Pbs-tv Affair & The Revisionists

[roger]

PBS-TV (USA) AFFAIR & the REVISIONISTS

 

Please petition PBS against airing of the so-called

"Debate" Armenian Genocide Deniers.

 

Below is the text of the letter by r. Dickran

Abrahamian, the initiator of this petition campaign:

 

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/pbspanel/petition.html

 

Thank you to join to the thousands signatures

 

Jean ECKIAN (www.inhomage.com)

 

-----------

 

Dear Friend,

 

If you are against the debating of the Armenian

Genocide with Genocide deniers and giving deniers

equal air time, please sign the petition below which

is self explanatory. Could you please also send the

petition to people you know to obtain their

signatures?

 

In the section Name you may add your titles if you so

wish, and in the section Country you may indicate the

city and country and the server will accept.

 

Thank you,

 

Dikran J. Abrahamian BA, MD

 

 

The follwing articles were published in the February

10-17, 2006 issue of USA Armenian Life Magazine:

 

1) PBS Should Not Let Turkey Stifle

Honest Free Speech in USA

Through Dishonest, Fraudulent „free‰ Speech

 

By APPO K. JABARIAN

Executive Publisher & Managing Editor

USA Armenian Life Magazine

Hye Kiank Armenian Weekly

 

 

2) Boycott PBS Stations that Air

"Balancing" Panel on Genocide

 

By Harut Sassounian

Publisher, The California Courier

 

 

 

 

 

1) PBS Should Not Let Turkey Stifle

Honest Free Speech in USA

Through Dishonest, Fraudulent „free‰ Speech

 

Friday February 10, 2006

 

By APPO K. JABARIAN

Executive Publisher & Managing Editor

USA Armenian Life Magazine

Hye Kiank Armenian Weekly

 

Recently, it was learned that on April 17, PBS will

air „The Armenian Genocide‰, a documentary produced by

Andrew Goldberg‚s Two Cat Productions.

 

In addition to broadcasting the documentary, PBS is

said to be planning to air a 25-minute long panel

discussion that includes two genocide deniers.

 

It is widely believed that PBS may have given in on

Turkish denialist government‚s pressures.

Pro-truth and pro-justice activists in USA and around

the world, were alarmed by a strongly-worded opinion

column by world-renown political commentator Harut

Sassounian (Please see page E7).

 

In this writer‚s opinion the decision by PBS to air

the panel discussion is ill-devised. PBS should not

give in to the denialist Turkish government, and

worst, should not let Turkey stifle honest free speech

in USA through dishonest „free‰ speech. No speech is

free, when it is saddled by fraudulent comments made

by willful deniers who knowingly lie about the

historic facts of the 1915 Armenian Genocide that

continues to affect a whole nation.

 

As of Tuesday night, only a few hours after the

worldwide web-casting of Sassounian‚s column numerous

reactions began to come in. One such response is a

letter by Mr. Emil Sanamyan of Arlington, Virginia,

USA.

 

In his remarks to Ms. Atlas of PBS, Mr. Sanamyan

wrote: „I am an avid PBS viewer and supporter, living

in Arlington, VA. I am writing in regard to the

Armenian Genocide documentary which is due to air on

PBS on April 17. While I commend you for the decision

to carry this program, I object to the subsequent

panel discussion that includes unabashed deniers of

the Genocide.‰

 

He continued: „I hope you will drop this panel and let

the documentary, which incorporates a number of

diverse Turkish voices on this issue, to stand on its

own.‰

 

The political war between the righteous individuals,

organizations, and governments acknowledging the

1915-23 Armenian Genocide at the hands of the Turks,

on the one side, and the denialists, on the other, has

been intensifying during the last decade.

 

Officialdom Turkey and its cronies have been waking up

from one nightmare to face yet new and even more

troubling nightmares in their desperate futile

attempts to cover up and/or deny the historic facts of

the Armenian Genocide.

 

The denialists seem to be especially troubled by

rising new waves of home-grown Turkish righteous

individuals like Halil Berktay, Orhan Pamuk, Taner

Akcam, Fatima Muge Gocek, Yigit Bener, Ahmet Altan,

Elif Shafak -to name afew- who have dared to cross the

denialist „rubicon‰ in clear defiance of their Turkish

denialist government.

 

Even more troubling for the Turkish denialists, is the

growing ranks of activists -regardless of their race,

color or religion- demanding the acknowledgment of a

crime that occurred 91 years ago.

 

Obviously, Mr. Ali Birand was more than correct in his

prediction that he had made nearly a year ago.

 

Mr. Birand, a Turkish commentator had predicted and

warned his readers that in 2005, on the occasion of

the 90th anniversary of the 1915 Armenian Genocide,

that an Armenian Tsunami may be flooding the

international arena, dealing the Turkish denialists a

serious blow.

 

With the way pro-truth and pro-justice activism is

progressing, Mr. Birand may surely predict unrelenting

political Hurricane Armenia not only in the days to

come in 2006, but in the years to follow, until such

time as the denialist Turks come to their senses and

acknowledge that, what is now called Turkey is

„built‰on the ashes of Western Armenia, and her 1.5

million martyrs.

 

______________________________

 

 

 

Boycott PBS Stations that Air

"Balancing" Panel on Genocide

 

By Harut Sassounian

Publisher, The California Courier

 

PBS is planning to air immediately after the April 17

broadcast of Andrew Goldberg‚s "The Armenian Genocide"

documentary, a 25-minute long panel discussion that

includes two genocide deniers, Asbarez reported last

week.

 

Goldberg told this writer that he did not agree with

the PBS decision to hold a panel discussion on the

Armenian Genocide. "I don't believe such a panel is

necessary. I had absolutely nothing to do with it," he

said.

 

Prof. Fatma Muge Gocek, a Turkish American scholar who

opposes the Turkish government‚s denials of the

Armenian Genocide, explained to this writer why she

refused to be on the panel: "I felt that I had said

what I wanted to say in the documentary and I did not

understand what additional discussion was going to

contribute to it, other than give Justin McCarthy and

Omer Turan a chance to articulate the Turkish state

view. I see this as PBS politicizing the issue and

giving in to Turkish State pressure. It sets a bad

precedent and it is bound to be hailed as a victory by

the Turkish State and their nationalist Diaspora. I

would rather not have the documentary aired at all

under such conditions."

 

The panel discussion, pre-taped by PBS on Feb. 6,

included Prof. Peter Balakian (Colgate Univ., NY),

Prof. Taner Akcam (Univ. of Minnesota), Prof. Justin

McCarthy (Univ. of Louisville), and Prof. Omer Turan

(Middle East Technical Univ., Ankara). The moderator

was Scott Simon of NPR (National Public Radio).

 

Balakian is the author of "The Burning Tigris" and

"Black Dog of Fate." Akcam is a Turkish scholar who is

a staunch defender of the facts of the Armenian

Genocide. McCarthy and Turan are genocide deniers.

 

In a lengthy letter dated Nov. 28, 2005, Balakian

wrote to David Davis, the Vice President of National

TV Production at PBS, explaining why he strongly

objected to the post-documentary panel discussion.

Saying, "this would be a serious mistake for both

intellectual and ethical reasons," Balakian made the

following arguments:

"First, it seems to me that there is no need for it.

My understanding is that post-show discussions are

tagged on to documentaries that lack balance. The

Armenian Genocide documentary is well-balanced, and is

ground-breaking because there are more than a

half-dozen Turkish voices in the film -- both Turkish

scholars discussing the Armenian Genocide and some

Turkish voices denying it. If this were not the case,

I could see that there might be a reason to follow it

with a discussion about Turkish perspectives, but

here, at last, we have an extraordinary number of

Turkish voices already incorporated.

 

"Second, from a scholarly perspective, I think it‚s

important for PBS to understand that the Armenian

Genocide is not a controversial issue. What happened

to the Armenians in the last days of the Ottoman

Empire is genocide ˆ this is the mainstream consensus

worldwide.

 

"Third, I believe it is ethically wrong to privilege

deniers by giving their position equal weight. This is

the conclusion the New York Times, Boston Globe,

Chronicle of Higher Education and other media have

come to.

 

"Fourth, with all due respect to the pressures on PBS,

this is still the United States of America ˆ our

country and culture -- and our own Public Broadcasting

System. There is no reason why fear of protests by a

foreign government should inform our culture‚s

programming. In the struggle for truth in the face of

coercion and cover-up, it is vitally important for

distinguished institutions, particularly public ones,

to hold their ground in the face of Turkish government

intimidation. By giving Turkey additional airtime

following a fair documentary on the Armenian Genocide,

PBS in effect would be supporting Turkey‚s well-funded

denialist campaign."

 

I agree with all of Prof. Balakian‚s well-reasoned

arguments. Even though I am quite confident that

Balakian and Akcam could easily demolish McCarthy‚s

and Turan‚s baseless conjectures, I find it offensive

that PBS is providing to genocide revisionists a

platform from which they can spew their denialist

venom. As Prof. Gocek suggested earlier, this panel

discussion would create an unwelcome precedent for all

future programs on the Armenian Genocide.

 

Furthermore, the holding of such a panel is an insult

to both the victims as well as the survivors of the

Armenian Genocide. Since PBS executives would never

think of including neo-Nazis in a panel discussion

following the airing of a Holocaust documentary, why

would they do it in the case of an Armenian Genocide

documentary?

 

As I had stated in an earlier review, Goldberg‚s

documentary is already excessively fair and balanced.

It includes remarks by several Turkish revisionists.

There is no need to further balance it by adding more

denialists in a panel after the show.

 

I suggest that all those who disagree with the PBS

decision to provide a platform to genocide

revisionists take the following actions:

 

1. Send an e-mail to Jacoba Atlas, Senior Vice

President of PBS programming, asking her to cancel the

airing of the panel discussion. Her e-mail address is:

jatlas@pbs.org;

2. Contact your local PBS station and urge the

programming director not approve the airing of the

panel discussion (each station, independently of PBS,

decides whether or not to air this optional panel

discussion);

3. Advise your station manager that if he goes ahead

with the airing of the panel discussion, you would

neither watch nor financially support the station.

Furthermore, you would urge the station‚s corporate

and foundation sponsors to cease their support;

4. If no satisfactory action is taken by PBS, then

contact your Congressional representative, asking that

Congress cut back the funding to PBS because of its

insensitivity to viewers‚ concerns;

5. If the panel discussion is aired, whenever PBS

broadcasts a Turkey-related documentary in the future,

demand that a panel discussion be held after each show

to balance the Turkish propaganda.

 

All those who care about upholding the truth should

not allow PBS to question the veracity of the Armenian

Genocide under pressure from the Turkish government

and its hired guns.

[Fadix2]

I don't think McCarthy should be silenced, but on the other hand, from the list there is no one prepared to answer back. They should not cancel, they should only add to the list, Hilmar Kaiser. Hilmar Kaiser confrontational style will shut McCarthy up... find the founds necessary to bring Kaiser on the panel.

[ED]

PBS has gone from beeing a public TV station, into a public whore, and all these years I supported PBS

perhaps freedom of speach? reminds me of some thread in this forum where those qho advocate freedom of speach, what do they have to say now

Edited February 12, 2006 by Edward

[gamavor]

Edo, there is nothing wrong with freedom of speech. If the fact of the Genocide is presented as it is, any denialist rambling will serve an excelent case to point purpose, i.e. it will reveal to the viewrs the baseless and racist denialism. The denial of the Genocide after the movie will put the Turks in a VERY undesiarable situation.

 

It will just serve to the best of "The best turk is the dead turk"! You will see a semi-human sitting in front of a journalist trying to disprove the obvioius. What kind of person can do this - a Turk?

 

Lets PBS air the panel and let the viewrs made their minds.

[ED]

Gamo, that was my initial stand, and is, but! and sometimes freedom of so called speach is an lisance to be a whore!!!

i beg someone to explain me in layman turms, what the heck freedom of speach is,

when a whore like ann colter says "whats so wrong of killing you enamies"? regarding Rewandan Genocide

thats not freedom of speach, thats insainity covered under the umbrela of freedom of speach.

 

 

I'm thru with this freedom of speach shablon! enough!

now unlike jews, we should permit a debate on AG when over 20 countries and more then 30 US states passed and arecognised AG.

 

give me a break man

[Sasun]

My view is that lies should not be disseminated, even if it is part of a seemingly balanced debate. This is not about who will beat at the debate, that makes it like a game while it is not.

[gamavor]

when a whore like ann colter says "whats so wrong of killing you enamies"? regarding Rewandan Genocide

 

It eludes to very pervered thinking pretty common among Amorrocans.

[skhara]

My view is that lies should not be disseminated, even if it is part of a seemingly balanced debate. This is not about who will beat at the debate, that makes it like a game while it is not.

 

 

In my fantasy world, an all-truth-knowing being decsends to earth and destroys every lie, all the corruption, the hypocrasy, the two-facedness, the trecheary, the deceit. In reality, lies, manipulations, corruption, wealth, supremacy, power, personal-interests, greed, rule the day. I've have witnessed plenty of times that Armenians side with exactly that. And its not always knowingly, most often than not its with a self-righteous conviction -- does it matter? This is certainly not exclusive to Armenians, "everybody does it", and in this instance its done to us -- so you guys can complain -- for it hurts Armenian interests, well it propogates someone elses. And that's a truth. Do you care when its done to someone else? Would you care to even know about it? And know that some believe in lies, quite religiously, and someones lie is anothers truth and someones truth is anothers lie. So who can break these deadlocks? Scholars? Debaters? Politicians? Organisations? How about an all-truth-knowing being? This all-truth-knowing being can show those who side with lies and corruption the truth and if a lie remains the religion of certain individual even after being shown the truth than he/she/it should be able to put their childrens lives on it.

[Sasun]

In my fantasy world, an all-truth-knowing being decsends to earth and destroys every lie, all the corruption, the hypocrasy, the two-facedness, the trecheary, the deceit. In reality, lies, manipulations, corruption, wealth, supremacy, power, personal-interests, greed, rule the day. I've have witnessed plenty of times that Armenians side with exactly that. And its not always knowingly, most often than not its with a self-righteous conviction -- does it matter? This is certainly not exclusive to Armenians, "everybody does it", and in this instance its done to us -- so you guys can complain -- for it hurts Armenian interests, well it propogates someone elses. And that's a truth. Do you care when its done to someone else? Would you care to even know about it? And know that some believe in lies, quite religiously, and someones lie is anothers truth and someones truth is anothers lie. So who can break these deadlocks? Scholars? Debaters? Politicians? Organisations? How about an all-truth-knowing being? This all-truth-knowing being can show those who side with lies and corruption the truth and if a lie remains the religion of certain individual even after being shown the truth than he/she/it should be able to put their childrens lives on it.

Truth is truth, and untruth is untruth. I do not think there is any ambiguity though we may not do enough effort to know the truth... to keep it short, I say do your best to know the truth and stand by it.

 

Now regarding the question, we happen to know what the truth is and should not let lies be told.

[hytga]

americans are pretty uninformed in the subject, so they'll believe whatever pbs tells them. That includes the turkish "historians" that'll be having a concert after the movie. Unless their propoganda is given the proper response by known historians, they should not air the "dabate". But the very fact of airing the debate plays in turkish hands even if it's contested. Because they'll be questioning facts, and thus making the genocide debatable. And i doubht that in their search for 50/50 objectivity pbs will let any one of the sides to take over the other, even if they know that the armenian side is right.

Remember it's turk's goal to make the genocide debatable, just like they were attempting to do last year by holding a conference