Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedThe Armenian Revolt (1894-1920)

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
bg_turk View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347
Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Armenian Revolt (1894-1920)
    Posted: 12-Feb-2007 at 23:07
A new documentary on the Armenian revolt at the beginning of the century for whoever is interested to watch.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3890647341795488452

I think the documentary really puts the events in their historical context.



Edited by bg_turk - 12-Feb-2007 at 23:26
Back to Top
Suren View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Chieftain

Joined: 10-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1673
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 00:14
This movie is one-side and  bais.
Anfører
Back to Top
Suren View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Chieftain

Joined: 10-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1673
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 00:54

Without taking any side in this issue, I think this thread has the potential for flame war over genocide issue.

Anfører
Back to Top
bg_turk View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 01:12
Originally posted by sirius99

Without taking any side in this issue, I think this thread has the potential for flame war over genocide issue.



It sounds hypocritical to proclaim that you are not taking any sides, when you already have with your very first post in this thread.
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 01:29
     Just some things off the top of my head:

     The documentary implies that the Armenian takeover of the Ottoman bank was prior to Sultan Abdul-Hamid's aggression (costing the lives of over 200,000 Armenian civilians), when in fact the very takeover was a response to the international silence over these killings. Rest assured I'm not saying whether what they did was good or bad, but the fact is that it was a response to get international recognition of Abdul-Hamid's massacres, which were basically hushed up by the Sultan. The documentary implies that Abdul-Hamid's massacres were a response to this act, which is false.

     And why are most of the professors in this documentary from Turkey? Also, much of the information comes from Justin McCarthy, who is a well-known benefactor of funds from the Turkish government. For this reason I'm reluctant in believing their theory that the Armenians were killing Muslims, just to get the Muslims to kill Armenians en masse, thus giving the European powers a reason to intervene and give the Armenians independence.

     And McCarthy also says "To think that the Ottomans would suddenly become mass-murderes after all that time is ridiculous", but the whole documentary is about how Armenians, after being loyal for so long, suddenly became mass-murderers on unprecedented scales, as the late portion of the documentary claims that more Turks were murdered by Armenians than Armenians were killed by Turks, which goes against the view held by virtually all major acedemic institutions across the world.

     And McCarthy also claims that the percentage of death among the populations of Kurds, Turks and Armenians was the same. This is false. Half of the Turkish and Kurdish populations did not perish, while nearly half the Armenian population of the world did (1-2 million depending on sources, out of 4.5 million). The area of present Armenia at this time was not mostly repopulated by fleeing Armenians (although there were obviously a significant number which did flee there), but by Armenians from Tbilisi (where Armenians were actually a majority prior to WWI), and other parts of the Soviet Union. A testament to this is the fact that when the Red Army took over the Armenian capital Yerevan in the early 1920's, it was a town of merely 30,000 people. Yerevan only got big after the Soviet Union took over due to the influx of Armenians from other parts of the Soviet Union, Tbilisi being just one example.

     Also, they are discussing political events and questioning the Armenian "deportations" of 1915 when they do not even make any inquiries into any one of the three pashas which ruled the Ottoman Empire. How do you draw conclusions without even considering these 3 rulers and their actions?

     And the talk of the Armenian mandate being void since the Armenians did not form a majority in any part of east Anatolia is misleading considering the population was either forced out of their homes or fleeing from deportations and murders (which was either not mentioned or downplayed in the documentary). Obviously they cannot maintain a majority in any region of east Anatolia after these events.

     Also it was said that the real Armenian emigration came in 1920 when the French forces collapsed... but not during the mass state-sponsored deportations which were taking place for over 5 years before French forces finally gave up. Actually the state-sponsored deportation of Armenians was in effect for about 2 years prior to French military involvement in Cilicia (which began in 1917 I believe).


     Overall I thought the film was pretty much a one-sided affair. I think the fact that a significant portion of the information comes from professors who work under the Turkish government, and also Justin McCarthy, who is on the Turkish payroll, speaks volumes about the agenda of such a film, considering the state line on the whole Armenian issue and the intolerance of an opinion which in any way questions the official stance.
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

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

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Suren View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Chieftain

Joined: 10-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1673
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 01:51
Originally posted by bg_turk

Originally posted by sirius99

Without taking any side in this issue, I think this thread has the potential for flame war over genocide issue.



It sounds hypocritical to proclaim that you are not taking any sides, when you already have with your very first post in this thread.
 
Dude I just said the movie is one-sided. It is about turkish view of the conflict and they interview with people that are turkish or taking turkish side claims in this conflict. I didn't say it is wrong or correct so I didn't take any side. Got IT ?
Anfører
Back to Top
bg_turk View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 03:51
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival


     The documentary implies that the Armenian takeover of the Ottoman bank was prior to Sultan Abdul-Hamid's aggression (costing the lives of over 200,000 Armenian civilians), when in fact the very takeover was a response to the international silence over these killings. Rest assured I'm not saying whether what they did was good or bad, but the fact is that it was a response to get international recognition of Abdul-Hamid's massacres, which were basically hushed up by the Sultan. The documentary implies that Abdul-Hamid's massacres were a response to this act, which is false.


The attack triggered further disturbances in Istanbul that cost several thousand innocent Armenian and Turkish lives, as obviously was the purpose of these Armenian terrorists.


     And why are most of the professors in this documentary from Turkey? Also, much of the information comes from Justin McCarthy, who is a well-known benefactor of funds from the Turkish government. For this reason I'm reluctant in believing their theory that the Armenians were killing Muslims, just to get the Muslims to kill Armenians en masse, thus giving the European powers a reason to intervene and give the Armenians independence.

The very fact that you use such ad hominem arguments rather than concentrating on the substance is proof enouigh to me that you are trying to discredit the documentary not because it is not truthful, but because it does not suit your agenda.


     And McCarthy also says "To think that the Ottomans would suddenly become mass-murderes after all that time is ridiculous", but the whole documentary is about how Armenians, after being loyal for so long, suddenly became mass-murderers on unprecedented scales, as the late portion of the documentary claims that more Turks were murdered by Armenians than Armenians were killed by Turks, which goes against the view held by virtually all major acedemic institutions across the world.


Such sweeping generalizations that the majority of instituions support your point of view are simply wrong. I am curious about how do you exactly judge whether an institution support your view? Is it enough for it to have one professor that says it was a genocide against Armenians alone, 2, 5, 10? Clearly most of the scholars who support your thesis are of Armenian dissent (such as the Genocide proponent Balakian) and have their own agendas.


     And McCarthy also claims that the percentage of death among the populations of Kurds, Turks and Armenians was the same. This is false. Half of the Turkish and Kurdish populations did not perish, while nearly half the Armenian population of the world did (1-2 million depending on sources, out of 4.5 million).

The documentary was clearly referring to Eastern Anatolia, in which Moslems suffered comparable death rates to Armenians. Hunger, disease and starvation were widespread, and did not affect Armenians alone, but also Muslims. Muslims too were driven out from their homes during the Russian agression.


The area of present Armenia at this time was not mostly repopulated by fleeing Armenians (although there were obviously a significant number which did flee there), but by Armenians from Tbilisi (where Armenians were actually a majority prior to WWI), and other parts of the Soviet Union. A testament to this is the fact that when the Red Army took over the Armenian capital Yerevan in the early 1920's, it was a town of merely 30,000 people. Yerevan only got big after the Soviet Union took over due to the influx of Armenians from other parts of the Soviet Union, Tbilisi being just one example.

I do not see how this statement disagrees with the documentary. In fact the documentary also states that many Armenians "fled" to Armenia fearing retributions from disgruntled Muslims.


     And the talk of the Armenian mandate being void since the Armenians did not form a majority in any part of east Anatolia is misleading considering the population was either forced out of their homes or fleeing from deportations and murders (which was either not mentioned or downplayed in the documentary). Obviously they cannot maintain a majority in any region of east Anatolia after these events.


Neither can they maintain majority by murdering and killing their Muslim neighbors, as they did back in 1918-20 and as they are doing now in Karabakh, in order to occupy land that does not belong to them alone.


     Overall I thought the film was pretty much a one-sided affair. I think the fact that a significant portion of the information comes from professors who work under the Turkish government, and also Justin McCarthy, who is on the Turkish payroll, speaks volumes about the agenda of such a film, considering the state line on the whole Armenian issue and the intolerance of an opinion which in any way questions the official stance.


Which was to be expected given your own agenda of promoting a one-sided  oversimplified and incredibly unsophisticaed version of the events where the Turks are the villains, and the Armenians the victims. I suppose you would be pleased if all Turkish professors would shut up, and leave it to Armenians to spin the events as they wish.

How exactly does the alleged "intolerance" of Turkish people today affect in any way shape or form the truthfulness of the what was said in the movie? Or is that yet another ad hominem attacks whose aim is to discredit everything Turkish and distract from what was said in the documentary because it was said by Turks?



If you believe that the funding invalidates the truthfulness of a documentary, then what do you think about the recent documentary aired on PBS, which was entirely Armenian funded? Was it biased?

And if Turkish "intolerance" today somehow invalidates this documentary, than what would you say about the intolerance in Armenia? How does Armenia treat dissenting individuals especially regarding this issue?

By the way I am glad you have taken the time to watch it.


Edited by bg_turk - 13-Feb-2007 at 03:59
Back to Top
Suren View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Chieftain

Joined: 10-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1673
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 04:03

ok ,so coninue...



Edited by sirius99 - 17-Feb-2007 at 19:42
Anfører
Back to Top
Denis View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 31-Dec-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 207
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 11:14
Originally posted by sirius99

please stop it or we will have another flame war. 
 
Why can't you just keep your big nose out of it? If there is going to be a flame war there is going to be a flame war, chill out and deal with it PC Brigade.
"Death belongs to God alone. By what right do men touch that unknown thing"

Victor Hugo
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 11:25
I think the use of the word terrorist should be banned from the forums Confused

It's a completely subjective term, used to discriminate between one's friends and one's enemies and as such never represents a balanced view point. Simply by saying "armenian terrorist" you have made your position very clear.
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 16:41
Originally posted by bg_turk

The attack triggered further disturbances in Istanbul that cost several thousand innocent Armenian and Turkish lives, as obviously was the purpose of these Armenian terrorists.


     Yes but the attack was after the fact that over 200,000 Armenians were killed by the state and no one was saying anything about it. Regardless of whether someone considers their actions 'good' or 'bad', that was the motive. The documentary implies that the takeover of the bank was unprovoked and led to Abdul-Hamid's massacres. That is wrong. Abdul-Hamid's massacres and the silence that followed led to the capture of the bank.

Originally posted by bg_turk

The very fact that you use such ad hominem arguments rather than concentrating on the substance is proof enouigh to me that you are trying to discredit the documentary not because it is not truthful, but because it does not suit your agenda.


     If the substance is presented by people who work for a state which adamantly denies any involvement in events which are basically recognized by the majority of scholars, then yes, the substance loses is credibility.

Originally posted by bg_turk

Such sweeping generalizations that the majority of instituions support your point of view are simply wrong. I am curious about how do you exactly judge whether an institution support your view? Is it enough for it to have one professor that says it was a genocide against Armenians alone, 2, 5, 10? Clearly most of the scholars who support your thesis are of Armenian dissent (such as the Genocide proponent Balakian) and have their own agendas.


     I have been told by doctors of history that "the institution is on your side" (their words...and no, they were not Armenians). They also told me that in all their years they never met a real historian who didn't accept that it was a gen.... you get the point.


Originally posted by bg_turk


The documentary was clearly referring to Eastern Anatolia, in which Moslems suffered comparable death rates to Armenians. Hunger, disease and starvation were widespread, and did not affect Armenians alone, but also Muslims. Muslims too were driven out from their homes during the Russian agression.


     Of course Muslims were also killed by starvation and disease and bullets. But McCarthy's claim is wrong, because half the Muslim population was not killed as was the case with Armenians (or else who are all those people in E. Anatolia today descended from?)

Originally posted by bg_turk

I do not see how this statement disagrees with the documentary. In fact the documentary also states that many Armenians "fled" to Armenia fearing retributions from disgruntled Muslims.


     Yes, it is said that most of the people who populated today's Armenia fled voluntarily from E. Anatolia. That is not true, because they did not leave voluntarily, and because most of the people in today's Armenia were transported there by the Soviets from other parts of the Soviet Union.

Originally posted by bg_turk

Neither can they maintain majority by murdering and killing their Muslim neighbors, as they did back in 1918-20 and as they are doing now in Karabakh, in order to occupy land that does not belong to them alone.


     They were the majority population in areas of E. Anatolia prior to WWI (Kars, Van, Bitlis, Sassun, Moush, Zeitun, Hajin, Kharpout, etc). Also they had more than a 3/4 majority in Karabakh in 88', and something like a 97% majority in Karabakh in 1920 prior to the Azeri annexation.

Originally posted by bg_turk

Which was to be expected given your own agenda of promoting a one-sided  oversimplified and incredibly unsophisticaed version of the events where the Turks are the villains, and the Armenians the victims. I suppose you would be pleased if all Turkish professors would shut up, and leave it to Armenians to spin the events as they wish.


     I have never denied that there were Armenian rebels, as is the case when any land is occupied. Did some of these rebels commit atrocities? For sure. But on the scale of hundreds of thousands, and outnumbering the people that the Ottoman state itself led to their deaths? I haven't read any study which claims this which wasn't endorsed by the Turkish state and the historians on its payroll.

Originally posted by bg_turk

How exactly does the alleged "intolerance" of Turkish people today affect in any way shape or form the truthfulness of the what was said in the movie? Or is that yet another ad hominem attacks whose aim is to discredit everything Turkish and distract from what was said in the documentary because it was said by Turks?


     Not because it was said by Turks. Because it was said by people who either work directly for the Turkish government or are on their payroll.

     Even if you assume that everything they said was in fact true, it is still obvious that the documentary is the Turkish point of view on the events. But even so, they make no mention of the 3 pashas and their actions and motives, for obvious reasons... they did not want to say that Talaat Pasha was a staunch supporter of the Pan-Turkic ideal of a Greater Turan.

Edited by ArmenianSurvival - 13-Feb-2007 at 16:59
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

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

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
bg_turk View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 17:41
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival


     Yes but the attack was after the fact that over 200,000 Armenians were killed by the state and no one was saying anything about it. Regardless of whether someone considers their actions 'good' or 'bad', that was the motive. The documentary implies that the takeover of the bank was unprovoked and led to Abdul-Hamid's massacres. That is wrong. Abdul-Hamid's massacres and the silence that followed led to the capture of the bank.


The takeover of the bank further exacerbated the already tense situation, and lead to disturbances in Istanbul. Other disturbances and massacres were taking place in the eastern provinces before and after this act of terror, but Armenians in Istanbul were not endangered until that day. They were endangered because it was important for these extremists to carry the disturbances to the heart of the empire, as that's where the world "media" was. They knew by escalating the violence in Istanbul would hurt the empire the most and would trigger a reaction from the West in their favor.


If the substance is presented by people who work for a state which adamantly denies any involvement in events which are basically recognized by the majority of scholars, then yes, the substance loses is credibility.

Most Turkish universities in Turkey are state funded, and thus most Turkish scholars are employed by the government.

    I have been told by doctors of history that "the institution is on your side" (their words...and no, they were not Armenians). They also told me that in all their years they never met a real historian who didn't accept that it was a gen.... you get the point.

Any self respecting university would never declare that it is on the side of anybody. University should be neither on the side of turks nor armenains, but on the side of the truth, they should be questioning and considering all evidence, rather than allowing a small vocal group to hijack the university's reputation for their own agenda.


    Of course Muslims were also killed by starvation and disease and bullets. But McCarthy's claim is wrong, because half the Muslim population was not killed as was the case with Armenians (or else who are all those people in E. Anatolia today descended from?)


Those in eastern Anatolia are the survivors of the Russian invasion, as are the Armenian diaspora now spread around the world. Likewise, I can ask you if there was a genocide against Armenians, then who are all these Armenian people in France, California, and Massachusetts?

There is no denying that a substantial proportion of the Muslim population in the region was annihilated as documented by the meticulous research of McCarthy, most of the dead Muslims can be accounted for by name, and only a fragment of the entire population survived.


    They were the majority population in areas of E. Anatolia prior to WWI (Kars, Van, Bitlis, Sassun, Moush, Zeitun, Hajin, Kharpout, etc). Also they had more than a 3/4 majority in Karabakh in 88', and something like a 97% majority in Karabakh in 1920 prior to the Azeri annexation.

The Armenians were not the majority in Erzurum, Erzinjan, Trabzon, nor were they an absolute majority in Van. Nonetheless all of these regions were cleansed from Muslims in 1918 and 1919 with the intention that they be incorporated into an ethnically pure Armenian state.


     I have never denied that there were Armenian rebels, as is the case when any land is occupied. Did some of these rebels commit atrocities? For sure. But on the scale of hundreds of thousands, and outnumbering the people that the Ottoman state itself led to their deaths? I haven't read any study which claims this which wasn't endorsed by the Turkish state and the historians on its payroll.


What occupation are you talking about? Eastern Anatolia was then formally and oficially a part of the Ottoman empire as it had been for hundreds of years. It was Ottoman land, it did not belong exclusively to Armenians, but to the Kurds, Circassians, Turks and all the other ethnic groups there, and Armenian gangs had no right to murder innocent Muslims with the intention of implementing a scorch earth policy, as they are doing now in Karabkh, in order to achieve their ideal for an ethnically pure Great Armenian state.


Not because it was said by Turks. Because it was said by people who either work directly for the Turkish government or are on their payroll.

That is nonsense. Since when does the source of funding invalidate once arguments? Most Turkish scholars are employed by the state, do you expect them to all shut up?



Edited by bg_turk - 13-Feb-2007 at 17:45
Back to Top
TheDiplomat View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1988
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2007 at 05:51
When it comes to this period of history, one should always also take into account the fact that Russian history of this period is entirely related with these revolts as well...In order to understand this period of history better, Russian history sources are of great value to historians.. I had been schocked when I read the telegram from the last Tsar Nicholas II to the leader of the Great Armenian Rebellion, Aram Manukian, dated on 18th May 1915, saying that he was grateful for their service to the great Russian Empre and will be rewarded for that...
 
I completely dislike Nicholas II and his diplomat as well as military commanders  for their imperialistic roles in these events...I have much more higher sympathy towards The Bolsheviks...So not only The Turks, The Armenians do bear responsibility, but the last Tsar period also inevitably.
ARDA:The best Turkish diplomat ever!

Back to Top
Batu View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 31-Aug-2006
Location: Barad-dur
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 405
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2007 at 07:58
Admiral Bristol, a guy  who came to Anatolia to see who has the majority in Anatolia said that the none of the Ottoman cities have armenian majority.So principles of Wilson would work for the Ottomans this time.
A wizard is never late,nor he is early he arrives exactly when he means to :) ( Gandalf the White in the Third Age of History Empire Of Istari )
Back to Top
bg_turk View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2007 at 13:40
Another interesting documentary:

Sari Gelin:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7





Edited by bg_turk - 14-Feb-2007 at 13:50
Back to Top
Truthality View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 17-Feb-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 05:35
 
ARMENIA REJECTS PROPOSALS OF AN INDEPENDANT INTERNATONAL INVESTIGATION ON THE EVENTS OF 1915 !!!

Republic of Turkiye has been for many years in good-will calling upon Armenia and all involved western countries Britain, Germany, Russia and USA to set up an independent commission made up of historians & academicians to investigate the events of 1915, and has guaranteed that it will open all its historic government and military archives dating from that era and has asked other countries to do so too, and has declared that she will accept the outcomes of such an independant international investigation no matter what.
Guess what everytime Turkiye proposed this Armenia REJECTED, they would rather not investigate the events, WHY IS THAT? Because they fear the truth !!!
The thruth that is summarily outlined in my following paragraphs containing historical quotes and verified facts with sources.. The popular belief and politics based on His Story is different than the Real History and they do not want this out in the public view, instead they would rather play on propaganda and brainwash mass public opinions and create politics on that.
All quotes have bibliograhphical sources, so please check them out for yourself to verify authenticity. Also please checkout www.tallarmeniantale.com for more information on the Real History instead of His Story propaganda been drummed out for 80+ years.

INTRO
" All Turkish children also should be killed as they form a danger to the Armenian nation" Hamparsum Boyaciyan, a former Ottoman parliamentarian who led Armenian guerilla forces, ravaging Turkish villages behind the lines, 1914. Cited from Mikael Varandean, "History of the Dashnaktsutiun." (Alternately known as "History of the A.R.Federation" ["H. H. Dashnaktsutyan Patmutiwn," Paris,1932 and Cairo,1950]. The author [1874-1934] has other works, including "L'Armnie et la Question Armnienne," noted in the library as "Delegation propaganda authenticated by the Armenian delegation at the Paris Peace Conference, 1919"])

I exterminated the Turkish population in Bashar-Gechar without making any exceptions. One sometimes feels the bullets shouldnt be wasted. So, the most effective way against these dogs is to collect the people who have survived the clashes and dump them in deep holes and crush them under heavy rocks pressed from above, not to let them inhabit this world any longer. So I did accordingly. I collected all the women, men and children and extinguished their lives in the deep holes I dumped them into, crushing them with rocks. A. Lalayan, Revolutsionniy Vostok (Revolutionary East) No: 2-3, Moscow, 1936. (Highly deceptive Armenian activists on the Internet are spreading rumors there is no Lalayan. The above quote has been confirmed was an Armenian Soviet historian and the Dashnag report above was first published in issue 2-3 of the magazine, Revolyutsionniy Vostok and then in issue 2 of Istoricheskie Zapisky, the organ of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Institute of History, The above quote is from a proud Dashnag officer, Aslem Varaam, in the report he wrote from the Beyazit-Vaaram region in 1920

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

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

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

"In Soviet Armenia today there no longer exists a single Turkish soul." Sahak Melkonian, Preserving the Armenian Purity, 1920

"Since all the able Moslem men were in the army, it was easy for the Armenians to begin a horrible slaughter of the defenseless Moslem inhabitants in the area. They ... simply cleaned out the Moslem inhabitants in those areas. They performed gruesome deeds, of which I, as an eye witness honestly say that they were much worse than what Turks have been accused of as an Armenian atrocity." General Bronsart von Schellendorf , "A Witness for Talat Pasha," Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, July 24, 1921

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

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

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

"... It's better that I be a dog or a cat, than a Turkish barbarian..." Edna Petrosyan, a SIX YEAR OLD Californian girl who recites hateful poems on the insistence of her mother. It is easy to see how this cycle of hate-perpetuation feeds the "Armenian Genocide" obsession for most Armenians. The Los Angeles Times, February 1, 1990


AT START

"The Armenians of Byzantium have welcomed the Seljuk Turk conquest with lengthy celebrations in the streets and thanksgiving to God for having rescued them from long years of Byzantine oppression. Seljuk Turks gave protection to the Armenian Church, which the Byzantines had been trying to destroy. They abolished the oppressive taxes which the Byzantines had imposed on the Armenian Churches, monasteries and priests, and in fact exempted such religious institutions from all taxes. The Armenian community was left free to conduct its internal affairs in its own way, including religious activities and education, and there never was any time at which Armenians or other non-Muslims were compelled to convert to Islam. The Armenian spiritual leaders in fact went to the Seljuk Sultan Melikshah to thank him for his protection." Stephanos Taronetsi ASOGHIK, Armenian historian who recorded his impressions on the arrival of Seljuk Turks to Anatolia around 1071, probably from his renowned Universal History.

"How well the Seljuk Turks treated the Armenians is shown by the fact that some Armenian noble families like the Tashrik family accepted Islam on their own free will and joined the Turks in fighting Byzantium." Mathias of Edessa, Armenian historian, probably in his Chronicles, Nr. 129; after the death of Sultan Kilic Arslan, the same Armenian historian also wrote, "Kilic Arslan's death has driven Christians into mourning since he was a charitable person of high caliber and character."
(The religious toleration of the Ottoman Government) "was complete" (and the state) "never in any way interfered with what the Christians did or taught in the schools or the churches.... it was impossible to desire more absolute liberty of worship or teaching." Gratan Geary, "Through Asiatic Turkey" (London, M.S. and R. Sampson, 1878)
The tolerance shown to foreign beliefs and hostile faiths by the Ottoman law and Ottoman officials which enabled them to establish their own religious institutions and to shape their own education was such that the thousand year old liberty reigning in France in the field of sects and beliefs, dating from the times of the ancient Gaul, could not be compared with it." Talcot Williams, Turkey, A World Problem of Today, New York, 1922, p. 194

"(Armenian) prosperity grew until, by the middle of the 19th century, they became one of the richest communities of the Ottoman empire, prominent not only in trade and professions, but also in the service of state." Dr. Andrew Mango, March 15, 2001 speech at the Society for the Promotion of Democratic Principles, in Istanbul
"Armenians are so pleased with their lives that this is impossible." French Ambassador in Istanbul, in response to Napoleon Bonaparte's query to induce rebellion among the Ottoman Empire's Catholic Armenians and take a kind of revenge for the Akka defeat.
The Ottoman institution came perhaps as near as anything in real life could to realizing the ideal of Platos Republic.
Arnold Toynbee, British historian after revealing that The Blue Book was a propaganda tool with false information in it.
"Few Europeans realized that the Turkish Ottoman Sultan
Suleiman was the head of the most democratic government of their time."
Harold Lamb, American historian and novelist, noted for his biographies of Genghis Khan, Alexander, and Hannibal

LATER

"The Protestant missionaries distributed in large numbers to various places in Turkey made propaganda in favour of England and stirred the Armenians to desire autonomy under British protection" Horen Ashikian, The Armenian Patriarch, in "History of Armenia." (Mr. Ashikian was probably quoted, and was not the writer of this book, of which there were several... by process of elimination, the book was probably either the 1936 one written by V.C. Vahan, or one by Vahan Kurjian, in 1958. Hovhannes, the Fifth Catholicos of the Armenians, also wrote a book by the same name in 1912.)

"As it is known, the Russian government gave 242,900 rubles at the beginning of the war for the initial cost of arming and preparing the Turkish Armenians and to start riots within the country during the war. Our volunteer units were obliged to break the chains of the Turkish Army by cutting through, causing anarchy in Turkey and joining the rioters from behind together with those fighting inside the enemy lines if possible and to provide the propagation of the Russian Armies to get hold of Turkish Armenia."Dashnak Party Military Minister, Armenian National Congress meeting in Tbilisi, February 1915; B.A. Boryan, Armeniya Mejdunarodnaya Diplomatiya; SSSR. Cast 11, Moskva, 1929, p. 360.

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

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

"Religious communities had long become revolutionary hearts of the Armenian revolutionary parties and most diabolical plans had been drawn up there. Religious spaces had become warehouses of arms and hearths of plots. Religious leaders had been exhorting the people to rise up against the state with their speeches and writings, people that had trusted them. They did not preach any more the teaching of the Gospel and utter noble words in their sermons. Rebellion had replaced loyalty and righteousness in their sermons, hatred and revenge had taken the place of humanity. Meanness and ignominy were preached in place of high morality. Religious leaders presided over festivities, meetings and ceremonies organised by revolutionary committees."Gevand Turyan, Armenian bishop and Ottoman citizen, "A Qui la Faute?" Aux Partis Revue Armnien. (Publication de la Revue Dadiar). Constantinople, 1917, pp. 40-41.

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

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

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

As soon as the Armenian volunteer units commanded by Antranik approach Van, the Dashnak fighters in the area will take to the mountains and unfurl the flag of revolt. The plans for the rebellion will be implemented in April 1915. The Catholicos has informed us that 10,000 armed fighters are ready to join the action.Dashnak decision, end of February 1915 Armenian National Congress held in Tiblis. [The Armenians in History and the Armenian Question; Esat Uras, Documentary Publications, Istanbul (1988); p.853]

"The Armenians greeted the Russians with ringing bells and with their priests dressed in their ceremonial robes. In this war, too, the Armenian people took their place beside the Russians... The war broke out and volunteers came from everywhere, from Armenia in Eastern Anatolia, from Egypt under Turkish rule, from the non-Russian areas of Rumania; all these people who were Ottoman subjects, familiar with Anatolia, gathered together and put themselves at the service of the Russian Empire.Tchalkouchian, in a May 24, 1916 speech addressed to the Armenian Congress in St. Petersburg [The Armenians in History and the Armenian Question; Esat Uras; Documentary Publications, Istanbul (1988); p.854.]

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

"...During this brief three year period (1904-1906), there were two Armenian victims assassinated by Armenian terrorists for every one non-Armenian. This hitherto almost totally neglected fact deserves our attention, for it was not a phenomenon limited to 1904-1906, but rather one which still exists today. Its purpose, then as now, was nothing more or less than intimidation. The conscious attempt to frighten the overwhelming majority of peaceful Armenians into silence as regards the activities of the terrorists."Heath W. Lowry, Professor, Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Armenian Terrorism: Threads of Continuity , 1984; referring to a 1983 source by Dr. Gerard Libaridian

As an Armenian, I never condone terrorism, but there must be a reason behind this. Maybe the terrorism will work. It worked for the Jews. They have Israel.Kevork Donabedian, the editor of The Armenian Weekly, an ethnic newspaper published in the United States, as quoted in the November 18, 1980 issue of The Christian Science Monitor. (Yet another Armenian dishonorably playing both sides of the fence.)

"...There is a systematic plan of destruction of Turkish villages and extinction of the Moslem population. This plan is being carried out by Greek and Armenian bands, which appear to operate under Greek instructions and sometimes even with the assistance of detachments of regular troops."Arnold Toynbee, "The Western Question in Greece and Turkey," p. 284; quoting the commission of the allies for the incidents of Yalova and Gemlik. This was the "reformed" Toynbee, in his later years.

"The Armenians were retreating before the Ottoman Army. They were in danger. Yet they stopped whenever they could to kill the innocent Muslims, despite the risk to their own safety. This kind of hatred and madness cannot be explained. It is often falsely claimed that the Turks committed a genocide of the Armenians. Yet this was the real genocide, a genocide of the Turks."Justin McCarthy, Professor, University of Louisville, "The Destruction of Ottoman Erzurum by Armenians ,2002

America should feed the half million Turks whose hinterland was willfully demolished by the retreating Greeks and Armenians, instead of aiding the Greeks and Armenians who are sitting around waiting for America to give them their next meal. The stories of Turk atrocities circulated among American churches are a mess of lies. I believe that the Greeks and not the Turks are barbarians. Colonel William Haskell, the American Red Cross; returning from a tour of investigation in the Near East. Source: The Turkish Myth,1923. Here is what the colonel thought of the Armenians according to Dr. Richard Hovannisian.

British promises to Armenians were exactly like their promises to Arabs in Syria, Palestine and Mesopotamia; they were made with the purpose of encouraging the war efforts of the Armenians, to influence neutral states in favor of England and to excite the separatist tendencies in ethnic minorities under the rule of these neutral states so as to make their enemy, the Ottoman Empire, collapse from the inside."A. H Arslanian, British Wartime Pledges, 1917-1918: The Armenian Case, Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 13, 1978 (page 522)

"The Armenians were very well treated for hundreds of years by the Turks, until Russia, in the first place, started using them as pawns for purely political purposes; they exploited them as Christians, solely as pawns."Lieutenant Colonel T. Williams (Labour Party M.P.), Parliamentary Debates (Commons), London 25.ii.1924, vol. 170

"The Turks had no deliberate policy of genocide at any stage, only the removal of Armenians from the front line with Russia, where they were collaborating with the Ottoman Empire's enemies and were thus a threat to its security."P. F. Peters, Former Australian Ambassador to TurkeyThe Australian, June 9th, 1994

"When those of Armenians resident in the aforementioned towns and villages who have to be moved are transferred to their places of settlement and are on the road, their comfort must be assured and their lives and property protected; after their arrival their food should be paid for out of Refugees' Appropriations until they are definitively settled in their new homes. Property and land should be distributed to them in accordance with their previous financial situation as well as current needs; and for those among them needing further help, the government should build houses, provide cultivators and artisans with seed, tools, and equipment."

"This order is entirely intended against the extension of the Armenian Revolutionary Committees; therefore do not execute it in such a manner that might cause the mutual massacre of Muslims and Armenians." Key Ottoman Decree, putting the Armenian "Deportations" into motion

"The Ottoman government prosecuted more than one thousand soldiers and civilians for disobedience. Further, approximately 200,000 Ottoman Armenians who were relocated to Syria lived without menace through the remainder of the war."Bruce Fein, Attorney and Adjunct Scholar of ATAA, "An Armenian and Muslim Tragedy? Yes! Genocide? No!"

"Whether or not hindsight and modern morality tell us that the deportations were a mistake, no one can seriously doubt the Ottoman government had reason to distrust many of the Armenians of Anatolia. Because of the assistance given by the Armenians to invading Russian armies in 1828, 1854, and 1877, the Ottomans decided they could not trust the Armenians, much as the United States, with much less justification, decided they could not trust the Americans of Japanese ancestry in World War II."Justin McCarthy, Professor, University of Louisville, "Armenian Terrorism: History as Poison and Antidote."

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

"The Turks and Armenians lived in peace side by side for centuries; that the Turks suffered as much as the Armenians at the time of the deportations; that only 20 % of the Turkish villagers who went to war would be able to return to their homes; that at the start of World War I and before the Armenians never had anything approaching a majority of the population in the territories called Armenia; they would not have a majority even if all the deported Armenians were returned; and the claims that returning Armenians would be in danger were not justified."
General James G. Harbord, in a report to Congress after touring through Anatolia during September and October; Kara Schemsi, Turcs et Armeniens devant l'Histoire, Geneve, Imprimerie Nationale, 1919, p. 31-32. Another excerpt: "...in the territory untouched by war from which Armenians were deported the ruined villages are undoubtedly due to Turkish deviltry, but where Armenians advanced and retired with the Russians their retaliatory cruelties unquestionably rivaled the Turks in their inhumanity

"...In some towns containing ten Armenian houses and thirty Turkish houses, it was reported that 40,000 people were killed, about 10,000 women were taken to the harem, and thousands of children left destitute; and the city university destroyed, and the bishop killed. It is a well-known fact that even in the last war the native Christians, despite the Turkish cautions, armed themselves and fought on the side of the Allies. In these conflicts, they were not idle, but they were well supplied with artillery, machine guns and inflicted heavy losses on their enemies"
George M. Lamsa, a missionary known for his research on Christianity, "The Secret of the Near East," The Ideal Press, Philadelphia (1923), page 133

"If Armenians lost their lives during that war, they died as soldiers, fighting a war of their own choosing against the Ottoman Empire which had treated them decently and benignly. They were the duped victims of the Russians, of the Allies, and of their own Armenian leaders. A few thousand Armenians may have lost their lives during their relocation, caused by their own subversion." Rabbi Albert Amateau, Sephardic Jewish leader in the United States, in his sworn testimony to persuade Congress to not implement yet another Armenian "Genocide" resolution... this time brought by Senator Robert Dole, in 1990. As a young student in the Ottoman Empire, Amateau got first-hand exposure to the young Armenians who revealed their plans of betrayalto him... believing Amateau was a Christian Frenchman.

"Russia's policy of hostility toward Turkey emboldened the Armenians of the Caucasus; that is why the Caucasus Armenians were involved in clashes between two friendly races. Thank goodness that this situation did not last too long. Following the Russian Revolution, the Armenians of the Caucasus understood that their security could be achieved only by having good relations with Turkey, and they stretched out their hands to Turkey. Turkey also wanted to forget the events of the past, and grasped the out-stretched hand in friendship. We agree that the Armenian Question has been resolved and left to history. The mutual feelings of suspicion and enmity created by foreign agents have been eliminated." Hairenik (Horizon), the Dashnak organ, on June 28, 1918; Kara Schemsi, Turcs et Armeniens devant l'Histoire, Geneve, Imprimerie Nationale, 1919, p. 31-32

The Armenian issue, which aims at meeting the economic interests of the capitalist world rather than bearing in mind the veritable interests of the Armenians themselves was best resolved with the Kars Agreement. The friendly ties between two industrious people coexisting peacefully for centuries have been satisfactorily established anew.Mustafa Kemal Atatrk, 1.3.1922, Inaugural Speech of the 3rd Year of Session of the Turkish Grand National Assembly

THE REALITY
"The meaning of genocide is the planned destruction of a religious and ethnic group, as far as it is known to me, there is no evidence for that in the case of the Armenians. Bernard Lewis, Professor, "There Was No Genocide," an interview by Dalia Karpel, Ha'aretz daily, Jerusalem, January 23, 1998

"(The Turk never deigns to explain his own case while) the pro-Armenians always manage to hold the field, appalling the public by incessant reiteration and exaggeration as to the number of victims, and apparently valuing to its full extent the wisdom of the old Eastern proverb give a lie twenty-four hours start, and it will take a hundred years to overtake it." C.F. Dixon-Johnson, British author of the 1916 book, "The Armenians

Few Americans who mourn, and justly, the miseries of the Armenians, are aware that till the rise of nationalistic ambitions, beginning with the 'seventies, the Armenians were the favored portion of the population of Turkey, or that in the Great War, they traitorously turned Turkish cities over to the Russian invader; that they boasted of having raised an army of one hundred and fifty thousand men to fight a civil war, and that they burned at least a hundred Turkish villages and exterminated their population.

...It is at least time that Americans ceased to be deceived by propagandaJohn Dewey, American professor, The Turkish Tragedy,The New Republic, November 12, 1928

"Condemnation without hearing both sides is unjust and un-American"Arthur Tremaine Chester, above Feb.1923 article

"The Turkish government felt that pressing the Turkish case against Armenians and others would rekindle old hatreds and invite war, so the Turks said nothing of their grievances. This was the right decision for the time. The unfortunate result was that no one spoke for the Turks" Justin McCarthy, Professor, University of Louisville, testifying at the Congressional Hearing on H. Res. 398 in 2000.

One should be blind to history not to understand the Turks. The dignified silence of the Turks against the mounting unjustified attacks and mean slanders can only be explained by their pity for the blind.How beautifully this attitude of theirs answers the undignified calumnies.Pierre Loti, French writer and traveller, Fantome dOrient (1928)

Back to Top
mamikon View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 16-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2200
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 15:18
The Turkish State is rich, I am sure it can pump out 100s of amateurish denialist documentaries a year

Edited by mamikon - 17-Feb-2007 at 15:21
Back to Top
mamikon View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 16-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2200
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 15:38
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7199779511612239455

a more objective (you know, without all those Turkish state historians), 3 clips down from the "documentary" you posted. I think this was part of Time Europe magazine

Edited by mamikon - 17-Feb-2007 at 15:42
Back to Top
bg_turk View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2347
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 16:22
Originally posted by mamikon

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7199779511612239455
a more objective (you know, without all those Turkish state historians), 3 clips down from the "documentary" you posted. I think this was part of Time Europe magazine


If all Armenians in Anatolia were annihilated, who are then the 4 million in the Armenian diaspora worldwide?

The truth of the matter is that a substantial majority of deportees survived, only a fraction died, and did so mostly because of hunger, epidemics and disease (as the documentary you posted admits). The intention was never to annihilate Armenians, therefore it was not a genocide, and no amount of nauseating propaganda will change that historical reality.


Edited by bg_turk - 17-Feb-2007 at 16:23
Back to Top
mamikon View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 16-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2200
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 16:55
Originally posted by bg_turk

If all Armenians in Anatolia were annihilated, who are then the 4 million in the Armenian diaspora worldwide?


why is it 10 million Turks can become 80 million, but 2 million Armenians cant become 8

Originally posted by bg_turk

The truth of the matter is that a substantial majority of deportees survived, only a fraction died, and did so mostly because of hunger, epidemics and disease (as the documentary you posted admits).


Well, if you were ordered to walk for 2 months through a desert with minimal nourishement, poor (albeit no) sanitation, with constant harrasement from the gendermes, I am sure you would get sick, and die too (oh wait, you are a guy, so you would have been taken out and shot 10 miles from your village, too bad)

majority deportees survived? you copied this straight from the video you posted.

Originally posted by bg_Turk

]The intention was never to annihilate Armenians, therefore it was not a genocide, and no amount of nauseating propaganda will change that historical reality.


So what WAS their intention. WHY would you force 5 year old children to march through a desert. Exactly what harm could come from them. And why would you do this in almost every single Armenian village?

what kind of logic is this?

maybe the Holocaust wasnt intentional...jee, I wonder what would happen if I put people in a gas chamber



Edited by mamikon - 17-Feb-2007 at 16:57
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.