Turkish Embassy Disinformation

[Boghos]

Oh and by the way, while I am waiting for your book please send me your address so I can send you a copy of your biography. It is called Medzabadiv Muratsganer .

[nairi]

Hagarag jan, once again, you live far and away in a safe country. I live in shark-infested waters. I cannot speak and be as free as you can. I LIVE in the Ottoman Empire. Most Armenians in Holland are too afraid to openly recognize the Genocide. Many Armenians in Amsterdam even go as far as to deny the Armenian Genocide, simply to keep the peace between themselves and the many "oppressed Turks who have no other choice but to turn to the MHP". And I haven't even started about The Hague, the MHP's lair.

 

Those Armenians who are active in Armenian affairs, aren't able to lead the relatively peaceful lives that ANCA and AAA can. We have to watch every step we make. Many activists in Holland don't even dare publicly print their names, and those who do (rightfully) live in constant fear.

 

My point is: TURKS HAVE NOT CHANGED IN THE LAST 100 YEARS. They were genocidal 100 years ago, they are genocidal today. Turks my age, Hagarag! Not old farts who experienced ASALA first-hand. NO! Young Turks, who have never even MET Armenians, for god's sake! Gavour is still a widespread word among your so-called innocent modern Turks. Innocent Turks DO NOT exist in significant numbers, no matter how unfortunate, but this is the truth. You may be able to reconcile with this truth, but I can't. Perhaps it's because I live in it and therefore I refuse to accept a quick apology and fix-it compensation. Did you know that German kids still cry whenever they are taught their history? 57 years later? And did you know that once again this year the Dutch and the Dutch Jews refused to accept Germans at their annual commemoration? I'm not saying Armenians should treat Turks who have recognized the Armenian genocide the way Jews treat Germans, but are you saying that 1.5 million people, including your dear parents, died in vain? Are you saying that the victims and their descendants don't deserve some sort of sincere apology for Turkey's century-long denial campaign? Not to mention all the Armenians who had nothing to do with the Ottoman Empire and Turkey.

 

All I know is, and I'm speaking purely from a human perspective, is that I have no trouble begging for an apology from someone I know I have maltreated and genuinely regret my wrongdoings (I may even continue to eat myself up for months after my sincere apology). This somehow goes naturally for me. I don't find it natural to hold a grudge against a person that I abused, and set precondition before apologizing. For crying out loud, Germans are STILL apologizing for their ancestors' crimes! So why can't Armenians expect the same from Turks?

 

As for making peace with progressive Turks and moving on... That's wishful thinking on your part, Hagarag jan. The VERY VERY VERY LARGEST MAJORITY of Turks is NOT progressive. You want to make peace with five Turks and move on? Move on where? You tell me; I might even decide to follow.

 

Btw, I never said we should accept land compensation. All I said was that the Turks should beg us to move back. It is entirely up to us to turn down their offer.

 

Nairi

[khodja]

Nairi Jan,

 

You do not realize what transpires in the US. As a historian, I mentioed to a few colleaguses at work that my family member was one of the top Armenians in the Ottoman government. A young cordial Turk appraoached me at work and asked me if tis was true. I acknowledged it and he was surprised that an Armenian could be in that poweful a position. I held no negative feelings toward him as he was a fine fellow. You would recognize his surname as his relative is a prominent person in Lebanon. Shortly after this I began to be harassed. He must have told this to other Turks who wanted to create problems for me just because I was Armenian. My auto was tampered with. My apartment broken into. I even believe that I was poisoned. I was told that some Turks have nothing but hatred to Armenians especially prominet Armenans in Ottoman Turkey because the Turkish government has barisnwashed it's people to beleive that these people were traitors.

[nairi]

So you agree that they deserve to be "punished" (in my book that's to feel deep regret for at least a year and be on probation for at least a generation)?

 

Hagarag jan, yes, the Turkish government plays a big role in brainwashing its people, but are Turks that primitive that they can't learn to think for themselves? Especially those Turks who grew up in the West? In countries where slogans like "think for yourself" are still very popular? No offence, but ignorance is no longer a valid excuse for me.

 

On another note, please don't forget that European Armenian activists have close bonds with the Germany based "Union/Committee Against Genocide", a committee that fights against genocide denial and assists Armenians in healing from the genocide. Both the chairman and vice-chairman have attended Tsitsernakaberd April 24 commemorations for several years in row now and were warmly welcomed by the Armenian people and authorities each time. Though it is true that their members are growing by the year, we also can't ignore the significant growth in MHP members in Europe. What Ali says about MHP being innocent and powerless is utter and complete nonsense. But I'm sure you were already aware of that yourself.

 

My sincere apologies for overestimating your safety in the US.

 

Nairi

[Rubo]

HagaragAs a historian

 

Wow Hagarag! Perhaps you should take logic courses on biases and inductive, deductive, objective, non objective differentiations and then may be when you do look in the mirror you don’t see a Jewish reflection but Armenian. “Historian” with twisted sense of logic is nothing more than a prostitute out to get self-satisfaction!

To tell you the truth Armenians are better then any Jewish whatever. You got that right, I am proud to my bones to be Armenian and under no circumstance would I place the Jew before an Armenian. Cheers! and you got no credibility talking about the genocide!!!

Take it as a gut expression no harm intended.

[khodja]

Hey Rubo,

 

Both my parents survived the Genocide, and YOU claim that I have no credibility to discuss the Genocide? What better credentials can a layman have? I am not a historian of Armenian history, neither a Hovannisian a Dadrian or a Suny, a Bournoutian nor a Chahin. My expertise is well known but it is not in Armenian history. BUT I know what I saw with my own family. I KNOW what I experienced first hand among my countymen.

[Rubo]

The obvious fact is that you are soft logically. You let your family sentimental ties to Jews cloud your reasoning. Every Armenian has a connection to genocide and you are no exception.

[khodja]

Jews in my formative years knew I was Armenia and treated me very well. No Jew was EVER vicious to me as were my fellow Armenians in my young adulthood. Armenians EVEN came up to me and stated that I looked rich and Jewish, neither of which was the case. My own Aunt, an Armenian (Vanetzi), claimed that I was trying to be a Mark Spitz look-alike and stuffed fresh mint down my shirt. When I dated the daughter of a famous Armenian I was hated by my own people. Never did a Jew ever treat me poorly until I moved to Los Angeles.

[sen_Vahan]

Ali,

 

"you (some of you) say that it is absurd to hide behind land claims to avoid recognising ag, because the armenians either don't have land claims, or know that it is not a perceivable goal, and claim the only reason why i stick to that line is to avoid having the ag recognised, and then you state these claims here and elsewhere on this forum and start making plans as to how to pressure turkey from all sides with other nations' help."

 

Right, and that's the result of the blockade, long-term AG denial and the absense of the desire among turks to "meet and solve the problem".

 

"and what we have here is a question of feasibility (practicality), not morality. the ag is a criminal issue, recognising it personally is a moral issue, and getting it recognised by the state and the public is a practical issue. the state is not going to recognise it as long as it sees such a recognition as a potential threat to its territorial integrity. and the state does, whether you agree with it or not."

 

Recognition is in some sense a diplomatic act (lets put aside the moral side). When two sides solve some problem and sign agreements each of them has own points,positions,etc. Probably, we are too far from such an agreement yet because even the historical fact is still denied!

 

"some of you say (if i understand you correctly) that turkey has nothing to fear because the armenians are so weak. what then if one day you get stronger? or get a stronger ally? the reason why roa - and the more tactful of you - do not vociferously push the land issue NOW is because you realise that you don't have the power to carry it out to the desired conclusion NOW. simply put, you don't try NOW because you know you can't get, NOT YET."

 

Ali, we are all aware that turks have the ability to solve a problem once and forever, but you will need to do that one more time in your history - the only difference is that you will need to do that in a correct diplomatic way this time and without a yatagan, that no other problems arise later even if armenians get stronger.

 

"in addition, i see an attitude on your part as you sitting on a higher pedestal than us, that you are intrinsically right and we intrinsically wrong, an attitude that i do not cultivate toward you. so a turk who accepts your line is "civilised, improving, hopeful etc.", the more of it he accepts, the more so he is. he is a less bad turk who symphatises with your sufferings, a goodish one if he accepts the ag, a good one if he accepts the ag, apologies, and compensation, and an excellent one if he agreed to pack his stuff and go wherever he came from."

 

Come on , Ali, what an exaggeration!

 

"taking it further, he'd be best if he dropped dead! ("i hate the turks biologically. i wish they simply didn't exist" - gamavor)."

 

Ali, lets not try to bring such phrases, i can also bring a lot from turkish forums about armenians and you will see the same and even much worse. Anyway, I agree that this is the most civilized forum and you expect more...

 

Regards,

Vahan

[Rubo]

Jews in my formative years knew I was Armenia and treated me very well. No Jew was EVER vicious to me as were my fellow Armenians in my young adulthood. Armenians EVEN came up to me and stated that I looked rich and Jewish, neither of which was the case. My own Aunt, an Armenian (Vanetzi), claimed that I was trying to be a Mark Spitz look-alike and stuffed fresh mint down my shirt. When I dated the daughter of a famous Armenian I was hated by my own people. Never did a Jew ever treat me poorly until I moved to Los Angeles.

 

I apologize to forum members. One last time:

I am sure just about every Armenian in this forum had a nasty or bad experience with fellow Armenians including my brother and myself (growing up in “charbagh” was not easy) but here one must pause to be objective. Generalizing an entire people based on personal experience is the very biases I am referring. Jews were nice to you because they knew you were not one of them but among themselves they are very vicious. Death threats, personal harassing calls to Jews who do support the Palestinians or at least are objective, by fellow Jews is very common.

Excerpt from Robert Fisk A Strange Kind of Freedom

 

Inside the First Congregational Church of Berkeley, the Californian audience had been struck silent. Dennis Bernstein, the Jewish host of KPFA Radio's Flashpoint current affairs program, was reading some recent e-mails that he had received from Israel's supporters in America. Each one left the people in the church – Muslims, Jews, Christians – in a state of shock. "You mother-****ing-*******-self-hating Jewish piece of shit. Hitler killed the wrong Jews. He should have killed your parents, so a piece of Jewish shit like you would not have been born. God willing, Arab terrorists will cut you to pieces Daniel Pearl-style, AMEN!!!"

 

Bernstein's sin was to have covered the story of Israel's invasion of Jenin in April and to have interviewed journalists who investigated the killings that took place there – including Phil Reeves and Justin Huggler of The Independent – for his Flashpoint program Bernstein's grandfather was a revered Orthodox Rabbi of international prominence but neither his family history nor his origins spared him. "Read this and weep, you mother-****er self-hating Jew boy!!!" another e-mail told Bernstein. "God willing a Palestinian will murder you, rape your wife and slash your kids' throats." Yet another: "I hope that you, Barbara Lubin and all other Jewish Marxist Communist traitors anti-American cop haters will die a violent and cruel death just like the victims of suicide bombers in Israel." Lubin is also Jewish, the executive director of the Middle East Children's Alliance, a one-time committed Zionist but now one of Israel's fiercest critics. Her e-mails are even worse.

(How you think Hagarag Mr. Bernstein and Lubin feel about their kin?)

 

Every race to some extend is harsh on their own people for obvious reasons. I spank my own children but never others. My point is that you must allow healthy distance from your personal experiences in order to develop impartiality. In short Armenians are no different then anybody else and to cling to “victimizations” is to miss the bigger picture.

[khodja]

Rubo,

 

So there is a vehement left-right dichotomy among American Jews, just like in Israel. It was Sharon's Likud Party that sponsored a resolution in the Knesset some 20 some years ago that the Armenian Genocide was a sham. Golda Meir refused to sign it. At least the liberal Jews stay and fight. There are enough liberals among them, even in Israel. Israel Charney, Yair Aron, Yossi Sarid, Yossi Beilin and others support the Armenian cause. I despise Sharon and his conservatives as much as I despise Armenian conservatives. Jews in general do not shun their liberals as the Armenians do. I have heard Armenians make derogatory remarks about Charles Garry, Cher and other liberals.

 

For years the Armenian power structure in America did not give their liberals a chance to even make their voices heard. That is slowly changing diue to activists like myself.

[aurguplu]

hagarag,

 

i know i am not the only one insulted, but as far as i can see i am the only turk who contributes regularly to the forum. so i think that makes a bit of a difference. this conflict has two sides, and here in this forum the other side is represented only by one person, and i think it is significant how he is addressed.

 

as far as the italian doctor is concerned, i don't know a thing about him, so i am not in a postion to judge. but of course, armenians are neither angels nor devils, nor was the italian doctor, and no-one deserves the treatment that armenians as a whole were accorded by the ittihadists.

[aurguplu]

nairi

 

read my postings before you refer to them. mhp INNOCENT? really...

[nairi]

Hagarag jan, quite frankly I feel that Turks profess "Holier than thou" much more than Armenians. I also think that Turks (including Ali) have insulted and hurt Armenians much more than he claims we have him and his race. To come back to my first comment to Ali: I want to see Turks BEG for our forgiveness, BEG for our acceptance of compensation, BEG for our return, and psychologically SUFFER GREATLY for their sins.

 

I don't see Turkey setting preconditions on Armenians as an option. It is WE, ARMENIANS, who should maintain our preconditions for Turkey, not the other way around.

 

As for Armenians among themselves, that is a whole different topic, which I would personally not like to confuse with our international affairs.

 

Nairi

[aurguplu]

1. other people have been proved wrong just as many times as i did, even more, and i have defended my positions with arguments and facts wherever i could and i could in most of the cases. i make a point of not commenting on issues i know nothing/enough about, there have been several such issues, and i am on record for having abstained from commenting on them for lack of knowledge.

 

2. the passage that you have quoted was a statement of facts and not a justification/display of pride/arrogance etc. i am disappointed that you cannot see the difference. when i post in this forum, i do so with the assumption that i) my stance re certain issues are obvious by know, and ii) certain basic facts under discussion are known by all participants in the forum. i am disappointed over and over again to see that both my assumptions are sometimes wrong.

 

3. i am not angry, nor particularly young (35). as far as i know you are not that older than me, either. so i would appreciate if you tried to stop sounding like a grandfather and instead concentrate on answering certain points that i make.

 

i see an attitude very much prevailing in this forum that armenians just cannot be wrong, especially in a discussion with a turk re the roots of conflict. it is a prerequisite of civilised and fruitful discussion to accept the fact that being human we all can be wrong. there have been several instances in this forum where i was factually wrong/stated my position in an inadequate manner/drew the wrong conclusions out of facts etc. and when these were pointed out and persuasively argued, i abandoned my former position and admitted i was wrong. i do not see this very often (hardly ever) on your part. don't you think that it is time to have a look at yourselves?

[nairi]

[Boghos]

Ali, it was you who wrote: "...and then your involvement with the russians and the genocide". It is part of a larger text of yours reproduced above. I will not comment much further except for saying that this is the usual accusation against Armenians: sedition. Not counting the overtone. So give up your righteous nonsense.

 

I will not bother anymore. Good bye.

[aurguplu]

vahan

 

1. the land claims are not there because of ag denial. various armenian groups were demanding land from the turks since well before 1915 or even the hamidian massacres in 1891-95.

 

2. we are in a vicious circle here. turkey is not going to officially recognise ag unless and until land claims are dropped, and land claims are going to persists unless and until turkey recognises ag. to break it, there has to be an agreement that the land claims will be dropped prior to ag recognition, upon condition that the dropping of these claims will be immediately followed by ag recognition (=you drop the land claims today, we recognise the ag tomorrow kind of thing).

 

3. the yataghan is out of date. these days it is the buttons. and before actual warfare, there are a host of economic/political measures such as trade sanctions, embargoes, freezing of assets, denial/postponement of eu membership etc. and do not forget that while you tend to see just us when you look at us, we tend to see the russians, eu and, to some extent, the usa in addition to you when we look at you. after all, the turkish armenian border was (is it still ) patrolled by russian troops and not armenian ones.

 

plus, if the armenians get stronger, they will want to "solve" the problem the way all strong nations solve. you have a problem with the azeris and you are solving it by the sword, not negotiations, because you have a sword strong enough and they don't (and we are not helping them much, because we don't want to get into yet another quagmire). the example is right before our eyes. artshakh opted out of attempting to achieve peaceful coexistence with the azeris already when azerbaijan was not even ruled by the azeris. and the issue there has always been more about getting ancestral lands back than working out a solution for peaceful coexistence. what guarantee do we have that you will even contemplate peaceful coexistence with us the moment you have the power to get rid of us?

 

4. no exaggaration, merely a statement of observable facts. all you have to do is look at the postings in this forum.

 

5. if the phrases have been utterred, then why not bring them up? whatever i (and even those turks in other forums) utter is brought before me, and not infrequently in a distorted interpretation, then why shouldn't i? besides, i see it very relevant. after all "i hate the turks biologically. i wish they simply didn't exist" sounds very much like hitler on the jews, does it not? what if we have someone like gamavor as the president of roa one day, and what if that roa is strong, and say, in possession of nuclear power? can this not happen? do we not have the right to take preemptive measures to prevent this from happening? after all, hitler did exist, as the ruler of an ostensibly civilised nation like germany, and nukes have been used, twice, one week apart, by another ostensibly civilised nation, the usa, against two non-military targets in japan, and that civilised nation still refuses to apologise for them. and all this was not that long ago, was it?

 

do you know on what grounds the decision was taken to use nukes against japan and not germany? "the japanese do not belong to the same branch of humanity that we do (the germans did)." well, we don't belong to the same branch of humanity that you do. you are christians, and we muslims. and especially after 9/11 (whose effects will last very, very long), you can find enough people in christendom (especially in your part of the world) to justify such an act, and less than enough people to oppose it effectively. and you are so buddy-buddy with russia, full of (mostly stray) nukes, and not a nation known either for civilised behaviour nor any standards of morality.

 

the bosnian genocide was allowed to go on for years in the middle of europe before any serious action was taken (by the usa, not europe) because i) the russians didn't allow any action against it, ii) europeans didn't want to risk life and limb, iii) europeans saw the serbs doing a dirty job for them (cleaning a part of europe of ottoman muslims), and iv) there was no oil. some 200,000 muslims were killed, there is an independent slovenia, serbia, croatia, macedonia now (and as far as i know montenegro is on its way to independence), but no independent bosnia: there is a bosnian croat federation. no independent muslim state in europe. chechnya is being raped by the russians and there is no action (i don't mean words) in sight. china is raping both sinkiang (muslim uighur turks) and tibet (tibetan buddhists), and again, no action. the list can go on.

 

wouldn't you be at least careful if you were a turk?

[aurguplu]

boghos

 

i cannot make you see what i want to say as long as you see just what you want to see. i wont bother anymore either. goodbye.

[nairi]

My point of view one more time: Turks have no right whatsoever to set preconditions on Armenians. I, as and Armenian, will not allow Turks to do so and Turks should learn to deal with that.

 

I remember from another thread where a Turk on this forum claimed that Armenians, unlike Australian and American Natives, were civilized people and therefore Turkey had more right to fear Armenians. Well I've got news for you: Turks knew Armenians were a civilized people from the beginning. They were also well-aware of the fact that the lands we lived on belonged to our ancestors. Turks decided to wipe out a civilized nation. Hence, they will have to deal with that civilized nation. And if that means losing a quarter or even half of their lands and belongings, they should accept that. What goes around, comes around.

 

Boghos, I fully understand where you're coming from. In fact, I'm thinking of giving up on this denier myself. I just always keep that bit of hope thinking that deniers will eventually change their minds. But so far I've been proven wrong over and over and over again.

 

Nairi

[aurguplu]

it has proved to be a futile exercise to attempt to establish a dialogue with you and find common ground. you are like arafat who kicked the table with peres when he was so close to getting most of what he wanted, and look what state he is in now.

[THOTH]

I think all of you are being to harsh on Ali. Sure I don't agree with everything he has stated - and I do see a bit of wanting to justify the genocide (sedition issue/Russian cooperation) - but I also see Armenians who continue to view Turks strictly as some kind of savages and who are often not well versed in the reality of international politics and conduct of nations or have very realistic expectations IMO. Can you honestly expect any Turk to have exactly the same views and perspectives on these issues as you? Plaease. And while I may quibble with some points that Ali makes - and like many here (me included I imagine...well certainly with Tigrannes) he may seem arrogant in posts and such - its no big crime. I think that your attitudes condemn this conflict to eternity - it will never be decided. Ali is just the sort we must encourage and work with - even if we don't see eye to eye on all things. And this name calling and such is uncalled for. I am particualrly disapointed in your increasingly hostile tone Boghos. Sure - Ali may hold some views that we as Armenians find offensive...but don't tell me you've never shown the bottom of your shoe to an Arab! And yes - we should be concerned with offending Turks - as not all are truly deniers in any informed sense - they are people - our brothers even in a sense - and regardless our conduct reflects who we are - and it disgusts me to see us emulate that which we claim to despise. Regardless of our differences civility (except perhaps with the most blatant types) is always called for - and I think that we must learn how tro cooperate with the Ali's of Turkey - and here with Ali in particualr - I mean really now - look what he is saying - it is in no way so unreasonable - in fact I comend him for his (core) positions on the Genocide. Lets not pass up the oppurtunity for dialouge and being able to appreciate perspectives other then our own. Let be civil - and stop the nastiness - it is uncalled for (with Ali) - IM(VSH)O.

[sen_Vahan]

Hi, Ali,

 

1. the land claims are not there because of ag denial. various armenian groups were demanding land from the turks since well before 1915 or even the hamidian massacres in 1891-95.

 

They had the right to do so. Show that they didn't and cannot now.

 

2. we are in a vicious circle here. turkey is not going to officially recognise ag unless and until land claims are dropped, and land claims are going to persists unless and until turkey recognises ag. to break it, there has to be an agreement that the land claims will be dropped prior to ag recognition, upon condition that the dropping of these claims will be immediately followed by ag recognition (=you drop the land claims today, we recognise the ag tomorrow kind of thing).

 

Present-day Turkey does not seem to be ready for such an agreement, Ali, because I said before what we see in the world is the denial of the fact. And I guess the propaganda of denial still goes on in your country and people are still being brainwashed. How do you want us to deal with a state with such an attitude among people? Sorry, but it does not seem to be a civilized manner to solve a problem.

 

3. the yataghan is out of date.

 

The principle is the same.

 

"these days it is the buttons. and before actual warfare, there are a host of economic/political measures such as trade sanctions, embargoes, freezing of assets, denial/postponement of eu

membership etc."

 

Exactly, and that's what you are probably doing?

 

"and do not forget that while you tend to see just us when you look at us, we tend to see the

russians, eu and, to some extent, the usa in addition to you when we look at you. after all, the turkish armenian border was (is it still ) patrolled by russian troops and not armenian ones. "

 

Sounds like you consider us to be very important. By the way, there are russian as well as armenian soldiers,troops in the border.

Whereas you see russians , eu, and us (?), we see you dealing with this problem.

 

"plus, if the armenians get stronger, they will want to "solve" the problem the way all strong nations solve. you have a problem with the azeris and you are solving it by the sword, not negotiations, because you have a sword strong enough and they don't (and we are not helping them much, because we don't want to get into yet another quagmire)."

 

1.you mean economic sunctions or buttons? Neither one will work with turkey because neither is possible. You probably think a small country will bother you (a powerful one) with its sword when it gets stronger? Come on, this game does not make any sense, sorry.

 

"the example is right before our eyes. artshakh opted out of attempting to achieve peaceful coexistence with the azeris already when azerbaijan was not even ruled by the azeris. and the issue there has always been more about getting ancestral lands back than working out a solution for peaceful coexistence. what guarantee do we have that you will even contemplate peaceful coexistence with us the moment you have the power to get rid of us?"

 

Yeah, in the near 1000 years Armenia may probably get that strong "to get rid of you". Isn't that rediculous, Ali?

 

"4. no exaggaration, merely a statement of observable facts. all you have to do is look at the postings in this forum."

 

Postings are different but you mainly deal with people that are polite and intelligent enough, right? Ali, unfortunately, one cannot find any turkish forum as civilized as this one. In all the turkish forums I attended armenians/armenia are insulted in an awfull manner.

Anyway, we talk to you personally, to a person who is really appreciated in this forum (I think you know that) but sometimes you are insulted because people are very different here, and the topic is about extermination of the nation, so, don't be surprised, please.

 

5. if the phrases have been utterred, then why not bring them up? whatever i (and even those turks in other forums) utter is brought before me, and not infrequently in a distorted interpretation, then why shouldn't i? besides, i see it very relevant. after all "i hate the turks biologically. i wish they simply didn't exist" sounds very much like hitler on the jews, does it not? what if we have someone like gamavor as the president of roa one day, and what if that roa is strong, and say, in possession of nuclear power?"

 

Please, don't go too far in this issue, we are discussing the AG recognition and probable land claims. I think if turkey has nuclear power the world will face more problems. Moreover, stop this game, please, the genocide of armenians were made in your country and how do you expect that there will be no armenian hating you? Sorry, but dealing with armenians in this problem you need to be very CAREFUL (I would do that if I were a turk,yes) because the emotions of people play an important role here. And if today you think that "somebody like gamavor" may become a president of roa then you either laugh on us or you are really far to be able to solve this problem.

 

"can this not happen? do we not have the right to take preemptive measures to prevent this from happening? "

 

You know your right better i guess. And we also may think that somebody like talaat or enver (lets not talk about hitler, please, we have other examples) becomes a president in your country god knows what will happen. Again, do not go too far, both sides have the same problem and both have something to lose.

 

"after all, hitler did exist, as the ruler of an ostensibly civilised nation like germany, and nukes have been used, twice, one week apart, by another ostensibly civilised nation, the usa, against two non-military targets in japan, and that civilised nation still refuses to apologise for them. and all this was not that long ago, was it?"

 

I would not mix all these issues. Japan was an agressor (I don't say US did a right thing though) and was very powerful. The problem of jews in germany is also very different(I don't want to start this because the topic may be changed as it usually happens). armenians in the empire were peaceful people (as they usually are unfortunately) and were one of the most cultural and they did not owe all the banking system in your country having a huge pressure on the politics and economy. Turks were solving problems they might face later - the land problems, and armenians were important who might have land claims. Today the situation is not very different as i understand because a very intelligent person in this forum says "what if land claims,..., what if gamavor as a president...., etc, etc".

 

"do you know on what grounds the decision was taken to use nukes against japan and not germany? "the japanese do not belong to the same branch of humanity that we do (the germans did)."

 

Sorry, I am not sure about that - it would not make sense to do against germany which lost the

war with Soviets.

 

"well, we don't belong to the same branch of humanity that you do. you are christians, and we muslims. and especially after 9/11 (whose effects will last very, very long), you can find enough people in christendom (especially in your part of the world) to justify such an act, and less than enough people to oppose it effectively. and you are so buddy-buddy with russia, full of (mostly stray) nukes, and not a nation known either for civilised behaviour nor any standards of morality."

 

Does turkey take into account all this to whether or not recognise the AG??

 

"the bosnian genocide was allowed to go on for years in the middle of europe before any serious action was taken (by the usa, not europe) because i) the russians didn't allow any action against it, ii) europeans didn't want to risk life and limb, iii) europeans saw the serbs doing a dirty job for them (cleaning a part of europe of ottoman muslims), and iv) there was no oil. some 200,000 muslims were killed, there is an independent slovenia, serbia, croatia, macedonia now (and as far as i know montenegro is on its way to independence), but no independent bosnia: there is a bosnian croat federation."

 

Right, and christians there have the opposite point of view.

 

" no independent muslim state in europe. chechnya is being raped by the russians and there is no action (i don't mean words) in sight."

 

Why do you bring all these examples?

 

"wouldn't you be at least careful if you were a turk?"

 

As I said I would.

 

regards,

Vahan

[nairi]

Thoth jan, though in many ways I agree with you, I don't see why Armenians should cooperate with the Alis in the world when we have the members of the "Union Against Genocide" to cooperate with. Don't you think cooperating with the latter is more effective than continuing the same old monologues with (pseudo/brainwashed)-deniers?

 

Ali has hardly responded to any of our substantial posts. He only selectively picks out posts to which he can respond "drop the land claims first" with. I don't care whether he has a diploma, is an A-level student, or a trained denier. The fact is, I haven't seen the slighest bit of progress in him in the last month alone. If you have, please point it out, because I'm having trouble seeing it.

[aurguplu]

dear thoth,

 

thanks. i just have to correct one serious misunderstanding on your part. i am not, have never, and will never attempt to justify a genocide, ANY genocide, for the simple reason that there is no justification for it.

 

i think my point that was misunderstood re the genocide was (as far as i understand from the quotes) my linking it with armenian revolutionary activity and cooperation witht the russians. i have stated numerous times that such an act would justify killing of those involved in it as an act of treason, but could not be carried further to encompass the whole population, at the very least since by definition an entire people could not be involved in it (babies, women etc).

 

allow me to give an analogy that i often give when discussing the kurdish issue or any other such issue (including 9/11 these days) and get people see red (but they cannot deny the logic behind it): you have a friend who smokes two packs a day. you like many others are concerned about his health and warn him of the dangers of smoking, especially at this rate. he ignores them all, and one day is diagnosed with lung cancer. some tactless friends tell him something to the effect "see, we had told you" at which point he loses his temper and accuses them of conspiring to make him cancer, or at the very least justifying his cancer. no. the friends were not doing either. they are not friends to cancer, but they know that it exists, and that smoking causes cancer. they are not the ones to blame for his cancer merely because they had predicted he could develop cancer by smoking so hard. they haven't caused it by pointing out the danger, nor did they "justify" it (it would have been a justification if they had said something like "serves you right", but they didn't, remember?). justification is the exercise of finding a moral cause for something done. if i had said something like "they did the genocide because they had to, and that was right" then that would be a justification. talat himself is reported to have said such things. that is justification. many turkish hardliners say that if he hadn't done it, turks would have been history in anatolia, and that we owe our existence partly to it. that is justification, too. the germans said comparable things to justify the holocaust. that was justification, too. justification is explanation PLUS a moral judgement in favour of the act. without that moral judgement, there is no justification. looking at european and especially german history, for instance, it is a no-brainer that some such act was imminent. there are plenty of precedents of it in european history, plus there was a terrible economic situation in germany (the inflation rate in germany in the two years preceding the war was about one trillion per cent). it is obvious in retrospect that something terrible was going to happen. this is explanation, and it can be found in most history books on wwii history, none of which can be accused of being tainted with anti-semitism. this is not justification. it would have been if they said something like "well, the germans had to do it to save their country".

 

i understand fully that in an emotionally charged topic such as the holocaust or the ag, participants in a discussion can lose their temper and overlook this very fine but very significant difference between "explanation" on the one hand and "justification" on the other.

 

suppose that we turn down all explanations regarding the ag and its subsequent denial as justifications and hence untenable. what then? how are we going to address the questions of why on earth turks killed the armenians after having lived side by side with them relatively peacefully until the 1890s, and why the are still denying it? and what is more pertinent, if we cannot explain, then how on earth are we going to tackle the problem of getting the turkish government recognise ag, since neither us (the turks who want to see it recognised) nor the armenians have the power to force it into such a recognition?

 

if the armenian side is sincere in its desire to get ag recognised and relations with turkey normalised (as many of them, at least most of those in the roa claim to do) it cannot avoid paying attention to turkish sensitivities. there are two sides to this conflict, and a solution is impossible without negotiation and reaching common ground. you have to put on the table all the things, the things you cannot do without as well as the things you can do without, and we have to do the same. when we can develop a common list of sine qua nons that we can agree upon, a solution is possible.

 

otherwise, this war of words and the blood feud keeps going on and on, and the greatest danger is that it can reconflagrate into yet another bloody conflict if the conditions in our part of the world give rise to a regional war (and that thing with iraq now gives me cold sweats).

 

i have always striven to carefully weigh my words when addressing the issue (i do concede that in retrospect i can see that i have sometimes failed) because i am not here for idle talk, but actually do want to participate in any such reconciliation effort if a realisable one emerges. but i am alone (or one of the very few here), and even if there are more of us, we cannot achieve anything in turkey unless and until we find like-minded people on the armenian side with whom we can reach common ground. my recent experience here has made me very disappointed, as i now see that quite a few armenians do really have an agenda to claim land from turkey and get it, and will not stop at having the ag recognised, apologised and compensated for. people with this attitude are of course not the ones that either i can have a dialogue with, or can expect members of my nation to have. i do not know how much clearer our position could be stated.

 

regards,

 

[ September 12, 2002, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: aurguplu ]