De Turkse genocide door Armeniers

Middels dit topic wil ik laten zien dat het officiele Armeense genocide verhaal niet klopt. Het officiele verhaal is namelijk dat er 1,5 miljoen Armeniers zijn vermoord door Turken en dat er geen Armeense opstand was. In het officiele verhaal wordt met geen woord gerept over 523.000 onschuldige Turken en Koerden die afgeslacht zijn door Armeniers. Ik wil jullie laten zien dat er een grote Armeense opstand was. Toen Turkije zich aansloot bij Duitsland tijdens WO I vielen Armeniers massaal Turkse dorpen binnen waarbij IEDEREEN werd afgeslacht. Niemand werd gespaard. De bronnen die ik u geef zijn voornamelijk westerse bronnen.

"Only 1,500 Turks remain in Van"
Gochnak, an Armenian newspaper published in the United States, May 24,1915 ... in a proud report documenting the slaughter of the Turkish citizenry of Van.

Van had een bevolking van 40.000. Ik was met een Armeniër aan het discussieren. Hij claimde dat de Turken waren omgekomen omdat de Armeniërs zich tegen de Turken verdedigden. De bevolking is echter teruggebracht van 40.000 naar 1500. Van deze 40.000 zijn er 20.000 vrouwen. Worden in een defensieve oorlog ook vrouwen vermoord? Van de 20.000 mannen zijn misschien de helft kinderen. Worden kinderen ook vermoord bij een defensieve oorlog? Moesten de Armeniërs zich ook tegen vrouwen en kinderen verdedigen? De Armeniër had daar geen antwoord op.

" All Turkish children also should be killed as they form a danger to the Armenian nation"
Hamparsum Boyaciyan, nicknamed "Murad," a former Ottoman parliamentarian who led Armenian guerilla forces, ravaging Turkish villages behind the lines, 1914. Cited from Mikael Varandian, "History of the Dashnaktsutiun."

"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.

"We have never denied the Armenian crime of genocide inflicted upon 2.5 million Muslim people between 1914 and 1920." Agop Zahoryan, 'Voices of Agonies', London; Reprint 1954, p. 91

"When we arrived at Zeve, the village couldn't be passed through because of its stench. It was as if the bones in our noses would fall off... There were bodies everywhere. We saw a weird scene on the threshold of one house: they had filled the house with Muslims and burned it, and so many people had been burnt that the fat that had oozed from under the threshold had turned back into the trench in front of the door. That is, it was as if the river of fat had risen and later receded. The fat was still fresh. The entire village had been destroyed and was in this situation. I saw this with my own eyes, and I'll never forget it. We heard that they did the same thing to the Muslims on Carpanak Island. The Armenians told me about the latter; I did not see it for myself.” Haci Osman Gemicioglu, an Armenian-Turk (having converted to Islam) who eyewitnessed the 1915 Zeve massacre; as told to Huseyin Celik, during interviews conducted in the late 1970s-early 80s.

"It is in our blood to hate the Turks. However, we hate Bulgarians and Greeks also. The Jews like Turks, but they hate Arabs. The Arabs, in their turn, are not in favour with the Turks. And the level of hatred is rising."
Narek Mesropian, Golos Armenii, a Russian-language newspaper in Armenia, in an August 5, 1997 article reflecting the tension between the Armenian and Jewish communities.

"Thousands of Armenians from all over the world, flocked to the standards of such famous fighters as Antranik, Kery, Dro, etc. The Armenian volunteer regiments rendered valuable service to the Russian Army in the years of
1914-15-16."Kapriel Serope Papazian, Patriotism Perverted, Boston Baker Press, 1934, pg. 38

"I have it from absolute first-hand information that the
Armenians in the Caucasus attacked Tartar (Muslim) villages
that are utterly defenseless and bombarded these villages
with artillery and they murder the inhabitants, pillage the
village and often burn the village." Admiral Mark Bristol, Bristol Papers, General Correspondence: Container #32: Bristol to Bradley Letter of September 14, 1920.

"The Moslems who did not succeed in escaping [the city] were put to death..." Grace H. Knapp, The Tragedy of Bitlis, Fleming H. Revell Co., New York (1919) , page 146.

"We closed the roads and mountain passes that might serve as ways of escape for the Tartars (Turks), and then proceeded in the work of extermination. Our troops surrounded village after village. Little resistance was offered. Our artillery knocked the huts into heaps of stones and dust, and when the villages became untenable and the inhabitants fled from them into the fields, bullets and bayonets completed the work." Ohanus Appressian, describing incidents in 1919; Memoirs of an Armenian officer, Men are Like That, 1926.

"This three-day massacre by Armenians is recorded in history as the 'March Events' and thousands of Muslims, old people, women and children lost their lives." F. Kazemzadeh, The Struggle for Transcaucasia (New York, 1951),

“As the Armenians found support among the Reds (who regarded the Tartars as a counter-revolutionary elements) the fighting soon became a massacre of the Tartar population” W. E. D. Allen and Paul Muratoff, “Caucasian Battlefields”, Cambridge University Press, 1953, p. 481

"The Armenians did exterminate the entire Muslim population of Russian Armenia as Muslims were considered inferior to the Armenians by the prominent leaders of the Dashnaks."
Mikael Kaprilian, Armenian revolutionary leader, in Yerevan, 1919

"Many massacres were committed by the Armenians until our army arrived in Erzurum... (after General Odesilitze left) 2,127 Muslim bodies were buried in Erzurum's center. These are entirely men. There are ax, bayonet and bullet wounds on the dead bodies. Lungs of the bodies were removed and sharp stakes were struck in the eyes. There are other bodies around the city."

Official telegram of the Third Royal Army Command, addressed to the Supreme Command, March 19, 1918; ATASE Archive of General Staff, Archive No: 4-36-71. D. 231. G.2. K. 2820. Dos.A-69, Fih.3

"Since all the Moslems capable of bearing arms were in the
Muslim Army, it was easy to organize a terrible massacre by
the Armenians against defenseless people, because the Armenians were not only attacking the sides and rear of the Eastern Army paralyzed at the front by the Russians, but were attacking the Moslem folk in the region as well."
General Bronsart von Schellendorf , Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, July 24, 1921

Nu een aantal aanhalingen die laten zien dat Armeense kinderen worden grootgebracht met haat voor Turken:

"For too many years Armenian mothers had lulled their children to sleep with songs whose theme was Turkish fierceness and savagery." Ohanus Appressian, lending testimony to how innocent Armenian children are subjected to the brutality of racism by their parents; their "Love NOT Thy Neighbor" churches are also known to join in this hatred bandwagon. Men Are Like That, 1926.

"... It's better that I be a dog or a cat, than a Turkish barbarian..." Edna Petrosyan, a SIX YEAR OLD Californian girl who recites hateful poems on the insistence of her mother. The Los Angeles Times, February 1, 1990

"Who wants to defend Turks?"
Pauline Kael, "When The Lights Go Down," 1980, p.499

"...In the early part of 1915, therefore, every Turkish city contained thousands of Armenians who had been trained as soldiers and who were supplied with rifles, pistols, and other weapons of defense. The operations at Van once more disclosed that these men could use their weapons to good advantage..." Henry Morganthau, U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Ambassador Morgenthau's Story, Doubleday, Page & Co., Garden City, New York (1918, page 301)

Nog een quote van Morgenthau. Wat Morgenthau heeft geschreven wordt gebruikt door Armeniërs om de Armeense genocide te bewijzen.

"I have really found it impossible to sit down and dictate a letter quietly. So I have instructed (Hagop) Andonian to take my diary and copy it with some elaborations of his own. Of course this relieves me of all responsibility for any error." Henry Morganthau, U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire (Lowry, 1990; Franklin Delano Roosevelt Presidential Library, New York, Letters; Box 7 May 11, 1915; Box 1 ­ 2 September 1, 1915; Box 8 July 13, 1915)

Zoals je kunt lezen had Morgenthau een ARMEENSE werknemer die hij het bevel gaf zijn eigen gedachtes toe te voegen. Is dat nu een onafhankelijke en betrouwbare bron? Er waren veel Armeense werknemers in de Amerikaanse ambassade.

Zijn sommige westerlingen echt objectief genoeg om in staat te zijn de Armeense kwestie te kunnen beoordelen? Lees het volgende:

"The Turks are a human cancer, a creeping agony in the flesh of the lands they misgovern, rotting every fiber of life. I am glad that the Turk is to be called to a final account for his long record of infamy against humanity."
David Lloyd George, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, getting ready to annihilate the last remnants of the dying Ottoman Empire.

De volgende quotes laten zien dat de Armeniers in opstand waren gekomen met als doel een interventie van buitenlandse mogendheden te realiseren.

"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)

"The aim of the Armenian revolutionaries is to stir disturbances, to get the Ottomans to react to violence, and thus get the foreign powers to intervene."
Sir Philip Currie, the British Ambassador in Istanbul, 28 March 1894 (British Blue Book, Nr.6 1894, p.57? Or p. 87).

"The aims of the revolutionary committees are to stir up general discontent and to get the Turkish government and people to react with violence, thus attracting the attention of the foreign powers to the imagined sufferings of the Armenian people, and getting them to act to correct the situation."
Graves, the British Consul in Erzurum, reporting to the British Ambassador in Istanbul, on January 28, 1895. British Blue Book, Nr. 6 (1894), pp. 222-223

"The Dashnaks and Hunchaks have terrorized their own countrymen, they have stirred up the Muslim people with their thefts and insanities, and have paralyzed all efforts made to carry out reforms; all the events that have taken place in Anatolia are the responsibility of the crimes committed by the Armenian revolutionary committees."
Williams, The British vice-consul, writing from Van. (March 4, 1896, British Blue Book, Nr. 8 1896, p.108.)
-------------------------------
"The Protestant missionaries distributed in large numbers to various places in Turkey made propaganda in favour of England and stirred the Armenians to desire autonomy under British protection" Horen Ashikian, The Armenian Patriarch, in "History of Armenia." (Mr. Ashikian was probably quoted, and was not the writer of this book, of which there were several... by process of elimination, the book was probably either the 1936 one written by V.C. Vahan, or one by Vahan Kurjian, in 1958. Hovhannes, the Fifth Catholicos of the Armenians, also wrote a book by the same name in 1912.)

"Correct behavior"
Marechal Franchet d'Esperay, a French commander of the allied occupation army, referring to the Turkish people and military authorities. From the preface of Commander Larcher's "The Turkish War within the First World War."

"The Dashnak revolutionary society is working to stir up a situation in which Muslims and Armenians will attack each other, and thus pave the way for Russian intervention "
General Mayewski, Russian Consul General in Bitlis and Van, December 1912; source: Kara Schemsi, Turcs et Armeniens devant l'Histoire, Geneve, Imprimerie Nationale, 1919, p. 11

"(The Ottoman State) has used its right to defend its existence against Armenian organisations that had fomented and incited disorders and rebellions at the instigaion of the Russians by relying on Russian arms."
Leo (Arakel Babakhanian), Armenian historian, Turkahai Heghopokhutian Kaghaparapanoutiunu (The Ideology of the Revolution of Turkish Armenian), published in Armenian,1934, Paris)

"The outcry and clamor of Armenians and Turks have been persecuting Armenians are nothing but lies. The Turkish government has done nothing evil to Armenians. Perhaps Armenians have planned a revolution taking advantage of the indifference of the government, have armed bands and sent them to mountains, as for the Turks, perhaps they have been trying only to pursue them and put down the uprisings."
Austrian Consul in a report submitted to his government, Nikerled Krayblis, Rusya'nin fiark Siyaseti ve Vilayet-i fiarkiyye Mes'elesi [Eastern Policy of Russia and the question of the Eastern Provinces], translated by Habil Adem, Istanbul, 1932, p. 178

"The truth is that the party (Dashnak Committee) was ruled by an oligarchy, for whom the particular interests of the party came before the interests of the people and nation. They (the Dashnaks) made collections among the bourgeois and the great merchants. At the end, when these means were exhausted, they resorted to terrorism, after the teachings of the Russian revolutionaries that the end justifies the means."
Dr. Jean Loris-Melikoff, La Revolution Russe et les Nouvelles Republiques Transcaucasiennes, Paris, 1920, p. 81

"The most opportune time to institute the general rebellion for carrying out the immediate objectives was when Turkey was engaged in war"
Louise Nalbandian, Armenian Revolutionary Movement, University of California Press, 1963

"As soon as the Russians have crossed the borders and the Ottoman armies have started to retreat, you should revolt everywhere. The Ottoman armies thus will be placed between two fires. On the other hand, the Armenians in the Ottoman army should desert their units with their weapons and unite with the Russians"
Dashnak committee order to the Armenians preparing to revolt within the Ottoman Empire

"The entire Armenian Nation will join forces “ moral and material, and waving the sword of Revolution, will enter this World conflict ... as comrades in arms of the Triple Entente, and particularly Russia. They will cooperate with the Allies, making full use of all political and revolutionary means for the final victory of Armenia, Cilicia, Caucasus, Azerbayjan. ... [H]eroes who will sacrifice their lives for the great cause of Armenia.... Armenians proud to shed their blood for the cause of Armenia...."
Hunchak Armenian [Revolutionary] Gazette, in a call to arms just prior to the formal declaration of war against Germany and the Ottoman Empire, November 1914 issue, Paris.

"The Armenians have taken their place on the side of the Entente states without showing any hesitation whatsoever; they have placed all their forces at the disposition of Russia; and they also are forming volunteer battalions."
Horizon, the Dashnak Society's official organ, as soon as Russia declared war on the Ottoman Empire

"The Hunchak Committee will use all means to assist the Entente states, devoting all its forces to the struggle to assure victory in Armenia, Cilicia, the Caucasus and Azerbaijan as the ally of the Entente states, and in particular of Russia." Hunchak Committee instructions to its organizations in Ottoman territory; Aspirations et Agissements Revolutionnaires des Comites Armeniens avant et apres la Proclamation de la Constitution Ottomane, Istanbul, 1917, pp. 151-153

"The volunteer Armenian regiments in the Caucasus should prepare themselves for battle, serve as advance units for the Russian armies to help them capture the key positions in the districts where the Armenians live, and advance into Anatolia, joining the Armenian units already there."
Papazyan, the Armenian representative in the Ottoman Parliament for Van, in a published proclamation; he would soon turn out to be a leading guerilla fighter against the Ottomans

“The long-anticipated day of deliverance for the Turkish
Armenians is at hand and the Armenians are prepared for any sacrifice made necessary by the performance of their manifest duty.”An Ottoman-Armenian newspaper, probably one of the two published in Van ("Van Kartali" or "Araratli"), as quoted in The New York Times article, ARMENIANS FIGHTING TURKS ("Besieging Van”Others operating in Turkish Army's Rear,") November 7, 1914

"...These gangs were advancing by plundering and pillaging (nehib ve garet) the properties/goods (emvalini) of the Moslem villages they passed through and massacred and destroyed even babies in cradles...." Ottoman Royal Army report describing the actions of 10,000 Armenian committee men (acc'd to the Armenian Catholicos V. the Kevork, B.A. Boryan, Armeniya Mejdunarodnaya Diplomatiya; SSSR. Cast 11, Moskva, 1929, p. 363) regarding the uprising started in "Shitak Country" on April 17, 1915, followed by further riots by Armenians in the entire province of Van, culminating in the Russians' entry of Van on May 19th, causing some 30,000 Turks to flee with heavy losses.

"From all countries Armenians are hurrying to enter the ranks of the glorious Russian Army, with their blood to serve the victory of Russian arms... Let the Russian flag wave freely over the Dardanelles and the Bosporus. Let, with Your will, great Majesty, the peoples remaining under the Turkish yoke receive freedom. Let the Armenian people of Turkey who have suffered for the faith of Christ receive resurrection for a new free life under the protection of Russia." Samson Harutunian, president of the Armenian National Bureau in Tiflis, in response to Czar Nicholas II's visit to the Caucasus, to make final plans for cooperation with the Armenians against the Ottomans. (Source)

"As demonstrated by the innumerable declarations, provocative pamphlets, weapons, ammunition, explosives, & c., found in areas inhabited by Armenians, the rebellion was prepared for a long time, organized, strengthened and financed by Russia. Information was received on time in Istanbul about an Armenian assassination attempt directed at high ranking state officials and officers." General Bronsart v. Schellendorf , Chief of Staff to the Ottoman Commander-in-Chief, Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, July 24, 1921

"When war broke out the Armenians of these regions [the Eastern provinces] made secret contact with the Russian authorities in the Caucasus, and an underground network was created which enabled recruits to be gotten from these Turkish provinces for the Russian Army."
Philips Price, A History of Turkey, 1956, p. 91

"(The Ottoman State) has used its right to defend its existence against Armenian organisations that had fomented and incited disorders and rebellions at the instigaion of the Russians by relying on Russian arms."
Leo (Arakel Babakhanian), Armenian historian, Turkahai Heghopokhutian Kaghaparapanoutiunu (The Ideology of the Revolution of Turkish Armenian), published in Armenian,1934, Paris)

"As soon as the Russians have crossed the borders and the Ottoman armies have started to retreat, you should revolt everywhere. The Ottoman armies thus will be placed between two fires. On the other hand, the Armenians in the Ottoman army should desert their units with their weapons and unite with the Russians"
Dashnak committee order to the Armenians preparing to revolt within the Ottoman Empire

"Thousands of Armenians from all over the world, flocked to the standards of such famous fighters as Antranik, Kery, Dro, etc. The Armenian volunteer regiments rendered valuable service to the Russian Army in the years of
1914-15-16."Kapriel Serope Papazian, Patriotism Perverted, Boston Baker Press, 1934, pg. 38


" All Turkish children also should be killed as they form a danger to the Armenian nation"
Hamparsum Boyaciyan, nicknamed "Murad," a former Ottoman parliamentarian who led Armenian guerilla forces, ravaging Turkish villages behind the lines, 1914. Cited from Mikael Varandian, "History of the Dashnaktsutiun."

"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.


"The Armenians did exterminate the entire Muslim population of Russian Armenia as Muslims were considered inferior to the Armenians by the prominent leaders of the Dashnaks."

Lees en huiver. De Armeense bendes hadden gedetailleerde beschrijvingen over hoe ze Turkse dorpen moesten aanvallen. Met welk doel zou je een dorp kunnen aanvallen?

Another similar document titled “Müdafaa-i Şahsiyye İçin Talimat [Instructions of Self Protection]” and bearing the signature of Toman was printed in 1910 and was distributed by the thousands. Although it poses as self protection, this document actually prescribes various ways of wiping out Muslims. On page 4, after explaining which weapons should be used under each circumstance, it goes on to explain how to raid on villages and set them on fire as follows:

“There are three kinds of villages. (1) Armenian villages among other Armenian villages that are habited by Armenians, (2) Villages habited by Armenians but located among villages which are habited by others, (3) Villages where Armenians live altogether with others.

“In all three types of villages, organizations bear no difference. They all should join the “forces” with their ammunition and weapons. The forces are divided as (1) stationary and (2) mobile. Each force should be assigned a chief and an assistant to the chief. The mobile and stationary forces should each elect an experienced chieftain for their village. These chieftains will be the ultimate authority in the villages and all the forces in that village will be under his command. These chieftains will be the representatives of the government and of the armed forces in their villages. All village chieftains will get together to elect three persons in their district as temporary armed command commissions. These government representatives (Erkanı Harbiye Heyeti) and the commander will have the power to collect arms from disabled users and redistribute them to more experienced persons during skirmishes. Messengers should be formed to inform nearby village forces in case of a surprise attack on a village. If the Armenians living as minority among others find themselves under attack and if they are unable to get help in time, they should collect their valuables and move in to other Armenian villages.

“In villages where the enemy numbers are fewer than Armenians, the former should be asked to leave if they have not done so on their own. Those who do not leave could be taken as hostage depending on the situation and the decision of the government.

“During skirmishes, doors will be kept open and those who are escaping from the army or police forces will be allowed to enter. Civilians wandering around without weapons should be forbidden. The villagers have to pay for any weapons lost to the enemy. Weapons taken over from the enemy belong to whoever confiscates them.”

“In order to attack villages:
1) Fortification points of enemy villages must be known.
2) The escape routes must be decided beforehand and kept under control of the outpost.
3) Villages that may aid to enemy must be explored beforehand and must be prevented.
4) Only three sides of the village to be attacked must be kept under siege. One side must appear like an escape route for the residents. (If contained from all four sides, the enemy may counter attack and endanger our victory.) Only a small contingent should be hidden on the fourth side to press and to inflict casualties on them. Actually, the real reason to leave an open side is to assure speedy victory by dividing the enemy’s forces, more so than allowing an escape route to them.
5) Attacking at dawn would surprise the enemy. Attacking earlier would cause us losses while waiting for the light.
6) In order to create chaos and commotion, fires must be started in different places at the same time and expanded. Necessary equipment must be prepared beforehand.
7) If there are no cavalrymen among the attackers, spare horses must be brought along to carry the wounded and the dead bodies into the Armenian villages so that they cannot be identified.

“A few days before the attack, strong and reliable agents selected by our Chief Armed Forces (Erkanı Harbiye Heyeti) must be sent to the targeted village. They must stay there as long as it requires to collect the necessary information. Consequent attack preparations must be planned based on these agents’ reports.”

Een stuk van professor Norman Stone:

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.

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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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,

Armeniers hebben bewijslast verzonnen en vervalst

- "The signature of Mustafa Abdülhalik Bey (the governor of Aleppo) does not jibe with actual specimens of the governor's signature.
- There are date mistakes as result of lack of knowledge of the differences between the Ottoman and European calendar. These errors destroy the system of dates and reference numbers that were used by the draftsman of the documents for his documents.
- The dates and reference numbers that are found in the Ottoman ministry of the interior's registers of outgoing ciphered telegrams reveals that the reference numbers used on Andonian's documents bear no relationship to the actual reference numbers used on ciphered telegrams sent from Constantinople to Aleppo in the period in question.
- All but two documents are written on plain paper with none of the signs found on the official paper used by the Ottoman government during World War I.
There are mistakes in grammar and languages that only a non-Turkish writer would make.[7]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Memoirs_of_Naim_Bey

Lees dit artikel in het Algemeen Handelsblad van 25-05-1920. Het Algemeen Handelsblad is een voorloper van het NRC Handelsblad. Het is een ooggetuige verslag van een Oostenrijkse correspondent. Volgens hem waren de Armeniers begonnen en liep het uit op een burgeroorlog waarbij Armeniers en Turken om de beurt wraak namen op elkaar. Volgens hem slachtten de Armeniers zelfs Turkse vrouwen en kinderen af. Hij heeft met een priester gesproken die getuige is geweest van putten die vol zaten met Turkse lijken en van massagraven die vol zaten met Turken. Lees en huiver. Het is een fantastisch stuk proza. Een echte aanrader en hij maakt ook nog eens de Armeense beweringen met de grond gelijk.

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

Algemeen Handelsblad
Amsterdam
25.05.1920 van Dinsdag

ARMENIE

De Armenisch-Turksche kwestie

Van een onzer medewerkers in den Balkan ontvingen wij den volgenden interessanten brief, waarvan de inhoud een anderen kijk geeft op de Armenische quaestie dan de in West Europa gebruijkelijke. Wij stellen in de objectiviteit van dezen medewerker het grootste vertrouwen. - Zijn betoogtrant bevat het bewijs dat hij dit verdient - en drukken daarom zijn correspondentie ongewijzigd en zonder commentaar af.

Evenals onder de regering van Sultan Abdulhamit komen uit Cilicie weer weerzinwekkende berichten over massaslachtingen van Armeniers, waardoor de zenuwen van de tamelijk afgestempte wereld weer opniew worden geschokt. Het valt mij in de verste verte niet in om slachtingen, door wie de ook worden gehouden, te rechtvaardigen en den weerzinwekkendsten van alle moorden, de goddienstmoord, in bescherming te nemen. Maar elke waarheid heeft twee kanten, en wanneer de Armeensche perspropaganda het Armeensche bloodbad in Cilicie tegen de Turken weet uit te buiten, in dezen zin, dat zij daardoor de volledige vernietiging van Turkije door de Entente bewerkt, dan meen ik dat het in het belang der waarheid is, om te onderzoeken of werkelijk alleen de beestachtigheid van de Turken aan deze massamoorden schuldig is.

Ik geloof, dat ik eenig recht heb om dit uit te maken, want ik had gelegenheid om Turkije gedurende den oorlog bij wijze van spreken, in neglige te zien en wel juist daar, waar de Armeensche en Turksche stammen in den meest verbitterden haat elkaar te lijf gaaan.

In de lente van het gedenkwaardige jaar 1918, toen ten gevolge van de Russische nederlaag, Turkije het offensief weer begon, en de vlag van den profeet zegevierend in vreemde landen woei, wat sinds den vrede van Küçük Kaynarca niet meer gebeurd was, bevond ik mij in het Armeeinsch-Russische grensgebied, en maakte een deel van den Turkschen opmarsch in het voornamelijk door Armenieers bewoonde gebied mee.

Een ieder die weet wat oorlogvoeren betekent, zal moeten toegeven, dat er geen betere gelegenheid is, om een land en volk te leren kennen, als juist in den oorlog, waar alle menselijke hartstochten met geweld tot uiting komen, en waar het laagje cultuur en veinzerij voor de ruwe, hoogere noodzakelijkheid van de oorlogsvoering verdwijnen. Als eenige Europeaan bevond ik mij toen ter tijd in de kritieke omgeving en ben misschien de eenige Europeesche getuige ervan geweest op welke wijze de gebeurtenissen gedurende den Turkschen opmarsch in Russisch-Armenie zich hebben toegedragen, en hoe deze beide volkeren tot elkander stonden.

Voordat ik mijn reis begon, was ik reeds Armenisch gezind. Ik had gedurende mijn oponthoud te Konstantinopel, in de jaren 1916/17, genoeg weerzienwekkende details over de Armeensche massamorden in Turksch-Armenie gehoord en de Europeanen, die meer of minder goed over de gebeurtenissen in Armenie ingelicht waren, gaven dan Turken alleen de schuld en beschouwden de Armeniers als de onschuldige offers van den Turkschen goddiensthaat en van de dierlijke hartstochten van een barbaarsch volk.

Mijn verhouding tot de Turken was goed genoeg om hen ook over dit netelige punt, wat een Europeaan bijna niet te berde durft te brengen, te spreken. De houding der Turken moest mij in mijn overtuiging sterken, dat de Armeniers onschuldig waren en de Turken alle shuld hadden. Want met een eigenaardige bruuske afwijzing werd mij steeds door iedereen Turk, wien ik ver het pro en contra van de Armeensche quaestie om inlichtingen vroeg, geantwoord: "Ja alles is waar wat men over ons verteld. Wij hebben een millionen Armeniers afgemaakt; het was afschuwelijk bloodbad, maar wij waren in ons recht en wij zijn daarvoor alleen tegenover ons zelf verantwoording schuldig." Het gelukte mij niet nog verdere details, of de gronden van deze verschrikkelijke daden te, weten te komen. En ik kon alleen tot den slotsom komen ..... In de loogelaten hartstochten van den oorlog het goddienstfanatiesme tegenover de Cristenen zich liet gaan, waar het maar gelegenheid daartoe zag. En dat gebeurde in het hoogland van Armenie, waar de van de gehele wereld afgesneden. Armenieers aan den Turken overgeleverd waren.

In het voorjaar van 1918 kwam ik in Trabzon van waaruit -gelijk bekend is -de einige beganbare weg naar binnenland van Hoog-Armenie loopt.
Trabzon zelf was in 1915 getuige van een Armeensch bloedbad en drie jaar later wisten Grieken en Levantijnsche Europeanen mij nog in kleuren en geuren te vertellen van de onbeschrijfelijke gruwelscenes, die zich binnen de oer-oude muren van de Trabzon in 1915 afgespeeld hebben. Hoe op de straten van Trabzon het bloed der Armeniers vloeide! Hoe de Armeensche wijken in rook en vlammen opgingen en nog dagen en weken na het bloedbad de lijken van kinderen tegen den oer-ouden Konstantijnschen dijk en in de haven van Platana aanspoelden. Ik zag geruineerde streken en men vertelde mij, dat dit eens Armeensche wijken waren geweest. Men toonde mij Cristelijke kerken. Dit waren de kerken der Armeniers. Men rakelde de mesthoopen op en beenderen en vergane lijken kwamen te voorschijn. Dat zijn lijken van Armeniers, zeide
men mij.

Dit zijn zulke ontzettende gewaarwordingen, die men nooit vergeet en die bij iedereen maar een wens doen opkomen: God behoede onsen een ieder voor deze barbaarscheid en voor den godsdiensthaat der Mohammeden!
Maar een prior der Franciskaner monniken, een envoudige oude priester, die ongetwijfeld aan de zijde van de Cristenen stond, schudde zijn hoofd, toen ik in verwenschingen tegen de Turken uitbrak. "Gij vergist u" zeide hij, "de Turken hebben niet alleen schuld. Ja voor iemand die uit Europa komt en die met Europesche begrijpen over Azie will oordeelen, die zal de misdaad van het uitroeien van dit volk verwenschen. Maar het is niet de geheele waarheid, die gij gezien en gehoord hebt. Gij moet deze dingen door een Aziatische bril bekijken en begrijpen, dat hier twee volken elkaar met eeuwenouden haat en verbittering te lijf gaan. Men heeft hier twee mentaliteiten, de Turksche en de Armeensche en beide mentaliteiten zeggen, dat een van hen te gronde gaan. Ja, in 1915 waren het Armeniers, die te gronde zijn gegaan.Alles werd tegen hen in werking gesteld, en zij moesten de nederlaag lijden. Maar zijt gij er wel van overtuigd, dat de Armeniers in dezelfde omstandigheden niet hetzelfde zouden hebben gedaan of deden? Ik heb mijn rapporten van missies, uitgezonden door mijn orde in Beyazıt, Van, Erzurum, Erzincan; uit de rapporten weet ik, dat in 1915 toen de oorlog met Rusland begon, het de Armeniers waren, die achter het Turkse leger de revolutie aanwakkarden en de Turksche dorpen en nederzettingen ontvolkten en met den grond gelijk maakten. De verdere gebeurtenissen, die daarna in Turkije voorvielen, waren alleen de gevolgen van deze eerste vijandelijke houding der Armeniers. Ik geef toe, dat er verschrikkelijke dingen gebeurd zijn; er is zoveel bloed gevloeid als nog nooit te voeren. Maar onschuldig waren de Armeniers aan het ontstaan van het bloedbad niet. En wanneer de Turken dan verder gegaan zijn dan nodig was, dan ligt daarvan de schuld niet alleen bij de Turken, maar bij de mentaliteit van Azie, waar de volkenhaat dieper gaat dan bij de Europesche volken en waar de oorlog beesachtige vormen aanneemt."

"Zie b.v. naar Trabzon. Gij hebt de platgebrande Armeensche wijken gezien, maar hebt hij ook de platgebrande Turksche wijken aanschouwd? Hebt gij op de nog frissche graven van de Turksche bevolking gelet? Neen! Ziet toen de Armeniers zich in de zelfde positie bevonden als de Turken, toen zij zegevierend voortrukten onder de bescherming van het Russische leger, toen herhaalde zich het schouwspel van het jaar 1915, maar toen moesten de Turken het ongelden. Waar de Armeniers een Turk vonden, daar werd hij onbarmhartig neergehouwen, waar zij een Turksche moskee zagen werd deze geplunderd en in brand gestoken. Turksche wijken gingen even goed in rook en vlammen op als Armeensche wijken. Gij gaat thans het land in en gij zult de sporen van den oorlog kunnen volgen: Bayburt, Erzincan, Erzurum en Kars. Gij zult nog rookende puinhoopen zien; gij zult nog bloed en lijken ruiken, maar dat waren echter Turkse lijken."

De Franciscaner pater heeft slechts de waarheid gezegd. Maandenlang ging ik dwaars door Armenie en Kurdistan en ik vond bevestigd, wat hij mij verteld had. Na den terugtocht van het Russische leger, die op de Russische vreede volgde, namen de troepen van het z.g. Armeensche leger, de militaire operaties in de bezette Turkse gebieden over. Gedurende de Russische bezetting beschermden de Russen het leven en eigendommen van de Turken. Wat na dan terugtocht van de Russen gebeurd is, is hartverscheurend. De kleine Turksche nederzettingen werden door de benden van generaals Adronits en Murat tot den laatsten man afgemaakt, kerken tot den laatsten steen vernield.
Toen waren de Armeensche verwachtingen nog hoog gespannen. Hun plannen reikten ver, omspanden het geheele Turksche rijk. En zij hoopten dat zij met den erfvijand zouden kunnen afrekenen tot den laatsten man, de laatste vrouw, het laatste kind. Ik heb in Erzincan ruines gezien, waar honderden lijken van gewurgde Turken lagen tusschen de puinhoopen. Ik heb licht laten schijnen in putten, die vol lijken waren. Ik heb met eigen ogen gezien, dat graven open gemakt werden, waarin mannen-en vrouwenlijken overelkaar lagen, bij honderden. Wie hadden dit gedaan? Die overwinnende Armeniers.

Deze tooneelen vergezelden mij op den verren, langen weg door Opper-Armenie, Kurdistan tot in Russisch-Armenie. En is het een wonder, dat de Turken, toen zij weer overwinnaars waren, wraak namen, kwaad met kwaad vergolden? Ik moet erkennen dat tijdens den Turkschen opmarsch naar Russisch- Armenie het moorden voortgezet werd door de Turken. Aan den anderen kant van de grens van de Sarıkamış werden de Armeensche vestigingen, die daar tamelijk gezaaid zijn, ontvolkt met vuur en ijzer. De meest verbitterde volkshaat woedde tegen de vroegere overwinnaars, thans overwonnenen , in den beestachtigen vorm, een wild land van Azie eigen. Onze Europeesche hersens begrijpen deze onverbiddelijke haat niet, die volkeren tegen volkeren opzweept tot de ergste gruweldaden. Maar wij mogen niet vergeten, dat Opper-Armenie een land is, waarvan de beschaving vergeleken kan worden met de oer-cultuur der Europeesche volkeren. De volkeren daar zijn geen naties, doch horden. En zoals in den oertoestand der volkeren een ontmoeting van twee hordende vernitiging beteekende van een dezer twee, zoo is men in de bergen om den Grooten Ararat heden ten dage nog niet bedacht op samenleven, doch op vernietiging. In de kale bergen van Opper-Armenie bestaat er geen compromis, alleen strijd op leven en dood. De overwinnaar leeft, de overwonnene kan alleen sterven.

Tijdens mijn verblijf in Alexandropol(Gümrü) gebeurde het volgende, dat een goed licht werpt op de mentaliteit van de menschen aldaar. Uit de richting van de bergengroep Alagöz hoorde men op een dag kanongedonder. De Armenische bevolking, die achter het Turksche front in angst en beven leefde, legden dit kanongedonder zoo uit, dat de Engelschen oprukten tegen de Turken. En zij leefden in de overtuiging, dat de Turken binnen enkele uren verslagen zouden zijn. Onmiddelijk ontstond achter het Turksche front een opstand, en de zwakke Turksche posten in de Armenische dorpen werden op de geraffineerde manier dood gemarteld. Maar de Engelsen kwamen niet. Een detachement van Kafkas- Armeniers had getracht door het dunne Turksche front te breken. Vandaar het kanongedonder. En toen het gevecht een paar uur later voorbij was, kwaam de wraak. De dorpen, waarin Turksche soldaten vermoord waren werden vernietigd. Kan men zeggen, dat de Armeniers geen schuld hadden?

In Alexandropol zelf, in een zuiver Armeensche stad, waar, niettegenstaande de Turksche bezetting, de Armeniers rustig hun werk deden , kwam ik veel in aanraking met toonaangevende Armeniers. Zij leefden voortdurend onder een verschrikkelijke angst, dat op een dag door een onbedachtzame handeling van Armeensche benden de Turken wraak zouden nemen en dat zij dan het eerst er aan zouden moeten gelooven. Een gedeelte van Armeensche volk, het beste deel- was voor een vreedzame overenstemmming met de Turken. Men was nu eenmaal gedwongen samen te leven. En dan zou toch alleen verdraagzaamheid een eind kunnen maken aan het moorden. Maar het grootste gedeelte en de benden, de zogenaamde militairen wilden van vreede niets weten. Hun leuze was : "Zij of wij, een moet te gronde gaan."

De mannen, die verdraagzaamheid en verzoeninig predikten, werden verwenscht door het gros van het Armeensche volk. Men zei mij openlijk in Armeensche kringen: "Nu zijn de Turken baas. Maar spoedig zullen wij weer heer en meester zijn en dan zullen we geen enkelen Turk, die in onze handen komt in leven laten. Tusschen ons is geen overeenstemming mogelijk. Wij hebben een rekening eeuwen oud te vereffenen. Onze strijd is zoo oud als ons volk. Deze strijd begon op den dag, waarop de Turken in ons land kwamen en zal tot den dag duren, waarop wij op zij te gronde gaan. Een verzoening willen wij niet. Vervloekt zijn zij , die vriendschap sluiten met de Turken. "

Zoo was de stemming in een tijd, waarin de Armenen geen hoop hadden ooit van de Turken bevrijd te worden. Het zag er naar uit, alsof de overwinnende halve maan geheel Russisch- Armenie tot zich zou trekken.
Hiernaar kan men beoordelen, wat er gebeurd is, toen de Turken moesten terugtrekken en de Turksche vestiginggen weer in handen van de Armeniers vielen.

Een vergelijk is alleen mogelijk tusschen beschaafde volkeren. Bij de volkeren van het wildste Azie bestaat alleen haat en vernietiging. "De Turken zijn schuldig. Zij hebben gemoord." Zijn echter de Armeniers minder schuldig, die ook hebben gemoord, zoodra daartoe de macht bezeten?

Azie kan men alleen beoordeelen met Aziatische ogen.

quote:

Op maandag 2 januari 2012 21:51 schreef TitusPullo het volgende:

[..]

De bronnen dateren uit 1899, 1904,1905 en 1920. Twee van de bronnen behandelen bovendien een pogrom in Georgie.

Lees niet alleen de krantenknipsels. Lees ook de andere stukken die ik geplaatst heb.

Uit de Turkse archieven blijkt dat er 523.000 Turken zijn omgebracht door Armeniers tussen 1910 en 1922. De Armeniers weigeren de eigen archieven te openen terwijl Turkije dit wel heeft gedaan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/17/international/17cnd-turkey.html

quote:

Op maandag 2 januari 2012 23:42 schreef TitusPullo het volgende:

[..]

Dat heb ik gedaan, maar zo'n geweldige slordigheid aan het begin is op z'n zachtst gezegd ontsierend.
Heb je verder wel eens wat van Morgenthau gelezen?

Ik weet wie Morgenthau was. Hij is niet geheel onbevooroordeeld. Hij had een sterke afkeer van Turken en een grote voor Armeniers. Ik zal je dit laten zien met een aantal quotes:

"I have really found it impossible to sit down and dictate a letter
quietly. So I have instructed Andonian to take my diary and copy it with some elaborations of his own. Of course this relieves me of all responsibility for any error."
Morgenthau, Lowry, 1990; Franklin Delano Roosevelt Presidential Library, New York, Letters; Box 7 May 11, 1915; Box 1 ­ 2 September 1, 1915; Box 8 July 13, 1915)
Hagop S. Andonian

Wat passages uit zijn boek:

" I realized from the beginning that my task would be a difficult one. On one hand were the Germans, urging their well-known ideas of repression and brutality, while on the other were the Turks, with their traditional hatred of Christians and their natural instinct to maltreat those who are helplessly placed in their power."

De Turken worden gekenmerkt als bruten.

"The Turks, like most primitive peoples, wear their emotions on the surface, and with them the transition from exultation to despair is a rapid one..."

De Turken zijn volgens hem primitief

Essentially the Turk is a bully and a coward; he is brave as a lion when things are going his way, but cringing, abject, and nerveless when reverses are overwhelming him.

Zoals je kunt zien is hij heel objectief:

We must realize that the basic fact underlying the Turkish mentality is its utter contempt for all other races. A fairly insane pride is the element that largely explains this strange human species...

Laten wij nu zien hoe hij over Armeniers denkt:

"What is definitely known about the Armenians, however, is that for ages they have constituted the most civilized and most industrious race in the eastern section of the Ottoman Empire. From their mountains they have spread over the Sultan's dominions, and form a considerable element in the population of all the large cities. Everywhere they are known for their industry, their intelligence, and their decent and orderly lives. They are so superior to the Turks intellectually and morally that much of the business and industry had passed into their hands."
.
De objectiviteit straalt er vanaf. Armeniers goed, Turken slecht.

The most beautiful and healthy Armenian girls could be taken, converted forcibly to Mohammedanism, and made the wives or concubines of devout followers of the Prophet. Their children would then automatically become Moslems and so strengthen the empire, as the Janissaries had strengthened it formerly. These Armenian girls represent a high type of womanhood and the Young Turks, in their crude, intuitive way, recognized that the mingling of their blood with the Turkish population would exert a eugenic influence upon the whole.

Hij was meer een propagandist dan een objectieve getuige.

Stukken uit zijn ingezonden brief in de Independent:

Two hundred and fifty thousand Christian Armenian women enslaved in Turkish harems call to the people of America for liberation! One hundred thousand women already rescued by Near East Relief agents from harems will perish unless support from America is continued! Two hundred and fifty thousand children, orphaned by the unspeakable Turks, are calling in the only English they know, "Bread, Uncle Sam." One million two hundred thousand destitute, homeless, clotheless adults look to the giant in the West for the succor that will keep them from annihilation. What shall our answer be?

250.000 Armeense vrouwen als slaven in Turkse harems? Wat een onzin. Hier zijn totaal geen bewijzen van. Compleet uit zijn duim gezogen. De Ottomaanse sultan was de enige persoon in het rijk met een harem.

More than 2,000,000 persons were deported. The system was about the same everywhere. The Armenians, men, women and children, would be assembled in the marketplace. Then the able-bodied men would be marched off and killed by being shot or clubbed in cold blood at some spot which did not necessitate the trouble of burial.

2 miljoen Armeniers zijn gedeporteerd? Dat is meer dan het totale aantal Armeniers in het Ottomaanse rijk. Nagenoeg iedereen is het erover eens dat er ongeveer 700.000 Armeniers gedeporteerd zijn. Ik hoop dat jij zelf kunt zien dat deze man behoorlijk bevooroordeeld is. Hij zegt niets over de Turkse slachtoffers van de Armeniers terwijl die er wel duidelijk waren.

Wat er met de Armeniers is gebeurd kan best als genocide gelabeled worden. Er zijn heel veel Armeniers omgekomen. Er wordt echter geen evenwichtig beeld geschept in de media. De andere kant wordt nooit belicht. De Armeniers hebben ook een genocide tegen Turken gepleegd. De westerse media geeft wel altijd aan dat Turkije zegt dat er een burgeroorlog was en dat er ook Turken zijn omgekomen. Dit zegt echter niet alleen Turkije, dit zeggen talloze westerse en Turkse bronnen. Dit staat 100% vast.

quote:

Op dinsdag 3 januari 2012 20:51 schreef TitusPullo het volgende:

[..]

Heb je het boek ook gelezen of heb je alleen deze passages gelezen op een website? De volgende aanhaling namelijk behoeft wat nader commentaar:

"I have really found it impossible to sit down and dictate a letter
quietly. So I have instructed Andonian to take my diary and copy it with some elaborations of his own. Of course this relieves me of all responsibility for any error."
Morgenthau, Lowry, 1990; Franklin Delano Roosevelt Presidential Library, New York, Letters; Box 7 May 11, 1915; Box 1 ­ 2 September 1, 1915; Box 8 July 13, 1915)
Hagop S. Andonian

Denk je nu werkelijk dat hieruit blijkt dat zijn assistent er allerlei gruwelverhalen aan heeft toegevoegd?

Ik heb het boek niet gelezen. Ik heb het van een site gehaald. Alle vindplaatsen en bronnen zijn echter wel gedocumenteerd. Ben je het met me eens dat er aan de objectiviteit van Morgenthau te twijfelen valt? Denk je niet dat uit de quotes de anti-Turkse en pro-Armeense sentimenten naar boven komen?

Nog meer over Morgenthau:

Prof. Heath W. Lowry, in his article entitled "American Observers in Anatolia CA. 1920: The Bristol Papers" states as follows:
"Morgenthau was a confirmed 'Turcophobe' whose hatred for the Turks was matched only by his unabashed support for the Christian minorities under Ottoman rule...Armenian spokesmen consistently refer to H. Morgenthau's statements as proof, in their pursuit to convince the politicians that a so-called genocide occurred. In his tenure, Mr Morgenthau has never left Istanbul ..."

Lees dit stuk maar eens Tito:

The Armenian-American Prosecution of Turkey

AN UNJUST TRIAL

A Publication of The Assembly of Turkish American Associations




Introduction

The Armenian American portrayal of the tragic events in Eastern Anatolia during the first part of the 20th century constitutes an adversarial prosecution of the Republic of Turkey, its citizens, Turkish Americans, and ethnic Turks worldwide. Armenian Americans choose their evidence carefully, omitting all evidence that may exonerate those whom they presume guilty, ignoring important circumstances contemporaneous to the events in question, and sometimes relying on dubious or prejudiced sources and even falsified documents. Though this portrayal is necessarily one-sided and steeped in bias, the Armenian American community presents it as a complete history and unassailable fact.

Unfortunately, the accused is granted no opportunity for rebuttal. Any Turkish or Turkish American attempt to challenge the credibility of witnesses, or the authenticity of documents, or to present evidence that some of the claimed victims were responsible for their own fate is either wholly squelched or met with accusations of genocide denial. Moreover, any Turkish or Turkish American attempt to provide a more complete history, one which also demonstrates the suffering and needless death of millions of Anatolian Muslim civilians enmeshed in the same events as the Anatolian Armenians, is greeted with sneers as if to say that some lives are inherently more valuable than others and that one faith is more deserving than another.

The lack of real debate, enforced with a heavy hand by Armenian Americans, ensures that any consideration of what genuinely occurred nearly a century ago in eastern Anatolia will utterly fail as a search for the truth. And thus, Armenians and Turks are left with scant middle ground upon which to salve both ancient and recent wounds.

Ultimately, whether to blindly accept the Armenian American portrayal is an issue of fundamental fairness and the most cherished of American rights — free speech. Simply put, in America every person has the opportunity to tell his or her story. Armenian Americans possess the right to promote and celebrate their heritage. They also possess the right to discuss ancient grievances, even those stemming from events outside of the United States. However, Armenian Americans seek to deny these very rights to Turkish Americans. This is proven by the punitive nature and sheer volume of legislation proposed In the state and federal legislatures, the one-sided curricula proposed to state boards of education, and by the vast sums of money and energy devoted to this cause by Armenian Americans. Together, these efforts only increase acrimony and antagonism against a people whose history is intertwined with that of the Armenian Americans. Peace and reconciliation do not enter the picture. And this will remain the case as long as a Turkish American voice cannot be heard in the United States. The voice of its detractors is just too loud.

Were another voice to be heard in this debate it surely would expose why the Armenian American portrayal is logically flawed, factually misleading, and in many instances, historically inaccurate.

The Ottoman Empire Governed the Region in
Question During All Relevant Periods. Thus, Armenian
American Accusations Against the Republic of Turkey
Cannot Hold.


Armenian American accusations denounce the "Turkish" Ottoman Empire or, simply, "Turkey" or "The Turks." These words are misleading. At the time of the events referred to by Armenian Americans, the Ottoman Empire was in power. The Republic of Turkey was founded in 1923 in response to, and in revolt against, the Ottoman Empire and thus bears no responsibility for the suffering caused by its predecessor. To ascribe blame in such a manner would violate long-held traditions of American fairness. Moreover, the Ottoman Empire incorporated lands and peoples which today account for more than 30 distinct countries in Southeastern Europe, Northern Africa and the Middle East, only one of which is the Republic of Turkey.


• The Number of Deaths Cited By Armenian Americans
is Illusory and Serves Only To Inflame, Not To Inform.

Each needless death is a tragedy. But so are lies which inflame hatred. Armenian Americans frequently state that at least 1.5 million ethnic Armenians were killed by Ottoman forces. No matter how many Armenians died, the number, surely in the hundreds of thousands, is a frightful toll. But to quote fanciful numbers without recognizing the number of Muslim civilians killed by Armenian insurgents who joined the enemies of the Ottoman Empire is to forget the loss of millions of Muslim lives.

What were the real Armenian losses? One must look to statistics and demographic studies. What becomes instantly clear is that there were fewer than 1.5 million Armenians in all of the Ottoman Empire at the time. Figures reporting the pre-World War I war total Armenian population vary widely, with Armenian sources claiming far more than others. Armenian sources claim a total Armenian population of 1.30-2.56 million, British and French sources claim 1.05-1.50 million, and Ottoman sources claim 1.29-1.50 million. The official Ottoman census of 1914 reported 1,295,000.

These figures must then be compared with figures for the numbers of Armenians who did not perish during the war period of 1912-1922. Boghos Nubar, head of the Armenian delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in 1920, declared that after the war 280,000 Armenians were living in the Anatolian portion of the occupied Ottoman Empire while 700,000 Armenians had emigrated to other countries. Clearly then, a great portion of the Ottoman Armenians were not killed as claimed and the 1.5 million figure should be viewed as grossly erroneous, mere hyperbole. Actual losses, according to historian and demographer, Professor Justin McCarthy, were probably slightly less than 600,000. This figure agrees with those provided by British historian Arnold Toynbee and by most early editions of the Encyclopedia Britannica. It also approximates the number given by Monseigneur Touchet, a French missionary, who inform the Oeuvre d'Orient in February 1916 that the number of dead is thought to be 500,000.

• While the Sufferings of Armenians Ought Not to be Minimized, They Must Not be Viewed Separate From the Misery Experienced by the Muslim Inhabitants of the Region.



We now know from reliable statistics that slightly less than 600,000 Anatolian Armenians died in the during the war period of 1912-22. By no means is 600,000 a small number. The Armenians suffered a terrible mortality. But when considering the numbers of dead Armenians, one must also consider the number of dead Muslims. The statistics tell us that more than 2.5 million Anatolian Muslims, among them ethnic Turks, Kurds, and Arabs died as well.

The numbers do not tell us the exact manner of death of the citizens of Anatolia, whether Armenian or Muslim. Intercommunal violence, forced migration of both Muslims and Armenians disease, and, starvation are listed in the documents of the time as causes of death. The Anatolian mortality was not simply deaths of soldiers in wartime, but deaths of men, women, and children, Armenian and Muslim alike, who were caught up in international war between Russians and Ottomans and intercommunal war between Armenians and Muslims.

We know from both documentary evidence and statistics tha intercommunal warfare between Christians and Muslims was a major cause of death. The province of Sivas, for example, was not in the war zone, having never been reached by the Russian army. Yet, 180,000 of the Muslims of Sivas died. The deaths of innocent Muslims by secessionist Armenians has been documented even by Armenian sources.

Nevertheless, Armenian Americans continue to ignore the deaths of non-Christians during World War I or by Armenian assassins more recently. They would have one believe that the sole victims of the horrendous deprivations and inhumanities brought about by the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and World War I were Christian. Yet statistics of mortality show that Armenians suffered greatly, but not that they suffered alone. The statistics indicate that the years 1912-22 were a horrible time for humanity, not simply for Armenians.


Certain Oft-Cited Armenian American Evidence is of
Dubious Value, Having Been Derived From Prejudicial Sources.

Armenian Americans purport that the wartime propaganda of the enemies of the Ottoman Empire constitutes objective evidence; to the contrary, as stated by historian David Fromkin, A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East (Avon Press, 1989): "Russian and French official accounts of what they were doing in the Middle East at that time were, not unnaturally, works of propaganda; British official accounts — and even the later memoirs of the officials concerned — were untruthful too. British officials who played a major role in the making of these decisions provided a version of events that was, at best, edited and, at worst, fictitious."

American sources from the period are likewise tainted. Ambassador Henry Morgenthau, who is frequently quoted by Armenian Americans, visited the Ottoman Empire with political, not humanitarian aims. His correspondence with President Wilson reveals his intent was to uncover or manufacture news which would goad the U.S. into joining the war. Given that motive, Henry Morgenthau sought to vilify the Ottoman Empire, an enemy of the Triple Entente. Moreover, Henry Morgenthau's research and reporting relied in large part on Armenians; his primary aide, translator and confidant in Istanbul and Anatolia was an Armenian, Arshag Schmavonian, his secretary was also an Armenian, Hagop Andonian. Morgenthau openly professed that the Turks were an inferior race and had "inferior blood." That an objective account did not emerge is not surprising.

General James G. Harbord, head of the U.S. Government's investigative Commission sent to Anatolia in the Fall of 1919, also is cited frequently by Armenian American sources. Yet his deliberate suppression of evidence showing Armenian crimes and atrocities against Muslims, as documented in the U.S. Archives, are carefully omitted by Armenian Americans.

• Though Tragic, The Armenian Deaths Do Not Constitute Genocide.

The totality of evidence thus far uncovered by historians tells a grim story of serious inter-communal conflict, perpetrated by both Christian and Muslim irregular forces, complicated by disease, famine, and many other of war's privations. The evidence does not, however, describe a genocide. Armenian Americans ignore the dire circumstances that precipitated the enactment of a measure as drastic as the mass relocation which resulted in the majority of Armenian civilian deaths.


A. The Armenians Took Arms Against Their Own Government. Their Violent Political Aims, Not Their Ethnicity or Religion Rendered Them Subject to Relocation.



In some measure, Armenians cooperated with Russian invaders of Eastern Anatolia in wars in 1828, 1854, and 1877. In greater numbers, between 1893 and 1915, Ottoman Armenians in eastern Anatolia rebelled against their government — the Ottoman government — and joined Armenian Revolutionary Groups, such as the notorious Dashnaks and Hunchaks. They took arms against the Ottoman Empire and spearheaded a Russian invasion of eastern Anatolia. Following the Russian declaration of war against the Ottoman Empire on November 5, 1914, the President of the Armenian National Bureau in Tblisi declared to Czar Nicholas II, "From all countries Armenians are hurrying to enter the ranks for the glorious Russian Army, with their blood to serve the victory of Russian arms. . . Let the Russian flag wave freely over the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus." One of those who answered the call was Gourgen Yanikian who, as a teenager, joined the Russians to fight the Ottoman government, and who as an elderly man, on January 27, 1973, assassinated two Turkish diplomats in a Santa Barbara hotel room.

Boghos Nubar addressed a letter to the Times of London on January 30, 1919 confirming that the Armenians were indeed belligerents in World War I. He stated with pride, "In the Caucasus, without mentioning the 150,000 Armenians in the Russian armies, about 50,000 Armenian volunteers under Andranik, Nazarbekoff, and others not only fought for four years for the cause of the Entente, but after the breakdown of Russia they were the only forces in the Caucasus to resist the advance of the Turks, whom they held in check until the armistice was signed. Thus they helped the British forces in an Mesopotamia by hindering the Turks from sending their troops elsewhere."

The Armenian treason is also plainly documented in the November 1914 issue of the Hunchak Armenian [Revolutionary] Gazette, published in Paris. In a call to arms just prior to the formal declaration of war against Germany and the Ottoman Empire, it exhorted, "The entire Armenian Nation will join forces — moral and material, and waving the sword of Revolution, will enter this World conflict ... as comrades in arms of the Triple Entente, and particularly Russia. They will cooperate with the Allies, making full use of all political and revolutionary means for the final victory of Armenia, Cilicia, Caucasus, Azerbayjan. ... [H]eroes who will sacrifice their lives for the great cause of Armenia.... Armenians proud to shed their blood for the cause of Armenia...."

Clearly, then, the Ottoman relocation was not based on the intent to destroy the Ottoman Armenians, as such. The fact that at least 140,000 Ottoman Armenians, mostly those living outside of the Russian battle zone, were not subject to the relocation supports this.

B. Evidence and Logic Controvert the Allegation of even Genocide.


1. Armenian Americans cannot boast about how their ancestors committed mass treason to fight alongside the Russians against the Ottoman government and simultaneously claim to be innocent victims of a relocation policy which went awry. No logic can reconcile these two positions which Armenian Americans openly promote. Eminent historian Bernard Lewis, speaking to the Israeli daily Ha'aretz, recently expanded on this notion: "The Armenians want to benefit from both worlds. On the one hand, they speak with pride of their struggle against Ottoman despotism, while on the other hand, they compare their tragedy to the Jewish Holocaust. I do not accept this. I do not say that the Armenians did not suffer terribly. But I find enough cause for me to contain their attempts to use the Armenian massacres to diminish the worth of the Jewish Holocaust and to relate to it instead as an ethnic dispute."

2. None of the relocation orders, whether public or secret, which have been reviewed by historians to date, orders murder. Instead, they order Ottoman officials to protect relocated Armenians.

3. Hundreds of thousands of Armenians survived the relocation.

4. It was in the regions where Ottoman control was weakest that columns of Armenian relocatees suffered most.

The stories of the time give many examples of columns of hundreds of Armenians guarded by perhaps two government guards. When the columns were attacked by Kurdish tribesmen or bandits, Armenians were robbed and killed. It must be remembered that these tribes were those who had themselves which suffered greatly at the hands of Armenians and Russians.

5. Only the Muslim actions against Armenians have been called genocide. This accusation is primarily based on counting only the Armenian dead, not the Muslim dead.

While Ottoman weakness should be condemned, so should the corresponding weakness of the Russians and the Armenians themselves. They failed to protect the Turks and Kurds who fell under their control. For example, in provinces such as Van, where intercommunal fighting was fiercest, Muslims who could not escape from Armenian bands were killed. The Ottoman central government had ordered the Van governor to send gendarmes, rural policemen, to guard columns of Armenian deportees. He responded that because most of his forces were at the front fighting the Russian Army and its Armenian irregulars, he was left with only 40 gendarmes at his disposal and they were protecting Muslim villages against Armenian attacks.

The Russians expelled from the Caucasus more than 1.3 million Muslims from 1827 to 1878. During World War I. virtually the entire Muslim population of southeast and far eastern Anatolia either became refugees or died. Like the relocation of Armenians, this too produced great mortality. Such should also be recorded when the evils of wartime relocations are examined.

6. Large Armenian populations, such as those of Istanbul and other major cities, remained throughout the war. These were areas where Ottoman power was greatest and genocide would have been easiest to carry out. To decide whether genocide was intended, it is instructive to compare this to the Nazi genocide of the Jews. The Jews of Berlin were killed, their synagogues defiled. The Armenians of Istanbul lived through the war, their churches open.


C. The 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Cannot be Applied to the Events in Question.



Though the term "genocide" is employed by Armenian Americans as if were part of the historical record of the World War I era, it did not exist prior to 1944. Genocide was subsequently defined quite specifically by the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention of the Crime of Genocide. This high crime is now recognized by most civilized nations, including the Republic of Turkey.

The standard of proof in establishing the crime of genocide is formidable given the severity of the crime and the opportunity for overlap with other types of crimes from which genocide is distinguished. Article II of the convention describes actions which, if "committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group" would constitute genocide. At the time of the Convention's ratification, the Secretary General of the U.N. emphasized that genocide is a crime of "specific intent." Furthermore, the Secretary General made clear that the Convention does not protect "political groups" — those merely sharing political goals. The requirement of specific intent serves to distinguish between genocidal killings and other forms of homicide. Homicide becomes genocide when the destruction is directed at members of a protected group simply because they are members of that group.

Under this standard of proof, the Armenian American claim of genocide fails. The Ottoman Armenians did not constitute a protected group under Article II because the Dashnak and Hunchak guerrillas and their civilian accomplices openly and admittedly waged war against their own government. Under these circumstances, it was the Armenians' violent political alliance with the Russian forces, not their ethnic or religious identity, that rendered them subject to the relocation.

Another crucial issue is the specific intention to destroy. Under the Convention, genocide is a "specific intent" crime, one which cannot be inferred from actions, but which must be proven by direct evidence demonstrating that the accused party intended to destroy the protected group. No such evidence has ever been found despite exhaustive research.

(Holdwater: Here is a link that spells out this convention, retroactively being used in the case of the Armenian "Genocide." However, some definition of "genocide" needs to be adhered to... since this has become a word that people love to use every which way.)

Two Tribunals Addressed Numerous Charges Against Ottoman Officials. No Evidence of Crimes That Would Constitute Genocide Could Be Found.


A. Spurious Ottoman Courts, Established to Satisfy the Post-World War I Occupation Forces, Tried and Convicted Over One-Thousand Individuals for Various War Crimes.

The post-World War I Ottoman Government was an unelected government, completely dependent upon the victorious Allied Powers who then occupied the remnants of the Ottoman Empire. This government indeed attempted to try its political enemies. Ersatz courts were formed, bringing sweeping charges including, "outrages to Armenians." With almost no presentation of evidence, the courts found nearly every defendant guilty as charged. 1,376 individuals were sentenced to varying degrees of punishment for offenses ranging from violations of military order such as leaving a post without permission to failing to properly carry out the order under which the Ottoman Armenians of eastern Anatolia were relocated. No charges of crimes against humanity were raised or sustained. According to trial transcripts, the convictions were mainly political retribution, aimed at those who brought the Ottoman Empire into such a disastrous war. Sixty-two officials were sentenced to death and executed. Six officials, members of the Union and Progress Party, were tried in absentia and four were sentenced to death. Because these courts were hardly impartial and provided little could be considered "due process," their convictions should hardly stand as proof of war crimes.

This does not mean that no Ottoman Muslims committed crimes against Ottoman Armenians or that no Ottoman Armenians committed crimes against Ottoman Muslims. But one must acknowledge that the Ottoman government brought to trial over 1,400 individuals for crimes against Armenians and executed some that were guilty of high crimes, while on the other hand, neither the Armenian state nor Armenian guerrilla groups ever charged or tried their criminals of the era whose ghastly deeds are well documented. The mere impanelment of such courts, despite their deficiencies, begs the question why a government intent on eliminating an ethnic group would prosecute, convict, and hang its own officials for harming members of that ethnic group.



(Holdwater, note: the numbers above are suspect. It's possible the author confused with the 1,397 Turks who were strictly tried for crimes against the Armenians during the war, according to K. Gurun's "The Armenian File." Similarly, the 62 executions need to be verified; I couldn't find reference to this number in Gurun's work. Peter Balakian claims in his "Burning Tigris" that only three were executed during the 1919 kangaroo courts, which seems an underestimation, since Damad Ferid Pasha's puppet administration was out for blood. During the war, at least twenty were executed for crimes against Armenians.)

B. Dissatisfied With the Questionable Standards of the Spurious Ottoman Post-War Courts, the British Convened the Malta Tribunals. No Evidence of Crimes That Would Genocide Could Be Found.

The Peace Treaty of Sevres, which was imposed upon the Ottoman Government, contained among its penalty clauses the requirement that the Ottoman government hand over to the Allied Powers those persons accused of "massacres," and to recognize the competence of Allied tribunals to try alleged Ottoman offenders. In this light, beginning, in May, 1919, the Sultan's figurehead government undertook to furnish to the Allies "all documents and information of every kind" which would be considered necessary to ensure the full knowledge of the alleged incriminating acts. Eventually, without serious investigation, 144 high Ottoman officials were arrested and deported for trial to the island of Malta. The principal sources of information about the accused relied upon by the British High Commission at Istanbul were local Armenians and the Armenian Patriarchate itself. Among the deportees were the Ottoman Grand Vizier, Speaker of Parliament, Chief of General Staff, State Ministers, Army Commanders, Sheik-ul-Islam, Deputies, Generals, Colonels, Governors, University Professors, Editors, and well-known Journalists. The British accused them of three categories of alleged offenses: failure to comply with Armistice terms, (ii) ill-treatment of British prisoners of war, and (iii) outrages to Armenians in Turkey and Transcaucasia. Fifty-six of the deportees were eventually selected for prosecution.

While the deportees were interned on Malta, the British appointed an Armenian scholar, Mr. Haig Khazarian, to conduct a thorough examination of documentary evidence in the Ottoman, British, and United States Archives to substantiate the charges. There was no issue of access to the Ottoman records as the British and French occupied and controlled Istanbul at the time. Khazarian's corps of investigators revealed an utter lack of evidence demonstrating that Ottoman officials either sanctioned or encouraged the killings.

At the conclusion of the investigation, the British Procurator General determined that it was "improbable that the charges would be capable of proof in a court of law," exonerated and released all 144 detainees — after two years and four months of detention without trial. Thus, the charges were exhaustively probed, investigated, and studied with the Allies agreeing that the charges could not hold. No compensation was ever paid to the detainees.

C. Despite the Verdicts of the Spurious Ottoman Courts and the Findings of the Malta Tribunals, Armenian Terrorists Have Engaged in a Vigilante War Which Continues Today.

Talaat, Enver and Jemal, the alleged organizers of massacres of Armenians were among the six officials tried in absentia, primarily of political crimes, and sentenced to death. In 1921, a secret Armenian network, named Nemesis, took the law into its own hands and hunted down and assassinated Talaat Pasha and Jemal Pasha. Nemesis also murdered several other officials whom the tribunal did not convict, among them, Sait Halim, Bahaettin Shakir, and Jemal Azmi. Following in Nemesis' footsteps, during the 1970's and 1980's, the Armenian terrorist groups, ASALA and JCAG, committed over 200 armed attacks, killing 70 innocent people, including 31 Turkish diplomats, and seriously wounding over 520 people in a campaign of blood revenge in Western Europe, Turkey, and the United States. Most recently, Mourad Topalian, Chairman of the Armenian National Committee of America, was recently tried and convicted in federal court in Ohio of terrorist crimes associated with a bombing in New York City aimed at killing Turkish diplomats.


Armenian Americans Make Frequent Reference to the Archives of Many Nations While They Carefully Avoid Promoting Any Study Calling for Their Examination

Armenian Americans make frequent reference to the archives of many nations while carefully avoiding calls for the examination of those archives. They know that no evidence of an "Armenian Genocide" has been found to date, as was the case in the Malta Tribunals. They also know that the national archives of several nations speak only of the deaths of Armenians because the recorders were only interested in the Armenians, while intentionally omitting reports of Muslim deaths. Take, for example, the 1915 Armenian revolt in Van: Armenian rebels took the Ottoman city of Van and held it against their own government — the Ottoman government — until the Russians could arrive. Armenian bands slaughtered those Muslims, mostly Kurds, who could not escape and massacred thousands in a field outside the city. At least 60,000 perished. Though the evidence for this is overwhelming, the official archives of several countries mention only dead Christians. The omission of Muslim suffering in World War I archives is largely due to wartime propaganda, but religious prejudice was also a significant factor.

American historians have already combed through the relevant U.S. archives which are composed largely of the reports of American missionaries and diplomats connected with them which reflect extreme anti-Muslim bigotry. By no small coincidence, the U.S. archives are nearly devoid of materials documenting attacks against Muslims. Reacting to the bias he found in reports from eastern Anatolia, Admiral Mark L. Bristol, U.S. High Commissioner in Turkey from l920 to 1926, in a March 1921 letter to Dr. James L. Barton of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions stated, "I see that reports are being freely circulated in the United States that the Turks massacred thousands of Armenians in the Caucasus. Such reports are repeated so many times it makes my blood boil. The Near East Relief have the reports from Yarrow and our own American people which show that such Armenian reports are absolutely false."

Still, Armenian Americans carefully avoid calls for the collection and examination of all records regarding the Armenian condition in the early 20th century. Such would include Ottoman records describing the activities of Armenian rebels and the Russian invaders whom they supported, Persian records, Russian, Syrian records, and, most importantly, the unedited records of the Armenian Revolutionary Groups. Only those who fear the truth would limit the scope of the investigation and call that which has yet to be proven a genocide.


The Holocaust Bears No Significant Relation to the Experience of the Ottoman Armenians.

We have been conditioned to expect a world of heroes and villains, or victims and villains. This feeling has sometimes caused Americans to misinterpret events. However, it is the Holocaust of the Jews of Europe that has most deeply and properly affected us. Our remembrance of the evils of Nazi Germany has caused us to see other events of history through the glass of the Holocaust. In the Holocaust, an innocent people was persecuted and annihilated. Jews were murdered solely because of who they were, not for what they had done. There was no Jewish threat to the German State. Yet the full force of a mode state was mobilized to slaughter the innocent. By contrast, Armenians of the eastern Ottoman Empire were relocated for the damage they had done to the Empire's efforts to defend itself while facing simultaneous attack on three fronts.

We naturally think of the Holocaust when we evaluate other examples of inhumanity. But no event of history can compare to the Holocaust. Indeed, in history most loss of civilian life has taken place in wars in which both sides were armed, both sides fought, and both sides were victims. The World War I period in Anatolia, roughly from 1912-1922 was such a war.



A. Armenian Americans Ignore Crucial Distinctions Between the Holocaust and the Armenian Experience



1. Jews did not demand the dismemberment of the nations in which they had lived.

By contrast, the Ottoman Armenians openly agitated for a separate state in lands in which they were numerically inferior. The Hunchak and Dashnak revolutionary organizations which survive to this day were formed expressly to agitate against the Ottoman Empire.

2. Jews did not kill their fellow citizens in the nations in which they had lived.

By contrast, the Ottoman Armenians committed massacres against local Muslims with whom they had lived peacefully prior to World War I.

3. Jews did not openly join the ranks of their countries' enemies during the course of World War II.

By contrast, during World War I, Ottoman Armenians openly and with pride committed mass treason, took up arms with Russians, traveled to Russia for training, and sported Russian uniforms. Others, non-uniformed irregulars, operated against the Ottoman government from behind the lines.

4. By solemn tribunal at Nuremberg the guilt of the perpetrators of the Holocaust was proven and sentences were carried out in accordance with agreed-upon procedures.

By contrast, the Malta Tribunals, which were convened by and composed of the World War I victors, exonerated those alleged to have been responsible for the maladministration of the relocation policies. Regardless, Armenian terrorists hunted down and assassinated several former Ottoman officials they believed to have been responsible, and successor groups continue to engage in anti-Turkish terrorism.

5. None of the perpetrators of the Holocaust were punished by the Germans during the war; to the contrary, those who carried out The Final Solution were commended by their leaders.

By contrast, the Ottoman government pursued, arrested, tried, and convicted numerous of its own officials and soldiers who had erred in carrying out the Armenian relocation orders.

6. Jews have never worked to persecute Armenians.

By contrast, Armenians actively joined the Nazi regime and aided Hitler in carrying out The Final Solution. Open Armenian-Nazi collaboration is evident in the activities of the 812th Armenian Battalion of [Nazi] Wehrmacht, commanded by Drastamar Kanayan (a.k.a. "Dro"), and its successor, the Armenian Legion. Anti-Jewish, pro-Nazi propaganda was published widely in the Armenian-language Hairenik daily and the weekly journal, Armenian.


B. Hitler Did Not Refer to the Armenians in Plotting The Final Solution. The Infamous Quote is Fraudulent.

Armenian American attempts to link the Holocaust and the Armenian Experience as engendered by the fraudulent quote, "Who remembers the Armenians?" Everything written to date has attributed the alleged quote to a November 24, 1945 Times of London article, "Nazi Germany's Road to War." The article's unnamed author cites the quote as having been included in an address given by Hitler to his commanders-in-chief on August 22, 1939 at Obersalzburg. The Times of London author claims the speech was introduced as evidence during the November 23, 1945 session of the Nuremberg Tribunal. The quote actually first appeared in a 1942 book by Louis Lochner, the Associated Press's Berlin bureau chief during the, war. Lochner, like the Times of London author, never disclosed his source.

Regardless, the Nuremberg transcripts do not contain the alleged quote. In fact, the transcripts demonstrate that the tribunal examined and then rejected Lochner's third-hand version of Hitler's address. Instead, the tribunal entered into evidence two official versions of the August 22, 1939 address found in captured German military records quoting those who were present at Obersalzburg. These bear document numbers US-29/789 PS and US-30/1014 PS. Neither document contains any reference to Armenians. In fact, neither document refers to the Jews; Hitler's address was an anti-Polish invective delivered years before he conceived The Final Solution.

Bibliography



The following texts provide a view of events quite different from that portrayed by Armenian Americans.

Armenian Atrocities and Terrorism ed. by the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (Assembly of Turkish American Associations, Washington, DC 1997);

Death and Exile: the Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922 by Justin McCarthy (Darwin Press, Princeton, NJ 1995);

Muslims and Minorities, The Population of the Ottoman Anatolia and the End of the Empire by Justin McCarthy (New York University Press, New York, 1983).

Pursuing the Just Cause of Their People by Michael Gunter (Greenwood Press, New York 1986);

The Armenian File: The Myth of Innocence Exposed by Kamuran Gürun (K. Rustem & Bro. and Weidenfeld & Nicolson Ltd., London 1985);

The Armenian Question 1914-1923 by Mim Kemal Oke (K. Rustem & Bro. London 1988);

The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau's Story by Heath W. Lowry (Isis Press, Istanbul 1990);

The Talat Pasha Telegrams: Historical Fact or Armenian Fiction by Sinasi Orel and Sureyya Yuca (K. Rustem & Bro., London 1986);

The U.S. Congress and Adolf Hitler on the Armenians, by Heath W. Lowry (Vol. 3, no. 2, Political Communication and Persuasion, 1985); and

Proceedings of Symposium on Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and Turkey (1912-1926), Bogazici University Publications, Istanbul, 1984.





©2000 The Assembly of Turkish American Associations

Printed October 1, 2000, The Turkish Times