Us v. them

[oz]

I really have to go now, but I think this is very important.

 

These are from your web site's welcome message:

 

 

quote

In living memory of  A.S.A.L.A. and  every Armenian that has sacrificed  his life in the pathway to freedom of Armenia, Artsakh, & The Armenian Cause. All the Fedayis and the  Freedom Fighters of Artsakh .

 

Guys, am I in the wrong place?

 

[ April 24, 2001: Message edited by: oz ]

[Berj]

Yes Harut, I deleted it. It was not appropriate. It was an emotional, offencive posting with an accusation, without providing any facts. And it was also out of the context of this topic.

[Berj]

1. It will be there for few days only, and it's not the welcome message.
2.Not by Armenians Oz, but by any major power which could one day decide they Turkey already isn't that important and is hampering its plans.
3.ASALA has killed 20-30 to raise the intentionally silenced issue of Genocide. Believe me if the issue was free for discussion they wouldn't have touched anyone. I do not think terrorism is right, but it has always been only an answer to surpression, murder, genocides etc. By the way, Turkey has rehabilitated and is honoring (monuments etc.) Talaat ***** and the other Young Turk Government members.
4.No

[Harut]

sorry Berj.

i was just too angry on those couple of days.

BTW, it was just my opinion. do we need facts for that, too?

 

please, can you teach me how to quote someone.

[MJ]

Oz,

 

I hope you read this message.

 

I feel obligated to retract one of my allegations, and extend my apologies. In the past I have claimed that a Turkish publisher has been jailed for translating and publishing one of Vahakn Dadrian's books in Turkey. First of all, his name is Zaracoulue (assuming that my spelling is correct). More importantly, it is true that he was sentenced to a term, however, the Supreme Court of Turkey has found that "even though Dadrian's book contains incorrect allegations, publishing of the book doesn't constitute a crime." I have also been told that, subsequently, the same publisher has published one of Levon Marashlian's books.

 

I apologize again for the misinformation.

 

P.S. My reference inside the quotation marks above is not precise, and is an attempted paraphrasing of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Turkey.

[oz]

Hi again,

 

Due to change in my workplace, I can not access the internet as frequent as before, but I will try to do my best for keeping in touch.

 

MJ, thank you for your refinement.

 

Levon Marahslian's book, Economic Influences on US Policies Toward Turkey and Armenians 1919-1923, was published by Belge Book Company in November 2000 in Turkish.

 

Also, you can find some other books about Armenian view of the problem from other book companies like Yazici.

 

You can easily find and buy these books in major bookstores in Turkey.

 

I will check the recent postings as soon as possible and try to answer the questions that I missed.

 

 

 

Berj, there could be no excuse for terrorism.

 

I don't accept buts,ifs or becauses when we are talking about terrorism.

 

By the way, I don't know any monument of Talat Pasa or any Young Turk in Turkey.

 

You have to prove your allegations before accusing an entire nation.

[MJ]

Oz,

How about excuses for Genocide, or even just for slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent people, whatever the context. Can there be an excuse for it?

[oz]

There could be no excuse for any type of violation.

[MJ]

So, what do we do now?

[ May 13, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[Guest Fadi]

I have a little treap to do, so before living, I want to correct little things.

 

Martin, UN Human right commission, accepted the genocide in 1985, it was accepted in the 70's but they pouled off, after Turkey's pressure, but finaly they reintroduced definitly in 1985.

 

I will answer you for your other post later, I have to prepare for my little treap now. So I will post something about Bristol, since Oz is just repeating himself on this board, when many have destroyed his arguments.

 

The essay here was not writen by me, but, I jave recieved the unconditional right to post it everywere.

 

" By Winston

 

Admiral Bristol stated (a number of times) a very clear preference for the Turks and a clearly greater dislike for Greeks and Armenians (perhaps this was all for the benefit of the Turks. His mission was clear however – most clear – and his own aids even occasionally admonished him for his zealotry in it (utter, unconditional support of the Turks). His (mis) pronouncements were also in sharp contrast to the US State department positions & archives (not, as yet corrupted by the Hoover administration which only seeked commercial gain and not justice etc.)

 

Morgathau – while reflecting some of the racial biases of his time (and certainly was tainted by the Turks he came into contact with (the CUP’s worst) essentially reported factually and with a first hand perspective invaluable for understanding the machinations of the Young Turks during this period. Bristol, on the other hand, had a clear mission which was politically tainted and even was in disagreement with the more justice and fairness minded of his own Government. Bristol’s conclusions and observations bare much more the taint of racially based non-factual opinionization (based on little or no exposure to the actual events – well after the fact, in fact) while Morganthau was the US man on the spot while the Genocide was underway in a unique position to report on it. You attempt to discredit him because his observations are accurate and damning to the defense of your ever innocent Turk heroes – the CUP.

 

Morganthau published several years after the war when it was pretty much wound down. The Americans had already entered the war against the GERMANS - but never commenced (or even considered) hostility toward the Turks - thus I am very confused as to who he was propagandizing - In fact he was only relaying the truth of the horror he had witnessed and was documenting his unique view (by being at the porte with routine contact with Talat & Enver) etc.

 

Bristol, on the other hand had a known mission: to appease the Turks in any way possible to curry favor and obtain commercial contracts and advantage over the Brits & others - and this is what he did. He may have loved Armenians and hated Turks personally - but this didn't enter into it - his mission - which he took most seriously is what drove his bias in reporting (to "butter up" to the Turks) - these are well known facts.

 

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

 

By Winston

 

H. Morgenthau and Admiral Mark L. Bristol

 

Admiral Mark Lambert Bristol served as the Commander of the U.S. Naval Detachment in Turkish waters and as the U.S. High Commissioner to Turkey during the years 1919-1927. In this capacity he witnessed first hand; the Turkish War of Independence, the formation of the First Turkish Republic and the early years of its existence.

 

His papers, which are housed in the Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress in Washington, reveal in great detail the character of political, military, social, and economic conditions in Anatolia during the turbulent period of post World War I.

 

The following is an excerpt from Bristol's letter dated March 28, 1921 to Dr. James L. Barton, the Secretary of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions:

 

"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. The circulation of such false reports in the United States, without refutation, is an outrage and is certainly doing the Armenians more harm than good. I feel that we should discourage the Armenians in this kind of work, not only because it is wrong, but because they are injuring themselves.

 

In addition to the reports from our own American Relief workers that were in Kars and Alexandrople, and reports from such men as Yarrow, I have reports from my own Intelligence Officer and know that the Armenian reports are not true. Is there not something that you and the Near East Relief Committee can do to stop the circulation of such false reports?

 

I was surprised to see Dr. McCallum send through a report along this line from Constantinople. When I called attention to the report, it was stated that it came from the Armenians, but the telegram did not state this, nor did it state that the Armenian reports were not confirmed by our own reports. I may be all wrong; but I can't help feeling that I am not, because so many people out here who know the conditions agree with me that the Armenians and ourselves who lend ourselves to such exaggerated reports are doing the worst thing we possibly can for the Armenians."

 

The letter continues:

 

"While the Dashnaks were in power they did everything in the world to keep the pot boiling by attacking Kurds, Turks and Tatars; by committing outrages against the Moslems; by giving no representation whatever to the Molokans which are a large factor in the population of the Caucasus Armenia; by massacring the Moslems; and robbing and destroying their homes; and finally by starting an attack against the Turks which resulted in a counter attack by the Turks…The acts of the Armenian army at Kars absolutely disgusted our Americans, including Yarrow".

 

Because of his objective observations and remarks, Admiral Mark Bristol was frequently attacked and discredited by Armenian and Greek spokesman as "anti-Armenian", "anti-Greek," and "pro-Turkish". For this reason, it is very rare to find any mention of Admiral Bristol in any Armenian publication. Instead they are full of quotations by Mr. Henry Morgenthau who was his predecessor in Istanbul.

 

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. To anyone sharing Morgenthau's prejudices (including the minorities themselves), Bristol's evenhanded objectivity could only be interpreted as 'pro-Turkish'…Bristol's insistence on the equality of Christian and Moslem alike, marked a drastic change from Morgenthau's championing of the Christian element. It is this fact which accounts for his being incorrectly labeled as 'pro-Turkish' and 'anti-minority'."

 

Armenian spokesman 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 and his only source of information was the Armenian Patriarchate.

 

Peter Michael Buzanski is the author of a full-length study on Bristol's tenure in Turkey, entitled: "Admiral Mark L. Bristol and Turkish-American Relations, 1919-1922". He presents an analysis of Bristol devoid of rhetoric and argues convincingly that Bristol should not be judged from the "standpoint of the American Committee for Armenian Independence". Buzanski concludes that Bristol must be evaluated in terms of the manner in which he represented the interests of the nation which he served. On this account he gives Bristol high marks.

 

Me -

I have detailed Bristol’s biases in past posts and the accuracy of Morganthau’s reporting of events (based on American consular reports received from four consuls stationed in Anatolia and corroborated statements of Young Turk leadership which the German and Austrian ambassador’s also report [as is contained in their nation’s archives]. I will repeat some of these posts here –

 

In his personal views Bristol clearly stated (a number of times) a very clear preference for the Turks and a dislike for Greeks and Armenians (perhaps this was all for the benefit of the Turks. His mission was clear however – most clear – and his own aids even occasionally admonished him for his zealotry in it (utter, unconditional support of the Turks). His (mis) pronouncements were also in sharp contrast to the US State department positions & archives (not, as yet corrupted by the Harding administration which only seeked commercial gain and not justice etc.)

 

Morgathau – while reflecting some of the racial biases of his time (and certainly was tainted by the Turks he came into contact with - the CUP’s worst) essentially reported factually and with a first hand perspective invaluable for understanding the machinations of the Young Turks during this period. Bristol, on the other hand, had a clear mission which was politically tainted and even was in disagreement with the more justice and fairness minded of his own Government. Bristol’s conclusions and observations bare much more the taint of racially based non-factual opinionization (based on little or no exposure to the actual events – well after the fact, in fact) while Morganthau was the US man on the spot while the Genocide was underway in a unique position to report on it. You attempt to discredit him because his observations are accurate and damning to the defense of your ever innocent Turk heroes – the CUP.

 

Like you also said before - Morganthau published several years after the war when it was pretty much wound down. The Americans had already entered the war against the GERMANS - but never commenced (or even considered) hostility toward the Turks - thus I am very confused as to who he was propagandizing - In fact he was only relaying the truth of the horror he had witnessed and was documenting his unique view (by being at the porte with routine contact with Talat & Enver) etc.

 

Bristol, on the other hand had a known mission: to appease the Turks in any way possible to curry favor and obtain commercial contracts and advantage over the Brits & others - and this is what he did. He may have loved Armenians and hated Turks personally - but this didn't enter into it - his mission - which he took most seriously is what drove his bias in reporting (to "butter up" to the Turks) - these are well known fact.

 

Even the pro-Turk Admiral acknowledged "the cruelties practiced upon the Armenians by Turks acting under official orders, and in pursuance of a deliberate official policy." For that policy, wrote Bristol, "there can be no adequate excuse."

 

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

 

The biases and motivations of Admiral Bristol

by Winston

Admiral Bristol might have been racist towards all Middle Eastern peoples – however it is clear he had his favorites (the Turks) and his less loved (Greeks and Armenians). He was also known to be anti-Semitic.

 

Aside from personal prejudice, Bristol was motivated by clear interests (U.S. Economic and perhaps also more personal) to favor the Turks and attempt to curry their favor (which meant putting down and attempting to discredit Greeks and Armenians at every opportunity). This was also made easier by the Turks who were able to lead Bristol around (many years after 1915) and selectively present the situation in Anatolia to him.

 

Bristol’s misrepresentation of the situation in Anatolia went far beyond this however. He was known to forward reports (back to the States) which were in direct contrast to what was submitted to him by his underlings (& U.S. consuls & military intelligence etc.) who were out in Anatolia fact gathering (depicted by the State Department as “a complete reversal of facts” . (Unlike Morganthau who accurately reported what was being passed to him by U.S. consuls and others who were eyewitness to the Genocide at various locations. This is supported when comparing Morganthau’s correspondences to the reports that are all available in the U.S. Archives.)

 

Unlike Morganthau, Bristol’s biases and pre-conceived plan to curry favor with the Turks were well known at the time and he had many critics due to this. One book of which I know which was written about him (By somebody named Simpson I believe) was titled: “the blond Beast” and it depicts him as both clearly favoring the Turks and participating (with Allen Dulles, early in his checkered Middle Eastern career – then an underling of Bristol) in a cover-up of the Armenian Genocide. The U.S. State Department reprimanded Bristol on several occasions for showing outright favoritism to the Turks. (2 July 1920 letter is one example)…and against the Greeks – who were seen, by Bristol, as being in league with the British whom Bristol saw as his (U.S.) chief competitor in the Middle East – particularly in regards to oil, but also in regards to general commercial interests. British Officials of the Eastern Department of the Foreign Office charged that Bristol was naïve and “was carefully spoon fed by the Turks”. To this end he was personal friends with Halide Edib, Ataturk’s chief propagandist at this time.

 

Many of Bristol’s correspondences with Allen Dulles reveal a concerted effort to suppress (and concern about) news of Turkish atrocities in Smyrna during and after the time it was occupied and burned by Ataturk’s forces. Their papers reveal that they were denying verified eyewitness reports that the city was burned by the Turks. (apparently there was a lawsuit regarding tobacco losses where Bristol was quoted as having reassured American companies that the occupation of Smyrna by the Turks posed them no risks!

 

Some notable Bristol Quotes:

 

“The Greek is about the worst race in the Near East” – 18 May 1919

 

“It (Turkey) is practically a virgin field for American business and American financial exploitation. The Turks want us, the Americans, because they believe we have no political sting tied to our operations” – 15 May 1922

 

“…as regards the information obtained from Azerbaijan, Armenia or from Turkey, (specifically in regards to Turk massacres at Tiflis) I never put much stock in its face value…” (to Col Wm. Haskell who had expressed concern over such intelligence reports in 1922)

 

“I had not yet read the article but knowing the author was a native, a Greek from Constantinople, would make me suspicious of the truth of the information..” 9 Feb 1922

 

“The Armenians are a race that deserve small consideration.” 12 July 1919

 

“Armenians are a race like the Jews; they have little or no national spirit and have poor moral character.” 05 May 1920 (so much for Armenians being “nationalists”

 

“I am holding no brief for any race in the Near East, I believe that if the Turk, the Greek, the Armenian, the Syrian, etc., were shaken up in a bag you would not know which one would come out first, but probably the Turk is the best one of the lot….I have not so much hope for these other races.” 18 May 1919

 

“Armenians and Greeks…have many flaws and deficiencies of character that do not fit them for self-government.” While “the Turk has some individual traits of character that are so far superior to those of other races that one is led to sympathize with the Turks even though you never forget the bad traits of his character that are illustrated by the acts committed against subjugated races.” 25 May 1919

 

“Latest information makes me certain that the Nationalist Government wishes to get rid of the entire Greek and Armenian population of Anatolia and Constantinople…” 19 Nov 1922 (now this was an interesting find…

 

Much of my material here was culled from a paper: George Horton and Mark L. Bristol, Opposing Forces in U.S. Foreign Policy 1919-1923 by Marjorie Dobkin. (largely compiled using Bristol’s own papers held in the U.S. Library of Congress).

 

Read Christopher Simpson - "The Splendid Blond Beast: Money, Law and Genocide in the Twentieth Century" (New York: Grove Press 1993)

 

New York Times book review - interview with Christopher Simpson (concerning this book) - January 1994.

 

And of course Bristol's own papers (which damn him quite well)! "

 

[ May 14, 2001: Message edited by: Domino ]

[Guest Fadi]

There is some repetitions in this post, since he posted tree time. And the funny faces are not intentional.

[MJ]

Oz,

Varujan Garbisian has never resided in Yerevan. He couldn't be sent "back" there, therefore.

[Guest Fadi]

LOL...posted in the same time

[MJ]

Domino,

You can easily disable the "faces." Click the edit botton, and then put check marks where appropriate.

[Guest Fadi]

Done. Thanks. Just wondering when I will be a member of this forum ? Having don more then 6000 posts in other forums, can not be rewarded in this board ?

 

And what is this thing of pouting the rank of persons that registared, this is discrimination. No fair

[MJ]

Everybody who is able to post here is already a member. So, you are a member. Your status depends on the number of your postings, and will be upgraded automatically by the software. We don't vote on the status of the members. It doesn't take too many postings so that to become a Member (non-junior). Don't know the exact number. Additionally, by being a Member rather than a Junior Member, nothing will change in your status or privileges. It is just reflective of the number of your posts.

 

[ May 14, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[Guest Fadi]

I know it Martin, I passed from it, in other forums. I was asking about the numbers of posts etc... or dates. Since there is places that it is by the numbers of day you are registared, and other places, by the number of posts.

 

Byy Rank I meant, Member # xxx etc... It's kind of, hehe... I'm the first one etc...

 

I really have to take the buss now, Or I will be not abble to do my treap. So good bye, write you later. Have a nice day.

 

Regards

[MJ]

Have a good trip.

[oz]

quote

Varujan Garbisian has never resided in Yerevan. He couldn't be sent "back" there, therefore.

 

So what MJ? Please try to be more sincere, you are intelligent enough to understand what I'm talking about.

 

Varujan Garbisyan is a member of ASALA terror organization and he is responsible for its activities against innocent people.

 

French Police Department cought him after bombing the Turkish Airlines Office in Orly Airport in France in July 1983. Then, he was sentenced to a life imprisonment by French judgement.

 

Couple of weeks ago French Government relased him as a gift to Armenia (he relased on the night of 23 April, interesting eh?)

 

Do you think that French Government did the right thing?

 

Do you think they are fair to all humans in human rights and other similar issues?

 

One last question, do you think they really care you?

[MJ]

Oz,

 

I have to tell you that it is one of my least favorite things when somebody questions my sincerity. To the contrary to you, I would not question your sincerity, even though I may have more reasons for it, and more evidence supporting it.

 

Before your mentioning of it, I have not even known who Garbisyan was, and have not had interest in him. Before you can raise the issue of one Armenian man killing one Turkish diplomat (or let’s say several), assuming even they were innocent, I am yet to hear from you condemnation for the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire, instead of your prolonged maneuverings on the subject – if we are to call things by their names.

 

I don’t speak for the French government. However my understanding is that Garbisian has admitted his responsibility for whatever killings he has done, has served his time, and now he is released. The length of his imprisonment is a secondary issue in my view. As you are aware (I am sure), Soghomon Tehlirian has also admitted his responsibility for the killing ofTaalat ***** in a German court, but has been found Not Guilty by the court.

 

Additionally, a denier of the Armenian Genocide, assuming that he/she does it consciously and with a full knowledge and understanding of the truth (which I am sure is the case with Turkish diplomats), is not an innocent person, in my view, but guilty in the participation of the Genocide through his/her attempt of cover up. Does this imply that I think we have to take the mission of bringing justice into our own hands? No. I don’t think so, and I think it is senseless and counterproductive.

 

I don’t know whether the French Government has done the right thing or not. I am not going to talk for them, neither I have any rights to talk for the Armenian Governement, or the US government, whose citizen I am. I can talk only for myself, and I have been doing so far in this forum.

You ask: “Do you think they are fair to all humans in human rights and other similar issues?” I presume you are asking if it is fair from the point of view of Human Rights to release Garbisian? Again, the French court has found him guilty in whatever crimes when convicting him, and the French court has perhaps cut his sentence short due to whatever “mitigating circumstances.”

When the Ottoman Turkey is found guilty for its crimes, and brought to justice, I would also be open to a discussion of cutting its “sentence” short, probably.

Finally, why do you care if French care about us or not? Does it change the facts? Are you pursuing justice and mutual understanding, or are you trying to give us education in International Politics? Does it have anything to do with the substance of the issue, which is the committing of one of the most hideous crimes in the history of mankind by the Government, whose crime you want to brush under the rug through your infinite maneuverings? Wouldn’t you give us a little bit more credit, and accept that we are, maybe just a little bit, but smarter than that?

[oz]

1-

 

quote

I have to tell you that it is one of my least favorite things when somebody questions my sincerity. To the contrary to you, I would not question your sincerity even though...

 

April 21 posted by you:

 

quote

Let’s just agree that this statement of yours is not your most sincere argument.  

 

2-

 

quote

Before your mentioning of it, I have not even known who Garbisyan was, and have not had interest in him.  

 

If you don't know or even don't have interest in a subject, then you don’t have right to make comments about it. Its better for you to say “I don’t know” or “I have to check before answering you” so we communicate in a better manner.

 

By the way, if you really don’t know what happened in last couple of decades, how can we argue about early 1900’s?

 

3-

 

quote

Before you can raise the issue of one Armenian man killing one Turkish diplomat (or let’s say several)...

 

First of all his target was not Turkish Diplomats, he was charged for bombing Turkish Airlines Office in Orly Airport, please read my postings carefully.

 

Second, he is not a single suffering man who is looking for revenge. He is a member of ASALA, which is responsible for many other terrorist actions against innocent people.

 

 

4-

 

quote

 a denier of the Armenian Genocide, assuming that he/she does it consciously and with a full knowledge and understanding of the truth (which I am sure is the case with Turkish diplomats), is not an innocent person...

 

So they and their families deserve being murdered.

 

Due to your position and your education you don’t state like this of course, even you say these kind of actions are “senseless”, however, you can't stop yourself finding excuses and defending Armenians regardless what they did.

 

Why don’t you just condemn them without sheltering under “mitigating causes”?

 

What would you think if I say Armenians had desired to be massacred because they were renegades? Can we accept it as an excuse or a “mitigating cause” for Ottomans?

 

On the other hand, if you really don't know what ASALA did, again I highly recommend you to research it before making comments.

 

(For example bombing marketplace in Istanbul and bombing Ankara Airport actions. Should we assume that all victims were deniers who deserved being massacred? What about RCMP Officer murdered in front of Turkish Embassy in Canada?)

 

 

5-

 

quote

Finally, why do you care if French care about us or not? Does it change the facts? Are you pursuing justice and mutual understanding, or are you trying to give us education in International Politics?  

 

I care because I know what they did Anatolian people; I care because I know what they did to Armenians whom were our best friends once upon a time.

 

As long as you keep on blaming Turks for everything goes bad in your life, you will deserve to experience same nightmares again and again.

 

If you really care about your people you should study history a little bit more and see what imperialist countries did to your and our people.

 

But may be you don’t care too, like many other Armenians in Diaspora.

 

(Sure you don’t need an International Politics lesson, probably you know better than I do)

 

6-

 

quote

Wouldn’t you give us a little bit more credit, and accept that we are, maybe just a little bit, but smarter than that?

 

It depends what you understand from being smart. I don't see any point to accept all your allegations without question them. If I accept everything you say I’m smart, otherwise I’m idiot eh?

 

Can we call ourselves "smart" if we just verbatim everything we read on articles or books? What about questioning, researching or at least listening (or reading) each other?

 

By the way, to the contrary to you, I know both Armenian and Turkish allegations so I can compare them and ask myself some questions.

 

7-

quote

I am yet to hear from you condemnation for the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire, instead of your prolonged maneuverings on the subject

 

Who is maneuvering here? You keep on saying same things but never listen to me.

 

quote

Turkish Government recognizes Ottoman Empire’s crimes against humanity and massacres.

 

quote

We are not denying the massacres and crimes against humanity; we are just saying you cannot judge them under the law of Genocide.

 

quote

Turkish Government recognizes the crimes of Ottoman Empire. All we need is a dialog process with Armenian Government.

 

quote

It doesn't mean that we don't recognize all horrible things happened to your people. We just need to improve our diplomatic relations to say it loud.

 

quote

Armenian Government knows that Turkey has no doubt about the massacres and crimes of Ottoman Empire. Only disagreement is the usage of the term “Genocide”.

 

quote

I don't want to argue the numbers anymore, it is not humanistic. We are talking about people here; 5000 or 5 million doesn't changes the fact in my view.

 

 

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

I can clearly see that you have some problems with understanding my opinions, so I need to repeat: neither I’m defending Ottoman Government's actions nor I'm denying the massacres of hundreds of thousands of Armenian people.

 

I feel deep regret not only for Armenians but all innocent humans who were suffered from government policies, wars etc.

 

Also, I strongly condemn all individuals and Governments who take part in all kinds of violations against all living creatures.

 

Also, again, to the contrary to you, I have no discrimination in my beliefs. I have no problem to condemn Ottoman Government or Turkish Government or any Turk for their actions.

 

So, if you want to hear my specific opinions about Armenians, I don’t hesitate to condemn Ottoman Government or any other individual who take part in murdering hundreds of thousands of Armenian. They were our brothers and sisters whom we shared peaceful centuries and whatever the reason was they didn’t deserve this kind of treatment. I can guarantee that many other Turks are feeling in the same way with me.

 

Why don’t you do the same think instead of claiming that hundreds of thousands of Turks were killed mostly because of sicknesses? Do you call this being sincere? If there is someone who is trying to hide something here, positively it is not I.

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

[MJ]

OK. You got me on the subject of alleging insincerity…

 

I don’t have to know any details so that to have an attitude towards ASALA and similar organizations. The very fact that I don’t know about them much is indicative of my absence of pride, or excitement for their actions. I indeed think that their actions have been senseless and counterproductive, and they have not served any positive purpose, with all the allegations that they have done it with the purpose of raising awareness of the Genocide on the International arena. Do you want me to say that I am condemning their senseless violence? No, I am not going to say it until things are put in the right context. And only modern Turkey can put things in the right context.

 

What disturbs me in your and many Turks’ attitude towards ASALA is the indications that I receive that following the official position of the government of Turkey, you want to put a sign of equality between the actions of ASALA and the Ittihat. How marvelous: “Ottomans have killed innocent Armenians, but ASALA has also killed innocent Turks.” What a quid pro quo, hah? This is all I have to tell you about ASALA, at this time. When we can resolve the real issues, we can also give a political and other assessment to the actions of ASALA.

No statement of mine implies that the families of any guilty of innocent parties deserve being murdered. To the contrary, I have spoken about bringing the guilty parties to justice, and have claimed that we/nobody should take the mission of bringing the guilty to justice into our own hands. Additionally, all my postings in the past, which I am sure you are familiar with, indicate how much I despise the feeling, moreover, the actions of revenge. There are courts for those purposes – from the parliaments of the world to the courts of public opinion.

 

The very fact of your such twisting of my statements is telling about your motives, I should say. From the very beginning of your arrival to this forum, you have tried to play with the concepts, maneuver and reinterpret what the meaning of “is” is. Let me make clear what all this is about: Since the late 19th century, the Ottoman Government has conducted a systematic policy of extermination of the Armenian nation under different pretexts. As a result, about half the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire has been slaughtered without discrimination, the other half has been condemned to generations of misery. Regardless of what political terminology would you choose, this is one of the most hideous crimes of a state against its own population – call them “rebels, “renegades,” or whatever. I am yet to hear an unequivocal condemnation of it, even not from the Turkish Government, but say, the Turkish Academia, Turkish Association of Writers, other Intellectual Associations of Turkish intellectuals. So far, the condemnations that I hear, with the exception of some admirable Turkish individuals, are too Clintonesque to be accepted for acknowledgement.

 

Regarding what Armenians have done… and my finding of excuses… There is not an iota of evidence that you can provide, which would support your allegation. Your desire of personalizing the argument is indicative only of the lack of arguments from your side. Why are you so nervous? What has happened? Have you learned something new, or have your old theories come down? Why cannot you argue on the merits? Is it because it is hard to argue on the merits?

Why don’t I condemn ASALA for their actions, you mean? Here it is one more time: Because I am not going to condemn ASALA, first. I am first going to here you to unequivocally condemn the Government of the Ottoman Empire for the slaughter of more than a million of innocent people, first, next to condemn all those who are engaged in a cover up, including the vast segments of Turkish academia and intelligentsia, condemn the modern day Republic of Turkey for engaging in systematic policy of denial and forgery, and then, I would feel that it is my moral obligation to speak out about ASALA.

“What would you think if I say Armenians had desired to be massacred because they were renegades? Can we accept it as an excuse or a “mitigating cause” for Ottomans?”

Well, this has been the logic of your postings in our forum, with all the Clintonesque temperings of definitions, and the allegations of rebellion, and it is the official position of your government. What’s new about it? Isn’t it what you have been implying?

 

And I have to thank you for the suggestion to research into the subject of ASALA, but should respectfully refuse. Have no interest in such marginal events in Armeno-Turkish history. And save your breath. It would be very difficult for you to equate their actions with the actions of your consecutive governments – both against the minorities and against the Turkish majority.

 

About the French… Whatever they have done to the Anatolian people, you should take it with the French. There is no rationale to hold the French responsible for whatever they have done to the Anatolians in an Armenian Forum.

 

“As long as you keep on blaming Turks for everything goes bad in your life, you will deserve to experience same nightmares again and again.

 

How telling this last statement of your is, isn’t it? The controls didn’t work for a moment? Isn’t it for these types of occasions that is said: “Beware of the wolf who wears sheep’s mask?” After all, how different are you from the murderers, who I am sure had their own rationale in their hearts?

 

Thank you again for the lesson on Imperialism. They were Imperialists, OK. But what was or what is still the modern Turkey? Colonialist?

 

Being smart in the particular context subject to discussions has meant ability to distinguish the wolf from a sheep.

Finally, show me that single declaration of the Turkish parliament, or the Turkish President, or the Turkish Prime Minister, where the fact of the Ottoman Empire’s atrocities, regardless if you would call it Genocide or apricot, has been recognized and condemned. Until you do it, I will call you “a lot of noise but no substance.”

If your government really needs a dialog process with the Armenian government, have your government give some evidence of it. First, no dialog between the governments can take place without diplomatic relations – that is obvious, I think. Second, you don’t invite somebody to a dialog with you, and close your doors to him. Give me some evidence that your government wants an honest dialog.

 

quote:

 

I don't want to argue the numbers anymore, it is not humanistic. We are talking about people here; 5000 or 5 million doesn't changes the fact in my view.

 

 

How convenient…

Your finale sounds better than your introduction, I should say. You could’ve started there, instead of escalating the argument.

 

But let me set the record straight. You have tried contrast the 2.5 million Turkish victims of the WWI to, let’s say, 1.5 million Armenian victims of the Genocide, as if it mitigates the crime of the Genocide. Additionally, the pretext of your statement has been that somehow Armenians had something to do with it, and “well, you have lost a lot of people, and we have lost a lot of people. This resolves the issue.” No, it doesn’t. In both cases, the responsibility of the lives of these about 4 million people is on the consciousness of the same government and the same leadership. Armenians have nothing to do with the 2.5 million Turkish loses. By the admission of the Turkish Generals of the time (there are references on such materials in our forum and I am sure you have seen them), about 600,000 Turkish solders have died only from typhus. The Generals subject to controversy have been found guilty by the Turkish public of the time and the Turkish courts, for their merciless usage of the Turkish solders on the capacity of human waves or, what is called, “cannon meat” in the WWI fronts. And it has been the decision of Turkey to enter the WWI – Armenians have not pushed Turkey towards that decision.

 

Sure if we are talking about the human tragedy, it doesn’t make difference if it was the tragedy of Turkish families or Armenian families. But when we are talking about calling the guilty to justice, this is where it makes all the difference in the world.

 

There has always been and still there is a lot of misery in the world. Millions of people have died in different wars, fro example WWII, millions of people are infected with AIDS and are condemned to slow death in Africa, millions of people suffer from hunger, tens of thousand of people in Armenia and Turkey have died from earthquakes. These types of human tragedies have no national, or ethnic, or religious boundaries. In this sense, Armenian lives are not more valuable than the Turkish lives.

But crimes have context and there is an expectation, at least, of responsibility for the committed crimes. This is what you refuse to accept. This is where you want to twist things, depoliticize the history, and take the context out of it. You try to present the Armenian Genocide as a pure human tragedy, of which Turkish people have also seen enough. But the context is what makes all the difference in politics and history. Because the Armenians loses have not been a mere unfortunate event. They have been the result of organized, orchestrated and hideous policies of the central government of Turkey. And this is what has to be acknowledged and condemned. This is what it is about, and not about expressing sympathies to the dead. We are past the point of sympathy.

 

Finally, about Genocide or not Genocide. I have referred you to the UN Resolution on the Genocide, of which the Republic of Turkey is a signatory, among many other states. I have asked you to explain me which point of the resolution the Turkish actions of the time do not satisfy? Your explanation basically has been “It is an incorrect definition.” Total absurd! This is what is defined to be Genocide. This is the meaning of that word according to its very definition. There is no other meaning to the word of Genocide other than what the resolution describes. Besides, why instead of questioning the meaning of the Genocide, you wouldn’t raise an issue with the Turkish Government of pulling out of the list of the signatories of this “incorrect” Resolution, then? Is there something more rational that you may suggest?

 

This would be my last argument with you, personally. I am getting tired of these pointless exchanges.

[Berj]

1.and 2.
Yes, it's true. There can't be an excuse for terrorsim on moral level. You don't accept "but"-s. A dogma or what? If you don't accept "but"-s lets make it more cinical: "Which one is more moral, killing one child and going to jail, or killing thousands and covering it?". You say terrorsts were cowards, as if they had any other way or means to strggle for their case.
First, we must discuss the "reason=>consequense" link. What's the reason of terrorism. I'm not talking about religious terrorism (like Osma Bin Laden or similar), let's discuss the main reason of the national terrorism: Irish, Armenian, Basque etc. It occurs ONLY as a CONSEQUENCE of surpression, mass killing from the side of those who are in controll of a given country.

Let the Kurds establish a free state and they will stop the terrorism.

3.Talaat's body was brought back from Germany in 1970s (not sure about the date), and was burried with honors. I'm sure there must be a monument over his grave. No matter it's small or big, it's there. It must be in the cemetery where your statesmen are being burried.