In my views and my studys i belief thier was a genocide carried out by the turks agianst thier christian citizens.  The turks wiped out more then 1.5 Million Armenians, 750,000 Assyrians and last but not least 500,000 Greeks who were all inocently killed without fighting back. Many more were killed who actully defended them selfs but thier numbers are not included in the genocidle count.

I am happy this opened since another one similar was shut down for no real reason..

No there was not a genocide in 1915.

Assyrian guy put a number of 750.000 Assyrian death toll. Very interesting indeed. But more interestingly our Russian forumer claim that there is a Russian genocide too. (Or was it a joke?).

By saying "imaginary liberation war" you have shown your intellectual and fatism capacity. Being defeated and forced to swim in Agean Sea may hurt your national pride but we cannot do anything for you. We are not psycholog to heal your social disease. 

Was Greek army in Anatolia an imaginary army? Or were they poor villagers or peaceful traders conscripts?

Poor guy......

That's the funniest thing i ever heard.The armenian population was 1.3 million!And if there was a genocide of million people they would need dozers and stuff to build massive graves.They didn't have that so in that case every house had to have a grave of 10-30 people

Greeks?

Without fighting back?

Dark one.My relative was killed too.So i looked up a mass of detailed info and found out that there was a civil war between armenians and Turks.Both sides killed

And for the greek murders:

QWhen the greeks attcked Izmir they commited huge crimes.I have a witnnes on that.They killed pregnant women,stabbed babies and raped dead bodies.The witness(Nazan S.)told me about a woman that didn't want to be raped and commited suicide.Later they found hr body and......

Instead of the fabrications of style " One witness told me..." lets see what the experts are saying.

One of the most accurate estimation of full scale ethnic cleansing occured from Turks back then, has been done from J.R Rummel.

J. R. Rummel is one of the top-class political scientists in the world with a major interest in political violence and statistics. His works in world wide democides are considered from the best of its kind.

Statistics Of
Turkey's Democide
Estimates, Calculations, And Sources http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM#* - ^*

By R.J. Rummel

The infamy of executing this century's first full scale ethnic cleansing belongs to Turkey's Young Turk government during World War I. In their highest councils Turkish leaders decided to exterminate every Armenian in the country, whether a front-line soldier or pregnant woman, famous professor or high bishop, important businessman or ardent patriot. All 2,000,000 of them.

To be continued..

Considering next the World War I period, and the resulting war-dead (lines 76 to 90), a problem is separating from the estimates those for civilian war-dead, versus those including massacres and genocide. I could include confidently only one estimate for war-dead (line 86). When this is added to the probable 400,000 consolidated battle-dead (line 83), we find that some 650,000 Turkish soldiers and civilians died from the war (line 90).

Of greatest importance are the estimates of the Young Turk's genocide during the war. In the table I organize these into several categories. The first gives and consolidates those of the number deported (lines 93 to 102), and then also does this for the estimates of their toll (lines 104 to 121). I calculate an alternative total (on line 122) from the estimated percentages of those killed during deportation (notes on lines 105, 116, and 118) and the consolidated number deported (line 102). From these two alternative ranges (lines 121 and 122) I determine a total (line 123) in the usual way.

Next I list the estimates of Armenians that the Turks killed (lines 125 to 146). These I classified by soldier or civilian and by place killed and then consolidate or sum them (lines 131, 138, and 147), and total them overall (line 148).

Finally, the table presents the many estimates of the overall genocide's toll during 1915 to 1918 (lines 151 to 186). These I order from the lowest to the highest figures. As can be seen, they vary from a low of 300,000 (lines 151 to 152) to a high of 2,000,000 (line 163), which anchor the consolidated range (line 187). Consistent with the estimates 1,000,000 dead (see lines 157, 160, 164 to 178) appears the most prudent mid-value.

Next I independently check this consolidation against the sum (line 188) of those Armenians murdered during the deportations (line 123) and otherwise (line 148). As can be seen, the alternative totals (lines 187 and 188) are divergent, the mid-value alone being off by 808,000 dead. To compensate for this, I give the final genocide range (line 189) the lowest low and highest high of the two and average their mid-values. Thus, given all these estimates, the Turks murdered most likely 300,000 to 2,686,000 Armenians, probably 1,404,000 of them. A critical question is then whether this is consistent with the Armenian population, itself a contentious estimate. This I will later consider.

Not only did the Turks murder Armenians, but Greeks as well. Estimates of this are far fewer (lines 201 to 203), but we do have assessments of those deported (lines 193 to 197) from which to calculate the possible toll (line 198). The actual percentages from which I make this calculation reflect the relevant historical bits and pieces in the sources. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM#6 - ⁶ Combining this calculation and the sum of the estimates (line 204) suggest a likely genocide of 84,000 Greeks.

Sometimes the sources would refer to Christians killed (lines 207 to 207b), which most likely included Armenians or Greeks, but could also refer to the relatively small number of Turkey's Nestorians, Bulgarians, or Cossacks. These are totaled separately (line 208).

During the war the British navy blockaded Turkey, including the Turkish Levant. No food was allowed in by sea. The resulting famine in Lebanon and Syria (with consequences shown on lines 208a to 20) would not have become as deadly as it did had not the Turks commandeered available food supplies and refused to help the starving. As a result they bear the greater responsibility for the famine, which I calculate as probably around 75 percent of the total dead (line 208i).

The Young Turks did not confine their democide to Turkey. When they invaded Caucasia, their soldiers massacred Armenians and other Christians and also encouraged Kurds and Azerbaijanis to do so. Overall, Turks possibly killed (lines 212 to 220) 10,000 Christians, most of them probably Armenians--there were very few Greeks in Caucasia. (It is difficult to keep this number in perspective when other figures are in the tens and hundreds of thousands; but imagine the contemporary enraged and horrified outcry were the highest American, British, or French authorities to be responsible for the murder of 10,000 Moslem citizens--the responsible government would fall or be impeached.) For this genocide the table also lists some specific estimates (lines 224 to 227). These I consolidated (line 228) and then add (line 229) an assumed 4/5ths of the Christian dead determined above. The table then sums the two ranges (lines 228 and 229) to get the genocide (line 232).

As noted, the Turks also massacred Nestorian Christians, for which there are also a few estimates (lines 235 to 238). From my assumption that 1/5th of the Christian dead previously determined (line 218) were Nestorians, I calculate a final genocide (line 241).

Only one estimate of Moslem Azerbaijanis killed is available (line 244).

I now can calculate the overall foreign genocide (line 249), which probably ranges from 105,000 to 157,000 killed, most likely 131,000.

Turkey's Armenians also massacred Moslems. Claims that this may have amounted to at least 1,000,000, or even 1,500,000 Moslem dead (table http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB5.1A.GIF - 5.1A , lines 106b and 106e) however, have no substantiation beyond former Young Turks or their officials. Had the Armenians indeed massacred even half this number, the Young Turks surely would have given it wide publicity, photographs and all. They had no better way to counter sympathy for the Armenians they were killing. In any case foreign newsmen and diplomats in the country surely would have noted the massacres. Moreover, the Turkish statistician Ahmed Emin, who was hardly sympathetic to the Armenians, gave (table http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB5.1A.GIF - 5.1A , lines 105 and 106f) an upper limit of 40,000 Moslem Turks killed by Armenians (including possibly by Armenian-Russian troops) in the area occupied by Russian forces after the Russian Revolution in 1917, and at least 128,000 for the 1914-1915 period. http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM#7 - ⁷ Given the other estimates and the overall populations involved, I estimate that from 128,000 to 600,000 Moslem Turks and Kurds were killed. Since this was done by Armenian irregulars serving with Russian forces, I split responsibility for these deaths in Turkey between the Russians and Armenians, and show in Table http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB5.1A.GIF - 5.1A (line 255) the Armenian half--probably 75,000 murdered.

Many Moslem Turks also died from famine and disease during the war (lines 258 to 262). Most estimates mix up the toll from these causes with the number killed from combat. To compensate for this, I first consolidate the estimates (line 263) and then subtract the war-dead previously determined (line 264) to get an overall famine and disease range (line 265).

Finally, I can bring together these various totals (lines 268 to 271). Domestically and during their foreign military actions and occupations, the Young Turks probably murdered at least 743,000 and perhaps as many as 3,204,000 people, probably 1,883,000 Armenians, Greeks, Nestorians, and other Christians (line 273). Altogether, likely 3,947,000 died or were killed during the war (line 274). When I add this to the toll I will determine below for the next period, we will be able to test the overall total against the population deficit and unnatural death).

The next division in the table covers the interregnum period after WWI. Turkish Nationalist forces fought three wars during this time (lines 279 to 303). Estimates for the Greco-Turkish war give two ways of determining war-dead (lines 302 and 303), from which I select a final war-dead range in the usual way.

There is one incredibly low estimate of the overall war and massacre dead for this period (line 307) and a reasonable one for the Muslim male war-dead from 1914 to this period's end (line 308). From the latter I subtract the WWI war-dead to get an estimate of the post-WWI war-dead (line 310). Since it largely excludes female dead, this is a conservative result. Nonetheless, as can be seen by comparing this to the war-dead sum for the three wars (lines 311), the mid-value and high are significantly greater than the sum. Departing from the usual approach because of the incredible low of zero (on line 310--this implies that less than 500 were killed), I take the low of line 311 for the low (line 312), the high of line 310 for the high, and average the two mid-values.

Following this I list the estimates, consolidations, and sums for the Nationalist genocide of Christians (lines 315 to 329), Armenians (lines 334 to 359), and Greeks (lines 366 to 375). Regarding the Christian genocide, one estimate (line 322) of those killed in Izmir could refer to the former city of Smyrna, or to the Izmir peninsula next to Smyrna. I cannot determine which is meant (the estimate is only cited in Gross http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM#8 - ⁸ and his source is in Armenian), and I thus conservatively assumed that it largely duplicates those already given for Smyrna. Virtually all the total domestic Christian democide (line 329) took place in the Aydin Administrative District, of which Smyrna was a part. Since almost all the Christians in this area were either Greeks or Armenians, and in 1914 Greeks made up 94 percent of the total of the two, http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM#9 - ⁹ we then can assume that the Armenians were 6 percent (line 330) and Greeks 94 percent (line 331) of the Christian toll. I later employ the resulting ranges (lines 353 and 373) to determine the total number of these two groups that the Turks killed.

For the Armenian toll (lines 334 to 359) I include the refugee deaths (lines 358 to 359). Armenia, which became temporarily independent during this period, and adjacent areas contained hundreds of thousands who had fled the Young Turk genocide. Within a few years they also had to flee before the genocidal massacres of invading Nationalist forces and their Kurdish-Azerbaijani tribal allies. These refugees died from famine, disease, and exposure--deaths surely the responsibility of the Nationalists. The sources give one estimate of these deaths (line 358), and based on this and the estimates of the number of refugees I consolidate elsewhere in the table (lines 509 to 522), I estimate the range of deaths shown (line 359). To display the effect of these assumed refugee deaths on the Armenian genocide total, I sum the deaths for non-refugees (line 362) and then list one estimate of the overall number of returning deportees killed in Turkey (line 362a), which understandably is much lower than the non-refugee sum. Note, however, that it is the same as the low for those killed in Turkish Armenia (line 350). Adding the lowest of line 362a and 350 to the low for refugee deaths (line 359) gives us the low for the Armenian genocide (line 363), and summing all the estimates, including refugees, gives us the mid-value and high. Most likely then, in total during this period the Turks killed from 325,000 to 545,000, most probably 440,000 of their Armenians--these along with those murdered during WWI.

In the table I next list partial estimates (lines 367 to 374) for the genocide of the Greek. There is one calculation of Turkey's Anatolian (Asia Minor) Greek population deficit during 1912 to 1922, taking into account emigration and deportation from Turkey (line 378). Subtracting from this the WWI Greek genocide I calculated from previous totals (line 379), I get the range of post-WWI losses shown (line 380). This then provides an alternative to the sum of the specific mortality estimates (line 381). From these alternative ranges I calculated a final Greek genocide for this period in the usual way (line 382). Most probably, the Nationalists Turks murdered 264,000 Greeks; 703,000 Greeks and Armenians together in the post-WWI years (line 385).

Nationalist forces also committed similar genocide during their invasion of Armenia, particularly in Kars and Alexandropol (lines 389 to 398). Many Armenians also died during flight to escape the massacres and tribal Kurdish and Azerbaijanis allies (lines 405 to 408). One source provides the overall Armenian toll in Caucasia from 1914 to 1922 (line 412), which gives us a total for this period (line 414) when we subtract those killed during WWI (line 413). There is one estimate we can compare to this result (line 415), which we find within its range. I also repeat the result (line 418) so that we may compare it to an alternative total (line 419) that I summed from the previous consolidations. The two ranges differ enough for me to calculate a final genocide toll (line 420) as for previous such cases.

The Greek Army before and during the Greco-Turkish War massacred Moslem Turks or permitted such to take place by Greek villagers. I show some specific estimates of the democide in the table (lines 424 to 427). From these and material in the sources, particularly Housepian http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM#10 - ¹⁰ and Toynbee http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM#11 - ¹¹ , I believe a minimum number of killed is 15,000 (line 428).

Finally, I pull together the various totals (lines 431 to 434). In this post-WWI period the Turks killed overall probably 878,000 Armenians and Greeks, or at least 665,000 and even perhaps as many as 1,156,000 in total (line 435). Including war-dead, 1,031,000 Turkish citizens or those under Turkey's rule or fleeing from it died during these years (line 436).

The table's next section in Table http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB5.1B.GIF - 5.1B sums up the various sub-totals and compares them to overall estimates in the sources and demographic calculations. The first of these concerns the Armenian domestic genocide (lines 441 to 449). I consolidate these (line 450) and compare the result to one population based calculation of the Anatolian Armenian dead (line 451--relatively few lived in European Turkey) 1912 to 1922. Clearly this is way below that of the various estimates. Moreover, it also is under the low of the Armenian toll that I calculated in the previous sections (line 452), even when I omit refugee deaths (line 453). This suggests caution in accepting the totals.

To further check on this, I did my own demographic analysis and calculated the likely Armenian unnatural deaths (line 454--see lines 601 to 606). Given that this is calculated independently from the estimate-based totals, the range is remarkably close to that for the relevant non-refugee total (compare line 454 to line 453). Accordingly, I accept the totals previously calculated and restate their sum (line 455).

To get the foreign genocide of Armenians in Caucasia, I sum the previous totals (line 458) and compared the range to that of the Armenian-Russian population deficit (line 459) I calculated separately (lines 608 to 611). As can be seen, the summed range (line 458) is conservative and therefore acceptable (line 460), even keeping in mind that Armenians were also killed in WWI, in the Turkish invasion of Caucasia, in Armenia's war against Georgia, and in military conflict with Azerbaijan. Moreover, thousands probably immigrated from the region.

Next I add together the Turkey and Russian Armenian population deficits and compared them to the sum of domestic and foreign Armenian genocide (lines 463 to 466). The result is acceptable: the low is below that of the combined deficit, the high is close, and the mid-value is also close and below that of the deficit. This helps further establish confidence in the figures determined here.

As to the genocide of the Greeks, I sum the previous totals I calculated (line 470) and show beneath it a partial estimate of the Greek dead (line 471) and the Anatolian Greek population deficit (line 472). The deficit is well within the range that I independently calculated and I therefore adopt it as the final genocide (line 473).

After summing or displaying various totals (lines 475 to 485f), I show Tashjian's estimate of those killed or deported 1822-1922 (line 486). Now, as noted in Death By Government, the Ottoman Empire committed numerous genocidal massacres of Armenians in the previous century, particularly in 1894 to 1896 when Turks murdered perhaps 100,000 to 300,000 Armenians. Were I to add to this 100,000 for other pre-1900 genocides, and then reduce Tashjian's estimate by the sum to compensate for these deaths, and by another 10-15 percent to account for those surviving deportation (for the sources of the percentages, see line 122 of Table http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB5.1A.GIF - 5.1A ), the resulting figure (line 486a) would still be within the range calculated here. Adding all the sub-totals (line 488) gives us the grand total genocide in turkey or committed by it: 1,428,000 to 4,380,000 murdered, likely 2,781,000 Armenians, Greeks, Nestorians, Moslem Turks, Azerbaijanis, and others.

Besides the tests of the genocide totals shown above (lines 451, 454, 459, 466, 471, 472, 486), we can also check the table's total domestic dead. The table first lists and consolidated three independent, overall dead estimates or calculations for the years 1912 (or 1914) to 1922 (lines 492 to 495), and then presents together the various totals (lines 498 to 501a) that I previously determined and sums them (line 502) to get the total dead, and next the overall domestic dead (line 503). Beneath this I show for comparison the consolidation of the estimated domestic dead (line 504). The comparison is as it should be: the low of line 503 is lower than line 504, the high is higher, and the mid-value is slightly below by about 5 percent. Because of this, there appears no need for me to reconsider the various calculations going into this total.

I next show the estimates and consolidations for refugees from Turkey's wars and genocides (lines 510 to 537). There is nothing unusual in their presentation and their consolidations figure in the calculation of population deficits and unnatural deaths (e.g., line 606).

In order to calculate population deficits I give population estimates and consolidations for Turkey as a whole (lines 542 to 551) in 1914 to 1915. To determine a population deficit later, I also calculate the population for 1920 to 1921 (line 552) from the minority population estimates given next for Armenians (lines 556 to 596), Greeks (lines 615 to 625), and Muslims (lines 628 to 630). Moreover, I had to calculate an average population controlled by the Nationalists (line 553) for later use in the genocide ratios (lines 640 to 641). I could not find any information on what this proportion was, even for a particular year, and therefore from narrative histories of this period http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP5.HTM#12 - ¹² I estimated it to vary from 40 to 75 percent, with a mid-value of 50 percent, taking into account that French and Greek forces occupied a portion of south-western Anatolia during this period.

The table lays out the calculation of the Armenian population deficit and unnatural deaths (lines 600 to 611). From the consolidated estimates of the Armenian's population growth rate, I projected what the population should have been in 1923 (line 604) and subtracted from it the actual population (line 589). Subtracting from this the number of refugees that escaped the genocide (line 522--this is conservative, since many refugees returned to later be killed by the Nationalists) gives an estimate of those Armenians who died unnatural deaths (line 606). I did the same for Armenian-Russians (lines 609 to 610). I also sum the two ranges of unnatural deaths (lines 606 and 610) to get the number of unnatural deaths for Russia and Turkey's Armenians together (line 611). And I also give or calculate the population deficits for the Greeks and Muslims (lines 626 and 632).

Finally, in the remainder of the table I calculate the democide rates for the Young Turks (lines 636 to 637) and the local Nationalists (lines 640 to 641). Per year the Young Turks killed almost 1 out of every 100 of their population (line 637). The Nationalists, however, were far more vicious. For the population they controlled they murdered 1 out of every 38 per year (line 641). 

Here is the table with estimates, sources and calculations.

Source: http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB5.1B.GIF - http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.TAB5.1B.GIF

hawaiii.edu?And rj Rummel seems like a pure turk that has counted and has acces to every population count.Impressive.....

And like i said no matter how much you meddle with numbers you can't disprove the need for graves

Experts do not have supernatural powers.They count on witnesses and documents.like R.J Rummel will make turkey pay!

So...our Turks co-forumers , r fed up with Armenians , Americans and Greeks , speaking about the Armenian genocide....

So , lets hear what a Turkish scholar .....

THE GENOCIDE OF THE ARMENIANS
AND THE SILENCE OF THE TURKS.
Taner Akcam ( Turkish Scholar)

The genocide of the Armenians has been a taboo topic for us Turks for eighty years. The eighty-year-old silence has produced such tension and a mountain of prejudice, not only between the two societies , i.e. the Turkish and the Armenian, but also in the academic world, that even the development of a common language in which the subject could be discussed is becoming a serious problem. For this reason, the fact that I, a Turkish historian, am critically approaching this subject for the first time is more important perhaps than the content of my speech. There is not only the risk that I may be accused of treason in Turkey, but also the risk that you may want to perceive me on this podium as the corporate representative of the Turks, expecting from me an account for the Turkish stance of the last eighty years. Conscious of all these problems, I ask you to listen to me, a historian who is about to speak to you solely in his own name.

My purpose is neither to hide behind the "pretext of having been born too late" nor to assert that I do not have my share in the "collective responsibility." Quite the contrary, independent of what position I personally may take, I am aware that I am a member of that collectivity which produced "the perpetrators" (or that I belong to a group of perpetrators). Precisely for this reason, I would like to explore the topic fully conscious of the fact as to what it means in this sense "being a member" and "bearing collective responsibility." It is easier for our generation, which cannot be held directly responsible for the events, to reflect upon the past and to define it as an essential element in our collective identity. This "haughtiness," this vantage of my generation perhaps could help to finally achieve a breakthrough.

On the other hand, the meaning of the passage of eighty years cannot be underestimated. It is incumbent upon us to "remember" a reality that was treated in our history as a non-event, one which was simply denied, to "recover it in our consciousness," and to assign to it the proper significance, But what shape can or will this recovered memory take? What does it mean "to incorporate the fact of the genocide in our historical present, and what will be the result? A start can only be made by way of discovering the meaning of belonging to the perpetrator group and of bearing collective responsibility. We have these and many other questions to answer.

At this juncture I would like to explain just how the Turks view or do not view the Armenian Genocide and how they have made it a taboo topic. The question to which I am seeking an answer may be formulated in the following way: why is it that a calm discussion of the subject is not possible, even if we proceed from the premise that there has not been any occurrence of genocide? Wherein lie the reasons for reacting to the topic with an agitation rarely observed elsewhere? I do not claim that I can answer this question in all its aspects. I will merely list some points that I consider meriting discussion.

I am of the opinion that the formation of the Turkish national identity played a decisive role not only in the decision to commit genocide but also in the current denial and tabooing of it. It is therefore indispensable that I first delve into the peculiarities of the origin of national identity and some of the related factors. I proceed from a concept that the well-known sociologist Norbert Elias has framed. He spoke of "national habitat,"' linking it firmly with the process of the formation of nation states. The concept epitomizes some of the peculiarities which were formed during the creation of a nation state. These peculiarities reflect a common mentality, an ethos permeating the psyche of the entire nation and help to explain why in certain situations general patterns of behavior emerge. In other words, a direct link is being established between national identity and the rise of a nation state, at the same time recognizing the central role of the nation state in the evolution of national identity.

1. UNDERSTANDING THE PERPETRATORS AND THEIR VIEWS

Generally speaking, we are inclined to characterize as "inhuman" acts that we consider morally reprehensible because of their dreadfulness. The revulsion we feel against these acts obviates any need to understand them. This attitude is well suited to engender a distance between us and the act in question, thereby preventing us from identifying with "what is bad." We can perhaps assuage our consciences by this means, but we must recognize that this does not help us to achieve "understanding" or to "evaluate" adequately. Adomo called our attention to the fact that beyond a moralistic attitude, the need "to understand" is absolutely necessary. He offered the following observation:

In the final analysis, the issue concerns the manner in which the past is recalled and integrated into the present; whether we stop at mere reproach or resolutely withstand the sense of horror in order to be able to comprehend even the incomprehensible.

On the other hand, however, difficulties likewise arise with the so-called scientific objective approach. In the first place, the scientific language that can be defined as a "dictionary intended for non-humans," because of its capability to objectify the events, is handicapped in terms of establishing a distance from the language used by the "perpetrators." Every attempt "to understand" has the potential of relativizing and justifying the act of perpetration. We must see to it that every historical reconstruction that "wants to know how events have transpired," as Walter Benjamin maintained, uses the method of introspection when analysing the perpetrator, and consequently becomes guilty of moral indolence.'

For this reason, perhaps it is better not to create a common perspective while analysing a phenomenon such as genocide, but to rely instead on two different perspectives, the perspective of the "perpetrators" and that of the "victims."' These two distinct perspectives bring to the fore distinctly different material for the reconstruction of historical events. The works that have been produced up to today about the genocide of the Armenians have essentially emanated from the perspective of the "victim group." My attempt in this regard can be understood as an investigation of the subject from the viewpoint of the "perpetrator group," a venture that could not be undertaken until now because of the past history of denial and tabooing.

The most important point in which the "perpetrator perspective" differs from the "victim perspective" is the predominance of the factor of historical continuity. In this perpetrator perspective, genocide appears neither as an "unintended accident" nor as an "aberrant phenomenon" free from the exertions of a cultural/ political background, and not likely to repeat itself. This argument does not suggest that events such as genocide are the inevitable result of the sway of certain cultural/political conditions. Certainly, genocide is afforded only by virtue of the existence of a set of very specific conditions that coincide in a special way with the dynamics of a compatible cultural/political background. By sensitizing ourselves to their significance we can better understand and define those special conditions that lead to genocide and determine the extent to which those factors that constitute the above-mentioned cultural/political background are still in effect today.

While I maintain that past events have shaped Turkish national identity and do even determine our present behavioral patterns, others may object that this "has nothing to do with modem times," because the events took place in a "past era." Thus it can be argued from a modem viewpoint that the consequences of the events of a hundred years ago have no great significance insofar as their relationship to the marks they left behind is concerned. Instead of initiating a discussion on these ideas, I would like to limit myself to adducing here a statement by Norbert Elias:

It is always amazing to ascertain the remarkable degree of persistence with which certain patterns of thinking, feeling and acting can endure in one and the same society over many generations, even though the members of that society do make specific adjustments to changing circumstances.'

This is also my thesis with reference to Turkey. If, for example, we examine the arguments that are being advanced with regard to the Kurds, we can recognize evidence of the surprising degree to which the state of mind, the model of thinking that dominated in the decade after 1 91 0, persists today. I do not want to be understood as saying that there is a simple "danger of recurrence." But before we take shelter behind such an easing of the emotions, we would do well to inquire whether the social conditions and the mentality from which the act of genocide has sprung still persists. This is the only way in which we can understand and combat the presence of a barbaric potential, however in different forms, at the core of societies.

If in given societies certain destructive potentials exist as peculiar ingredients of national identity, as a type of mentality, then we must make a conscious effort toward reckoning with these. One of the most important ways to confront a mentality that directs, to a great extent, subconscious processes entailing, almost automatically, spontaneous reactions, consists of bringing this mentality to the conscious level. This is the method that Adomo called "confronting the subject."' If you want "to understand" and analyze collectively committed cruelty, and you wish to prevent the repetition of such events, then you will not find a solution if you direct your attention primarily to the group of "victims." Attention must be directed to the "perpetrators" in order to uncover a series of "conscious or unconscious" mechanisms which underlie their actions, for it is the activation of these mechanisms that makes these people "perpetrators."

Following this general introduction, I would like to list below, in the form of a thesis, a few fundamental features of Turkish national identity that have played an important role in the decision to commit genocide as well as in the subsequent tabooing of the topic.

To be continued..

11. SOME CHARACTERISTIC TRAITS OF TURKISH
NATIONAL IDENTITY

1. Compared to France, Germany and other European states, Turkish nationalism and Turkish national consciousness entered the historical stage very late. There are different reasons for this belatedness. Special significance attaches to the influence of Islam and the cosmopolitan character of the Ottoman Empire. Because of its late development, Turkish nationalism was strongly influenced by Social Darwinism and racist ideologies. This intellectual background of Turkish nationalism, combined with the urgent need to catch up, made that nationalism aggressive.

2. Turkish nationalism arose as a reaction to the experience of constant humiliations. Turkish national sentiment constantly suffered from the effects of an inferiority complex. Various factors played a role in this. Critical, however, was the fact that the Turks not only were continuously humiliated and loathed, but they were conscious of this humiliation. The Turkish political elite had clear ideas as to what people thought of the Turks, and this knowledge became an important determining factor for their actions. One of the consequences was a strong "sense of being misunderstood" and a fear of being isolated. A nation that was humiliated in this way in the past and is also conscious of that experience, will try to prove its own greatness and importance. As Elias noted:

The established feeling of inferiority ... and the resentment, the sensitivity to the humiliation, often connected with it was countered [and compensated] with the preoccupation with its own greatness and power.

The result is a penchant for power.

3. Turkish national identity evolved in conditions in which the fear of annihilation and dissolution was omnipresent. The process of disintegration afflicting the Ottoman Empire was of such gravity that it produced a traumatic anxiety among Ottoman leaders. The fear of annihilation and disintegration, fed by a deep consciousness of weakness and helplessness, is "the midwife" of Turkish national identity.

One result of this mental attitude was to reflect upon the possible reasons, persons and circles of political operatives that could have caused these negative developments. Seen through the prism of Turkish national identity, the Christian minorities were viewed as one of the primary factors responsible for the decline and disintegration of the Ottoman Empire. The Christians were, therefore, stigmatized as enemies. This enmity was rendered all the more intense by the fact that some imperial powers used the Christians as a lever in order to realize the partition of the empire consistent with their own power interests. The Christians hereby obtained certain economic and social privileges.

Another factor which created an image of hostile Christians was the role Islam played in this connection. On the basis of Islamic culture and its system of laws, the Moslems have always considered the Christians as an inferior minority group and have never viewed them as being equal to themselves. Thus the Christians did not enjoy equality in the Ottoman Empire. But during the stages marking the disintegration of the Empire, the reforms and economic privileges led to a change in the position of the Christians. The Turks gradually lost their social status as a superior class. They could not reconcile themselves to the idea of equality with the Christians by way of reforms, or that a Christian minority should attain a better economic position than they. This loss of status led to the rise of hate-revenge sentiments against those who were seen as responsible. The Moslems did not "peacefully" accept their steadily weakening position. This awareness of loss of status played a significant role in the enactment of the massacre against Christians, and the history of the nineteenth century provides much evidence for this.

4. The psychology of those found on the brink of disaster and dying a slow death was shaped through two peculiarities. First, the rebellious Christian minorities lived in the fringe areas of the empire. Continual losses of territory on the fringes of the empire had created among the Turks a siege mentality, that is, the feeling that the empire was encircled by enemies. Elias points out certain features in the development of the German nation state, the incidence of which may be observed in the development of the Turkish nation state also:

The process of state development for the Germans was deeply influenced by their position as a central block in the configuration of those three ethnic blocks. The Latinized and Slavic groups again and again felt threatened by the populous German state. Representatives of the nascent German state simultaneously felt threatened from different sides. All parties quite recklessly availed themselves of every opportunity for expansion that presented itself. The pressures stemming from this configuration of states in the center led to a continuous crumbling of the peripheral regions that separated from the German union of states and established themselves as independent states.

Second, this "crumbling" of the fringes was not the result of the military defeats of the Ottoman leadership. The insurrections of the minorities could almost always be crushed. It was pressure from abroad that forced the Ottomans to make political concessions to those they defeated militarily. Thus a nation and its elite, who were accustomed to dominating others over the course of centuries, were shocked by the ability of others to toy with and degrade their honor. One way that nations under pressure from above and reduced to whipping boys tend to react is by way of avenging themselves against those they hold responsible for their misfortune. Elias captures the essence of this dynamic when he writes:

A state's relative weakness vis-a-vis other states creates specific crises for the people involved. They suffer physical insecurity, doubt their own worth, feel degraded and disgraced and are prone to indulging in wishful thinking about revenge that they would like to inflict on those they hold responsible for the situation.

5. Another characteristic of Turkish national identity is the fact that the Turks consider themselves the actual, true victims of history. "We are the nation upon whom actual injustice was inflicted. We are a persecuted nation, but no one recognizes that. We are treated as the "'stepchildren' of history." Two factors have contributed to the evolution of this mental attitude. First, throughout the nineteenth century, the national wars of liberation of Christian groups in the Balkans (Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians, etc.) were experienced as massacres of the Moslem population. Secondly, Europe paid no attention to the massacres of Moslems, although European nations were highly sensitive to the massacres of Christians and utilized every occasion to interfere. It is not an exaggeration to say that in the minds of the Moslems had entrenched itself the firm belief that the entire world was poised against them; they considered themselves the victims of history.

6. Two essential factors are responsible for the difficulty of the Turks in coping with this sentiment of collapse and worthlessness. First, there was the deeply rooted belief in the superiority of the Turks over other peoples and the right of Turks to dominate them. There is still talk today of erecting a world empire and of dominating other nations as signposts of Turkish superiority and historical uniqueness. The most important reason for this attitude lies in the fact that the Turks, as a ruling stratum, (even though they themselves were not conscious of their Turkishness), and under the influence of Islamic thought, identified themselves with Islam and felt superior to the empire's other religious groups. The idea of the " ruling nation" (Millet-I Hakime) dominated the thinking of the Ottoman-Turkish ruling elite. At the same time, the Ottoman-Turkish ruling elite was overwhelmed by the greatness of its own past. There was really an enormous gap between the sense of belonging to an empire that ruled over three continents and the current situation, in which national honor was being dragged through the mud. The conflict between these past and present realities intensified the need to 1) reject the present, 2) return to the old days of imperial glory, and 3) punish those who were accused of being responsible for the current malaise.

It is possible, even necessary, to introduce here additional factors for consideration. The decision to commit genocide can be understood only against this background, but I do not claim that the genocide is a direct result of this frame of mind. Needed were additional conditions which, however, could lead to genocide only in this context. One of these conditions was that the Turks were the heirs to a sublime and glorious past but were steadily growing weak and were suffering from the ills of the exaltation of their past. The demise was unavoidable in the event of a war. The decision for genocide arose within the purview of this assumption.

Generally speaking, nations that have a "great and glorious" past live in the shadow of and under the burden of this past. When such nations lapse into a position of weakness, when they are repeatedly wounded in their sense of honor and degraded and have a premonition of ruination, the burden of the awareness of the past, its ballast, becomes even greater. The stronger the feeling of loss of worth and the level of humiliation, the more forcefully is the past idealized and its recovery made a priority. Depending on how strongly it is believed that the glorious past could become the ideal future, the potential for violent action, which is deemed to be needed, will be increased.

A wounded national pride, a national identity unsure of itself, and a national ideal looking backwards to the past were the cumulative effects of the troubled German history (which can also be read as OttomanTurkish history-T.A.), which in the long-run is punctuated by defeats and an ensuing loss of power. The vision of a greater past projected into the future provided a fertile environment for the rise of especially vicious forms of behavior and credos.

As a rule, the desire to apply power against those who are held responsible for the loss of strength and power, humiliation, and the loss of worth is the result of these developments. Parallel to this debacle and loss of self-worth, one has to consider other occurrences. Accelerated disintegration and fragmentation of the national state give rise to feelings of fear of "annihilation"," siege by enemies," and "a war of naked survival fought with one's back to the wall" in the later stages of this process. When the situation is seen as increasingly hopeless, those in power who cannot prevent this decline become increasingly aggressive. When the national elite sees it as less and less probable that a great and ideal future can be created and that the goal appears in jeopardy and the process of decline is unstoppable, the countermeasures meant to stop this process acquire a more and more barbaric character. The resort to genocide stands at the apex of this process. If this process of decline is erratic, and now and then hopes spring up that one can find a way out, the end result promises to be even more painful. When a nation has a premonition of downfall it will never concede that it is at the edge of such a downfall and will stubbornly focus on the dream of a great future. In such a situation, the dreams become even more unrealizable.

The force of the downward trend was reflected in the extreme brutality of the means with which they tried to stop it .... With their backs to the wall, the defenders easily become the destroyers of civilization. They easily become barbarians.

This was the history of the Turks before World War 1. PanTuranism and the ideal of a great Turkish empire became stronger as the disintegration and partition of the empire progressed and the situation grew more hopeless. While the quest for a collective identity that would hold the empire together proved abortive, the leadership turned farther toward the East, to regions and peoples where the ideal of empire could be realized. The Turks perceived the First World War as an historical opportunity. Those who had suffered defeat and lived through a painful process, including degradation and loss of honor, for years, now saw the looming on the horizon of an historical opportunity to stop the decline from which there was otherwise no escape. The Turks' bad fortune, it was thought, could now be reversed and the disintegration stopped. The great Turkish empire could be recreated; not on all the same lands, but on another expanse inhabited by loyal Turkish people worthy of trust. It was as if the clouds had unexpectedly lifted to reveal the contours of a glorious sun.

The rapid succession of military debacles the Turks suffered during the first months of World War I had a very sobering effect however. Especially the defeat at Sarikamish, near Kars, in the Anatolian east, in December 1914 and January 1915, burst the Turanian-lslamic dream like a soap bubble. The Ottoman-Turkish rulers could, however, assign blame and identify those responsible for this defeat. The Turks had not really lost; they had been betrayed. Elias' description in the German context is apt here: "[The defeat] had been caused by cunning deception, by criminals, by means of a conspiracy, by a 'stab in the back' administered by internal traitors in the rear of the combat troops." This quote from Elias, though describing the Nazi case, can not only logically be extended to the rationale advanced for the case of the Armenian Genocide, but it can literally be seen as a general accusation levelled against the Armenians in some studies of the genocide.

The sudden loss of an historical opportunity that had resulted from the constant military setbacks, humiliations, and losses of self-worth coincided with another historical event. Enemy forces stood at the entrance of the Dardanelles in March, 1915, and with that, the end of the empire was in sight. Without a doubt, this cast a special dark pallor over the mood of the Ottoman leaders. The land, (Anatolia), so quintessential for the survival of the Turks, would be handed over to the Armenians after the defeat. There had been a corresponding plan for reform even before the war. In order to avert such a possible outcome, the Turks had resort to the most ruthless and daring action. "When a chronic feeling of sinking, of being driven into a corner and encircled by the enemy awakens the belief that only absolute ruthlessness can rescue the vanishing power and glory..." then one does not recoil before the idea of using the most barbaric methods. The dimensions of the sense of loss of self-worth and of meaning, and the fact that the Ottoman Empire stood at the doorstep of defeat led rapidly to desperate actions that were "insane" and reckless. Ottoman-Turkish ruling circles were gripped by the great fear that the end of the empire could become a reality. Their refusal to accept this led to the brutality of the measures they undertook for deliverance. It is probably not incorrect to consider the Armenian Genocide as a product of this frame of mind. The battle for the Dardanelles lasted 259 days and represented a kind of "purgatory."" Death and resurrection were being lived every day. It is probably no accident, however, that the genocide of the Armenians became a compelling issue after the defeat at Sarikamish and at a time when the war for the Dardanelles had become a struggle for life and death.

To be continued..

111. THE REASONS FOR TURKISH SILENCE

Why is discussion of the Arrnenian Genocide a taboo? Why do we Turks have the feeling that lightning has struck our bones whenever the theme is addressed? What are the reasons for this sensitivity and indisposition? At first these reactions appear difficult to comprehend. If it wishes, Turkey can recognize the fact of genocide, at the same time asserting that it had no connection to the act. There is sufficient material available to justify doing this. Turkey maintains that it is a completely new state. Official history propounds the thesis that the war of liberation was also directed against the Ottoman rulers. Moreover, a few members of the Ittihad party that organized the genocide were brought before the court in 1926, and some of them were executed. Even if an explanation along the lines of "it is indeed regrettable, but we did not do it, it was the Ottomans" would meet with strong objections, it could be seen as a normal, expected pattern of response.

Since the possibilities of a discussion free from portentous problems are not being pursued, there must be deeper underlying reasons for the extreme reactions, evasions, and denials. In the form of a preliminary thesis, I would suggest for consideration the following points, fully cognizant of the fact that they are rudimentary points and need to be developed further.

111 A. LACK OF HISTORICAL CONSCIOUSNESS

The first and most important point concerns the lack of historical consciousness in Turkish society. I would characterize amnesia as a social disease in Turkey. The inability to remember refers not only to the period of World War I but also to incidents from the 1860s and 1870s that have long since been forgotten.

To begin with, the founders of the Turkish Republic have severed our connections and bonds to history. Each state that asserts itself as a new entity must provide a basis for its legitimacy and predicate that legitimacy on the historical past. The Kemalist cadres of the republic had serious difficulties with this issue. Islam had consigned everything that was called Turkish to oblivion over the entire course of Ottoman history. For that reason, the rulers of the new republic had no possibility of linking their newly established nation state, which they fashioned on the principle of Turkish national identity, with the Ottomans. They had to find a new Turkish history for themselves. They had to skip backwards six hundred years, past the Ottomans, who had repressed the idea of Turkishness, and who had even degraded it. As a final result, this long time span of history was treated as non-existent.

Through a series of reforms, this time interval, intended or not, was stricken from memory. The Latin alphabet was introduced with the "revolution" of 1928. Thus future generations were barred access to the written testimony of the past. The Turkification of the language was carried out in such an extreme and rapid fashion that the younger generations can no longer understand the language of the 1930s. Consequently, the relationship to the past and to history became circumscribed by the manner in which a few officially approved history professors defined it. It is difficult to conceive of a society that has no access to what has occurred before 1928. Yet it is true that people cannot even read the diaries of their parents and forebears. As a society, we are dependent today on what is etched in our memory, what we have ourselves experienced and what has been conveyed to us by our family members.

111 B. THE REASONS FOR "WANTING TO FORGET"

Lack of historical consciousness is a common problem. However, there are still more direct reasons for fearing the discussion of the Armenian Genocide as if one feared "a monster." I hereby maintain that the "wish to forget history" is directly related to the genocide of the Armenians. In order to be freed from the connotations of the term genocide, the founders of modem Turkey undertook a kind of cleansing as they ushered in the republic. The slow but continuous disintegration of the great empire, the military defeats in wars that continued over the years, the loss of tens of thousands of people, a society whose dignity was scorned along with the constant loss of self-worth, overwhelmed by the imagery of a great history, fantasies about recreating the past, the terminal bursting of these dreams, and the inability to absorb and integrate these numerous contradictions, and ... finally, the genocide: that constitutes a social trauma of major proportions.

As is the case with individuals, so it is also with societies that they experience difficulty in incorporating in their own living history events that produce crises. Mechanisms of blocking out and forgetfulness intrude and encumber the effort to overcome the difficulty. The reason why the republic is described as a new birth, as a zero point, lies in the psychological crises generated by the legacy of the past and the desire to not remember it. The republic believes that the entire dismal image can be suddenly erased and that the Turks can thus be delivered from a nightmare, from an extremely dangerous, fatal illness.

I believe that this frame of mind plays an important role in steering all discussion away from the genocide. To raise the issue is akin to telling someone who was miraculously delivered from a fatal illness that the disease is not really in remission and that he should brace himself for a relapse. Not only do people not want to think of decline, humiliation, and disgrace, but people do not want also to be reminded of them. We like to believe that we have recovered and that we have acquired a new persona. Therefore, the official line is that Turkey emerged from a period of upheaval in history from which "a new personality was created from nothing."

I maintain here that we have not yet recovered, that we have not yet acquired the "new personality that has divested itself of the spell of the old crises," and that as long as we do not talk about the Armenian Genocide, our chances of creating a new "other" remains rather tenuous. As long as the act of perpetration is not consciously accounted for, all peculiarities of this event will live on in the unconscious. If, as Turkey maintains, a decisive turning point really occurred and a completely new element emerged, then there should be a link to the past that would be free of the problems prevalent today. The desperate effort to avoid any discussion about the genocide is the most telling proof that the assertion regarding the rise of a "completely new and other element" is not a valid one. A society, a state does not like to confront an imagery that is at variance with its self imagery, and, as such, is likely destroy its world of fantasies. Herein lies the reason for our sharp reaction to those who call our attention to that reality.

111 C. "WANTING TO FORGET" IS A KIND OF SEQUEL

Another question that must be addressed is what do we expect if we "forget" the genocide or drive its reality into the inner recesses of the unconscious? My suggestion at this point is a kind of "historical quest for the traces." To be sure, it is not just a matter of repressing the memory of a historical period. Through such repression, even the conditions that led to the Armenian Genocide are relegated to the unconscious. However, they are not destroyed, but live on in another form.

The Turks were gripped by powerful impulses of wishful thinking during the years of World War 1. They wanted to free themselves from the shackles of their weak and powerless position, They wanted to establish a new strong hegemony and thereby cast off their feelings of humiliation and disgrace. We can speak of the fact that a strong collective narcissism was developed, primarily through the vehicles of Pan-Turanism and Pan-lslamicism. These needs remained unsatisfied as a result of the Ottoman defeat. Collective narcissism suffered hard blows and neither the community that perceived itself as such a collective, nor individuals have come to terms with this frustration. The relinquishing of the goals to which the elite aspired was not an act that could be compared to a reckoning with the past, but a mere "swallowing." In this respect, the words of Mustafa Kemal are very instructive with regard to Pan-Turanism and Pan-lslamism. It was essential for him not to turn against them, but to choose not to deal with what could not be achieved, given Turkey's insufficient resources.

In the final analysis, the past was not shut off, it is waiting in the unconscious to be summoned up again. "Social-psychologically, it is to be expected that the damaged collective narcissism is lying in wait for a chance to be repaired. It grasps for whatever brings the past consciously into harmony with the narcissistic wish, but there is also the possibility that reality can be modeled in such a way as if there was no damage in the first place. I do not assert at this juncture that collective narcissism will again manifest itself in Pan-Turanic goals. That can occur in yet another way. The underlying drive, however, is the desire to again dominate other nations and to again become a great power.

I will not go into how this affects the unfolding of the present day realities in Turkey. There are, however, a series of indications that we have begun to recover from the shock of the debacles of World War 1. Fundamental changes in world structure and the relative economic strength of Turkey compared to its neighbors reinforce the desire in Turkey to return to the old powerful days of empire. It can be argued that this condition accounts for one of the essential reasons for the strengthening of nationalistic and fundamentalist forces in Turkey. The desire to be a great power and to return to the old days does not derive from a psychology of disintegration and decline, but from a belief that it can be fulfilled through modem Turkey's own resources and strength.

111 D. OUR SELF IMAGE AND THE GENOCIDE

One of the most important reasons for the tabooing of the Armenian Genocide lies in the coupling of this event with the establishment of the republic. To a certain extent, the establishment of the republic depended heavily on the genocide. The founders of the republic knew that, and they were not averse to expressing it openly. For example, one of the leaders of the Ittihad ve Terakki stated: "If we had not cleaned up the eastern provinces of Armenian militia who were cooperating with the Russians, there would have been no possibility of founding our national state." A speech was delivered in the first parliament of the young republic, the thrust of which was that we accept the label of "murderers" since it served the purpose of saving the fatherland:

You know that the problem of [Armenian] deportations threw the world in an uproar and all of us were labeled murderers. We knew before this was done that world opinion would not be favorable and this would bring loathing and hatred upon us. Why have we resigned ourselves to being called murderers? Those are things that have only happened in order to secure something that is more holy and valuable than our own live at the future of the fatherland.

These "brave" words that the Turkish Republic was built on the genocide of the Armenians were reflections of the enthusiasm of the years during which the Turkish Republic was founded. In the course of time, however, we have sketched out an entirely contrary portrayal. Our nation state "had been created from nothing and in opposition against the imperial forces," an achievement of which we could be proud. The Turkish state was the symbolic proof of a national existence, that "we had dug ourselves" out of the national void "with our fingernails." Anti-imperialism was an indispensable component of our national identity. One aspect of national identity of which we were obviously proud was the organizing of the "National Forces" (Kuvayi Milliye) that had helped us obtain our independence. The "spirit" of these fighting forces, which originally were part of the first guerrilla units of the Turkish national movement, was still inspiring the generation of 1968 as a symbol of anti-imperialist identity.

One of the most important reasons we go out of our way not to discuss the Armenian Genocide is, therefore, the fear that our faith in ourselves would collapse. The model, the structures of thought that we use to explain the genocide to the world and in Turkey could collapse through such discussions. A discussion of the Armenian Genocide could reveal that this Turkish state was not a result of a war fought against the imperial powers, but, on the contrary, a product of the war against the Greek and Armenian minorities. It could show that a significant part of the National Forces consisted either of murderers who directly participated in the Armenian Genocide or of thieves who had become rich by plundering Armenian possessions.

Three different aspects can be discussed with respect to the connection between the Armenian Genocide and the establishment of the Turkish republic. First, the Turkish national movement was organized by the Ittihad ve Terakki party that had carried out the wartime genocide. It is known that the plans for this movement were already drafted during the First World War. In case of military defeat, preparations were made to organize a long lasting resistance. These plans were carried out in the Armistice of 1918 and thereafter.

An important point is that organizations, such as the "Society for the Defense of the Rights..." and "Rejection of Occupation," that were the mainstay of the forces supporting the national movement in Anatolia, were formed either directly on the order of Talaat Pasha or with the aid of the Karakol (Police Station) organization connected to Talaat and Enver. If we look at the regions in which those organizations were established and the sequence of the acts of their founding, it becomes clear that these events initially took place everywhere a perceived Armenian or Greek danger existed. Of the first five resistance organizations that were founded after the Mudros Armistice agreement, from the 30th of October,1918 to the end of the year, three were directed against the Armenian and two against the Greek minorities.

The local cadres of Ittihad ve Terakki constituted the main elements among the founders of these associations. This overlap of membership was so great that when later the central organization "A-RMHC" (Society for the Defense of the Rights of Anatolia and Rumelia) formed a party, it was stipulated that no one from the "Freedom and Accord Party," seen as an enemy of Ittihad ve Terakki, could become a member." An important mission of the Karakol movement, which organized the national movement in Anatolia, was to arrange the escape to Anatolia of those Ittihadists who had been involved in the Armenian Genocide and who were then being sought by the British. To some extent the organization was a symbol of the nexus linking the Armenian Genocide to the resistance movement in Anatolia.

The second important connection between the genocide and the national movement concerned the formation of a new class of wealthy men in Anatolia who had enriched themselves thanks to the genocide. Even Turks point to the fact that the economic motive played an important role in the Armenian Genocide. An important figure in the national movement, Halide Edip, said, "...there was a strong economic one ... this was to end the economic supremacy of the Armenians thereby clearing the markets for the Turks and the Germans." The prominent people who had enriched themselves through the genocide feared that the Armenians could return to avenge themselves and reclaim their goods. After all, this was part of the Allied agenda. These nouveaux riches were drawn even closer to the national movement on those occasions when Armenians did return with occupying forces to reclaim their goods and carry out a few acts of revenge, especially in the Cukorova (Adana, transl.) region. The newly rich thus became an integral part of the national movement. In many areas the resistance was directly organized by these newly rich elements. It was not an accident but rather a necessity that in many regions members of the governing bodies of the organizations for the protection of rights were those whose fortunes had been made as a consequence of the genocide of the Armenians.

Among those who had been enriched through the genocide were some who served directly at the side of Kemal himself. Topal Osman, for example, was one who later advanced to the rank of commander of the guard battalion, (protecting the institution of the Grand National Assembly in Ankara, and the person of Mustafa Kemal-transl.), and Ali Cenani, who had been exiled to Malta, later became the Minister of Commerce in the new republic. The list can be expanded. It is not surprising, therefore, that on September 22, 1922, the national government repealed a January 8, 1920 law of the Istanbul government concerning the restitution of Armenian goods. This change served to reinstate the law of September, 1915 concerning the Abandoned Goods [of the Armenians]. The government in Ankara knew it had to take into account the interests of those who had a share in the founding of the republic.

The third important link between the genocide of the Armenians and the republic is a natural outcome of the first. The initial organizers of the national movement were people who had directly participated in the enactment of the genocide. Those who set up the first units of the National Forces in the Marmara, Aegean, and Black Sea regions and held important posts in these units were for the most part people sought by the occupation forces and the government in Istanbul for their participation in the genocide. When Kemal began to organize the resistance in Anatolia, he received the strongest support from the Ittihadists for whom there were arrest warrants on account of their role in the genocide. Many who were sought or were actually arrested and deported to Malta for their role in the genocide, but fled or escaped later, received important posts in Ankara. There are many examples, but a few should suffice here. Sukru Kaya became the Interior Minister and held the office of Secretary-General in the Republican Peoples Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi), founded by none other than Mustafa Kemal. During the deportations of Armenians he was "Director General of the Office for the Settlement of Nomadic Tribes and Refugees." This was attached to the Interior Ministry and was officially responsible for the implementation of the Armenian "deportations." For this reason Sukru Kaya was also known as "Director General for Deportation" (Sevkiyat Reis-i Umumisi). Mustafa Abdulhalik (Renda) was the governor of Bitlis and later Aleppo during the genocide. Rossler [Germany's veteran consul at Aleppo-trans.) said of him that: "[He] works inexorably on the annihilation of the Armenians. In an affidavit prepared by Vehip Pahsa, the commandant of the Third Army (during the war, in February, 1916) the special role of Abdulhalik Renda in the genocide is being emphasized. According to General Vehip's testimony, thousands of human beings were burned alive in the region around Mush, a district under the control of Mustafa Abdulhalik. This event is mentioned in German consular reports as well as by eyewitnesses.

There are others, for example, Arif Fevzi (Princcizade), who was a deputy from Dlyarbekir during the war years. He was suspect number 2743 in the warrant prepared by the British for the detainees in Malta, was assigned to the group implicated in the genocide, and was to be charged as such. He held the office of Minister of Public Affairs from July 21, 1922 to October 27, 1923. Ali Cenani Bey, the Ittihad ve Terakki deputy for Aintep, was suspect number 2805. He had enriched himself from the loot and spoils associated with the genocide. "In the English archives ... a very dirty file exists on him." He was the Minister of Commerce between November 22, 1924 and May 17, 1926.

Dr. Tevfik Rustu Aras was also one of those who held important political posts in subsequent years. During World War I he was a member of the High Council on Health, which was responsible for the burial of the dead Armenians. Between 1925 and 1938, he served as Foreign Minister of the Republic of Turkey.

This list could be extended by several pages. It can be stated conclusively that Mustafa Kemal led "the war of liberation ... with Ittihadists who were sought for Greek and Armenian incidents and ... was supported by and relied on prominent persons who carried the ghost of the Greeks and Armenians into the subculture of the resistance movement. Participation in the national war of liberation was a vital necessity, a last refuge for all members of Ittihad ve Terakki and especially the special organization that masterminded the organization of the genocide. Only two alternatives existed for them. Either they surrendered to be sentenced to hard labour or death, or they fled to Anatolia and organized the national resistance. A well-known journalist and close friend of Mustafa Kemal, Falih Rifke Atay, expressed this quite clearly:

When the English and their allies began to demand an accounting from the Ittihadists and especially of the murderers of the Armenians after the end of the war, everyone who had something to hide armed himself and joined a gang.

I think that the tabooing of the Armenian Genocide in a republic whose foundation was created in this way is "understandable." The devastation that would ensue if we had to now stigmatize those whom we regarded as "great saviors" and "people who created a nation from nothing," as "murderers and thieves" is palpable. It seems so much simpler to completely deny the genocide than to seize the initiative and face the obliteration of the ingrained notions about the Republic and our own national identity. I would like to conclude my talk at this point with an open question: What significance do the effects of such a policy have for society today and in the future, especially when such "denial" means that the frame of mind and the pattern of behavior that led to the genocide against the Armenians continue to exist?

The End...

So , it is avisable for the Turks co-forumers , to read and learn....

If they do still choose  to have  their eyes closed and their ears shut ...so be it ..it is their own decision .

Isk.

Hundreds and thousands,not millions that didn't exist.

They are not lying it's just that we killed each other.But armenians were more hostile

Your claims are false.Discussing it is not a taboo.You have been ignoring all my posts and common sense.Graves?Civil wars?Witnesses?

All disproved by a professor and you?

Ittihad party had nothing to do with it.If you know anything about them say things you know.Armenians started it

Why didn't the ottomans commit the genocide when they invaded there?(If they are so bloodthirsty)

We do not feel a shock but righteus anger when we are blamed of bloodthirst

And you can't adress Turkey for the Past

This issue is not a taboo in Turkey but contrary it is a taboo in many European countries. They are assumed to be democratic.

Tonight there will be discussion TV program about so-called Armenian genocide on Franco-German TV channel ARTE. Turkish embassy of Paris has protested the channel since they did not invite Turkish side. The program will be again one-sided and biased. Anybody knows the views of  Turkish side.

Taner Akcam is not an historian.   

Why do you people get unified when there appears any anti-Turkish topic? Is this hatred so deep?

Alparslan defined Taner Akcam in the best way, but you keep on giving examples about his ideas and repots.

The Turkish government is still calling all European and Armenian Historians to meet and discuss this non-sense topic, and prove the truth by giving population records and millions of resources from Ottoman records, and even travelling them Eastern Anatolian villages.

But these cannot be enough to feed the Armenian's and European's greed and hatred, so we should try to feed some of them a little to keep themaway from attacking us.

If you are too obstinate on giving some Turkish treators' non-sense comments about a topic which even he doesnt have any real knowledge about, here is something from an old Armenian prime minister:

The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnagtzoutiun) has nothing to do any more.
The Manifesto of Hovhannes Katchaznouni, First Prime Minister of the Independent Armenian Republic.
Translated from the original by Matthew A. Callender, Edited by John Roy Carlson (Arthur A. Derounian).
Published by the Armenian Information Service Suite 7D, 471 Park Ave. New York 22 - 1955.


This is a summary of an important book, entitled � The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnagtzoutiun) Has Nothing To Do Any More �.

The author is Hovhannes Katchaznouni (1), the first Prime Minister of the independent Armenian Republic. It is actually a manifesto, which he had presented to the Convention of foreign branches of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation convened in April 1923 in Bucharest, Romania. Convinced that the questions raised there would be subject to serious consideration of, not only the members of the Dashnag (Dashnak) Party, but also of other Armenians as well, Hovhannes Katchaznouni thought it was his duty to have the manifesto published and thereby made public property.

The Armenian version of the book was published in Vienna by the Mihitarian Press in the year 1923. The English version appeared in New York in 1955 through the Armenian Information Service. It was translated from the original by Matthew A Callender and edited by John Roy Carlson (Arthur A. Derounian).

One small detail worthy of remark is the fact that it is rather difficult, even impossible, to find it nowadays in the libraries of the world. On account of what the former Prime Minister says of the Dashnag experience, it is quite possible that certain Armenian circles prefer it to be dropped from the list of acquisitions of libraries. In some libraries it appears in the card cataloques, but cannot be found in the stacks.

In his � Introduction � to the English version, the editor states that �historical truth cannot be subverted forever � and that � however hard Dashnag propagandists may try to twist and bury the truth and glorify the failure of their Independent Armenian Republic, truth must eventually prevail. � He rightfully presents the author as � a pillar of the Dashnagtzoutiun.� He adds that � few were in a position to know more, nor to express themselves with greater clarity, logic and foresight than Hovhannes Katchaznouni. � (p. 3)


The English version is a condensation of Katchaznouni's parting words to the Dashnags. The first seven-and-a-half pages are � translated verbatim �, but from there on, the text is only � excerpts of his arguments. � (p. Apparently, the Armenian version is the complete text. As well expressed by the editor, � Katchaznouni's work is a basic source of Dashnag history. � (p. 3) Therefore, this booklet will mainly quote or restate the arguments of the author and thus make available to the reader a publication now difficult to find.

* * *

During its two-and-a-half years of existence, the independent Armenian Republic had four prime ministers and seven cabinets. Hovhannes Katchaznouni was the Premier of the First Cabinet, in which A. Manoogian served as the Minister of the Interior, A. Khatissian the Minister of Foreign Affairs, A. Hakhverdian the Minister of War and K. Gardjigian the Minister of Finance.

Katchaznouni had given � deliberate and serious consideration � (p. 4) to the matters that he discussed at the Convention. He asked the party members to � approach the matters with an open mind. � In an attempt to give a concise commentary from the beginning of the First World War to the Lausanne Conference, he formulated the initial attitude of the Armenian bands in the following words :

� At the beginning of the Fall of 1914 when Turkey had not yet entered the war but had already been making preparations, Armenian revolutionary bands began to be formed in Transcaucasia with great enthusiasm and, with especially, much uproar. Contrary to the decision taken during their general meeting at Erzurum only a few weeks before, the A.R.F. had [actively participated] in the formation of the bands and their future military action against Turkey.

� In an undertaking of such gravity, fraught with most serious consequences, individual agents of the Transcaucasian A.R.F. acted against the will of our superior authority, against the will of the General Meeting of the Party... In the Fall of 1914 Armenian volunteer bands organized themselves and fought against the Turks because they could not refrain from organizing and fighting. This was (in) [sic.] an inevitable result of a psychology on which the Armenian people had nourished itself during an entire generation: that mentality should have found its expression, and did so. � (p. 5)

Katchaznouni believes that � the formation of bands was wrong � and that the Armenians had participated in that movement to the greatest extent � contrary to the decision and the will of the General Meeting of the Party. � He wrote that the Armenians � had embraced Russia whole heartedly without any compunction. � (p. 6) He declares :

� We had created a dense atmosphere of illusion in our minds. We had implanted our own desires into the minds of others ; we had lost our sense of reality and were carried away with our dreams. Attention was called to some kind of a letter by Vorontzov-Dashkov to the Catholicos... with...generalities which might be interpreted in any manner... �

Katchaznouni says that they had � overestimated the ability of the Armenian people. � This is, of course, in the sense of � political and military power... the extent and importance of the services [the Armenians] rendered to the Russians. � He adds : � And by overestimating our very modest worth and merit we were naturally exaggerating our hopes and expectations. � He admits that the cause of the Dashnags was � an incidental and trivial phase for the Russians. � (p. 7) They had drawn such conclusions as though the Armenian issue was � the center of gravity of the Great War, its cause and purpose. � He declares : � When the Russians were advancing, we used to say from the depths of our subconscious mind that they were coming to save us. �

Katchaznouni also asserts, however, that one of the main aspects of what he calls Armenian � national psychology... [is] to seek external causes for [Armenian ] misfortune. � He says: � One might think we found a spiritual consolation in the conviction that the Russians behaved villainously towards us (later it would be the turn of the French, the Americans, the British, the Georgians, Bolsheviks -the whole world- to be so blamed.) � (p.

* * *

The territory of the Armenian Republic was formerly a part of one of the outlying provinces of the Tsarist Russian Empire, namely Transcaucasia. Following the outbreak of the Russian Revolution in the Spring of 1917, the then Provisional Government of Kerensky created there a special administrative body called the Commissariat of Transcaucasia. When the Bolsheviks overthrew the Kerensky government, the Commissariat declared itself on November 28, 1917 to be the supreme authority there. In February 1918, the Seim, or the legislative assembly of Transcaucasia convened in Tiflis, accepted the resignation of the Commissariat and created in its place a temporary government. On April 22, 1918, the Federal Democratic Republic of Transcaucasia was formed. The three principal peoples of Transcaucasia were the Azerbaijanis, the Georgians and the Armenians. The federal republic lasted about five weeks ; on May 26, 1918, it was terminated. Georgia declared its independence the same day, and Azerbaijan and Armenia followed, two days later. The Treaty of Batum was signed on June 4, 1918 between Turkey and the Transcaucasian Republics. Armenia was based upon a republican form of government. It had a legislative branch, consisting of an elected Parliament and an executive branch, which was the Cabinet. It did not have a President, whose powers were exercised in part by the Parliament and in part by the Cabinet.

Sovereignty resided in an 80 member Parliament of one house, composed of representatives from the four political parties. Voting was direct and secret, and the elections were based on the system of proportional representation. The Cabinet was composed of eight ministers. The Prime Minister, elected by the Parliament, was at the head of the government. He designated the ministers, but presented them for the approval of the Parliament, to which the Cabinet as a whole was responsible.

Katchaznouni says, in his book, however, that � this was the form. But the reality was otherwise. � (p. In a Memorandum, dated October 28, 1919, to the United States Government, the same Katchaznouni had described the Armenian Republic as a democracy. (2) Later in the book, he concludes : � ln practice our Party tended to subject to itself, to control, the legislative body and the government. We did not have the courage, nor the ability to declare an open dictatorship...There was no Parliament ; it was an empty form without content. The problems of state were being discussed and solved behind closed doors... In reality, there was not even a parliamentary faction, because this latter was under the very strict supervision of the Dashnag Bureau and was obliged to carry out its orders. There was not a government either. This, also, was subject to the Bureau ; it was a kind of executive body for the Bureau in the state. � (pp. 8-9)

The Parliament of the independent Armenian Republic opened on August 1, 1919. It looked like a body composed of the people's representatives. Katchaznouni writes : � ...It was strange and disheartening that 72 out of 80 members were Dashnags, with only four members from the other parties. There was no opposition party to act as a check... It was not a Parliament, but a caricature of a Parliament. � (p. 9) The Party Bureau had � replaced the Parliament with its own dictatorial rule. �

The fifth Cabinet under A. Khadissian had resigned and the sixth under H.Ohanchanian was formed on the orders of the Bureau. The latter presented the already prepared list of ministers to the Parliament, which was indefinitely recessed. Katchaznouni sums up : � The Armenian Parliament had given a dictatorial government to the Dashnagtzoutiun - to the Bureau.�

The war between the Turks and the Armenians broke out in the Fall of 1920. The crushed Turkey of 1918 was no more. Atat�rk's British biographer writes : � [Mustafa Kem�l's] foreign policy was based not on expansion but on retraction of frontiers ; his home policy on the foundation of a political system which could survive his own time. It was in this realistic spirit that he regenerated his country, transforming the old sprawling Ottoman Empire into a compact new Turkish Republic. � (3) The Turks formed a representative government in Ankara at the same time the Dashnags were trying to do the same in the Caucasus. The Ankara experiment was a novelty in many ways. The idea of representative government and republic was ever present in Mustafa Kem�l's mind. As early as the second constitutional regime (1908), he believed in eradicating the Sultanate.

Several Turkish memoirs reveal his early statements while on duty in Salonica (his birthplace) and later in Aleppo (Syria), on the dire necessity to establish a republican form of government. (4)

Considering the conditions prevalent at the end of the First World War, an independent Turkish state, based on national sovereignty, seemed to be the only alternative to the newly-dismembered Ottoman Empire. The old capital was occupied, the former members of the Union and Progress had fled and the Sultan was powerless. A new government had to be formed ; its task necessitated the active support of the people at large ; and success

depended upon the nation's democratic participation in the struggle. Apart from the theoretical considerations, republicanism seemed the only practical alternative. The new Ankara government was based on the republican r�gime even before the official proclamation on October 29, 1923.

In the newly-established government in Ankara, there was no higher authority than the Grand National Assembly, any member of which could pose questions and cross-examine, not only the government members, but Mustafa Kem�l himself -even on his tactical military moves. (5) This right of scrunity, this resolute interrogation, this solemn canvassing was not mere theory ; discussion and perusal were the order of the day even in the most critical hours. Mustafa Kem�l, as Speaker of the Grand National Assembly and as acting Commander-in-Chief, was replying to questions even on minute details when the roar of enemy artillery could be heard from the assembly hall.

On the war with Turkey , Katchaznouni says :

� The war with us was inevitable... We had not done all that was necessary for us to have done to evade war. We ought to have used peaceful language with the Turks...We had no information about the real strength of the Turks and relied on ours. This was the fundamental error. We were not afraid of war because we thought we could win... When the skirmishes had started the Turks proposed that we meet and confer. We did not do so and defied them. Our army was well fed and well armed and [clothed] but it did not fight. The troops were constantly retreating and deserting their positions ; they threw away their arms and dispersed in the villages. Our army was demoralized during the period of internal strife, the inane destruction and the pillage that went [on] without punishment. It was demoralized and tired. The system of roving bands, which was especially encouraged by the Bureau government, was destroying the unity of the military organization... � (pp. 9-10)

In spite of the fact that the Armenians had better material and better support, their armies lost. Although Armenian politicians and writers had, for years, criticized the Ottoman Government for not making military service obligatory for the Armenians, there were no Moslems in the army of the Armenian Republic. (6) And the advancing Turks fought only against the regular soldiers ; they did not carry the battle to the civilian sector.


Edward Fox, the American District Commander at Kars, in a telegram, dated October 31, 1920, (7) to Admiral Bristol, the U.S. High Commissioner in Istanbul, wrote that the Americans were continuing their work of looking after the Armenian children as before, that the Turkish soldiers were well-disciplined and that there had not been any massacres. Such missionary and philanthropic establishments protected only the children of Armenians, and never the thousands of Turkish children, who had become orphans on account of Armenian massacres of their parents and families.(

When on November 2, 1920, the armies of K�zim Karabekir Pasha reached G�mr� (Alexandropol, now Leninakan), the Bureau-government presented its resignation. Simultaneously, within a few hours of each other, while one Dashnag delegation headed by the retiring Prime Minister was negotiating with the Soviets, another Dashnag delegation led by a former Prime Minister negotiated with the Turks It was decided that those who negotiated should be new men. A government under Simon Vratzian was formed.

Talks with the Turks led to the Treaty of G�mr� (9), signed on December 2, 1920. It states that the Turkish and the Armenian Governments, � for the purpose of putting an end to the hostilities and to find a basis of agreement, have sat down for an examination of the facts. � K�zim Karabekir Pasha (Commander on the Eastern Front) on behalf of the Turks, and Alexander Khadissian (Prime Minister) on behalf of the Armenians, participated.

The discussions resulted in the following agreement : The state of war between Turkey and the Armenian Republic was to be ended. The frontier between Turkey and Armenia was established. The territories designated for Turkey were to remain as such � by irrefutable historical, ethnic and legal rights. � The two parties agreed to the return of refugees across the old boundaries, with the exception of those who, during the First World War, went over to the enemy's army and those who crossed occupied territories and participated in massacres. Those claims of the refugees who do not return within one year after the ratification of the Treaty would not be heard. The two parties agreed � to forego their rights to ask for damages. � They had thus closed the doors forever for reparations. The cancellation of damages also included the great expenses of Turkey incurred during two years because of the urgency of the war it had to wage against Armenia. The Yerevan Government declared the Treaty of S�vres null and void. It promised to recall � delegations who have been tools in the hands of the imperialist countries � and to keep away from such men � who are after imperialist aims. � Armenia agreed to consider null and void all treaties signed by the Armenian Republic with any country that related to Turkey or were harmful to Turkish interests.

In the meantime, the Armenian Bolsheviks entered Itchevan and Dilijan.

�Was there an understanding between the Bolsheviks and the Turks ? � asks Katchaznouni and replies : � In our ranks that conviction was widespread. I think, however, that it was wrong. The plot of the Bolsheviks was not the reason of our defeat, nor the power of the Turks... but our own [ineptitude] ! Of course the Bolsheviks benefited from our defeat and that was very natural, but it was not essential that they should have come to an understanding with the Turks for that purpose. � (p. 11 )

The day the Vratzian government signed an agreement with the Turks, it resigned and relinquished power to the Bolsheviks. Katchaznouni says :

� The Bolsheviks entered Armenia without meeting any resistance. This was the decision of our Party. There were two reasons for acting this way : first, we could not resist even if we wanted to... ; second, we hoped that the Soviet authorities, backed by Russia, would be able to introduce some order in the state -a thing which we, all alone, had failed to do, and it was very plain already that we would not be able to do. It was our desire to let the Bolsheviks rule the country without any obstruction, to remain loyal to the new government, to cooperate with their useful work. � (p.11)

The decision was, of course, not unanimous. There were some who opposed the Bolsheviks, � even though defeat was inevitable. � Their number was small and when their proposal was refused, they left the country. There was another minority, a so-called � Leftist Dashnags �, whom the Bolsheviks distrusted and discarded. But in a final effort to displace the Soviets, the Dashnags staged on February 18, 1921, a counter-revolt against them. Simon Vratzian, the last Prime Minister, sent the following note, dated March 18, 1921, to Bahaeddin Bey, Turkey's representative in Yerevan :

� Please forward the present request promptly to your high authorities...The Armenian Government requests the Government of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, that... it... give the Armenian army some ammunition... [and] communicate with us, if the Government of the Grand National Assembly finds it possible to send military aid to Armenia, and if able to do so, to what extend and when ?... � (p.24)

The Ankara Government did not help the Dashnags, and the Soviets ejected them from Armenian soil in April 1921. Vratzian sought asylum in Iran, where he set out for Europe via Istanbul, finally became a U.S. citizen and died in Beirut. (10)

***

Katchaznouni implores : � What had been our diplomatic activity with the outer world... and what were the results ? � (p. 12). In the Spring of 1919, the Paris Delegation of the Armenian Republic, jointly with the Delegation of Turkish Armenians, presented a Memorandum of Armenian demands to the Peace Conference. According to that memorandum, the frontiers of the Armenian State would include : the Caucasian Republic with enlarged territory, including Kars ; the seven Ottoman provinces in Eastern and Southern Anatolia (namely, Van, Bitlis, Diyarbakir, Harput, Sivas, Erzurum and Trabzon) ; and the four sanjaks of Cilicia (Maras, Sis, Cebel-i Bereket and Adana) plus Alexandretta. It is instructive to read Katchaznouni's evaluation of the Armenian demands in respect to frontiers:

� A vast state was being organized and demanded -a great Armenia from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, from the mountains of Karabagh to the Arabian Desert, [From] where did that imperial, amazing demand emanate ?. How did it happen that our Delegation signed [the] 'from Sea to Sea' demand ? It was told that they did not demand those fascinating frontiers, the Turkish Armenians (through their National Delegation) would sever their cause from that of the 'Republic of Ararat' and will apply to the powers accordingly. Our delegation was also told that America would not accept a mandate over a small Armenia but would accept one over a 'from Sea to Sea' Armenia. The Paris Memorandum, of course, thrilled us. A kind of mentality was created according to which the drawing of frontiers on paper actually gave us those territories. To doubt it was a treachery. � (p, 12)

Then followed, in the words of Katchaznouni, � the rude awakening �. The Treaty of Sevres, signed on August 10, 1920, which could not have been enforced on the Turks, had to be abandoned, Lord Kinross writes that it was � an early product of that 'circus' of Allied conferences which followed the signatures of the Treaty of Versailles. � (11) The Ottoman Empire was broken-up into a series of small states and foreign spheres of interest, Turkey was to lose, not only Arab possessions (to which she was already resigned), but also the Greeks were to receive the whole of Thrace, Smyrna and its hinterland as well as eight Aegean islands (the Dodecanese going to Italy). Apart from an independent Armenia, much of Anatolia was partitioned into French and Italian zones of influence. The Turkish Straits being placed under international control, Istanbul had become a mere enclave of European-occupied territory. The hated Capitulations were extended and Turkey's finances were to be directed by the Allies. Turkey itself was to become an inland state, with a shadow of a sovereignty. The Turkish army was to be a token force under foreign supervision, and even the limited gendarmerie would be officered by foreigners. When the Greeks advanced along the shores of the Sea of Marmara, the enthusiastic British Prime Minister Lloyd George thought that the Turks were beaten and � fleeing with their forces towards Mecca (sic). � When � Ankara � corrected his Foreign Secretary, Lloyd George replied : � Lord Curzon is good enough to admonish me on a triviality. � (12) The British Premier, who was ignorant of basic knowledge in terms of Turkish geography, pretended to be a driving force in the partition of the country.

The Treaty of Sevres was obsolete even before it was ready for signature. The Allied Conferences, with continuous rounds of entertainment, had no way of reinforcing the grant of an independent Armenian state by any form of military action. Nor could any country under a Mandate. When President Wilson announced that he was ready to arbitrate on its frontiers, the � award � had no relation whatsoever to realities. The Treaty of G�mr�, the first international agreement to be contracted by the Ankara Government, restored to Turkey its traditional eastern frontier along the banks of the Rivers Aras and Arpacay. The Bolsheviks, who had defeated Wrangel's army, entered Erevan, without a shot fired. The Ankara Government and Soviet Russia signed the Treaty of Moscow on March 16, 1921, 13 drawing a line across the map which survives as the boundary between the two neighbours today. This is the frontier that is here to stay. The Treaty of Kars, 14 dated October 13, 1921, ratified generally the provisions of the Moscow Treaty. Repeating the territorial clauses regarding the North-eastern boundary of Turkey, it reaffirmed the establishment of the Nakhichevan under the sovereignty of Azerbaijan. Appendix 1 of the Treaty of Kars describes the boundary line between Soviet Georgia, Soviet Armenia, Nakhichevan and Turkey. On December 30, 1922, all three Transcaucasian Soviet Republics merged into the Soviet Union.

What were the reactions of some Armenians to these inevitable developments? Katchaznouni writes : �... There were the usual complaints that the powers were unfair, did not appreciate us and did not compensate us according to what we deserved. � (p. 13) It is common knowledge that the Treaty of Lausanne signed on July 24, 1923, replaced the Treaty of Sevres. While the French signed with the Ankara Government an agreement on October 20, 1921 (which amounted to something like a separate peace between Turkey and France) and the U.S. Senate turned down a Mandate (whose frontiers
drawn by President Wilson had not satisfied the Armenians), Chicherin (according to Katchaznouni) � offered in the name of [the] Soviet Russia to locate the Armenians of Turkey in [the] Crimea, on the shores of [the] Volga [and] in Siberia. � (p. 13)

Katchaznouni enquires at this point � Was the arrival of the Bolsheviks a calamity for our country ? � He retorts : � The Bolsheviks are necessary in Armenia... There is no other force that could take their place. This is the truth. � (p. 14) He adds:

� We had exhausted all our resources, had come to an impasse as government and as Party in the Fall of 1920. Had the Bolsheviks delayed their arrival, we ourselves would have asked them to come... �


* *

Katchaznouni concludes that the � European cities are full of emigrant malcontents of all kinds who publish newspapers, write books, call protest meetings... � He ends his book, saying : � It is here that I shall state the very grave word, which I know will embarrass you but which must be said at last and said simply, without concealment or attenuation : � The Armenian Revolutionary Federation has nothing to do any more. � He proposed � dissolution of the party �, having nothing else to do anymore � neither at the present time, nor in the future � (p. 16). After a trip to the United States of America, Katchaznouni himself returned to Armenia and spent his last years there.

Man that was long, well written but long Now I must compliment you Oguzoglu for having a profound knowledge on the subject and having done your reasearch; I am however inclined to agree with Strategos here. You must be open to this. You cannot simply deny these facts and claims because in this case the genocide was commited by your nation. All nations make mistakes, and despite there are always reasons, they are still grave mistakes. You must see this. I am of german descent and understand that the holocaust occured, and only through accepting one's past can one be greater for the future having now learned from one's mistakes.

(There were reasons for the holocaust as well. The germans didn't just randomly choose to hate the jews, but now knowing what has happenned, we can at least learn from why it happenned so to avoid it in the future)

prior to 1915 figures- Armenians in the Ottoman empire.

According to average tally of this chart, how did Armenians actually claim 1.5 million dead?

I remember Ted Koppel on Nightline once told a Turkish Diplomate to the United States during the early 1980's that there were actually 3,000,000 Armenian dead. This drama is very interesting. Not only are arbritrary numbers floating around as one desires but this attitude of Genocide has a life all its own. Its a case of the 'squeeky wheel gets the oil'. I am all for an honest inquiry. American historians Stanford Shaw and Justin McCarthy are to. In fact they have already done the research for us. Read their books on this topic. They also recieved death threats after their books were published. Who threatened them? Armenians in the U.S. Who threatened me a couple of times in college just for being a Turkish American. Armenian Americans! Who constantly massed themselves outside various Turkish American gatherings with American congressman present? Armenian Americans.  Who killed innocent Turkish Diplomats in the U.S. and Canada during the 1970' and 80's? Armenian Americans. Who claimed bomb threats against Turkish American Community Associations? Armenia Americans.

So it becomes frustrating dealing with those who make allegations and expect only sympathy. And when such offensive individuals actually recieve feedback contrary to their expectations they get all midieval and violent. So, prove the claim. Watch the slander. And don't get violent. Oh, and since nonpartial researchers have already presented that there was no Genocide. Then start apologizing. I'm all ears.

One thing, you are saying that Armenian revolutionary groups were hostile. In 1895-1896 Sultan Abdul-Hamid massacred 100,000 to 200,000 Armenians. Did you want Armenians to lie down and not ask for their freedom? And secondly, Armenian revolutionary parties were only comprised of a few thousand people at most. Its easy to take statements made by such a small faction and make people think that the majority of Armenians behaved this way. Armenians never killed innocent women and children. Ottoman soldiers, however, drove the women and children into the deserts to be killed. Hundreds of thousands of women and children, this is not war. You cannot say "Turks and Armenians were killing each other" when there was no official war waged on Armenia by Ottomans. Armenia had no government, there were tens of thousands of Armenian men in the Ottoman army serving the empire. Thats like blaming September 11th on all Saudi Arabians since most of the terrorists were Saudis. Every country has revolutionaries/nationalists. You cannot justify the murder of hundreds of thousands of Armenian women and children because of the act of a couple of thousand revolutionaries. Revolutionaries do not commit any systematic acts, especially in a time of World War, the Ottoman murder of Armenians was systematic. THATS the whole definition of genocide. Lets all accuse every Arab nation of genocide because of the act of a few thousand revolutionaries. Im sorry, it doesnt work like that.

And those revolutionaries cannot wage any type of genocide on Turks or Kurds, most of them didnt have firearms. All the firearms were taken by the Ottoman Government because they were in high demand because of the extent and magnitude of the war. Youre telling me a couple of thousand poorly-armed Armenians massacred hundreds of thousands of Turks and Kurds? I dont care how intense the war was, the Ottoman army was bigger beyond imagination...it was an EMPIRE. And, there were huge numbers of Ottoman soldiers in Turkish Armenia because they were gaurding the Russian front. A couple of thousand poorly-armed Armenians massacring hundreds of thousands of Turks when the Ottoman army is fully armed and in that same region? Please explain how, im curious.

And no one mentions WHY those Armenians took up arms in the first place. The 1915 genocide was not the first genocide against Armenians by the Ottomans. In 1895-1896 Sultan Abdul-Hamid massacred around 150,000 Armenians. THATS why the revolutionaries took arms. And, i dont think there were any women and children in the revolutionary parties. Thats just not common anywhere.

P.S. I can see that this thread is very unstable and all hell might break loose. Lets keep it civilized, no ones saying anything personal to anyone in here.

In fact the experts on history refuse this genocide story. On May 1985  group of historians and scholars lent their names to the following statement, which appeared as an advertisement in The New York Times and The Washington Post .

The undersigned American academicians who specialize in Turkish, Ottoman and Middle Eastern studies are concerned that the current language embodied In House Joint Resolution 192 is misleading and/or inaccurate in several respects.   Specifically, while fully supporting the concept of a ?National Day of Remembrance of Man?s Inhumanity to Man,? we respectfully take exception to that portion of the text which singles out for special recognition: ?... the one and one half million people of Armenian ancestry who were victims of genocide perpetrated in Turkey between 1915 and 1923??

Our reservations focus on the use of the words ?Turkey? and ?genocide? and may be summarized as follows: > >

? From the fourteenth century until 1922, the area currently known as Turkey, or more correctly, the Republic of Turkey, was part of the territory encompassing the multi-national, multi-religious state known as the Ottoman Empire. It is wrong to equate the Ottoman Empire with the Republic of Turkey in the same way that it is wrong to equate the Hapsburg Empire with the Republic of Austria. The Ottoman Empire, which was brought to an end in 1922, by the successful conclusion of the Turkish Revolution which established the present day Republic of Turkey in 1923, incorporated lands and peoples which today account for more than twenty-five distinct countries in Southeastern Europe. North Africa, and the Middle East, only one of which is the Republic of Turkey. The Republic of Turkey bears no responsibility for any events which occurred in Ottoman times, yet by naming ?Turkey? in the Resolution, its authors have implicitly labeled it as guilty of the ?genocide? it charges transpired between 1915 and 1923; > >

? As for the charge of ?genocide:? No signatory of this statement wishes to minimize the scope of Armenian suffering. We are likewise cognizant that it cannot be viewed as separate from the suffering experienced by the Muslim inhabitants of the region. The weight of evidence so far uncovered points in the direction of serious inter-communal warfare (perpetrated by Muslim and Christian irregular forces), complicated by disease, famine, suffering and massacres in Anatolia and adjoining areas during the First World War. Indeed, throughout the years in question. the region was the scene of more or less continuous warfare, not unlike the tragedy which has gone on in Lebanon for the past decade. The resulting death toll among both Muslim and Christian communities of the region was immense. But much more remains to be discovered before historians will be able to sort out precisely responsibility between warring and innocent, and to identify the causes for the events which resulted in the death or removal of large numbers of the eastern Anatolian population, Christian and Muslim alike.  > >

  Statesmen and politicians make history, and scholars write it. For this process to work scholars must be given access to the written records of the statesmen and politicians of the past. To date, the relevant archives in the Soviet Union, Syria, Bulgaria and Turkey all remain, for the most part, closed* to dispassionate historians. Until they become available the history of the Ottoman Empire in the period encompassed by H.J. Res. 192 (1915?1923) cannot be adequately known. >>

  We believe that the proper position for the United States Congress to take on this and related issues, is to encourage full and open access to all historical archives, and not to make charges on historical events before they are fully understood. Such charges as those contained in H.J. Res. 192 would inevitably reflect unjustly upon the people of Turkey, and perhaps set back irreparably progress historians are just now beginning to achieve in understanding these tragic events.> >

  As the above comments illustrate, the history of the Ottoman-Armenians is much debated among scholars, many of whom do not agree with the historical assumptions embodied in the wording of H.J. Res. 192. By passing the resolution Congress will be attempting to determine by legislation which side of a historical question is correct. Such a resolution, based on historically questionable assumptions, can only damage the cause of honest historical enquiry, and damage the credibility of the American legislative process.

Rifaat Abou-EI-HaJ Professor of History >> California Stale University >> at Long Beach> >  > > Sarah Moment Atis Associate Professor of Turkish >> Language & Literature> > Univ. of Wisconsin at Madison> >  > > Karl Barbir Associate Professor of History >> Siena College (New York) >>  > > Ilhan Basgoz Director of the Turkish Studies >> Program at the Department of >> Uralic & Altaic Studies >> Indiana University >>  > > Daniel G. Bates Professor of Anthropology >> Hunter College, City >> University of New York> >  > > Luke Bates Professor of Art History >> Hunter College, City College >> of New York> >  > > Gustav Bayerie Professor of Uralic & Altaic >> Studies> > Indiana University >>  > > Andras G.E. Bodrogligetti Professor of Turkic & Iranian >> Languages> > University of California at >> Los Angeles> >  > > Kathleen BurriIl Associate Professor of  Turkish >> Studies> > Columbia University >>  > > Timothy Childs Professorial Lecturer >> SAIS, Johns Hopkins University> >  > > Shafiga Daulet Associate Professor of Political> > Science >> University of Connecticut >>  > > Roderic Davison Professor of History >> George Washington University >> Washington. D.C.> >  > > Walter Denny Professor of Art History & >> Near Eastern Studies> > University of Massachusetts >>  > > Dr. Alan Duben Anthropologist Researcher >> New York City >>  > > Ellen Ervin Research Assistant Professor >> of Turkish >> New York University >>  > > Caesar Farah Professor of Islamic & Middle >> Eastern History> > University of Minnesota >>  > > Carter Findley Associate Professor of History >> The Ohio State University >>  > > Michael Finefrock Professor of History >> College of Charleston> >  > > Alan Fisher Professor of History >> Michigan Stale University >>  > > Cornell Fischer Assistant Professor of History Washington University (Missouri) >>  > > Peter Golden Professor of History >> Rutgers University, Newark >>  > > Tom Goodrich Professor of History >> Indiana University of Pennsylvania >>  > > Andrew Gould PhD. in Ottoman History >> Flagstaff, Arizona >>  > > William Griswold Professor of History >> Colorado State University >>  > > Tibor Halasi-Kun Professor Emeritus of Turkish >> Studies> > Columbia University >>  > > William Hickman Associate Professor of Turkish >> University of California, Berkeley >>  > > J.C. Hurewitz Professor of Government Emeritus >> Former Director of the Middle >> East Institute (1971-1984) >> Columbia University >>  > > John Hymn Professor of History >> Glenville State College >> West Virginia> >  > > Halil Inalcik University Professor of Ottoman >> History & Member of The >> American Academy of Art >> & Sciences> > University of Chicago >>  > > Ralph Jaeckel >> Visiting Assistant Professor of >> Turkish >> University of California >> at Los Angeles >>  > > Ronald Jennings Associate Professor of History >> Asian Studies >> University of Illinois> >  > > James Kelly >> Associate  Professor of Turkish >> University of Utah >> Kerim Key Adjunct Professor >> Southeastern University >> Washington, D.C. >>  > > Metin Kunt Professor of Ottoman History> > New York City >>  > > Frederick Latimer Associate Professor of History,> > Retired> > University of Utah     I am asking...... Which parliament on the world is an expert on history? People who did not know anything about Turkish history can not decide about Turkish history.

Avigdor Levy> > Professor of History >> Brandeis University >>  > > Bernard Lewis Cleveland E. Dodge Professor >> of Near Eastern History> > Princeton University> >  > > Dr. Heath W. Lowry Institute of Turkish Studies, Inc. >> Washington, D.C. >>  > > Justin McCarthy >> Associate Professor of History >> University of Louisville >>  > > Jon Mandaville Professor of the History of >> tire Middle East >> Portland State University (Oregon) >>  > > Michael Meeker Professor of Anthropology >> University of California >> at San Diego> >  > > Rhoads Murphey Assistant Professor of Middle >> Eastern Languages & Cultures> > and History> > Columbia University >>  > > Thomas Naff Professor of History & Director, >> Middle East Research Institute >> University of Pennsylvania >>  > > Pierre Oberling Professor of History >> Hunter College of the City >> University of New York >>  > >  > > William Ochsenwald Associate Professor of History >> Virginia Polytechnic Institute >>  > > Robert Olson Associate Professor of History >> University of Kentucky >>  > > William Peachy Assistant Professor of the Judaic & >> Near Eastern Languages & >> Literatures> > The Ohio State University >>  > > Donald Quataert Associate Professor of History >> University of Houston >>  > > Howard Reed Professor of History >> University of Connecticut >>  > > Dankwart Rustow Distinguished University >> Professor of Political Science> > City University Graduate School >> New York >>  > > Ezel Kural Shaw Associate Professor of History >> California State University, >> Northridge> >  > > Stanford Shaw Professor of History >> University of California >> at Los Angeles> >  > > Elaine Smith PhD. In Turkish History >> Retired Foreign Service Officer >> Washington, D.C. >>  > > Grace M. Smith> > Visiting Lecturer In Turkish >> University of California >> at Berkeley> >  > >  > > John Masson Smith, Jr. >> Professor of History >> University of California >> at Berkeley >>  > > Dr. Svat Soucek> > Turcologist, New york City> >  > >  > > Robert Stash Assistant Director of the Middle >> Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 02:55 After 4-5 searches i found a government site that displays the Ottoman archives.Enjoy! K�z�lmescid, Zeydan, Hersan, Ta� mahallesi, Ayn�lbarid mahallesi, Avih mahallesi, Ahlat'�n Erkuzan [Erkezen] mahallesi, K�m�s mahallesi, Mahalleba��, �dilcevaz, Kar�ikan kazas�, Yako karyesi, Tatargazi karyesi, Patnos karyesi, Hamtos mahallesi, Marmutlu mahallesi, Azad karyesi, Kereko�lan karyesi, Kurubulak mahallesi, N�ho�nud mahallesi, Mabekor mahallesi ve Malazgirt'in �irvan�eyh karyesinde Rus ve Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan i�kenceyle �ld�r�len, namuslar� kirletilen, evleri yak�l�p, paralar� �al�nan, mallar� ya�ma edilen M�sl�manlar ile yak�lan ve tahrip edilen cami, medrese, tekye, ziy�retg�h, mektep, resm� d�ire, k�pr�, hamam ve depolar�n isimlerine dair, Rus istilas� s�ras�nda ka�amay�p Bitlis'te kalan ve Ermeni �eteleriyle Ruslar�n mez�limine u�rayan �sl�m ahalisinin yeminli ifadeleri. Massacres perpetrated by Armenian bandits and Russians against Muslims population in Bitlis and its neighborhood. According to depositions made on oath by those muslim people who, incapable to escape remained in Bitlis and had suffered Armenian bandits and Russian�s atrocities: In the quarters of K�z�lmescid, Zeydan, Hersan, Ta� and in Ayn�lbarid, Avih, Erkuzan (Erkozan) quarters in Ahlat K�m��, Mahall�be�e, Adilcevaz quarters and in the villages of Yako, Tatargazi and Patnos, in the quarters of Kurubulak, Naho�nud, Malikan and the village of �irvan�eyh attached to Malazgirt; muslim population had been tortured to death by Armenian bandits and Russians and dishonored (raped), their homes burned down, moneys stolen, goods and proporties looted; schools, mosques, dervishes� convents, saints� tombs, government offices, bridges, public bathes and storehouses had been destroyed. 27 L. 1334 (27. VIII. 1916)   B�b-� �l� D�hiliye Nez�reti Emniyyet-i Um�miyye M�d�riyeti K�z�lmescid mahallesinden Kalkanc� o�lu Osman A�a'n�n if�desidir. Komiteci Ermeniler taraf�ndan kas��� s�ng� ile cerhedilmi�, elli sekiz g�n habsedilmi�dir. Bir bu�uk ya��nda o�lu Abd�lb�ki s�hibsiz sokaklarda kalarak so�ukdan incim�d etmi� ve �lm��d�r. H�nesinde bulunan her t�rl� e�ya ya�ma edilmi�dir. Yaras� iltiy�m buldukdan sonra en m��kil hizmetlerde angarya s�retiyle kullan�lm��d�r ve on d�rt lira da paras� al�nm��d�r. K�z�lmescid mahallesinden Hadid bin Feyzullah. Ruslar taraf�ndan sol memesinden kur�unla cerhedilmi� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilerek angaryada kullanm��lard�r. Zeydan mahallesinden Pirmuslu o�lu Mustafa Efendi bin �mer Efendi. �ki ay habsedilmi� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilerek on �� ya��ndaki o�lu �evket g�ib olmu�, hayat ve mem�t� mech�l kalm��d�r. On mecidiye ile be� lira ve elli guru� ma����e paras� al�nm��d�r. Zeydan mahallesinde �eyh Yusuf Efendi bin S�leyman Efendi. Ruslar taraf�ndan 27 Mecidiye, 40 �eyrek, bir s�ati al�nm�� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. On ya��ndaki o�lu Mehmed N�ri g�ib olmu�. Hersan mahallesinden Hurlulu Re�id o�lu Mehmed. V�lidesi elli ya��ndaki Nigar n�m kad�n� kama ile kesmi�ler. Day�s� o�ullar� olup kendi h�nesinde bulunan G�vey, Hasan, H�seyin ve Ahmed A�a n�m kimsenin bu h�nedeki k�z� ma�s�meyi k�l�� ve kama ile kesmi�ler. Cen�zeleri k�pekler taraf�ndan da��d�lm��, k�smen kemikler h�len mevc�ddur. Merk�m Mehmed'in h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�, altm�� g�n habsedilerek angaryada kullan�lm�� ve din ve �m�n� �etmedilerek def�atle darbedilmi�dir. Ahlatl� olup K�z�lmescid mahallesinde muk�m H�seyin o�lu S�lih. Yetmi� ya��ndaki pederi S�lih'i Ruslar k�l��la �ld�rm��lerdir. Kendisini de kolundan ve kafas�ndan k�l�n�la yaralam��lard�r. H�nesindeki e�ya k�milen ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ahlatl� olup Zeydan mahallesinde Kasab o�lu Ahmed. On alt� ya��nda Asl� n�m�ndaki k�z�n�n �rz�na cell�d�ne bir s�retde tec�v�z etmek isteyen Ermenilere kar��, n�m�sunu kem�l-i sal�betle m�d�fa�a eyleyip geceleyin as�kir-i Osmaniyye nezdine fir�r ile tahl�s-i hayat ve n�m�s etme�e te�ebb�s eylemi� ise de, Ermeniler taraf�ndan al�akcas�na katledilmi�dir. Kendisi soyulmu�dur. Hersan mahallesinden Mahmud o�lu Resul. H�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Kendisinden y�z yirmi guru� al�nm��, bir ay i�kence ile habsedilmi� ve ah�ren mezarc�l�kda, ba�dehu bostanc�l�kda istihd�m edilmi�dir. K�z�lmescid mahallesinden Safrasor A�as�z�de H�seyin o�lu Hasan. H�nesi ya�ma edilmi� ve m�sinn bulunmak hasebiyle eser-i darbdan m�te�essiren �� m�h hastah�nede kald�kdan sonra ��kar�lm�� ve kem�l-i sef�letle bir h�neye habsedilmi�dir. Ta� mahallesinde �sm�il o�lu Mehmed. Doksan ya��ndaki pederi �sm�il k�l�n�la par�alanm��, h�nesi ya�ma edilerek iki ay habsedilmi�dir. Ayn�lb�rid mahallesinden Haso o�lu Bedri. On yedi ya��nda b�kire k�z� F�t�ma'n�n cebren bikri iz�le edilmi� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. �� m�h habsedilerek ah�ren darb ve i�kence ile angaryada kullan�lm��d�r. Ve d�rt y�z guru� kesesinden al�nm��d�r. K�z�lmescid mahallesinde ��kir bin Mehmed. H�nesi ya�ma edilmi�, kendisi fir�ra muvaffak olmu�dur. Avih mahallesinden Mutki Mekteb Mu�allimi Abd�lhakim Efendi bin Molla �sa Efendi. Kama ile kafas� cerh edilmi�, g�zlerine a�a� sokmak s�retiyle sakat edilmi� ve sa� kaburgas� darb ile k�r�lm��d�r. Kesesindeki on bir liras�yla iki s�ati al�nm��d�r. Mahalleba�� civ�r�nda Emine binti Musa A�a. Zevci Bitlis �st�n�f A�z� M�l�z�m� �aban Efendi geceleyin Ermeniler taraf�ndan s�ret-i fec�ada katledilmi�, on sekiz be�ibirlik, elli adet lira, y�z elli adet ba� altunu, d�rt kemer, d�rt alt�n k�pe, yirmi sekiz adet y�zl�k banknot cebren al�nm�� ve h�nesinde bulunan b�t�n e�ya ya�ma edilmi�, k�z� on be� ya��ndaki N�ciye'nin cebren bikri iz�le, Emine Han�m'�n pederi Musa �iddetle darbedilerek katl, amucaz�desi G�lperi n�m kad�n dahi Ermeni kad�nlar� taraf�ndan darbedilerek katledilmi�lerdir. Emine Han�m'�n bo�az� kertebatla ip ile k�sd�r�lmak s�retiyle bir ka� def�alar �l�mle tehd�d ve darbedilmi�dir. Ta� mahallesinden Z�lf� bint-i S�d�k n�m kad�n. Kay�n v�lidesi Fidan ve kay�n bir�deri K�mil, kur�unla katl ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ta� mahalleli �i�e bint-i Abdullah. Zevci K�mil ve �� ayl�k �ocu�u ma�s�m �erif ve h�nesindeki Rukiyye n�m kad�n, kur�unla g�yet fec� bir s�retde katledilmi� ve cen�zeler k�pekler taraf�ndan par�alanm��d�r. H�nesi ya�ma ve kendisi sol budundan kur�unla cerhedilmi� ve cer�has� el-�n mevc�d bulunmu�dur. Be� lira on iki mecidiyesi cebren al�nm��d�r. Ta� mahalleli M�nteha bint-i Monla Abdullah. O�lu F�ris cebren h�neden al�n�p g�t�r�lm��, hayat ve mem�t� mech�ld�r. F�ris'in on ya��ndaki o�lu Kadir ve on iki ya��ndaki Tevfik, kur�unla katl ve on ya��ndaki �erif, Ermeniler taraf�ndan duvara vurulup kafas� �izmelerle t�fenk dip�ikleriyle ezilmek s�retiyle vah�iy�ne bir �ekilde katledilmi�dir. Day�s� T�hir'in o�lu Dursun'un zevcesi Mintan ve Ki�mi� ve Zinet n�m kad�nlar�n �rz�na ta�arruz edilmi� ve Zinet n�m kad�n, def�atle cebren g�t�r�l�p fi�li �en� icr� edilmi� ve amcaz�desi Esad dahi k�l��la par�a par�a edilmi�dir. Ve h�nesi e�yas� k�milen ya�ma edilmi� ve her t�rl� vah�etler bu h�ne hakk�nda irtik�b olunmu�dur. K�z�lmescid mahallesinde �dilcevazl� Mecidiye bint-i Ayn n�m kad�n. �eki�le ba�� birka� yerinden cerhedilip g�zleri sakat edilmi�dir. Zeydan mahallesinden F�t�ma bint-i Mustafa n�m kad�n. N�m�suna tec�v�z edilmek istenildi�inden m�d�fa�ada bulunmu� oldu�u i�in, kafas� d�rt yerinden de�nekle darbedilip sol kolu k�r�lm��, y�z�nden ve sol kolunun iki yerinden kur�unla cerhedilmi�, �� lira, bir �ift bilezik g�t�r�lm��d�r. Ta� mahallesinde muk�m Mekteb-i R��d� mu�allimlerinden Hac� �mer Efendi. Yetmi� lira ve s�at kendisiyle ref�kas�ndan al�nm��, b�t�n e�yas� gasb, son zamanlarda Ermeniler, nezdine gidip para taleb etmi�lerse de olmad���ndan tazy�k edildi�i. Zeydan mahallesinde Molla Ali Kad�z�de F�z�l'�n ker�mesi Elmaset. D��man�n �ehre duh�l� esn�s�nda fir�r eder iken arkas�nda bulunan alt� ya��nda ve Eyyub n�m�ndaki mahd�mu katledilmi� ve kendisi Ruslar taraf�ndan kald�r�l�p K�z�lmescid mahallesine getirilmi�dir. K�z�lmescid mahallesinde Erzurumlu H�nkar Han�m. Kocas�, Vergi Kalemi Odac�s� ��kr� Efendi es�r-i harb olarak g�t�r�ld��� ve Hoca �mer Efendi'nin h�nesinde bulundu�u esn�da Ermeniler taraf�ndan be� lira cebren al�nm��d�r. Ahlat'�n Erkizan [Erkezen] mahallesinden olup K�z�lmescid mahallesinde muk�me �i�e bint-i �br�him. Nezdinde bulunan kay�n bir�derinin mahd�mu Halil'in babas� Kadri katledilmi�dir. Ahlat'�n Erkizan [Erkezen] mahallesinden olup K�z�lmescid mahallesinde muk�m Mahmed bin Yakub. D��man�n �ehre duh�l� esn�da Arap k�pr�s� civ�r�nda, kur�unla sol omuz ba��ndan mecr�h oldu�u ve hen�z i��de-i �fiyet etmedi�ini s�ylemi�dir. K�m�s mahalleli Zeyneb bint-i Mehmed. D��man�n �ehre duh�l� esn�da on alt� ya��nda Arif n�m�ndaki o�lu katl ve kendisi kur�unla ve on iki ya��nda H�lid n�m�ndaki o�lu, alt� yerinden s�ng� ile cerhedildikleri. K�m�s mahalleli Abd�lgani bin Selim. D��man�n �ehre duh�l� esn�da 19 ya��ndaki bir�deri Abd�lb�ki'yi es�r ederek g�t�r�ld���, �� s�atlerini ahz ve �ehirden ��kd�klar� s�rada, pederi Selim'i de K�z�l c�mi�-i �er�fi �n�nde katledildi�i if�de edilmi�dir. Hersan mahallesinden Hanife bint-i Halil. K�l��la tehd�d edilerek 30 lira-i nakd� ile s�ir huliyy�t� cebren al�nm��d�r. K�z�lmescid mahallesinden M�nevver bint-i Veli. D��man�n �ehre duh�l� esn�da on be� ya��nda k�z� Nasibe, Ermeniler taraf�ndan al�n�p g�t�r�lm�� ve n�m�suna tec�v�z edilmi�dir ve kocas� Mehmed �irin n�m �ahs� da es�r-i harb olarak g�t�r�lm�� ve huliyy�t� al�nm��d�r. Zeydan mahalleli Sultan bint-i Veli. Esn�-y� ist�l�da bir�deri asker �mer ile ber�ber �ehirden ��kar iken Tah�ot civ�r�nda, bir�deri katledildi�i ve kendisi es�r d��d��� s�ylenmi�dir. K�z�lmescid mahallesinden Sultan bint-i Molla S�leyman. D��man�n �ehre duh�l� esn�da Ermeni ve Ruslar h�nesine giderek kocas� Hoca Yusuf'dan, tazy�k s�retiyle para taleb ve on lira, iki s�at ve kemeri ile bilezikleri alm��lar ve ih�fesinden kocas� vef�t etmi�dir. Avih mahallesinden Dilber bint-i �emo. D��man �ehre girdi�i esn�da k�im bir�derini alt� ya��nda ve Beyaz n�m�ndaki k�z� katl ve ker�mesi on ya��ndaki Sultan'�n cebren bikrini iz�le etmi�lerdir. Zeydan mahallesinden Dilber bint-i Mehmed. D��man�n �ehre duh�l� esn�da kocas� Hakverdi, kur�unla cerhedilmi� ve bo�az�ndan kesilmi�dir. D��man�n h�n-i ist�l�s�nda tahl�s-i nefse muktedir olamad�klar�ndan dolay�, Bitlis'de kal�p Ruslar�n ve Ermeni �etelerinin ta�arruz�t ve tec�v�z�t�na d���r olan ah�l�-i �sl�miyye taraf�ndan if�de edilip ma�a'l-kasem huz�rumuzda zabtedilen i�bu if�d�t taraf�m�zdan tasd�k olunur. F� 30 Temmuz sene [1]332   Kaz�zlar �eyhi �eyh Yusuf Hac� Melikz�de �eyh Yusuf Molla �saz�de Abd�lhakim R��diye-i Askeriyye Arab� Mu�allimi �mer Hulusi Polis M�d�ri Vek�li M. Arif Bitlis Mekt�b� Vek�li Hakk� Hersan mahalleli Kalal�z�de Dursun Efendi. Pederi seksen ya��ndaki Hulef�-y� Nak�ibendiyye'den Haydar Efendi, Ermeniler taraf�ndan kama ile do�ranmak s�retiyle �eh�d edilmi� ve cesedinin baz� par�alar� ve bir kolu kanl� elbiseleri i�inde bulunmu�dur. H�nesindeki e�ya k�milen ya�ma edilmi�dir. Mahalleba��nda muk�me ve anas� S�niye bint-i Mustafa. Kur�unla alt� ya��nda N�ciye n�m�ndaki ker�mesi katl ve v�lidesi Sinem'den alt� lira gasb ve Bekir n�m�ndaki bir�deri es�r edilerek g�t�r�lm��d�r. �dilcevazl� olup K�z�lmescid mahallesinde muk�me on be� ya��nda Hediye bint-i Re�id. D��man�n �ehre girdi�i esn�da Rus ve Ermeniler taraf�ndan cebren bikri iz�le edilmi�dir. Avih mahallesinden Yadigar bint-i �aban. On alt� ya��nda bir�deri Polad kur�unla katledilmi�dir. Avih mahallesinden Zerni�an bint-i Sayyad. Elli ya��nda k�in bir�deri Hasan o�lu �zzet ve kom�usu Ali n�m �ah�slar kur�unla katledilmi� ve altm�� liralar� cebren al�nm��d�r. K�m�s mahalleli Ki�mi� bint-i Hoca �aban Efendi. Kocas� bakkal Muhyiddin kur�unla katl ve yan�nda bulunan otuz alt�n� cebren al�nm��d�r. Kar�ikan kaz�s� s�kinelerinden G�ll� bint-i S�lih. Kocas� Osman katl ve on ya��ndaki mahd�mu Hac� es�r edilmi�dir. K�z�lmescid Mahalleli Bedo bint-i Receb. On be� ya��nda haf�di Ali, kur�unla katledilmi�dir. Avih mahalleli Cevahir bint-i Fehim. Sekiz ya��ndaki G�lbeyaz ve d�rt ya��ndaki Behiyye n�m�ndaki k�zlar�n� kur�unla katl ve mezb�reyi boynundan kur�unla arkas�ndan da s�ng� ile cerh ve yirmi aded mecidiyesini ve bir aded Serkisof s�atini ahzetmi�lerdir. K�m�s mahalleli Mercan bint-i Abdurrahman. K�rk ya��nda Rahime ve k�rk be� ya��nda Hanife ile k�in bir�deri Resul, h�nede kur�unla katl ve altm�� liras� cebren ahzedilmi�dir. Yako karyeli Hac� bint-i H�lid. F�t�ma n�m�ndaki k�z�n� kur�unla katl ve be� liras�n� cebren ahzetmi�lerdir. Tatarg�z� karyeli Fidan bint-i Andelib. Kocas� �rif es�r edilip g�t�r�lm��d�r. Patnos karyeli Telli bint-i Haso. On iki ya��nda Sultan n�m�ndaki ker�mesi kur�unla katledilmi�dir. K�z�lmescid mahalleli G�ls�m bint-i Mehmed Efendi. Kocas� berber ��kr�'y� s�ng� ile katl ve d�m�d� bakkal Mehmed Ali'yi es�r etmi� ve �zerinde bulunan bir mikd�r paras�n� alm��lard�r. K�z�lmescid mahallesinden Leyla bint-i �lyas. Mahd�mu K�lhanc� S�lih'i kur�unla katletmi�lerdir. K�z�lmescid mahallesinden Karacaz�de Abd�laziz bin Hac� �sm�il. Babas� Hac� �sm�il ile bir�deri �shak'� kur�unla katl ve alt� y�z liralar�n� cebren alm��lard�r. Ta� mahalleli �eyh Abd�lgani o�lu �eyh Yusuf. Ermeniler taraf�ndan darb ve tehd�d ve env�-i i�kence ile yirmi �� lira paras� ve kar�s�na �id elbise ves�ir e�yas� al�nm�� ve h�nesi hedmedilmi�dir. Hersan mahalleli Kalal� o�lu Osman bin Yusuf. K�z� Medine n�m kad�n, Ermeniler taraf�ndan darb ile eser-i darbdan �lm�� ve d�m�d� H�lid'i ve o�lu Ali'yi bo�az�ndan kama ile keserek katl ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi� ve on d�rt liras� kesesinden al�nm��d�r. Ve kom�usu bulunan Molla Mehmed'i, o�lu Ziver'i, k�z�n�, kay�n v�lidesi Hezar'�, bacana�� Resul'� ve h�nesinde m�s�fir bulunan Komas karyeli �br�him'i, k�l�� ve kama ile kafalar� kesilmek s�retiyle itl�f etmi�lerdir. Ve Osman'�n h�nesine iltic� eden ��k�s karyeli Re�id ve kar�s�n�, �� k�z ve �� erkekden ib�ret �ocuklar�n�, yine k�l�n� ve kama ile katletmi�lerdir. Yine ��k�s karyeli olup Hersan mahallesinde Osman'�n kom�ulu�unda bulunan bir h�neye iltic� eden Yusuf ve ref�kas�yla alt� �ocu�u fec� bir s�retde katl u itl�f edilmi�dir. Hersan mahalleli Maksud o�lu Musa. O�lu on d�rt ya��ndaki Hasan, Ermeniler taraf�ndan t�fenkle katledildi�i gibi d�rt mecidiye paras� al�nm�� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Kom�usu Haso o�lu Ahmed'i, Ermeni �etesi taraf�ndan baltalarla par�alanm��lard�r. Ve Musa'n�n k�in bir�deri S�lih bin �br�him, t�fenk kur�unuyla elleri ba�lanmak s�retiyle katledilmi�dir. Ta� Mahalleli Haydar o�lu Hasan. Ermeniler taraf�ndan kafas� kamalarla cerhedilerek kesesinden 67 liras� al�nm��d�r ve kendisi �� ay habsedilmi�dir. Ta� mahalleli R�dvan o�lu Sufi H�lid. Hem��releri Hanife ve di�eri Rahime ve bir�deri Resul, bir�deri Mehmed'in �ocuklar�; Yusuf, Cemil, Hamid ve Horsi n�m ma�s�m ve ma�s�meler k�l�n� ve balta ve kamalarla Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan fec� bir s�retde katledilmi�dir. Y�z yirmi liral�k ziynet, alt�n ve liras� ve otuz iki be�i birli�i al�nm��, h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ta� mahallesinden Sad�k o�lu Polad. O�lu yedi ya��nda Yusuf, ref�kas� Nazl� bint-i R�stem ve k�zlar�; Nesibe, H�diye ve bir�derinin haremi Sultan, Ruslarla Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan k�l�n� ve kama ile par�alanm�� ve kesesinden yetmi� aded liras� al�nm�� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilerek h�nesi yak�lm��d�r. Vanl� olup Mahalleba��'nda muk�m ihtiy�r Hasan A�a. Darb ve i�kence edilmi� ve elbiseleri y�rt�larak be� y�z guru�u al�nm��d�r. Hersan mahalleli Hatibz�de Molla Hamza bin Molla �br�him. Amucaz�desi Haydar Efendi'nin o�lu Abd�lmecid ve Abd�laziz, Ermeniler taraf�ndan kur�unla katledilmi�dir. Di�er amucaz�desi Halife Molla Ali o�lu on be� ya��nda Mehmed ve iki ref�kas� Cevahir ve Zeyneb'in n�m�slar�na tec�v�z ve k�zlar� Huri ve Sabriye'nin bikrleri iz�le ile m�kerreren fi�l-i �en� icr� edilmek s�retiyle c�mlesi k�l�n� ve baltalarla katledilmi�dir. Ve h�nesinde m�s�fireten muk�m Malazgird'in Tend�rek karyeli Fak� Mehmed iki o�lu, iki k�z� ve ref�kas�, yine Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan Hersan mahallesinde telgraf m�d�rlerinden Resul Efendi, h�nesinde par�alanm��d�r. Ve Molla Hamza'n�n elli be� liras� kesesinden al�nm�� ve k�z�n�n huliyy�t ve elbisesi ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Hersan mahalleli Bedir bin S�leyman. Bir�deri Molla Resul Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan t�fenk kur�unuyla katledilmi�, yedi lira ve s�ati cebren al�nm��d�r. Hem��resi Yadigar ve Feride'nin huliyy�t� al�nm��d�r. Zeydan mahalleli Reyhan bint-i �mer. Zevci Musa k�l�n�la �ld�r�lm��d�r. Ta� mahalleli Z�lfinaz bint-i �sa A�a. O�lu Abd�lhamid kafas� par�alanmak s�retiyle katledilmi� ve yirmi liras� kesesinden al�nm��d�r. Ayn�lb�rid mahalleli Zeyneb bint-i H�lid. K�z� Hanife ve d�m�d� Memi, Ermeni �etesi taraf�ndan kama ile katledilmi�dir. Hersan mahalleli Cevahir bint-i Hac� Ali. O�lu Mehmed Said kur�unla katledilmi� ve k�rk aded g�ll� altun ve g�m�� kemer ve altun k�pesi ve yirmi �� mecidiyesi al�nm��d�r. Hersan mahalleli Ki�mi� bint-i Osman Bey. H�nesi Rus ve Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan yak�lm��, k�z� Zinet, haf�desi alt� ya��nda �liye, o�lu yedi ya��nda Mehmed S�lih, h�ne der�nunda ihr�k edilmi�dir. O�lu on be� ya��ndaki Osman, es�r-i harbolarak g�t�r�lm��d�r. Haf�di be� ya��ndaki Necdet, Rus kumandan� taraf�ndan cebren al�n�p g�t�r�lm��d�r. Hersan mahalleli Yadigar bint-i S�leyman �avu�. Pederi S�leyman �avu� ve bir�deri Resul, Ermeniler taraf�ndan balta ve k�l�n�la katledilmi�, elli lira ve ba��ndaki fer�h�si ve kesesinde yedi liras� ve bir �ift altun k�pesi al�nm��d�r. Ta� mahalleli Ayn ibn-i �sm�il. Pederi ihtiy�r �sm�il, Ermeniler taraf�ndan katledilmi�, on �� lira otuz guru� ve s�ati al�nm��d�r ve iki ay habsedilmi�dir. Ta� mahallesili Ali bin Mehmed. On be� ya��nda bulunan merk�m, Ermeniler taraf�ndan �� yerinden kama ve s�ng� ile cerhedilmi� ve amcas� K�s�m, h�ne der�nunda yak�lm�� ve amucaz�desi H�lid ve Abd�lk�dir'i ve amcas�n�n kar�s� Rukiyye'yi k�l�n�la kesmi�ler, yirmi liras�n� alm��lar, be� lira da Rukiyye'nin cebinden ��kar�p alm��lar ve kendisinden iki lira, bir rovelver, bir s�at al�nm�� ve h�nesi tamamen ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ayn�lb�rid mahallesinden Mehmed bin Hamid. Sekiz ya��nda bulunan merk�m Mehmed Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan darb ve cerhedilmi� ve pederi Hamid es�r-i harbolarak g�t�r�lm�� ve amucalar� F�ris ve �sm�il kama ve k�l�n�la par�alanm��d�r. Zeydan mahalleli Kadri bint-i Cum�a. O�ullar� d�rt ve on d�rt ya��nda H�seyin ve Mehmed'i k�l�n�la kesmi�ler ve k�in bir�deri Emin kur�unla katl ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Mahalleba��'ndan Didar bint-i Receb. Ermeniler taraf�ndan darb ve i�kence edilerek h�nesi e�yas�yla Sefer Beyz�de K�mil Bey'in em�neten b�rak�lan e�ya-y� beytiyyesi k�milen ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ta� mahalleli Muhabbet bint-i Hac� �sm�il. Zevci K�s�m hasta yatakda iken t�fenk kur�unuyla katledilip h�ne der�nunda ihr�k edilmi�dir. Yirmi liras� al�nm��d�r. Bir�deri H�lid dahi kap� �n�nde as�lmak s�retiyle �ld�r�lm��d�r. Day�s� kar�s� dul Rukiye'yi de k�l�n�la kesmi�ler. Hersan mahallesinden Mercan bint-i ��kir. Bir�derz�desi on be� ya��ndaki Yusuf'u kama ile �ld�r�p h�nesi ihr�k edilmi�dir. Avih mahalleli Polad o�ullar�ndan H�lid'in zevcesi Minnet�. Zevci H�lid ve yedi ya��ndaki �erkes n�m o�lu, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan fec�atle katledilmi� ve yirmi liras� al�nm��d�r. Zeydan mahalleli Besi bint-i S�leyman. Zevci Abdullah ve Besi'nin bir�deri Ma�ruf ve Re�id ve g�r�m� b�kir Feriha n�m k�z, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan katledilmi�dir. Hamtos mahalleli Yadigar bint-i Hasan. O�lu on sekiz ya��ndaki Abd�lbaki, Ermeniler taraf�ndan al�n�p g�t�r�lm�� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilerek kendisinden on lira al�nm��d�r. Avih mahalleli Cemile bint-i Bekir. Sekiz ya��nda bulunan mezb�renin anas� Hezar, Ermeniler taraf�ndan katledilmi� ve h�neleri ya�ma edilmi�dir. Mahalleba��'ndan Hayriye bint-i �br�him. Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan cebren bikri iz�le ve Rus efr�d� taraf�ndan def�atle n�m�suna tec�v�z edilmi�dir. Bir liras�, sa� ba�lar�, elbise ves�ir e�yas� k�milen al�nm��d�r. K�z�lmescid mahalleli K�y (?) bint-i �ero. Zevci Mehmed Ali hasta iken Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan katledilmi�dir. Marmutlu mahallesinden ��hret bint-i Mehmed. Dokuz ya��ndaki o�lu M��tak ve d�rt ya��ndaki Hikmet, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan k�l�n�la katledilmi�dir. Cebinden be� liras� al�nm�� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ahlatl� olup Hamtos mahallesinde muk�me Hamail bint-i Abd�laziz. O�ullar� Ali ve ��kir Ermeniler taraf�ndan kur�unla katledilmi� ve haf�desi on ya��nda P�kize'nin kolunu ve kula��n� kesmek s�retiyle katledilmi�dir. Gelini Hamail t�fenk ile cerhedilerek eser-i cerhden be� g�n sonra �ld�r�lm��d�r. Tatarg�z� karyeli olup Diyarbekir cihetine gitmek �zere Bitlis'den ge�mekde iken Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan der-dest edilen S�fiye. Zevci S�leyman, k�zlar� sekiz ya��ndaki Emetullah ve memedeki Redikal (?) n�m sabiyye k�l�n�la Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan par�alanm��d�r. O�lu Abd�lkerim g�ib olmu�dur. E�yas� ya�ma edilmi�dir. Hamtos mahallesinde muk�me �dilcevaz'�n Manik karyeli Fidan bint-i Musa. Zevci Abd�lmecid darb ve cerhedilerek es�r-i harbolarak Ermeniler taraf�ndan g�t�r�lm��d�r. Az�d karyeli olup Diyarbekir cihetine gitmek �zere Bitlis'den ge�mekde iken Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan der-dest edilen Subera bint-i Amo. Gelini Medine ve on be� ya��ndaki o�lu Abd�lbaki, Ermeniler taraf�ndan cebren g�t�r�lm��d�r. E�yas� al�nm��d�r. Kereko�lan karyeli olup K�m�s mahallesinde muk�me Zarife bint-i S�leyman. Bir�derleri Ali ve Memi, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan katledilmi� ve e�yas� k�milen gasbolunmu�dur. Dedeli karyeli olup Kurubulak mahallesinde muk�me Aban� bint-i Hasan. Zevci Haso, k�in bir�deri S�leyman ve haremi Harime Rus ve Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan k�l�n�la kesilmi� ve yirmi liras�yla e�yas� gasbedilmi�dir. Ahlatl� olup Kurubulak mahallesinden Minnet� bint-i �br�him. Pederi ihtiy�r �br�him, karde�i Mecid, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan k�l�n�la kesilmi�dir. E�yas� ve d�rt y�z guru�u al�nm��d�r. Ta� mahalleli Cemile bint-i H�seyin. Zevci �br�him ve o�lu on iki ya��ndaki Sayyad*, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan katledilmi� ve �� liras� al�nm��d�r. N�ho�n�d mahalleli Zinet bint-i N�ri. Karda�� H�lid'i kur�unla Ermeniler katletmi�ler, iki y�z guru�unu alm��lar. Dedeli karyeli olup Kurubulak mahallesi,nden G�rnaz bint-i Haso. Babas� Haso, bir�deri 15 ya��ndaki Cem�id, v�lidesi Amo, bir�deri d�rt ya��ndaki Ahmed, k�l�n�la, kur�unla katledilmi�, on iki liras�yla e�yas� al�nm��d�r. �aml� olup K�z�lmescid mahallesinde Esma bint-i Hac� Mustafa. O�lu mahkeme ba�k�tibi �zzet Efendi Ermeniler taraf�ndan katledilmi�, on be� liras�yla s�at ve e�ya-y� beytiyyesi k�milen ya�ma edilmi�dir. Mabekor mahalleli F�t�ma bint-i Mehmed Efendi. O�lu on ya��ndaki Necmeddin, Ermeniler taraf�ndan katledilmi�, kocas� �sm�il eser-i darbdan alt� ayd�r yatakda hareketden mu�attal bir h�lde bulunuyor. �� y�z liras� ve ba��ndaki altm�� altunu ve fer�h�si, be� s�at ve �� bilezik ve e�ya-y� beytiyyesi tamamen al�nm��d�r. Zeydan mahalleli Ki�mi� bint-i Ahmed. Pederi Ahmed'i Ermeni �eteleri k�l�n�la kesmi�ler ve be� liras�n� alm��lar. Tatarg�z� karyeli olup Bitlis'den ge�mekde iken Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan der-dest edilen S�liha bint-i Memi. Bir�derleri H�mi ve Hamza ve o�lu dokuz ya��nda S�lih ve alt� ya��ndaki S�bit ve d�rt ya��ndaki Sultan, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan k�l�n�la kesilip par�alanm��d�r. Tatarg�z� karyeli Elmaset bint-i Abd�lgafur. O�lu on be� ya��ndaki Said es�r edilip Ruslar taraf�ndan g�t�r�lm��d�r. Zevci H�seyin, k�l�n�la Ermeniler taraf�ndan katledilmi�dir. Malazgird'in �irvan�eyh karye li R�bia bint-i Hac�. Pederi Hac� ve v�lidesi Saray ve bir�derinin zevcesi Leyla, bir�deri on ya��ndaki Sabri ve memedeki bir�deri �ebab ve halas� Horzi ve hem��resi Cemile, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan katledilmi�dir. Malazgirdli Nuran bint-i �ebab. Pederi �ebab Ermeniler taraf�ndan g�ib edilmi�dir. Avih mahalleli Nigar bint-i Polad. Kocas� Ermeniler taraf�ndan kama ile kesilerek otuz liras� al�nm��, h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. K�z�lmescid mahallesinde Papir soka��nda. D�vud'un haremi F�t�ma ve iki o�lan, bir k�z �ocu�uyla Dellak Nezir'in haremi ve bald�zlar� F�t�ma ve H�diye ve F�t�ma'n�n iki k�z ve bir o�lan ve H�diye'nin bir k�z, bir o�lan �ocuklar� ve K�m�s mahalleli Hasan'�n zevcesi ve k�in v�lidesi ve k�z� Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan g�t�r�lm��d�r. Ve �ser�dan K�r�mz�de Habib Efendiyle Emrullah n�m�ndaki �ocuk, katl u itl�f ve Alemdar k�pr�s� civ�r�nda Hac� R�stem'in on iki ya��ndaki k�z�n�n cebren bikri iz�le edilmi�dir. Ayn�lb�rid mahalleli Abd�lhamid'in haremi �i�e bint-i Ahmed. Zevci Abd�lh�m�d, o�ullar� alt� ve iki ya��nda �evket, Latif, �hsan, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan g�t�r�lm��d�r. H�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Komus mahalleli �br�him Halil zevcesi G�rc� bint-i Ahmed. N�m�suna Ermeniler taraf�ndan tec�v�z edilmi�, k�in bir�deri �sa Efendi'nin o�lu on yedi ya��nda Abd�lb�ki, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan g�t�r�lm�� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ayn�lb�rid mahallesinden �i�e bint-i S�lin. Ermeniler taraf�ndan kafas� ve di�leri k�r�lm�� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ayn�lb�rid mahalleli Yadigar bint-i Bayram. Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Zevci Polad Efendi g�t�r�lm��d�r. Ta� mahalleli Cemile bint-i Feyzi Bey. Zevci Mehmed ve k�in bir�deri Mikdad'� Ermenilerle Ruslar katletmi�ler ve cen�zelerini yakm��lar. H�nesi ya�ma ve ihr�k edilmi�, h�nesi kap�s� yang�n esn�s�nda Ermeniler taraf�ndan ba�lan�p tahl�s-i nefs i�in kendisini pencereden atarak kula��ndan mecr�h olmu�dur. Ta� mahalleli Han�m n�m kad�n, Ermeniler taraf�ndan par�alanm�� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ta� mahalleli Sufi Veli bin Receb. Amcaz�desi Ke�i� ve k�z� H�diye ve Cemile ve bir�derz�desi on be� ya��nda Said ve on �� ya��nda Hamid ve yedi ya��nda Cemil ve be� ya��nda Garib, Rus ve Ermeniler taraf�ndan k�l�n� ve kama ile kesilmi�dir. Ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Haremi Cemile'den altm�� lira al�nm��d�r. Ta� mahalleli bin�c� Mahmud'un zevcesi Nasibe'nin kafas� Ermeniler taraf�ndan kesilmi� ve Nasibe'nin be� ya��ndaki �ocu�u ��kr� k�l�n�la kesildikden sonra, alet-i ten�s�l� kat� ile a�z�na sokulmu� ve on ya��ndaki Cemile'nin g�zleri oyulmu� ve kafas� kesilmi�dir. Avih mahalleli R�yi�e bint-i Mustafa. O�lu on be� ya��nda Ali, on yedi ya��nda �zzet, zevci Hasan, Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan par�alanm�� ve kafalar� el-�n mevc�ddur. Avih mahalleli K�y (?) bint-i Resul ve K�l�� o�lu Haso ve o�lu �zzet, Mazoran �eyhi �eyh Ahmed Efendi ile zevcesi �ema ve hizmetcisi K�rm�z�, Ahmed o�lu Mehmed ve bir�deri Mikdad ve A�rz�de F�ris, bir�deri Ahmed, �ve�i o�lu �zzet ve A�rz�de Habib'in kar�s� Zekiye, Polad o�lu �sm�il, bir�derz�desi H�lid, s�vac� Bolak o�lu Fethullah, Bay�nd�r o�lu Hac� Ali, mahd�mu Yusuf Ermeniler taraf�ndan katledilmi� ve k�l�n�la par�alanm��lard�r. Hac� Yusufz�de �emseddin'in k�z� on �� ya��nda Melek ve Arafat'�n v�lidesi Z�lfinaz Ermeniler taraf�ndan katledilmi�dir. Me�koz�de Mahmud'un ker�mesi Feride, korkusundan tecenn�n ederek kendisini asmak s�retiyle h�nh�r �etelerin elinden kurtarm��d�r. Hersan mahalleli Maksud bin K�s�m. Ruslar taraf�ndan bir�deri S�leyman'�n on be� ya��ndaki k�z� G�ll�'n�n bikri iz�le ve yirmi ya��ndaki Peri'nin n�m�suna tec�v�z edilerek ba�dehu k�l�n� ve kama ile par�alanm��d�r. H�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Hersan mahalleli Mehmed bin Hasan. H�nesinde mis�fir seksen ya��nda Mehmed isminde bir K�rd katl ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Hersan mahalleli Reyhan bint-i �emseddin. H�nesinde mis�fir Hizanl� F�t�ma ve Van k�yl�lerinden Ziynet n�m kad�nlar�n n�m�suna Ruslar taraf�ndan tec�v�z edilerek ba�dehu katledilmi�dir. Hersan mahalleli Batum bint-i Yusuf. O�lu yedi ya��ndaki Tevfik, Ruslar taraf�ndan es�r edilip g�t�r�lm�� ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ve kom�ular�ndan Azizo Neno n�m kad�n�n kocas� Ruslar taraf�ndan katledilmi�dir. Hersan mahalleli ��hret bint-i Mehmed. Ruslar taraf�ndan o�lu �efik es�r edilip g�t�r�lm��d�r. H�nesi ya�ma edilmi� ve k�rk yedi liras� cebinden al�nm��d�r. Avih mahalleli G�ll� bint-i Emrullah. Zevci Cihangir Ruslar taraf�ndan katledilmi�dir. On be� lira ve on be� mecidiyesi al�nm��d�r. Avih mahalleli �mm�han bint-i Abd�lgafur Efendi. Haf�di on alt� ya��nda Polad, Ermeniler taraf�ndan par�alanm��d�r. K�m�s mahalleli Molla Veliz�de Bilal bin Hasan Ruslar taraf�ndan katl ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. K�m�s mahalleli Bir�derz�de Mirze'nin ref�kas� G�l�in bint-i Selam ve yine Bir�derz�de Hac� Mehmed'in ref�kas� �ffet bint-i Abdurrahman ve orta�� Vanl� Kad�n ve �ffetin k�z� ve G�lenz�de F�ris bin Eyyub'�n ref�kas� Mahbube bint-i Yakub ve Dilanz�de (?) Polad'�n ref�kas� Hano bint-i Ali ve Barutcuz�de Osman'�n ref�kas� Ana bint-i �smet ve k���k �ocu�u Abdullah ve G�lo�lu Molla Mahmud'un k�z� a�ma Ko�du (?) ve R�stem o�lu �aban ve K�sez�de Hasan ve o�lu S�leyman ve Senco bin �aban Ruslarla Ermeniler taraf�ndan k�l�n� ve kama ve s�ng� ile par�alanmak s�retiyle katledilmi�lerdir. K�m�s mahalleli Hamza �elebiz�de Haydar'�n haremi Peru bint-i Abdullah Ermeniler taraf�ndan g�t�r�lm�� ve Hamza �elebiz�de F�ris bin Yusuf ve haremi Kudret bint-i Ali Efendi ve Hamza �elebiz�de Ayo'nun o�lu Halo'nun haremi Sultan bint-i Abdullah ve yine o �ileye mens�b Ahmed'in ref�kas� Cevahir bint-i �mer A�a Ruslar taraf�ndan katledilmi�dir. Ve Hamza �elebiz�de Veli �avu�'un h�nesi Ermeni �eteleri taraf�ndan bomba ile tahr�b edilmi�dir. K�m�s mahalleli Fethullah'�n k�z� ve N�ri'nin haremi Meryem Ruslar taraf�ndan katledilmi�dir. Zeydan mahalleli Re�id bin Cafer, bir�deri Ali, bir�derz�desi H�lid s�ret-i fec��nede katl, H�lid'in mahd�mu on be� ya��nda Mehmed S�lih es�r ve h�neleri ya�ma edilmi�dir. Zeydan mahalleli N�ri bin Osman'�n zevcesi F�t�ma ve alt� ya��nda k�z� H�rriyet, �� ya��nda o�lu Abdulaziz es�r ve h�neleri ya�ma edilmi�dir. Zeydan mahalleli �mer bin Mehmed'in kar�s�n� ve yedi ya��nda k�z� ve Resul bin Veli'nin alt� ya��nda o�lu, sekiz ya��nda k�z� Ruslar taraf�ndan es�r ve e�yalar� ya�ma ve Sofu �br�him sakat ve yetmi� ya��nda oldu�u halde ve zevcesi �siye ihtiy�re ve ma�l�le bulundu�u halde katledilmi�lerdir. Zeydan mahalleli elli ya��nda S�leyman bin Mehmed y�z ya��nda v�lidesi �mmihan� Rus ve Ermeniler taraf�ndan katl ve zevcesi Ki�mi� bint-i Halil cerhedilmi�dir. Hizanl� Hamza Ruslar taraf�ndan katl ve h�nesi ya�ma edilmi�dir. Zeydan mahalleli Hac� Mahmud Efendiz�de H�f�z Yakub Ruslar taraf�ndan katl ve Hasan o�lu Eminin kar�s� Elmas katl, ker�mesi N�dire d�rt yerden kur�unla cerhedilmi�dir. Veli mahd�mu �mer, Haydar o�lu Halef ve iki k���k mahd�mu ve H�lid bin N�ri, Hamza o�lu Said, S�d�k o�lu Mikdad, Mahmud'un zevcesi D�dare, k�z� G�ll�, Hasan'�n ker�mesi Cevahir, di�er Cevahir bint-i Abdullah, Melenzeliz�de yetmi� ya��nda �rfan, Hac� C�ndi Abdulcelil, Hac� C�ndi'nin haremi Zekiye, di�er haremi Ziynet, v�lidesi G�ll�, o�lu �� ya��nda Abdullah, ker�mesi d�rt ya��nda N�riye, ��kr�'n�n kar�s� Penbe, Ahmed'in zevcesi N�dire, Habib'in mahd�mu E�ref, Terzi Murtaza o�lu F�ik s�ret-i fec��nede, Terzi P�r�z�de Abdurrahman par�alanmak s�retiyle, Kazanc�z�de �br�him o�lu Tevfik, Seyfullah Efendi o�lu sekiz ya��nda Dursun, Hamza o�lu Bekir, Z�lkadirz�de S�d�k o�lu Mikdad, Mamag�z�de (?) Osman o�lu H�lid, Tahinciz�de Abdullah, Z�lkadirz�de K�s�m'�n o�lu yedi ya��nda Mehmed katl ve h�neleri Rus ve Ermeniler taraf�ndan ya�ma edilmi�dir. P�r�z�de Receb o�lu yetmi� ya��nda Hakverdi katl ve h�nesi ihr�k edilmi�dir. Dizdarz�de �rfan'�n o�lu ��kr�, G�l�o o�lu Musa katl ve Musa'n�n kar�s� Reyhan iki yerden yaral�, H�lidz�de N�ri'nin mahd�mu H�lid Ruslar taraf�ndan es�r ve kar�s� katledilmi�dir. Vankkavarl� Mehmed bin Mahmud ve k�z� Huri Ruslar taraf�ndan cerhedilmi�dir. Zeydan mahalleli Abdullah o�lu �sa, ��r�kz�de H�lid'in kar�s� Halime, Muhtar �aban'�n mahd�mu N�ri ve haf�di �emseddin �rif z�k�r ve ............ Rus ve Ermeniler taraf�ndan katl ve �aban'�n k�in bir�deri Tevfik es�r ve h�neleri ya�ma edilmi�dir. Zeydan mahalleli Pir Musaz�de �evket bin Habib Efendi Ruslar taraf�ndan g�t�r�lm�� ve yine o mahalleli Kalal�z�de Mustafa bin Hakverdi'nin bir�deri Abdullah, Mustafa'n�n kar�s� Selbi bint-i Re�id Efendi Rus ve Ermeniler taraf�ndan katl ve h�neleri ya�ma edilmi�dir. Ve yine o mahalleli altm�� ya��nda Polad bin H�lid, N�s�rz�de Hac� Osman'�n hem��resi seksen be� ya��nda Rindi (?), M�zikz�de (?) �emseddin, Fethullah haremi Nigar, Buda�z�de Mehmed'in kar�s� Hediye, iki ve d�rt ya�lar�nda iki k�z�yla yedi ya��nda bir o�lu, N�s�rz�de �shak'�n kar�s� Selbi, N�s�rz�de �emseddin Efendi'nin v�lidesi seksen ya��nda Kudret, Kalal�z�de S�leyman bin Sadullah Rus ve Ermeniler taraf�ndan katl ve h�neleri ya�ma edilmi�dir. Be�ir Efendiz�de ��kr�'n�n v�lidesi Han�m ve ker�mesi on be� ya��nda Cemile, K�d�z�de Mahmud'un haremi F�t�ma, Dervi�'in v�lidesi Hazo, Mustafa'n�n haremi Hamo, H�f�z'�n haremi Kudret Ruslar taraf�ndan katl ve h�neleri ya�ma edilmi�dir. D��man�n h�n-i istil�s�nda tahl�s-i nefse muktedir olamad�klar�ndan dolay� Bitlis'de kal�p Ruslar�n ve Ermeni �etelerinin ta�arruz�t ve tec�v�z�t�na d���r olan ah�l�-i �sl�miyye taraf�ndan if�de edilip ma�a'l-kasem huz�rumuzda zabtedilen i�bu if�d�t taraf�m�zdan da tasd�k olunur. Kaz�zlar �eyhiz�de Yusuf Hac� Melikz�de �eyh Yusuf Molla �saz�de Abd�lhakim R��diye-i Askeriyye Arab� Mu�allimi �mer Hulusi Polis M�d�ri Vek�li M. Arif Bitlis Mekt�b� Vek�li Hakk� C�mi�ler Meydan c�mi�-i �er�fi �hr�k C�mi�-i Keb�r �hr�k ve tahr�b Hocabey " G�kmeydan " �eyhhasan " Kurup�nar " F�risiye c�mi�-i �er�fi Tahr�b H�t�niyye Ahur ittih�z edilmi�dir Kurey�i Tahr�b Marmut " Ta� " K�z�lmescid Tahr�b Alemd�r " �erefiye " �eharsand�k �hr�k Sult�narab Tahr�b Medreseler G�kmeydan medresesi Tahr�b Kirafiye (?) " Gazibekye " �erefiye " Tekyeler K�frevi tekyesi �hr�k �eyheminefendi tekyesi Tahr�b �eyhabdull�h Bedeh��n� tekyesi �hr�k Ziyaretg�hlar �eyhabdull�h Bedeh��n� �hr�k Vel��emsedd�n Tahr�b �eyhbabo Tahr�b �eyh�'l-garib " Mektebler G�kmeydan �btid�� mektebi   Marmut civ�r�nda Sult�n�   K�z�lmescid'de �btid��   �ar�uba��'nda �btid��   Hersan mahallesi'nde �btid��   H�nlar �ar�uda t�cc�r hanlar� �hr�k A�a��kal�a'da Hamza'n�n han� " Dev�ir-i Resmiyye H�k�met d�iresi D�hilen tahr�b Polis d�iresi " Jandarma d�iresi " Beled� d�iresi "   Polis karagolh�neleri Mahalleba�� karagolh�nesi Tahr�b �ar�� karagolh�nesi " Kurup�nar karagolh�nesi " Saparkur karagolh�nesi " K�m�s karagolh�nesi " Zeydan karagolh�nesi " K�pr�ler Arap k�pr�s�   Alemd�r k�pr�s�   Saferbey k�pr�s�   Diyadin k�pr�s�   �orpunar k�pr�s�   Hatuniye   Ham�mlar Pa�a ham�m� Tahr�b H�n " Orta " Depolar G�kmeydan civ�r�nda asker� deposu �hr�k Beled� d�iresi civ�r�nda asker� deposu Tahr�b  Memleketin Zeydan, K�m�s, Hersan mahallelerindeki b�t�n ba�lar tahr�b m�smir ve gayr-� m�smir e�c�r kat�edilmi�dir. �ar�udaki d�kk�nlar�n b�t�n kapaklar� ihr�k ve ba�z�lar�n�n damlar� hedmedilmi�dir. 1- Mahalleba��'nda Caferuz�de'nin h�nesi hedm ve kapusu �n�nde yirmi n�f�su m�tec�viz kad�n, erkek, �ocuk katledilmi�, foto�raf� al�nm��d�r. 2- Yine o mahallede Ahmed'in h�nesi tand�r�nda Ta� mahalleli on iki�er ya�lar�nda Ali ve Abdullah n�mlar�ndaki iki �ocu�u katl ve Ta� mahalleli �lyasz�de Kerimo'nun kafas� kesilmi� ve kanl� k�l�h� foto�raf� al�nm��d�r. 3- Mahalleba�� caddesi �zerinde onbe� n�f�su m�tec�viz kad�n, erkek s�byan s�ret-i fec��da itl�f edilerek foto�raf� al�nm��d�r. 4- Ayntab kaz�s� s�kinlerinden on be� ya��nda F�t�ma n�m�ndaki k�z�n bikrini iz�le, sol elinin iki parma�� kat�edilmi� ve foto�raf� al�nm��d�r.   �hr�k Edilen H�neler Zeydan mahalleli Suvac�z�de Abdulgani h�nesi. Zeydan mahalleli Bid�yet Ba�k�tibi Resul Efendi. Zeydan mahalleli bir�deri S�leyman h�nesi. Zeydan mahalleli Tahinciz�de Hakverdi h�nesi. Zeydan mahalleli Molla Musaz�de Re�id h�nesi. Zeydan mahallesinin A�a��kala'da Hac� Hamza'n�n h�n�. Hersan mahalleli S�atc�z�de Hac� Mehmed Efendi h�nesi. Hersan mahalleli Polis Halef Efendi. Hersan mahalleli Hale Aliz�de Osman h�nesi. Hersan mahalleli Tahtav�z�de Mahmud Efendi. Zeydan mahalleli T�cc�r Resulz�de Receb o�lu Dervi� h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli Hac� Mehmed S�lih Efendi h�nesi. Ces�m bir h�nedir. Ta� mahalleli Kasab Be�ir h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli Da�va Vek�li Mustafa Efendi h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli Mecid bin Polad h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli Bekir bin Ahmed h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli Barutcuz�de Yasin'in fevk�n� k�sm�. Ta� mahalleli Dervi� A�az�de S�d�k h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli Hac� Hasanz�de Resul Efendi bin Hac� Bedir A�a h�nesi. Muntazam ve ces�m bir h�nedir. Ta� mahalleli Hac� Hasanz�de Osman Efendi bin Hac� Mehmed h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli Hac� Hasanz�de Komiser �rif Efendi bin Murad A�a h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli Hac� Hasanz�de Yasin Efendi bin F�ris h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli D�rtsanduk �eyhiz�de �eyh Abdulmecid ve �eyh Nazif (?)efendiler h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli Papu��u Bedir h�nesi. Hersan mahalleli Hang�l�z�de Bapir h�nesi. Hersan mahalleli M�zikz�de (?) Cehver h�nesi. Hersan mahalleli Halil Bey h�nesi. Ta� mahalleli K�sez�de Bayram h�nesi. M�ftiz�de Sadullah Efendi'nin kahveh�nesi. Zeydan mahalleli Cafer'in h�nesi. Zeydan mahalleli Hac� R�stem h�nesi. B�y�k bir h�nedir. Zeydan mahalleli Caferuz�de Eyyub h�nesi. Ta� mahallesinin G�kmeydan civ�r�nda T�cc�r Yakubz�de S�leyman h�nesi. Zeydan mahallesinin alt�nda Kalbur civ�r�nda K�k�z�de Ahmed bin Receb h�nesi. Zeydan mahallesinin alt�nda Kalbur civ�r�nda �sa bin Abd�ssamed h�nesi. Zeydan mahallesinin alt�nda Kalbur civ�r�nda Yunus bin Hac� Hasan h�nesi. Zeydan mahallesinin Yusufpa�a civ�r�nda Mecid bin Bekir h�nesi. Zeydan mahallesinde K�k�z�de Abd�rrezzak bin Hamid h�nesi. Zeydan mahallesinde G�lsenem o�lu Halil h�nesi. Zeydan mahallesinde Fakih Hasan'�n h�nesi. Hul�sa Rus k�ta��t�n�n ma�l�ben hez�meti �zerine Bitlis'e duh�l�m�zde �ehrin hey�et-i mecm��as� yek-nazarda bir levha-i h�n�n-i fec�at ve har�biyyet arzetmi�dir. �yle bir levha ki: Her s�hib-i vicd�n bu derece vah�etler �k� eden ins�nlara la�net-h�n olmakdan kendisini alamaz. Yukar�da ah�l�-i �sl�miyye taraf�ndan ma�a'l-kasem if�de edilip s�ras�yla yaz�ld��� �zere �ehre duh�l eden Ruslar tahl�s-i nefse �it�b ile kurtulamayan �ocuk, kad�n, erkek bir�ok ins�nlar�n h�n-� ma�s�m�nesini k�l��, kama, balta, kur�un, bomba gibi ves�yit-i vah�etleriyle �r�ka etdikden sonra bakiyet�'s-s�y�f sekiz y�z seksen iki n�f�su k�biliyyet-i ist��besi on-on be� n�f�sa ancak k�fi gelebilen ve beher odaya altm��-yetmi� n�f�su b�rakmak s�retiyle bil�-istisn� c�mlesini iki ay d�ire-i h�k�metde ve ba�dehu K�z�lmescid mahallesindeki h�nelerde habsederek erkekleri angaryada kullanm��lar ve es�r etdikleri me�m�rlar� alt� g�n a� b�rakd�kdan sonra gerilere g�ndermi�ler �ehrin um�m erz�k�n� al�p kalanlara yevmiye yar�m nefer ta�y�ni olarak kuru ekmekden ba�ka bir �ey vermemi�lerdir. Zulm-d�deg�n be� ay alt� g�n zarf�nda mahbeslerinin tenv�r edildi�ini g�remiyerek karanl�klarda imr�r-� vakt eylemi�lerdir. Otuz ikisi m�stesn� olmak �zere b�t�n gen� ve ihtiy�r kad�nlar�n n�m�sunu hetk ve k�zlar�n bikrini iz�le eylemek vah�et ve cin�yetini irtik�bdan ve b�-��reg�na ez� ve i�kenceden �ekinmemi�lerdir. Hatta tefr�k etdikleri kad�n ve k�zlardan on sekizini bir h�neye t�kayarak cebren fuh�a al��t�rm�� ve a��lad�klar� sifilisden alt�s�n�n ma�l�liyeti m���hede edilmesi �zerine tecr�d edilmi�ler, di�erlerinin n�m�su �ehrin istihl�s� g�n�ne kadar hazz-� beh�melerinin �let-i fec�at-�l�du olup kalm��d�r. Fuh�iy�ta al��d�rd�klar� kad�nlar� d�n ve milliyetlerini her s�retle tahk�r etme�e icb�r etmi�lerdir. Zeydan mahallesinde muk�m Ahlatl� Kasab o�lu Ahmed'in on alt� ya��ndaki k�z� Asl�'n�n bikrini iz�le etmek, ismetini y�rtmak istedikleri halde n�m�sunu kem�l-� sal�bet ve cel�letle m�d�fa�a etmesinden gazab-n�k olan cell�dlar bir kolunu k�l�n�la v�c�dundan ay�rm�� iseler de seb�t�n� ihl�l etmiyerek fir�ra ba�lad��� s�rada Arab k�pr�s� civ�r�nda kur�unlarla o iffet m�cessemini �ld�rm��lerdir ve hi� bir s�retle m�d�fa�a kudretine m�lik olmayan ma�s�m bir �ok insan yavrular�n�n kafalar�n� duvarlara �arp�p �izmelerle ezerek katletmeleri lev�y�h-� fec�at�n en kanl�, en �en�, en nefret-�ver, en m��essir n�m�nelerindendir. H�nelerde ba��eler aras�nda par�alanm�� ve v�c�dlar�ndan ayr�lm�� kafalar, kollar, bacaklar, kad�n sa�lar�, pek k���k �ocuk cen�zeleri, kanl� g�mlekler, elbise par�alar�, yatak bozuntular� ve �ehirden fir�rlar� g�n� katletdikleri yirmi iki kadar erkek M�slim�n�n kanlar i�erisindeki cesedleri t�r�h-i be�erin e�k-i te�ess�rle tahr�r ve ters�m edece�i m�vahha�, m��essif i�k�l ir�e ediyor. Bu vah�etlerin tahamm�ls�z te�s�riyle bir hayli ins�nlar a�l�kdan �lm��, korkudan tecenn�n eylemi�dir. Kumandan ve z�bit�n�n ik�met eyledikleri otuz kadar h�ne istisn� edilirse k�rkda biri ihr�k ve b�t�n h�nelerin kap�lar�, pencereleri, camlar� hatta ekserisinin demirleri s�k�l�p mahvedilmi� ve bil�-istisna b�t�n h�nelerin k�ffe-i m��temil�t� kaz�l�p ik�mete gayr-� s�lih bir �ekl-i harab�ye getirilmi�dir. Hatuniye, �erefiye, Kurubulak, K�z�lmescid c�mi�leri ahur ittih�z olundu�u gibi �e�melerden yedisi ve Hersan ve Mahalleba�� mahallelerinin su yollar� b�sb�t�n tahr�b edilmi�dir. Mecm��u hak�kata kar�b bir tahm�ne nazaran a�zami bin be� y�z k�yye kadar k�sm-� m�himmi isti�m�lden s�k�t bak�r ev�ni ve bir iki y�z par�a k�r�k bozuk koltuk sandalyesi ve masadan ve Bank-� Osman�'deki �� adet kasadan m�ad� dev�ir-i resmiyye ve h�nelerin her cins ve nev� e�yas� ya�ma edilmi� ve istemedikleri par�alanm�� ve �ser�n�n bey�nat�na g�re k�sm-� c�z��si Ermeniler v�s�tas�yla �ran t�cc�rlar�na satd�r�lm�� ve di�erleri k�milen gerilere sevketdirilmi�dir. Civ�r k�ylerde ka�amay�p kalan ah�l�-i �sl�miyye k�milen ayn� ahv�le ma�r�z kald�klar� m���hede edilmi�dir. Ve'l-h�s�l Bitlis kasabas�yla civ�r� h�t�r ve hay�le s��maz fec�yi�a sahne-i cerey�n olmu�dur.   F� 14 A�ustos sene [1]332 Bitlis �kinci Komiseri M. �rif Bitlis Mekt�b� M�meyyizi Hakk� BOA. HR. SYS. 2872/2, Belge no: 34-55 ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 02:57 Originally posted by Phallanx It is at least PATHETIC to attempt to make a mockery of the dead. But this is a norm to you FASCISTS trying to deny what the whole world knows. It's quite similar to how you've changed your once allies in all MASSACRES Kurds to your most hated enemies, not to mention what you've done to them for this betrayal.I guess U.S. President Woodrow Wilson is the only one to blame. I'm very sorry for you ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ArmenianSurvival Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 02:58 Alparslan, good post. There is always at least two sides to every story. Some scholars claim a genocide did take place, and the others (that you listed) disagree. The number of scholars that agree that a genocide took place is overwhelmingly more than that of the scholars who said it didnt happen. There are even ethnic Turk historians who claim a genocide did take place. Engin Akarli is one example. ------------- Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ Posted By: ArmenianSurvival Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 03:10 Originally posted by ak�nc� After 4-5 searches i found a government site that displays the Ottoman archives.Enjoy! You said thats a government site? Theyre the ones being accused! And most of us dont speak Turkish, Effendi. And i dont feel like making my dad read all that and translating it to me,lol. ------------- Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ Posted By: Guests Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 05:14 Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival You said thats a government site? Theyre the ones being accused! And most of us dont speak Turkish, Effendi. And i dont feel like making my dad read all that and translating it to me,lol. I dont think your dad could understand it, if he didnt live during Ottoman times, because even I dont understand most of the texts written in Ottoman language... Also the Ottoman governmental records are the ones which are the purest, because they didnt even had the idea of denying or changing some facts to avoid the negative impression against world media. ------------- Posted By: Phallanx Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 06:17 I'm very sorry for you What on earth are you talking about, have you totally lost any connection you allegedly had to the topic???? ------------- To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent. Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 06:18 Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival Originally posted by ak�nc� After 4-5 searches i found a government site that displays the Ottoman archives.Enjoy! You said thats a government site? Theyre the ones being accused! And most of us dont speak Turkish, Effendi. And i dont feel like making my dad read all that and translating it to me,lol. Just like alprslan said.But your accusation was made before but our government proved that the archives were original. Turkey cannot be held responsible for anything ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ArmenianSurvival Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 15:06 Turkey, as an ethnicity, is of course not responsible for anything. The average Turk and the average Armenian have usually gotten along throughout Ottoman history. But Turkey, as a government, is responsible. You cannot say "Turks were one of the most advanced people during the reign of the Ottoman Empire" and then go and say "Turkey has no responsibility for what the Ottoman empire did." Its complete contradiction. You cannot only take the good aspects and take pride in them, you also have to be responsible for your wrongdoings. By you i mean the Turkish government, not literally you or your people as a whole. ------------- Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ Posted By: Seko Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 15:48 Turkey has been a republic government since 1923. Why are they held responsible? ------------- Posted By: ArmenianSurvival Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 16:24 Germany also became a republic after WW2. The German Government paid reparations for the Hitler's regime. ------------- Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ Posted By: Seko Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 16:43 That was up to the West German republic to chose so. There was overwhelming proof of the Nazi "genocide". After WWI, the British tried the Ottoman government and found them innocent of state sanctioned "massacres". The term genocide did not exist as a legal entity since the term was later a UN descritption. Even if the term was viable, there was no proof that the Ottoman ordered the extermination of the Armenian subjects. ------------- Posted By: strategos Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 17:23 Originally posted by Seko Turkey has been a republic government since 1923. Why are they held responsible? Because, the main governing body was Turkish people. Also, present day Turkey grew OUT of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.. It was not Just called the Ottoman Empire, it was the Turkish Ottoman Empire ------------- http://theforgotten.org/intro.html Posted By: Seko Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 17:45 Part of my post from April 11 in "ArmenianSurvival" Modern History.   The Ottoman Empire not only defended itself against its neighbors, but against Turks also. In the last days of the empire, while under allied occupation, the Ottoman government tried to arrest Mustafa Kemal and the Nationalists. Had they been succesfull then there would not be a Republic of Turkey (at least in the current form anyway). In that same time the British, French, Italian, Armenian, and Greek governments tried to impose their will on the Ottoman government, especially as benfactors of the Sevres Treaty. The allied forces parcelled out territories from Ottoman Anatolia. While this was going on the Nationalists under Gazi Mustafa Kemal formed a government of their own. They gathered any able bodied persons that were willing to join their cause. They formed armies to defend their homeland. Eventually creating modern day Turkey. That is why I do not see any link what-so-ever with what the Ottoman Empire is charged with and what current dispora want from Turkey. ------------- Posted By: iskenderani Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 18:15 http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/gibbons-helen-davenport.html - Helen Davenport Gibbons THE RED RUGS OF TARSUS http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/red-rugs.html - Table of contents http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/cover.html - The cover, pages i-vi (title, copyright notice, etc) | http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/preface.html - Preface | http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/table-of-contents.html - Table of contents (as in the book) 1. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/half-way.html - Half way through the first year | 2. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/three-christmases.html - Three Christmases and the seven sleepers 3. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/adana.html - A visit to Adana | 4. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/expectations.html - Great expectations | 5. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/tarsus.html - Round about Tarsus 6. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/hamlet.html - Hamlet and the gathering of the storm clouds | 7. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/storm-approaches.html - The storm approaches 8. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/storm-breaks.html - The storm breaks | 9. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/life-and-death.html - Life and death | 10. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/why.html - Why? | 11. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/abdul-hamid.html - Abdul Hamid�s last day 12. The Young Turks and the toy fleet | 13. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/new-life.html - A new life 14. http://armenianhouse.org/gibbons/tarsus/egypt.html - Off to Egypt [ page 162 ] THE YOUNG TURKS AND THE TOY FLEET Mersina, April twenty-ninth. Dear Mother: I suppose that baby doesn't come because I 'm too busy and the time is not propitious. There are more important things to think about and to do. Sounds unmaternal and abnormal, does n't it? But just like other girls I had my dreams of how these days of waiting would be. And up to several weeks ago I plied the needle vigorously, and thought a lot about how many of each wee garment would be necessary, and what sort of blanket would wash best. I hesitated a long time before deciding which dress was the prettiest for IT to be baptized in. Now I don't know how many garments I have. [ page 163 ] I have n't even made a complete inventory of what we brought from Tarsus. We are too engrossed in the duties and problems that each day brings forth to think at all about the morrow. Honestly, Mother, during the four days we have been in Mersina, maternity has n't had much of a place in my mind�I mean, of course, my own maternity. Heaven knows we have the babies coming in abundance all the time around us, and there is everything to be done for them. I wrote you of the landing of the Turkish regiments from Beirut on the day we learned of Abdul Hamid's deposition. They went to Adana the same day, and started that night a second massacre more terrible than the first. The Armenians had given up their arms. On the advice of the foreign naval officers�trusting in the warships here at Mersina�they accepted the assurance of the Government that the "rioting" was over. So they were defenseless when the Young Turk regiments came. [ page 164 ] The butchery was easier. I spare you details. I wish to God I could have spared them to myself. Most of our Adana friends who escaped the first massacre must have been killed since last Saturday. The few who have reached Mersina are like the messengers that came to Job. Adana is still hell. The soldiers set fire to the French Mission buildings, and are going each night after other foreign property. The American Girls' Boarding School was evacuated. The teachers and some girls who were saved arrived yesterday, and are with us. One of our American teachers has typhoid, and reached us on a stretcher. Herbert brought me here from Tarsus to get away from the contagion that might come from the crowding of refugees in our compound. It is now worse here than it was in Tarsus. And this morning word came to us that we must be ready at any moment to move to the French Consulate. The captains of the warships had a meeting last night, and decided to [ page 165 ] defend the French and German consulates in case of trouble. They notified the local authorities that if killing began in Mersina three hundred German, French and British sailors would be landed with machine-guns to protect foreigners. The idea is to gather the foreigners together, and let the Armenians and other native Christians shift for themselves. Of course we could not enter into any such scheme as that. The Dodds would under no circumstances desert those who have taken refuge with them. Anyway, we Americans are invited only by courtesy. Ships of the other Great Powers are here. American ships are supposed to be en route. But we have not seen them yet. We wonder if the new Administration is going to continue the supine policy of Mr. Roosevelt, who always refused to do anything for Americans and American interests in this part of the world. I used to think that missionaries looked to Washington for help and protection. Now I know that the [ page 166 ] United States is known in Turkey only by the missionaries. If our flag has any prestige or honor, it is due to men like Daddy Christie, and not to the Embassy in Constantinople or the few Consuls scattered here and there. At the station, soldiers are turning back the Armenians who have managed to slip into trains at Adana and Tarsus. From a long distance one can see, when riding in the train, the warships in the harbor, flying the flags of the "protecting" Powers, whose obligation to make secure life and liberty for Armenians was solemnly entered into by the Treaty of Berlin. One does not expect much of Russia: the treaty was imposed upon her. But England, France, Germany, Austria, Italy�they all have warships at Mersina. Armenian refugees, fleeing from the massacre at Adana, which occurred right under the nose of the English, French, Germans, Austrians and Italians, see these warships as the train draws into Mersina station. Turkish soldiers, of the same regiments [ page 167 ] who massacred them three days ago, bar the way. Back they must go to death.   Devoted to out Turkish co-forumers who have never heard of any massacres... From an American.. Isk. Posted By: strategos Date Posted: 14-Apr-2005 at 22:11 Originally posted by Seko  That is why I do not see any link what-so-ever with what the Ottoman Empire is charged with and what current dispora want from Turkey. If you do not claim a link, Do not CLAIM the legacy of the Ottomans then, because you do not want to take the pros and CONS of the empire and the turkish people.. ------------- http://theforgotten.org/intro.html Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 15-Apr-2005 at 09:26 Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival Turkey, as an ethnicity, is of course not responsible for anything. The average Turk and the average Armenian have usually gotten along throughout Ottoman history. But Turkey, as a government, is responsible. You cannot say "Turks were one of the most advanced people during the reign of the Ottoman Empire" and then go and say "Turkey has no responsibility for what the Ottoman empire did." Its complete contradiction. You cannot only take the good aspects and take pride in them, you also have to be responsible for your wrongdoings. By you i mean the Turkish government, not literally you or your people as a whole. This does not explain anything.If turkey pays,armenia should pay too. The thing is this: Armenians attcked The Ottomans made a very bad choice by sending them to exile They died on the roads Both sides have many dead But like i said,Islamist Ottomans-Republic of tukey Not the same ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: Seko Date Posted: 15-Apr-2005 at 09:29 Originally posted by strategos Originally posted by Seko  That is why I do not see any link what-so-ever with what the Ottoman Empire is charged with and what current dispora want from Turkey. If you do not claim a link, Do not CLAIM the legacy of the Ottomans then, because you do not want to take the pros and CONS of the empire and the turkish people..   More wisdom from the ever loving Strategos. Forget the pro's and con's. I'll claim anything I want dude, especially if its historically accurate. Keep changing your tune! Governments vs citizens. Who do you want to take the blame for all of your allegations? The Governments or the people. Make up your mind. Or did the people rule the Ottomans and Turkish Governments. Yeah! I am proud of both the Ottomans and the Turkish Republic. They were and are leaders in their geographical areas. Nothing you can say will change that. ------------- Posted By: iskenderani Date Posted: 15-Apr-2005 at 12:00 Seko wrote : ###  More wisdom from the ever loving Strategos. ....  Yeah! I am proud of both the Ottomans and the Turkish Republic. They were and are leaders in their geographical areas. Nothing you can say will change that. ### Another joke from out Turkish co-forumers... The Ottomans i.e the Turks were and are leaders in their geographical area...A brilliant phrase... So r the Chinese , in China , Japos in Japan , Mongolians in their deserts.....Greeks in Greece  , French in France ...... etc. And each one is proud of his origin and his country...Everybody is a leader in its own country...So , Turks , are no exception....they just fall under the general rule.. But the way Seko wrote it  , was the best way to draw a smile , if not a laughter from all of us.. Thanks Seko..  Isk. Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 15-Apr-2005 at 13:45 You do realise tht this is not an ansewer but a cheap insult do you isk.? ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 15-Apr-2005 at 13:50 And if you say that a first hand archive is propoganda..... ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: Guests Date Posted: 15-Apr-2005 at 15:27 Originally posted by ak�nc� But like i said,Islamist Ottomans-Republic of tukey Not the same In that case you should be consequent, and you should not be proud of the great deeds of the Ottoman Empire, since it's not Turkey according to you. ------------- Posted By: iskenderani Date Posted: 15-Apr-2005 at 17:36 Akunsu wrote: ### You do realise tht this is not an ansewer but a cheap insult do you isk.? ### No.... Aku...i definitely DO NOT WANT to insult anyone... But i still have the right to laugh at a good joke wherever i find it.. Isk. Posted By: ArmenianSurvival Date Posted: 15-Apr-2005 at 17:48 Originally posted by Mixcoatl In that case you should be consequent, and you should not be proud of the great deeds of the Ottoman Empire, since it's not Turkey according to you. Yes, thank you Mix. Originally posted by akyncy This does not explain anything.If turkey pays,armenia should pay too. The thing is this: Armenians attcked The Ottomans made a very bad choice by sending them to exile They died on the roads Both sides have many dead But like i said,Islamist Ottomans-Republic of tukey Not the same A couple of thousand poorly-armed Armenian revolutionaries should not incite the Ottomans to start uprooting and killing women and children. I dont care how bad their situation was in the war, they chose to join the war, and they were never attacked by women and children to take such stern action towards them. There is simply no excuse for this. And secondly, the Armenians, as a community, did not have the means to attack the Ottomans. Tens of thousands of Armenian men were serving in the Ottoman army and fighting their war. A couple of thousand poorly-armed revolutionaries was all that was left. No one ever mentions the disarmament of the Armenians before the war started. Not enough men, and not enough weapons to even be considered anything more than just a nuisance. Originally posted by akyncy The Ottomans made a very bad choice by sending them to exile So you're saying that it actually happened, but you are saying the Ottomans should be considered victims and repaid as well? I understand many Turks died during the war, this is no secret and it is tragic. But those Turks died in retaliation when the Armenians were being uprooted. And, the Turks never died from government order, seeing as we had no government and the revolutionaries were such a small percentage of our population. What happened to the Armenians was government order, and thats what constitutes as genocide. ------------- Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ Posted By: strategos Date Posted: 15-Apr-2005 at 17:51  [QUOTE=ak?p>But like i said,Islamist Ottomans-Republic of tukey Not the same   Well then I guess I can have my government slaughter all the foreigners in the country, overthrow the government the next day, and the new country would not have to take any of the blame for it? Sounds good.. ------------- http://theforgotten.org/intro.html Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 16-Apr-2005 at 07:46 Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival Originally posted by Mixcoatl In that case you should be consequent, and you should not be proud of the great deeds of the Ottoman Empire, since it's not Turkey according to you. Yes, thank you Mix. Originally posted by akyncy This does not explain anything.If turkey pays,armenia should pay too. The thing is this: Armenians attcked The Ottomans made a very bad choice by sending them to exile They died on the roads Both sides have many dead But like i said,Islamist Ottomans-Republic of tukey Not the same A couple of thousand poorly-armed Armenian revolutionaries should not incite the Ottomans to start uprooting and killing women and children. I dont care how bad their situation was in the war, they chose to join the war, and they were never attacked by women and children to take such stern action towards them. There is simply no excuse for this. And secondly, the Armenians, as a community, did not have the means to attack the Ottomans. Tens of thousands of Armenian men were serving in the Ottoman army and fighting their war. A couple of thousand poorly-armed revolutionaries was all that was left. No one ever mentions the disarmament of the Armenians before the war started. Not enough men, and not enough weapons to even be considered anything more than just a nuisance. Originally posted by akyncy The Ottomans made a very bad choice by sending them to exile So you're saying that it actually happened, but you are saying the Ottomans should be considered victims and repaid as well? I understand many Turks died during the war, this is no secret and it is tragic. But those Turks died in retaliation when the Armenians were being uprooted. And, the Turks never died from government order, seeing as we had no government and the revolutionaries were such a small percentage of our population. What happened to the Armenians was government order, and thats what constitutes as genocide. This is to mix. then by your claim we can rightfully claim our old lands of the ottoman empire. Arm.Surv you are historically wrong.It is a fact that the armenians were giving the ottoman army a hard time by attcking from behind in www1. No government order.The armenians were sent to exile because of their acts.And they weren't done by a small population. Killing women and babies?Do you know what the armenians did?No?I thout i made it clear with my previous posts. ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: AyKurt Date Posted: 16-Apr-2005 at 07:59 I dont think you can call it a genocide unless you accuse both sides of being guilty of a genocide.  It was the intention of Armenian groups, armed and encouraged by the Russians for their own purposes, to ethnically cleanse eastern Turkey of its non-Armenian population in order to create an Armenian state there, were they, the Armenians, were the minority. Ill repeat that since many people seem to not really understand this, the Armenians sought to ethnically cleanse a part of Turkey.  Is not that a genocide? Its ironic that it was the Armenians that started the troubles yet its the Turks who get accused of being guilty of genocide. Yet the instigators who ultimately lost in their racist pursuit now go round the world crying genocide.  Bad losers.  They shouldnt have started it in the first place. ------------- Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 16-Apr-2005 at 09:27 Originally posted by strategos  [QUOTE=ak?p>But like i said,Islamist Ottomans-Republic of tukey Not the same   Well then I guess I can have my government slaughter all the foreigners in the country, overthrow the government the next day, and the new country would not have to take any of the blame for it? Sounds good.. That's what we have been discussing,whether it happened or not ,concluding like that,sounds good.... ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 16-Apr-2005 at 09:31 Originally posted by iskenderani Akunsu wrote: ### You do realise tht this is not an ansewer but a cheap insult do you isk.? ### No.... Aku...i definitely DO NOT WANT to insult anyone... But i still have the right to laugh at a good joke wherever i find it.. Isk. eheheheehhtickle me so i can laugh.... ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ArmenianSurvival Date Posted: 16-Apr-2005 at 17:49 Originally posted by AyKurt I dont think you can call it a genocide unless you accuse both sides of being guilty of a genocide.  It was the intention of Armenian groups, armed and encouraged by the Russians for their own purposes, to ethnically cleanse eastern Turkey of its non-Armenian population in order to create an Armenian state there, were they, the Armenians, were the minority. Ill repeat that since many people seem to not really understand this, the Armenians sought to ethnically cleanse a part of Turkey.  Is not that a genocide? Its ironic that it was the Armenians that started the troubles yet its the Turks who get accused of being guilty of genocide. Yet the instigators who ultimately lost in their racist pursuit now go round the world crying genocide.  Bad losers.  They shouldnt have started it in the first place. Tell me how many Armenian revolutionaries actually partook in the 'ethnic cleansing' of Turks, when tens of thousands of Armenians were serving in the Ottoman Army, and the government had disarmed everyone because they needed the arms for war. No one has yet to make this clear. And also, you do not need to have actual bodies and graves to count the dead. Many Armenians were burned alive or drowned in rivers and lakes. Tell me how we are supposed to find these bodies. You only have to look at a map for population density in the Ottoman Empire from pre-1914 to post-1914 to see what im talking about. 1914, right before the Genocide: Compare that with this map from 1926: Armenians became extinct in the region and Turks are the majority, so tell me how the Armenians ethnically cleansed the Turks. It would shed a lot of light to the situation. No one still answers my question of why the Ottomans killed women and children. ------------- Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ Posted By: strategos Date Posted: 16-Apr-2005 at 17:53 Originally posted by ak?QUOTE=strategos  [QUOTE=ak?p>But like i said,Islamist Ottomans-Republic of tukey Not the same   Well then I guess I can have my government slaughter all the foreigners in the country, overthrow the government the next day, and the new country would not have to take any of the blame for it? Sounds good.. That's what we have been discussing,whether it happened or not ,concluding like that,sounds good....   I love how the Turks will tlak about the glory of the past, but now that some "bad light" has been seen, they run and hide and say "We, the Turkish people of Turkey, are not the same as the Ottoman Turks", yet they claim heritage and legacy of the Ottoman Empire?? THis is absurd.. Then do not claim ANything from the Ottoman Empire.. ------------- http://theforgotten.org/intro.html Posted By: Seko Date Posted: 16-Apr-2005 at 18:11 Originally posted by strategos Originally posted by ak?QUOTE=strategos   Originally posted by ak?p>But like i said,Islamist Ottomans-Republic of tukey Not the same   Well then I guess I can have my government slaughter all the foreigners in the country, overthrow the government the next day, and the new country would not have to take any of the blame for it? Sounds good.. That's what we have been discussing,whether it happened or not ,concluding like that,sounds good.... I love how the Turks will tlak about the glory of the past, but now that some bad light has been seen, they run and hide and say We, the Turkish people of Turkey, are not the same as the Ottoman Turks, yet they claim heritage and legacy of the Ottoman Empire?? THis is absurd.. Then do not claim ANything from the Ottoman Empire.. [/QUOTE   Actually, try to get your facts straight.! A Turk's admiration for a proud past is part of a Turk's heritage. Putting historical events into perspective has been laid out for all to see. There is a debate on the validity of an Armenian "genocide". There is debate regarding the validity of Armenian insurgency in the last days of the Ottoman Empire. There is no debate with regards to the formation of the Republic of Turkey. Turkey is not part of any alleged debate. If one choses to seek rational from a political basis or personal bias to further obscure these facts then he is simply trying to reject a historical account of known fact.   Actually, try to get your facts straight.! A Turk's admiration for a proud past is part of a Turk's heritage. Putting historical events into perspective has been laid out for all to see. There is a debate on the validity of an Armenian "genocide". There is debate regarding the validity of Armenian insurgency in the last days of the Ottoman Empire. There is no debate with regards to the formation of the Republic of Turkey. Turkey is not part of any alleged debate. If one choses to seek rational from a political basis or personal bias to further obscure these facts then he is simply trying to reject a historical account of known fact. ------------- Posted By: Phallanx Date Posted: 16-Apr-2005 at 20:50 Let's see a Turk's view on this. Note that he isn't a simple Jo but one of Turkey's No1 writers. It would also be interesting to see exactly how they see freedom of speech "Orhan Pamuk, wielder of Turkey's finest pen, has spoken and cut a swath through his country's conscience.................................Brilliant novelist, translated in 20 languages, winner of international prizes, he has become a hate figure. His crime was one sentence in an interview with the Swiss newspaper Tagesanzeiger this month. 'Thirty thousand Kurds and a million Armenians were killed in Turkey. Almost no one dares speak but me, and the nationalists hate me for that.' Halil Berktay, professor at Sabanci University, supported Pamuk: 'In 1915-16 about 800,000 or one million Armenians were killed for sure.' Mehmet ��ok, an attorney, filed charges at the Kayseri public prosecutor's office. So much hatred. So much anger. What does Turkey have to hide?" the rest at: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903, 1426319,00.html .Another persecuted Turk that just wanted to tell the truth!!!!! "After the explanations of historian Halil Berktay, who investigates the Armenian Question, we now face a new issue. The media attacked Professor Berktay and it became apparent that a historian has to decide what action to take when the national interests and scientific evidence conflict. What should a historian do in this situation? In reality, can the interests of a nation be in conflict with scientific facts? Or, can a nation, which has established its interest on lies rather than facts, flourish? In Turkey, scientists are under constant pressure. The Armenian Question, Kurdish issues, minority issues, several national and religious issues are taboos. We do Turkish propaganda to our Turkish people. We are assuming that the whole world will believe in our made-up facts.""" http://ermeni.org/english/Thementalityofabdulhamit.htm More on Armenian and Hellinic genocides by Halil Berktay: Turkish Historian reveals evidence about Armenian and Greek Genocides. Monday, 7.3.2005 From the Greek Daily �Chronos� The Deportation Law was being applied after a direct order from the Interior Ministry. The Ottoman Empire pursued a policy of ethnic cleansing against Armenians and Greeks according to Turkish historian and Professor of the University of Sabanci, Halil Berktay whilst referring to historical Ottoman sources and documents. In an interview with the Turkish daily �Milliyet� Professor Berktay calls the Balkan wars of 1912-13 a �turning point�. �As the Greek and Bulgarian Armies were marching towards Istanbul, the minorities in Peran were celebrating the victory. Before WWI had broken out, ethnic cleansing commenced against the Greeks. That is mentioned by the president of the Ottoman Parliament Halil Mentece in his memoirs, says Professor Berktay.� http://homepage.ntlworld.com/dikran.yegye/Genocide.htm How about Taner Ackam???? "Destroying documents is an essential part of government culture. Perhaps, people from my generation can find or unearth some documents on their ancestors and therefore demonstrate that we have people other than the ones who pride themselves for destroying documents. The article titled "Countless Archives Destroyed" by Ayshe Hur reminded me destruction of Armenian Genocide related documents. Systematic destruction of documents appears to be a significant part of our culture. The Sabah daily, in its November 7, 1918 issue states that documents related to Armenian Genocide, sought after by the government, could not be found, and it furthers claims that Talat Pasha and his entourage, before they left the government, quite possibly destroyed the orders related to Armenian genocide in entirety." http://ermeni.org/english/cleansingarchives.htm Taner Ak�am, one of the first Turks to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, gave a lecture. http://www.glendalenewspress.com/education/story/8951p-123 24c.html But then again, these people are nothing more than traitors, right??? ------------- To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent. Posted By: ArmenianSurvival Date Posted: 16-Apr-2005 at 22:19 Awesome information, Phallanx. This is just another example of why we cannot trust the accused party with the real facts, because most of the original sources have been covered up or destroyed. Hats off to the Turkish historians who are speaking out and taking the heat. ------------- Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ Posted By: Seko Date Posted: 17-Apr-2005 at 17:12 Armenian Guerillas Killed 523,000 Turks between 1910 and 1922 Source:Zaman While for years the Armenians have been trying to direct the world's opinion to favor their side with regard to the so-called genocide allegations, official documents prove that Armenian guerillas killed over 500,000 Turks in Anatolia between 1910 and 1922. The Turkish Prime Ministry State Archives Director General Professor Yusuf Sarinay noted that Turkey has been facing impositions stating "face up to your past" for a long time and said: "When we face up to our history, what we encounter is our own pains and losses." Professor Sarinay expressed that history is locked at a point regarding the so-called Armenian genocide allegations and opinions are deadlocked on the year 1915 and added: "The problems do not start from this date. 1915 is a result." ------------- Posted By: Seko Date Posted: 17-Apr-2005 at 17:14   some recent news:     Turkey Repeats Dialogue Call to Armenia Source:Turkish Armenian Relations Jan SOYKOK, ANKARA (JTW) Turkish Prime Minister repeated Turkey�s dialogue call to Armenia. Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan wrote a letter to Armenian President Robert Kocherian. Erdogan used �memories which hurt� words for the 1915 events. In 1915, many Turks and Armenians were killed in the communal clashes and war circumstances. Erdogan said in his letter �a joint commission should be established to discuss all historical disputes. This will serve to normalize our relations�. The letter was handled by Turkey�s Tbilisi Embassy to Yerevan. �Turkey and Armenia interpret the past in different ways� Erdogan added. Erdogan continued in the letter: �Turkish and Armenian peoples not only shared a common history and geography in one of the most volatile regions of the world, but also lived together for a very long time. However it is not a secret that there are differences in interpretation some parts of the past between two nations. These memories gave sorrow to our peoples in the past, and now still play a role which does not help to develop friendly relations between us." "As the leaders of our countries, our foremost duty to the next generations is to leave a peaceful and friendly environment. All these ideas are shared by the main Turkish opposition party leader Mr. Deniz Baykal as well. In this framework, we kindly call you to establish a joint group including Turkish and Armenian historians and other experts to research the 1915 events by using not only the Turkish and Armenian documents but also all archives in the third countries, and to declare all the findings to international community. I think, such an initiative will shed light on a disputable part of the past and also will serve to normalization relations between our countries." "I hope that, our offer aiming to leave a more friendly and peaceful environment will be welcomed. We are ready to discuss the details when you accept our offer to set up a joint historian and other experts group to make researches in archives. Regards.� (JTW's Note: This is not an offical transilation) ARMENIAN FM OSKANIAN: TURKEY TRIES TO RECONSIDER HISTORY WITHOUT ANY SHAME Despite all dialogue calls from Ankara, Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian uses very strong and even aggressive language towards Turkish politicians. "Turkey not only tries to reconsider its history without any shame but also wants to force other countries do the same," said Oskanian on 13 April 2005 press conference. Oskanian had rejected Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan�s call to establish a joint commission to discuss the historical disputes. Mr. Oskanian claims that the recognition of the �genocide� allegations is an issue of security for Armenia. "We can�t feel secure near a neighbor that exceeds in the military aspect and definitely supports Azerbaijan in the Nagorno Karabakh issue," Armenian Foreign Minister said. Turkish Republic never attacked or threatened Armenia since the beginning, while Armenia occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijani territories and has threatened Turkey to occupy the eastern parts of Turkey. The First Armenian Republic attacked the Turkish forces, yet failed to advance. Under the Soviet rule, the Armenians demanded some of the Turkish towns. However when Turkey entered NATO, the USSR could not make more pressure on Turkey. Armenia gained its independence after the USSR collapsed. However the Armenians continued to their irredentist demands, and named Turkey�s eastern provinces �Western Armenia�. Armenian forces not only attacked the Karabakh and other Azerbaijani cities, but also to Naxcivan province of Azerbaijan. Armenia also encourages the separatist Armenian movements in Georgia. Dr. Nilgun Gulcan from ISRO find Oskanian�s security concerns baseless: �Armenia attacks almost all neighbors and perceives security threats.� ARMENIA TRIES TO BLACKMAIL TURKEY Mr. Oskanian further said "Turkey wants to be a member of an organization that is built on the bases of the human rights protection. When Turkey wants to become an EU member country, the genocide issue becomes of European, human importance." However Dr. Gulcan says Armenia abuses Turkey�s EU bid: �Armenia tries to blackmail Turkey in EU case. Armenia has occupied 20 percent territories of a European country, Azerbaijan. The EU named Armenia occupier and aggressive. Despite all these Armenia can blackmail Turkey. I think there are anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim biases in the EU institutions. They are discriminative. The EU Parliament for instance calls Turkey to improve its relations with Armenia, yet says nothing to Armenia about occupation. The EP makes pressures on Turkey to open territorial borders with Armenia, however they have done nothing to lift embargo and isolation on Turkish Cypriots. Turkish Cypriots cannot make business with any country except Turkey. If you want justice you must be fair. Armenia is occupier and aggressive country in the region. They threaten Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia, and they can say that Armenia perceives threats. � According to Dr. Nilgun Gulcan, Armenia�s aim is not to establish a dialogue, but to damage Turkish interests. Gulcan says Armenians are not sincere in �genocide claims�: �They started to use �genocide� term in 1965. Before that year they never used the term. After the First World War they applied to the Allies to join the Lausanne negotiations claiming that they were a part in the wars against the Ottoman Empire. They confessed many time that they joined the Allies against the Ottoman Armies. And now they can claim with no shame that the Ottoman Government committed genocide against Armenians. They do not question what Armenian militants did in Khojally in Karabakh War. They do not speak about the Khojally genocide just committed 10 years ago, but accuse the Turks for the events happened almost a century ago. This is a political war. The allegations are baseless.� JTW 15 April 2005 ------------- Posted By: Phallanx Date Posted: 17-Apr-2005 at 18:41 According to the 3 turks I mention above, such a discussion is pointless simply because your goverment refuses to open the Ottoman archives. Let me repeat Orhan Pamuk's question: "So much hatred. So much anger. What does Turkey have to hide?" ------------- To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent. Posted By: Seko Date Posted: 17-Apr-2005 at 18:50 Originally posted by Phallanx According to the 3 turks I mention above, such a discussion is pointless simply because your goverment refuses to open the Ottoman archives. Let me repeat Orhan Pamuk's question: "So much hatred. So much anger. What does Turkey have to hide?"   The Ottoman archives have been opened from the 1980's. Try telling the Armenian and Russian governments to open their "secret" archives. The hate and anger is from the anti-Turks. Turks could care less what goes on in Greece, as long as your government and newspapers stop the slander campaign. But in Greece your newspapers have news regarding Turkey on a daily basis. Your constant barrage of accusations bent on emotional sympathy is your desire.  What we are trying to do is discuss matters without broad generalizations. ------------- Posted By: Phallanx Date Posted: 17-Apr-2005 at 19:36 Turks could care less what goes on in Greece, as long as your government and newspapers stop the slander campaign. But in Greece your newspapers have news regarding Turkey on a daily basis. Who asked you if you care???? If you don't want our goverment and newspapers talking about you, try to stop provoking and claiming our lands. Isn't it interesting that beside the alleged "peace talks" just a few days ago you continue to provoke???? GREEK AIRSPACE VIOLATIONS BY TURKISH AIRCRAFT Athens, 15 April 2005 (14:58 UTC+2) http://www.mpa.gr/article.html?doc_id=522918 And today an interview given by Erdogan to Kathimerini newspaper: Eσείς προκαλείτε την ένταση στο Aιγαίο O Tούρκος πρωθυπουργ ός Pετζέπ Tαγίπ Eρντογάν εμμένει στο σύνολο των διεκδικήσε ων εις βάρος της χώρας μας http://www.kathimerini.gr/4dcgi/_w_articles_politics_10005 2_17/04/2005_140968       (you'll have to wait till tommorow for a translated text) But I thought the topic was about the ethnic cleansing and the Armenian GENOCIDE. Why try to turn this around???? Anyway, to the topic. Every source I've seen mention that only a few of the archives have been opened to public and none of them are the ones in question "Armenian GENOCIDE" ------------- To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent. Posted By: Seko Date Posted: 17-Apr-2005 at 20:58 Then don't infringe on airspace that is debateable. No one is claiming your lands. But if you want to stay paranoid your whole life be my guest. ------------- Posted By: iskenderani Date Posted: 18-Apr-2005 at 00:08 Well done Phallanx....Ur info about the minority of truth telling professors is overwheming... Isk. Posted By: iskenderani Date Posted: 18-Apr-2005 at 00:12 Originally posted by ak�nc� Originally posted by iskenderani Akunsu wrote: ### You do realise tht this is not an ansewer but a cheap insult do you isk.? ### No.... Aku...i definitely DO NOT WANT to insult anyone... But i still have the right to laugh at a good joke wherever i find it.. Isk. eheheheehhtickle me so i can laugh.... If by tickling u , u will laugh , i will try that too... U dont have to tickle me though to laugh .... Keep , u and the rest of the Turkish co-forumers , posting ur propaganda...Its enough for me.. Isk. Posted By: iskenderani Date Posted: 18-Apr-2005 at 00:17 . Let me repeat Orhan Pamuk's question: So much hatred. So much anger. What does Turkey have to hide? A lot of graves.... Isk. Posted By: iskenderani Date Posted: 18-Apr-2005 at 00:28   ### For this reason, perhaps it is better not to create a common perspective while analysing a phenomenon such as genocide, but to rely instead on two different perspectives, the perspective of the "perpetrators" and that of the "victims."' These two distinct perspectives bring to the fore distinctly different material for the reconstruction of historical events. The works that have been produced up to today about the genocide of the Armenians have essentially emanated from the perspective of the "victim group." My attempt in this regard can be understood as an investigation of the subject from the viewpoint of the "perpetrator group," a venture that could not be undertaken until now because of the past history of denial and tabooing.### ### Compared to France, Germany and other European states, Turkish nationalism and Turkish national consciousness entered the historical stage very late. There are different reasons for this belatedness. Special significance attaches to the influence of Islam and the cosmopolitan character of the Ottoman Empire. Because of its late development, Turkish nationalism was strongly influenced by Social Darwinism and racist ideologies. This intellectual background of Turkish nationalism, combined with the urgent need to catch up, made that nationalism aggressive.### ### Turkish nationalism arose as a reaction to the experience of constant humiliations. Turkish national sentiment constantly suffered from the effects of an inferiority complex. ### ### Another factor which created an image of hostile Christians was the role Islam played in this connection. On the basis of Islamic culture and its system of laws, the Moslems have always considered the Christians as an inferior minority group and have never viewed them as being equal to themselves. Thus the Christians did not enjoy equality in the Ottoman Empire. But during the stages marking the disintegration of the Empire, the reforms and economic privileges led to a change in the position of the Christians. The Turks gradually lost their social status as a superior class. They could not reconcile themselves to the idea of equality with the Christians by way of reforms, or that a Christian minority should attain a better economic position than they. This loss of status led to the rise of hate-revenge sentiments against those who were seen as responsible. The Moslems did not "peacefully" accept their steadily weakening position. This awareness of loss of status played a significant role in the enactment of the massacre against Christians, and the history of the nineteenth century provides much evidence for this. ### This Tanner Aksam ...knows exactly what he says . All of these can be seen in the reactions of our Turkish co-forumers. Typical Turkish... Isk.   Posted By: Phallanx Date Posted: 18-Apr-2005 at 02:03 Seko, Oguz, Acyncy A friend of mine sent me this link to Hurriyet newspaper but I can't read it cause it's in Turkish. Could anyone of you guys help me out and tell me what it's all about??? http://www.hurriyetim.com.tr/haber/0,,sid~2@tarih~2002-09- 11-m@nvid~172761,00.asp ------------- To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent. Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 18-Apr-2005 at 13:06 Originally posted by Phallanx Let's see a Turk's view on this. Note that he isn't a simple Jo but one of Turkey's No1 writers. It would also be interesting to see exactly how they see freedom of speech "Orhan Pamuk, wielder of Turkey's finest pen, has spoken and cut a swath through his country's conscience.................................Brilliant novelist, translated in 20 languages, winner of international prizes, he has become a hate figure. His crime was one sentence in an interview with the Swiss newspaper Tagesanzeiger this month. 'Thirty thousand Kurds and a million Armenians were killed in Turkey. Almost no one dares speak but me, and the nationalists hate me for that.' Halil Berktay, professor at Sabanci University, supported Pamuk: 'In 1915-16 about 800,000 or one million Armenians were killed for sure.' Mehmet ��ok, an attorney, filed charges at the Kayseri public prosecutor's office. So much hatred. So much anger. What does Turkey have to hide?" the rest at: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903, 1426319,00.html .Another persecuted Turk that just wanted to tell the truth!!!!! "After the explanations of historian Halil Berktay, who investigates the Armenian Question, we now face a new issue. The media attacked Professor Berktay and it became apparent that a historian has to decide what action to take when the national interests and scientific evidence conflict. What should a historian do in this situation? In reality, can the interests of a nation be in conflict with scientific facts? Or, can a nation, which has established its interest on lies rather than facts, flourish? In Turkey, scientists are under constant pressure. The Armenian Question, Kurdish issues, minority issues, several national and religious issues are taboos. We do Turkish propaganda to our Turkish people. We are assuming that the whole world will believe in our made-up facts.""" http://ermeni.org/english/Thementalityofabdulhamit.htm More on Armenian and Hellinic genocides by Halil Berktay: Turkish Historian reveals evidence about Armenian and Greek Genocides. Monday, 7.3.2005 From the Greek Daily �Chronos� The Deportation Law was being applied after a direct order from the Interior Ministry. The Ottoman Empire pursued a policy of ethnic cleansing against Armenians and Greeks according to Turkish historian and Professor of the University of Sabanci, Halil Berktay whilst referring to historical Ottoman sources and documents. In an interview with the Turkish daily �Milliyet� Professor Berktay calls the Balkan wars of 1912-13 a �turning point�. �As the Greek and Bulgarian Armies were marching towards Istanbul, the minorities in Peran were celebrating the victory. Before WWI had broken out, ethnic cleansing commenced against the Greeks. That is mentioned by the president of the Ottoman Parliament Halil Mentece in his memoirs, says Professor Berktay.� http://homepage.ntlworld.com/dikran.yegye/Genocide.htm How about Taner Ackam???? "Destroying documents is an essential part of government culture. Perhaps, people from my generation can find or unearth some documents on their ancestors and therefore demonstrate that we have people other than the ones who pride themselves for destroying documents. The article titled "Countless Archives Destroyed" by Ayshe Hur reminded me destruction of Armenian Genocide related documents. Systematic destruction of documents appears to be a significant part of our culture. The Sabah daily, in its November 7, 1918 issue states that documents related to Armenian Genocide, sought after by the government, could not be found, and it furthers claims that Talat Pasha and his entourage, before they left the government, quite possibly destroyed the orders related to Armenian genocide in entirety." http://ermeni.org/english/cleansingarchives.htm Taner Ak�am, one of the first Turks to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, gave a lecture. http://www.glendalenewspress.com/education/story/8951p-123 24c.html But then again, these people are nothing more than traitors, right??? Tamer Ak�am,orhan pamuk.These people were not liked,read or looken up to even before they said these things.A friend of mine does publishing and he said that they said these things because they sold more books.They sold more books then ever.Their every word was important because each was a scandal ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: Phallanx Date Posted: 18-Apr-2005 at 13:18 From what I hear, these guys were well respected professors before this scandal broke out. So what are Articles 159 and 312 of the Turkish penal code that he was accused of??? ------------- To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent. Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 19-Apr-2005 at 05:59 Originally posted by Phallanx Seko, Oguz, Acyncy A friend of mine sent me this link to Hurriyet newspaper but I can't read it cause it's in Turkish. Could anyone of you guys help me out and tell me what it's all about??? http://www.hurriyetim.com.tr/haber/0,,sid~2@tarih~2002-09- 11-m@nvid~172761,00.asp Funny guy you know what it's about.But let me tell you;according to the instatude of statistics in Turkey %92 percent of all people snt to jail because of raping a small child,raping an animal,commiting an inhumane crime are killed in jail in the first 2 months.The prisoners cannot accept these sick ba***s so they kill them.So even if you skip a lifetime in jail,justice follows.... ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 19-Apr-2005 at 06:03 Originally posted by Phallanx From what I hear, these guys were well respected professors before this scandal broke out. So what are Articles 159 and 312 of the Turkish penal code that he was accused of??? No they weren't.I knew oran pamuk and no,he was not a deeply respected professor ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 19-Apr-2005 at 06:09 Originally posted by iskenderani   ### For this reason, perhaps it is better not to create a common perspective while analysing a phenomenon such as genocide, but to rely instead on two different perspectives, the perspective of the "perpetrators" and that of the "victims."' These two distinct perspectives bring to the fore distinctly different material for the reconstruction of historical events. The works that have been produced up to today about the genocide of the Armenians have essentially emanated from the perspective of the "victim group." My attempt in this regard can be understood as an investigation of the subject from the viewpoint of the "perpetrator group," a venture that could not be undertaken until now because of the past history of denial and tabooing.### ### Compared to France, Germany and other European states, Turkish nationalism and Turkish national consciousness entered the historical stage very late. There are different reasons for this belatedness. Special significance attaches to the influence of Islam and the cosmopolitan character of the Ottoman Empire. Because of its late development, Turkish nationalism was strongly influenced by Social Darwinism and racist ideologies. This intellectual background of Turkish nationalism, combined with the urgent need to catch up, made that nationalism aggressive.### ### Turkish nationalism arose as a reaction to the experience of constant humiliations. Turkish national sentiment constantly suffered from the effects of an inferiority complex. ### ### Another factor which created an image of hostile Christians was the role Islam played in this connection. On the basis of Islamic culture and its system of laws, the Moslems have always considered the Christians as an inferior minority group and have never viewed them as being equal to themselves. Thus the Christians did not enjoy equality in the Ottoman Empire. But during the stages marking the disintegration of the Empire, the reforms and economic privileges led to a change in the position of the Christians. The Turks gradually lost their social status as a superior class. They could not reconcile themselves to the idea of equality with the Christians by way of reforms, or that a Christian minority should attain a better economic position than they. This loss of status led to the rise of hate-revenge sentiments against those who were seen as responsible. The Moslems did not "peacefully" accept their steadily weakening position. This awareness of loss of status played a significant role in the enactment of the massacre against Christians, and the history of the nineteenth century provides much evidence for this. ### This Tanner Aksam ...knows exactly what he says . All of these can be seen in the reactions of our Turkish co-forumers. Typical Turkish... Isk.   Ok so i'll give a reaction closer to yours; Isk,isk,isk.... No.U........r wrrrronnngggg.Tamerr ak�am iz nut famous or important in turky.Therefore he needs to speak of discussible matters from a wrong point of view so he can sell mooorrre. I wil expect frm yr ysual yappiimg. (I hope this has been a diffrent reaction since it's closer to yours) ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: Gazi Date Posted: 19-Apr-2005 at 06:10 He is not a professor.He is a writer. ------------- �Freedom is the recognition of necessity.�-Friedrich Engels Posted By: iskenderani Date Posted: 19-Apr-2005 at 06:48 Originally posted by ak�nc� Ok so i'll give a reaction closer to yours; Isk,isk,isk.... No.U........r wrrrronnngggg.Tamerr ak�am iz nut famous or important in turky.Therefore he needs to speak of discussible matters from a wrong point of view so he can sell mooorrre. I wil expect frm yr ysual yappiimg. (I hope this has been a diffrent reaction since it's closer to yours) Aku...even u can be reasonable some times , i guess.... I dont get it why u shout at me ....i simply post the explanations Tanner is giving for ur actions.....IF u think different , prove HIM wrong... Shouting at me , does not change any fact.... By the way DO U HAVE ANY PERSON IN TURKEY WHO IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH UR PROPAGANDA AND U RESPECT HIM ????? ( This will be another un-answered question....) Isk. Posted By: iskenderani Date Posted: 19-Apr-2005 at 07:03 Originally posted by Gazi He is not a professor.He is a writer. Gazi....whatever he is , even maybe the next Pope...i dont care. He is giving some reasonable explanations for ur actions...What u have to do is to give another explanations....That simple...The outcome will be , that the explanation the most logical will prevail. Ur problem , for all of u , is that u cant answer what he says , and u only sing "he is a dog " , he is not respected" , "he is not a scholar , he is a writer " , and some other weak excuses that make his words seem more and more true... Try to find something better....these weak excuses , expose u as a nation , in the worst way... Isk. Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 19-Apr-2005 at 09:09 Originally posted by iskenderani Originally posted by ak�nc� Ok so i'll give a reaction closer to yours; Isk,isk,isk.... No.U........r wrrrronnngggg.Tamerr ak�am iz nut famous or important in turky.Therefore he needs to speak of discussible matters from a wrong point of view so he can sell mooorrre. I wil expect frm yr ysual yappiimg. (I hope this has been a diffrent reaction since it's closer to yours) Aku...even u can be reasonable some times , i guess.... I dont get it why u shout at me ....i simply post the explanations Tanner is giving for ur actions.....IF u think different , prove HIM wrong... Shouting at me , does not change any fact.... By the way DO U HAVE ANY PERSON IN TURKEY WHO IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH UR PROPAGANDA AND U RESPECT HIM ????? ( This will be another un-answered question....) Isk. If you can hear my voice there is something wierd going on Yes.The thing is all respected history professors miraculously go with our ideas ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 19-Apr-2005 at 09:15 Originally posted by iskenderani Originally posted by Gazi He is not a professor.He is a writer. Gazi....whatever he is , even maybe the next Pope...i dont care. He is giving some reasonable explanations for ur actions...What u have to do is to give another explanations....That simple...The outcome will be , that the explanation the most logical will prevail. Ur problem , for all of u , is that u cant answer what he says , and u only sing "he is a dog " , he is not respected" , "he is not a scholar , he is a writer " , and some other weak excuses that make his words seem more and more true... Try to find something better....these weak excuses , expose u as a nation , in the worst way... Isk. You are wrong.The reason we call them dogs is that they lost ALL the debates they have been.The problem is thouh proven wrong they still speak ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: dorian Date Posted: 21-May-2005 at 14:10 The main point is that the genocides of Pontian-Greeks and Armenians must be recognised. This is one of the most massive massacres. Millions of peoples were killed. That's the rsult no matter the reasons. Posted By: Kenaney Date Posted: 21-May-2005 at 14:48 Originally posted by dorian The main point is that the genocides of Pontian-Greeks and Armenians must be recognised. This is one of the most massive massacres. Millions of peoples were killed. That's the rsult no matter the reasons. Ok then how much whas that exactly? I WANT PROOFFFFFFF NOT NONSENS!!!!   ------------- OUT OF LIMIT Posted By: Justice Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 00:57 Originally posted by Kenaney Originally posted by dorian The main point is that the genocides of Pontian-Greeks and Armenians must be recognised. This is one of the most massive massacres. Millions of peoples were killed. That's the rsult no matter the reasons. Ok then how much whas that exactly? I WANT PROOFFFFFFF NOT NONSENS!!!!   My little Turkish friends there is really nothing to proove though since it is already prooven.The International Assosiation Of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) and the Institute for the Study of Genocide already have recognised the Genocides.So it is you Turks who are suppoed to convince us that there wasnt a Genocide not vice versa If your Turkish Historians and you have any objections about it , why dont you just take your information and the proofs that you claim you have and convince them that there wasn't any Genocide,instead of crying all the time. By the way 2 weeks ago the First International Commite of  ONLY Turkish Historians to disguss the Armenian Genocide was stoped by the Turkish Goverment , and they called all the Historians there traitors.I repeat they were just only Turkish Historians.Imagine what would happen if there were Armenian or pro-Genocide Historians there. http://www.isg-iags.org/ - http://www.isg-iags.org/ ------------- THEY WILL NOT PASS Posted By: baracuda Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 01:30 Originally posted by Justice Originally posted by Kenaney Originally posted by dorian The main point is that the genocides of Pontian-Greeks and Armenians must be recognised. This is one of the most massive massacres. Millions of peoples were killed. That's the rsult no matter the reasons. Ok then how much whas that exactly? I WANT PROOFFFFFFF NOT NONSENS!!!! � My little Turkish friends there is really nothing to proove though since it is already prooven.The International Assosiation Of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) and the Institute for the Study of Genocide already have recognised the Genocides.So it is you Turks who are suppoed to convince us that there wasnt a Genocide not vice versa If your Turkish Historians and you have any objections about it , why dont you just take your information and the proofs that you claim you have and convince them that there wasn't any Genocide,instead of crying all the time. By the way 2 weeks ago the First International Commite of� ONLY Turkish Historians to disguss the Armenian Genocide was stoped by the Turkish Goverment , and they called all the Historians there traitors.<span style="font-weight: bold;">I repeat they were just only Turkish Historians</span>.Imagine what would happen if there were Armenian or pro-Genocide Historians there. http://www.isg-iags.org/ - http://www.isg-iags.org/ The source you give also recognises greek attrocities against macedonians "Macedonians in Greece in the Twentieth Century: Genocide, Ethnic Cleansing, Denationalization, Assimilation and Non-Recognition." still want to use the source? and admit to all of us on greek genocide, and ethnic cleansing.. it hasnt been over a century no.. its only been 50 odd years..and still continueing... Posted By: Murtaza Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 03:17 LOL I think he would find another source now. Justice how many Turks killed by Greeks and Armenians?  Any Idea, I think greeks  and  armenians just call themself human being. They dont care How many  Turks died.   Posted By: ArmenianSurvival Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 03:39 Originally posted by Murtaza Justice how many Turks killed by Greeks and Armenians?  Any Idea, I think greeks  and  armenians just call themself human being. They dont care How many  Turks died. Ya a lot of Turks died. Mostly from World War, and some by Armenian guerillas AFTER the massacres started. People always leave out the fact that Armenians and Greeks only started attacking after the massacres had started. Turkish deaths are recognized, while over a million Armenians and Greeks deaths are still unrecognized, and thats our whole point. We are not denying that Turks died. We do not deny history, it is the Turkish government that should work on that department. And dont post back saying "there was no massacre" because Turkey is the only nation that doesnt agree with the Armenian Genocide, and they are the ones being accused. That should tell you something. ------------- Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ Posted By: Murtaza Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 03:46 ArmenianSurvival Infact, the countries who accept Armenian  Genocide  didnt do it because of their superior idea of humanity. They did it just politically. Will you call russia, or france humanist nations?(I think instead of accepting our genocides, they should first accept their genocides) So dont tell me all world accept it The other point, when this people live in harmony,(I cant say they love each  other much, but they lived togetter enough time).  Why this bloody killings happened? And sorry no massacre. People killed each other, and not 1.500.000 Armenians died.   Posted By: baracuda Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 04:16 Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival Originally posted by Murtaza <span ="bold">Justice how many Turks killed by Greeks and Armenians?� Any Idea, I think greeks� and� armenians just call themself human being. They dont care How many� Turks died. Ya a lot of Turks died. Mostly from World War, and some by Armenian guerillas AFTER the massacres started. People always leave out the fact that Armenians and Greeks only started attacking after the massacres had started. Turkish deaths are recognized, while over a million Armenians and Greeks deaths are still unrecognized, and thats our whole point. We are not denying that Turks died. We do not deny history, it is the Turkish government that should work on that department. And dont post back saying "there was no massacre" because Turkey is the only nation that doesnt agree with the Armenian Genocide, and they are the ones being accused. That should tell you something. </span> You are using the word After too much, maybe you're forgetting a few facts of why the whole things started with the greeks, and the Armenians. I am not claiming anything as an argument on this matter will be useless you would continue on forever and I likewise.. so let me state to you some facts. The ottoman empire was judged against for 'attrocities' against the armenians, due to armenians wanting this court.. and the english,french support for it.. but not 1 single evidence was produced by the armenian side.. so the court not even wanting try to defend an un-win-able case dropped the hearings.. as it wouldnt have taken 30 minutes for the other side to show the opposite. So if there were no sources then for this armenian genocide.. then how is it that almost a hundred years later some books written at the fall of the ottoman empire by greek and armenian sympathisers who have no clue of the area, count as facts.. that my friend is beyond my understanding.. Coming to other reports on After, take a look at war reports , from Crimea, and from Bulgaria.. and you will see what I mean, as there are some realy viable sources Russian and English.. SO to round up, a game was played on you, as armenians, like with the present day kurds, as a result which disturbing things happened and led to your exile. In the end of course your people arent going to be happy about it. Turkey, on the other hand doesnt have anything to do with the armenians, but is afraid of its own democracy, as there are many sell-outs to various people for momentary fame, money whatever.. so turkey sensors many things, but the archive's are open, both yours and ours.. So to come to the absolute roundup of the whole genocide in 1915 idea.. its just pure politics. Think, will the turkish saying yes, feed you?will it open borders? will it bring back people politicians killed in europe by your people? will it clean the views of others who have been bluntly looking at tale's and not facts regardless of own histories? NO. it wont, and there is absolutely no gain for you whatsoever. But on the other hand, if dissproven it would be your total demise and ridecule... So this politics is just going to continue on and on and on.. (like the duracell rabbit..) and on and on.... untill someday someone is going to stop, and say.. wait a minute, why argue and go after false pretenses, lets make peace its better for us. Posted By: ArmenianSurvival Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 06:28 You make some good points. I know as well as you do that there are a lot of political tactics being used by every side of the genocide case. But, i do not see a gain for foreign nations to accept the genocide. There can only be loss, such as the United States and their military bases in Turkey. That is the reason the U.S. has not passed the Genocide Bill. Every U.S. President since Ronald Reagan has said there was a genocide perpetrated by the Ottoman government, but they dont pass the bill for political reasons. So in that sense, you make a very good point. You claim that Turkish archives are open to the world and how Armenians have no factual information pertaining to the genocide. Is that why the Armenians ALWAYS bring up the genocide in EVERY discussion and the Turkish government always tries to cover it up? Why else would Turkey censor their OWN historians? How are you "open to the world", and at the same time censoring Turkish historians? I would like to know. You said Turkey has nothing to do with the Armenians. This is wrong. When the Turkish Republic was formed, it wasnt because they founded a new land and formed a nation. They INHERITED Ottoman-controlled lands. When you inherit a nation, you inherit everything from riches and plunder to all the nations problems. The Armenian genocide was the Ottomans problem, just as you said, and now Turkey has inherited that problem. Anyone who tries to separate Turkey from the Ottoman Empire is not thinking realistically. Because these same people that say Turkey has nothing to do with Ottomans talk about Ottoman history all day and how their ancestors were so great. Thats fine. But they should also take responsibility for what their great ancestors did. Im not saying every Turk, just the government. And the foreign sources on the genocide is the main thing thats fueling our case for genocide recognition. The British, French, German and American sources have many eyewitness accounts as well as statistics which were all different than the Turkish sources. The foreign sources were on the same pace as each other, while the Turkish sources were way off. Foreign documents helped Armenians more than anything. ------------- Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։ Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 06:54 You claim that Turkish archives are open to the world and how Armenians have no factual information pertaining to the genocide. Is that why the Armenians ALWAYS bring up the genocide in EVERY discussion and the Turkish government always tries to cover it up? Why else would Turkey censor their OWN historians? How are you "open to the world", and at the same time censoring Turkish historians? I would like to know.   It is not a nice thing to say but you are completely wrong.Yes,the armenian government does bring it p in every discussion but they say "ACCEPT IT!!!!" or such things like that They usually don't say scientific things,but sometimes they do become reasonable My point is that we never try to cover it up,our president offered to work TOGETHER in a NEUTRAL place but you didn't take the deal,oh well no problem We did cencsor the seminar,i know we did.That was half justified.They did no invite the historians saying "NO".So we did not cancel it but postponed it. Remeber swizerland threatened to arrest a historian saying no?How is that?from where i see it,hat was much heavier than our act   ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: ak�nc� Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 06:59 And the foreign sources on the genocide is the main thing thats fueling our case for genocide recognition. The British, French, German and American sources have many eyewitness accounts as well as statistics which were all different than the Turkish sources. The foreign sources were on the same pace as each other, while the Turkish sources were way off. Foreign documents helped Armenians more than anything. How were our sources way off?You have your archives,original ones(?),i doubt armenia has any. Ok,let's take your argument like this,your sources have witnesses;so do we british and french... archives support your claims;so do ours Being diffrent does not prove us to be wrong,it only makes them less belivable I'm sorry,freshen my memory,which naion used a fake book to support thier claims? The ones that support your claim,even bernard lewis says that they bribed him into writing that   ------------- "I am the scourage of god appointed to chastise you,since no one knows the remedy for your iniquity exept me.You are wicked,but I am more wicked than you,so be silent!"                Posted By: Murtaza Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 07:00 ArmenianSurvival   sorry but do your realy thinking this countries care Armenian lifes who lost that times? Yes They accept and support Armenian genocide, but half of them is because they are against the Turkey joining with EU. Or like russia because they are adversaries of Turkey. Or Like PKK because they are enemy of Turkey. Did you read what Turkey write? In fact you have nothing from some notes(And Turkey say they are false) writen by Talat Pa�a for genocide. The others are for killing, And we accept killing happened in Turkey both Turks(Also  Kurds) and Armenians died. You cannot say exile is Genocide. It was  made by USA too. Yes I is a wrong thing but not genocide. I accept exile leaded  very  bad. But Turkish soldiers are leaded as bad as exile. We lost 70000-80000 people  at the Sar�kam�s, because of cold. But there is not a genocide. Turks did  not exiled All Armenians. Noone wanted to get rid of Armenians. Posted By: Phallanx Date Posted: 09-Jun-2005 at 07:11 QUOTE=baracuda]So this politics is just going to continue on and on and on.. (like the duracell rabbit..) and on and on.... untill someday someone is going to stop, and say.. wait a minute, why argue and go after false pretenses, lets make peace its better for us.[/QUOTE] I honestly wonder at times..... How on earth do you make peace with someone that has no intention of denouncing the (to use a mild term) "mistakes" of his past? Where are any efforts seen by the Turkish goverment to disprove this issue officially in a open fora where both sides will freely support their position?? Is it possible that you already have forgotten about an idependant attempt by scholars of both sides that was closed down by the Turkish goverment and the Turkish  scholars were once again labeled 'traitors'??? You have a perculiar way of inventing little conspiracies when it comes to judging your country's past. Now you discredit all existing documents, photos and archives by saying that the issue was presented in books only some hundred years later. "Genocide idea"??? "pure politics"??? You are doing nothing different than you always have, clearly not accepting the fact that innocent people were killed by a facsistic goverment/ruler. A Genocide may not have happened but a Democide (same thing really just smaller amount of people massacred) definitely did. How is any massacre titled "politics"??? ------------- To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.