition, but that is a matter known only to the agitators themselves."

The reason why English public opinion is generally in favor of the Armenians is both political and religious. No real esteem for the Armenians themselves exists in England. Besides, everybody admits in Europe that Armenians are, as a race, much inferior to the Turks. Armenians, even in olden times, showed no greatness. Their influence in the world has been absolutely nill. In science, in art, in literature, in warlike achievements, they have left no trace. But they are Christians; and this is one reason why English public opinion is in their favor. The political reason lies in the fact that England wishes to harass Turkey for the just opposition of the latter to English scandalous encroachments on Egyptian territory, which, after all, belongs legitimately to the Sultan. It is just as if England had taken possession of one of your States, and at the same time were formenting discontent for, and disapprobation of, your treatment of the Indian race which Columbus found supreme on this continent.

Such being the real state of things, we consider that it is quite time for public opinion in the United States to see how erroneous and even anti-American is the policy which consists in helping England in her political aspirations in the East. American public opinion ought to remain aloof from European intrigues. It ought especially to learn to estimate correctly the value of Armenian assertions and of the Armenian moral standard.

"If," writes the Associated Press correspondent above quoted, "the detailed facts of the Sassoun massacre are ever established, it must be independently of Armenian testimony, or their value may be seriously questioned.

In the first place, every Armenian with whom it has been my lot to come in contact, seems to have a very vague idea of the value of the truth.

In the second place, in his anxiety to make out a case against the Turk, he is willing to publish as a fact, any grotesque rumor that he may chance to fall over in the street.

In the third place, he does not really know what actually took place in the Sassoun mountains, but his vanity will not permit him to acknowledge it, and so, to be up with the times and to help along the cause of his people, he embellishes the rumor that he hears, and frequently says that he is in secret communication with friends in Moosh and Bitlis, who are harboring Sassoun refugees, he average Armenian cannot be believed on oath."

In this deplorable condition of Armenian honesty, we find a true explanation of the following remarkable incident, an account of which was given at the time, as follows, by all newspapers:

"The story which has been thrilling the world for some time past of the wife of the Armenian leader Grego, who, rather than suffer dishonor at the hands of her Turkish persecutors, threw herself, with her child in her arms, into an abyss, and was followed by other women until the ravine was filled with corpses, has been exploded, as many persons predicted it would be, at the time is was sprung upon the public. It has been discovered that the horrible narrative is a reproduction, with additions and embellishments to suit the occasion, of an old tale told in poetry by Mrs. Hemans years ago, under the title of 'The Suliote Mother.' "

In the face of all the innumerable Armenian falsehoods of this kind, word has just reached us that Mr. Gladstone, in his Chester speech, asserted that the world is in possession of independent American testimony favorable to the Armenians. No greater error has ever been made. Mr. Gladstone ought to have known better. There is absolutely no American testimony regarding the Sassoun troubles. And the reason is very simple. No American was at the Sassoun district at the time of the revolt. The Rev. F. D. Greene, it is true, published a slanderous pamphlet on the "Armenian Crisis in Turkey," in which he printed a few documents supposed to be well authenticated. But as no American-born citizen saw anything of the Sassoun disturbances, it follows necessarily that said documents were written either by Armenians or by American missionaries, under the inspiration of Armenians. Therefore, the Rev. F. D. Greene's pamphlet is based upon Armenian falsehoods. This makes it utterly and completely valueless. Mr. Gladstone owes to us to show where and how he was able to find a single genuine American document favoring the Armenian allegations; that is to say, the allegation of a people who "cannot be believed on oath." Facts, however, have very seldom disturbed Mr. Gladstone's fanaticism. We trust that Americans having no political views on Turkey will see how dangerous it is to encourage, either by word or by moral help, Armenian revolutionists, for the simple reason that they are Christians.

"Armenia," wrote some time ago the correspondent mentioned above, "is preparing for war. The revolutionary party has now both money and guns. During the past eight weeks money has poured into the revolutionary treasury in a steady stream from the Armenian colonies in Batoum, Tiflis, Baku, Erivan, Etchmiadzin, and other places in Russia, and from Rescht, Kazvin, Teheran, Tebriz, Khoi, and other cities in Persia. I have not visited the Armenian colonies on the north coast of the Black Sea, nor the large colony at Ispahan in Southern Persia, but I am reliably informed that revolutionary agents have been as busy there as elsewhere. I have myself seen a considerable sum of this money raised publicly, and I am told that the wealthy Armenian merchants in the cities I have named have made large private contributions, with promises of more for future use if needed.

"The money raised publicly has been obtained by means of balls, social entertainments, theatrical performances, and lotteries. These functions were ostensibly for the 'benefit of the Sassoun refugees.' But it was a very thin disguise. It was thoroughly understood what the money was wanted for, and that the Sassoun refugees would not see a penny of it except in the shape of rifles and ammunition."

The cries, therefore, in favor of the Sassoun refugees and the famished are either based on Armenian falsehoods or uttered by those who have political aims to further and attain. Could Americans be deceived by such a very thin disguise?" We doubt it.

***
Constantinople, Aug 8.

Norman Stone: Genocide lies are based on distorted, forged, one-sided history

“The more vociferous Armenian diaspora historians like to claim that 'historians' support them but this is just not true. Quite the contrary: on the whole, the people who know the subject at first-hand do not accept the thesis of 'genocide'.”

“The whole business of 1915 remains murky, but perhaps I can bullet-point some of it. I can easily supply references for these, but I think that anyone familiar with the subject - including diaspora historians - will know my sources. In general, Professor Lewy's book (University of Utah Press) will serve in this respect.

1. The documents allegedly proving the genocide are forgeries, and the British law officers who were trying to find evidence over a four-year period of occupation in Constantinople refused to use them. With much regret, they said that they could not establish a case against some hundred men whom they were holding. The State Department were unable to help. This has not stopped the diaspora Armenians in France from using the most notorious of these forgeries (the 'Naim-Andonian documents') in their museum in the south of France.
2. The Ottomans themselves in 1916 put on trial some 1300 men for crimes committed during the deportation of the Armenians in 1915, and executed a governor.
3. The Armenians' leader, Boghos Nubar, was offered a post in the Ottoman cabinet in 1914, but turned it down on the grounds that his Turkish was not up to it.
4. The figure given by Boghos Nubar to the French for Armenian losses for use in the post-war treaties was 700,000. Most died of disease or starvation, but in eastern Turkey at the time at least one quarter of the entire population, Moslem and Christian, died of such causes. It was a terrible time.
5. The internal Ottoman documents talk of 'deportation', in the context of widespread Armenian nationalist risings in the early spring of 1915. The Russians and the French (on Cyprus) used Armenian regiments and legionaries.
6. The Armenian populations of Istanbul, Izmir and Aleppo were not affected by the deportation order….. “

“The diaspora Armenians have never allowed this to come before a properly-constituted and competent court. Instead, they prompt parliamentary and other bodies to 'recognize the genocide'.”

“I might add incidentally that I consider myself neutral and I have never written anything to deny the possibility that a genocide (in the classic sense) was considered. However I do not think that the evidence that we have really adds up, and I quite agree with Professors Lewis,
Lewy and Veinstein. “

23 August 2007

PROFESSOR NORMAN STONE,

NOTED BRITISH HISTORIAN

***
This material is distributed by The Livingston Group, LLC on behalf of The Republic of Turkey. Additional information is available at the Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.

Why an Armenian Genocide Resolution is Not a Good Idea

It will cripple US-Turkish cooperation on America’s top strategic goals, including Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran at a time when we already face immense difficulties in the region.

• Jeopardize the use of Turkish airspace, military bases and border crossing into Iraq, adding to the risks and expenses of our operations there and Afghanistan.
• Compromise our collaboration on regional democracy and energy security in the Middle East, Balkans, Caucasus and Central Asia.
• Put at risk Turkey’s close relations with Israel.

It will derail Turkish-Armenian normalization, reconciliation and border reopening that are key to ending Armenia’s regional isolation.

• Produce an extreme nationalist backlash and silence liberal voices speaking out for honesty about the past and reconciliation with Armenians, Kurds, Greeks, etc.
• Kill the Turkish-Armenian dialogue on establishing a joint commission to examine the events of 1915 and possibly other issues.
• Undermine prospects for an Azerbaijan-Armenia settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh by delaying prospects for opening the Turkish border.
• Damage will be long-lasting, setting back Turkey-Armenia normalization for decades.

It will undermine democracy in this stable, moderate Muslim country.

• Poison political debate.
• Discredit those calling for greater openness, modernization, liberal democratic values and closer ties with the US and Europe.
• Fuel xenophobic, anti-Western, anti-democratic and nationalist movements.
• Isolate Turkey’s minorities, especially ethnic Armenians, most of whom, like Hrant Dink did, strongly oppose foreign parliamentary judgments on genocide.

It will fan anti-Americanism in Turkey, potentially reverberating in negative ways throughout the Muslim world.

• Provoke hostile, possibly violent public reaction that could jeopardize the safety of US soldiers, diplomats, and government installations in Turkey.
• Threaten the US business presence, especially symbols of American culture, at a time when Turkey’s economic success is attracting competitors from other countries.

Ross Wilson

US Ambassador

***
This material is distributed by The Livingston Group, LLC on behalf of The Republic of Turkey. Additional information is available at the Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.

Shooting yourself in the foot

"October 1, 2007

Dear Members of the Caucus on U.S.-Turkish Relations and Turkish Americans:

I was pleased to read the letters of eight former Secretaries of State and three former Secretaries of Defense, Democrats and Republicans, urging Speaker Nancy Pelosi not to bring to the floor of the House the Armenian Resolution, H. Res. 106.

In their letters, the Secretaries drew the Speaker’s attention to the continuing strong national security and foreign policy relationship we maintain with our NATO ally Turkey, and the extraordinary risks passage of this Resolution would bring to our national security interests, and American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. They point out as well that passage would also damage efforts for reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey.

I know all of these former Secretaries very well and worked with most of them. Their collective foreign policy wisdom is unsurpassed; their personal devotion to the welfare of our Nation unassailable. Yet, their reward for calling Speaker Pelosi’s attention to these critical truths about passage of H.Res. 106 was to be charged by the Armenian diaspora with “outsourcing” America’s moral conscience to Turkey.

As a former National Security Advisor, and for the past six years Chairman of the American-Turkish Council, I have been intimately involved in our relationship with Turkey for nearly three decades. I can assure you that the concerns expressed by the former Secretaries fairly reflect the public reactions, and consequences, I would expect to see in Turkey were H.Res. 106 to pass.

I am also keenly aware that American corporate members of the American-Turkish Council represent many billions of dollars of annual trade with Turkey, both defense and civilian. Much of this trade would be put in jeopardy by passage. Many American jobs would also be at risk.

I urge you to caution your colleagues that H. Res. 106 is not, in the eyes of Turks, merely a resolution or an exercise in political symbolism. Nor is it immoral for Representatives to give utmost care to the welfare of American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq who are so heavily dependent on the supply line through Turkey for their welfare. It is not immoral to give high regard to the interests of a long-time and highly valued ally and partner. It is not immoral to assess with judgment and wisdom the negative commercial consequences of unnecessary political actions. And it is most certainly not immoral to question whether passage of H. Res. 106 would be harmful to the future of the Armenian community in Turkey (that strongly opposes this resolution), or to Armenian-Turkey relations.

Please do your part in assuring that H. Res. 106 does not come to the House floor.

Sincerely yours,

Brent Scowcroft
Chairman"

Political games on a baseless lie!

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, famous for donning a head scarf earlier this year to commune for peace with the Syrians, has now concluded that this is the perfect moment to pass a Congressional resolution condemning Turkey for the Armenian genocide of 1915. Problem is, Turkey in 2007 has it within its power to damage the growing success of the U.S. effort in Iraq. We would like to assume this is not Speaker Pelosi's goal.

To be clear: We write that we would like to assume, rather than that we do assume, because we are no longer able to discern whether the Speaker's foreign-policy intrusions are merely misguided or are consciously intended to cause a U.S. policy failure in Iraq.

....

Back when Bill Clinton was President, Mr. Lantos took a different view. "This legislation at this moment in U.S.-Turkish relations is singularly counterproductive to our national interest," he said in September 2000, when there was much less at stake in the Middle East. According to Reuters, he added that the resolution would "humiliate and insult" Turkey and that the "unintended results would be devastating."

If Nancy Pelosi and Tom Lantos want to take down U.S. policy in Iraq to tag George Bush with the failure, they should have the courage to walk through the front door to do it. Bringing the genocide resolution to the House floor this week would put a terrible event of Armenia's past in the service of America's bitter partisanship today. It is mischievous at best, catastrophic at worst, and should be tabled."

Wall Street Journal

Professor Bernard Lewis condemns the genocide claims

Princeton University history professor, Bernard Lewis stated on April 14, 2002, at the National Press Club on C-Span 2:

“[T]hat the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire was the same as what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany is a downright falsehood.

What happened to the Armenians was the result of a massive Armenian armed rebellion against the Turks, which began even before war broke out, and continued on a larger scale.

But to make this a parallel with the holocaust in Germany you would have to assume the Jews of Germany had been engaged in an armed rebellion against the German state, collaborating with the allies against Germany.

That in the deportation order the cities of Hamburg and Berlin were exempted, persons in the employment of the state were exempted, and the deportation only applied to the Jews of Germany proper, so that when they got to Poland they were welcomed and sheltered by the Polish Jews.

This seems to me a rather absurd parallel.”

Real genocide by Armenian vampires

A group of Muslims who, on August 29 1914, after being arrested by the Armenian bands while visiting the tomb of a Saint on the Siverek-Urfa high-road, near Karadja-Dag, were used as living targets by the latter and assasinated in a most barbarous way.

Reference: The Armenian Aspirations and Revolutionary Movements

Click to see more of this atrocity!

Hono the Dracula!

A group of Muslim women and children from Hizir İllias village, Diyarbakir, helpless and defenseless on account of the absence of their husbands and male relatives serving in the Army, were, on July 23, 1915, slaughtered at Mersin Dere, by means of daggers and shot by rifles in a most pitiless and horibble way by an Armenian Band under the the notorious and well known bandit Hono.

Reference: The Armenian Aspirations and Revolutionary Movements

Killed by the Armenian vampires - July 23rd, 1915

Photograph, taken on the spot, of soldiers belonging to the Imperial Army and disbanded on account of their ill-health who, on July 23rd, 1915, were willfully murdered by the Armenian Bands near the villages of Koom and Tcoom in Lidje Town.

Reference: The Armenian Aspirations and Revolutionary Movements

Tashnak Vampires Armed!

A group of Armenian bandits, Ankara and Yozgat.

Reference:Massacre Exerted By The Armenian On The Turks During World War I Pictures.

Tashnak Vampires

A group of the Armenian Tashnak bands during the Van rebellion

Reference:Massacre Exerted By The Armenians On The Turks During World War I Pictures.

Hinchak Vampires July 20th, 1915

Second Company of the Armenian Voluntary Hinchak Regiment "Yerissart Hayastan" (Young Armenia) 20th July 1915.

Reference: The Armenian Aspirations and Revolutionary Movements

Hinchak Vampires

A group of the Hinchak volunteer bandsmen who took part in the fightings at Caucasus against the Ottoman and who commited horrible crimes and atrocities amongst the Mohamedan population of devastated villages and towns.

(From the Armenian Daily "Azk" of March 2nd 1915)

Reference: The Armenian Aspirations and Revolutionary Movements

Armenian Genocide: The Obvious Lie

"In Santa Barbara on January 27, 1973, the first individual terrorist attack was launched by an aged Armenian named Gurgen (Karekin) Yanikian. He murdered Mehmet Baydur and Bahadir Demir, the Turkish Consul General and Vice Consul in Los Angeles, and these murders turned into an organised campaign after 1975."

Who should believe in this vampire diaspora?

Certainly NOT the House!