3402) 1915 Events: Critique & Exposition Of How Facts & Falsifications Mixed Up, Stirred & Served On A Golden Platter

Buenos’ Review Of Üngör Article by Sadi Dinlenc

Tal Buenos’ review (15 Characteristics Of The Armenian Narrative by Tal Buenos of yet another historical falsification of the 1915 Events, by Ugur Ümit Üngör, titled ‘ The Armenian Genocide, 1915, is an excellent critique and exposition of how facts and falsifications mixed up, stirred and served on a golden platter, as happened many times before.

The review by Buenos clearly describes 15 points where Üngör manipulated previous writings, historical facts and ignored realities to suit his pre-determined purposes.

The important issue here is not how Buenos has literally destroyed Üngör’s article but Buenos’ 15 famous points about destortion, ignorance and falsifications common to all articles written earlier by Armenians and/or their sympathizers, including some Turkish Apologizers recently, regarding the false claims of genocide. These articles, books and brochures commonly : . . .

1. Totally ignored the sufferings of Turks preceding the ‘forced deportaion’,

2. Did not remember the Armenian Alliance with the Russian Army advancing on Turkey,

3. Forgot to mention the alliance of 22,000 Armenian soldiers collaborating with Hitler in mass killing of Jews during the WWII,

4. Did not show any remorse for killing of innocent Turkish Diplomats by ASALA,

5. Tried taking about CUP only without mentioning Armenian Revolutionary Committees,

6. Exploited the anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim sentiments prevailing in Europe,

7. Intended clearly to destroy the Turkey’s name in Europe,

8. Started telling their stories by mentioning first the Armenian sufferings inflicted by the Turks as if Armenians were drinking a cup of coffee when all these things happened,

9. Tried to draw whimsical parallels between Hitler and the CUP leaders,

10. Emphasized that only the Muslims killed the Christians while not talking about at all the killings of Turks in the hands of Christian Armenian bandits,

11. Always named the killings “ racial and religious” without mentioning the security concerns and political reasons behind them,

12. Never mentioned the promise given by the Great Powers to the Armenians to fight with them against Turkey in return for their own homeland – which later was totally forgotten- ,

13. Never mentioned the famous speech which is in itself ‘ A TOTAL ADMISSION OF GUILT’ by the President Kachaznouni of the Armenian Republic of 1918, made in Bucharest, Romania, and submitted to Paris Conference where he famously grouped the previous and recent Armenian activities into the following headings, within his 6 pages long speech: (*)

“ We have participated in military operations….”
“ We were cheated… we were made part of the Russia ..”
“ We were dreaming….”
“ Turks were forced to declare the Deportations ..”
“ We could not see the realities..”
“ We are the reason of all these events ..”
“ The National War was Turks’ right ..”
“ We uprose and fought against the Turks…”
“ The Sevres Agreement has blinded us ..”
“ The foundation of our uprising was the ‘Greater Armenia’ “
“ We never managed to be a ‘State’ “
“ There is no such thing as Turkish Armenia “
“ We have used terrorism…”
“ The remnant of the old days ‘Dashnak Party’ has to terminate itself .. “
“ Dashnak Party is against the peace…”

(*) The whole written body of the speech and its appendices may be downloaded from the website, free of charge, Armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2008/07/2540-free-e-book-scanned-copy.html

When one pulls himself/herself away from the details, emotions and fanatical addresses, he/she will clearly see the above pattern which is becoming so outdated and non-scholarly, after all.

---

Readers Comment

If Turks committed a genocide which is the greatest crime of humanity, and if Turkey really avoids of facing its history, and if the Armenians and their supporters sincerely want Turkey to do it, why do the Armenians persistently refuse Turkey’s suggestions to discuss these events together with historians from both sides and other countries? For example:

“Our objective is to have the matter investigated by historians and experts. We are ready to accept the decision of the joint historical commission. We agree for different professionals from various countries to be involved” Abdullah Gul recently said. If historians committee project could be realized, issue of so called Armenian genocide will not be discussed by politicians but by historians. Furthermore, other than Turkish and Armenian historians, historians from third countries will also be included.


The Turks who were eager for establishment of such an historical commission, were supported by the United Nations, European Parliament and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). http://www.tegenwicht.org/weblog_2006/67_armeens.... http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/bericht/77330, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/93374... and was very happy. While Turkey was eager and very happy, the Armenians were exceedingly unwilling and very angry.

http://www.keghart.com/content/dans-la-rue#english; http://www.hairenik.com/armenianweekly/august_2004/history001.html


In an interview with Armenian Reporter, Prof Richard Hovannisian from California University and the father of Raffi Hovannisian, the first Foreign Minister of Armenia, said: ‘It is very dangerous to establish such an historical commission…because according to 1948 United Nations’s Genocide Convention, a deliberate and planned massacre is mandatory. The Turks will accept that nearly 200-300 thousand Armenian died; but nobody can call them deliberate acts. In Turkish Archives the Turks have the telegrams sent from vilayets about the then Armenian upraisals and documents about the Armenians who fled from the Ottoman Army. So, the Turkish historians will accuse the Armenians and say that all these events were a reaction to what the Armenians did and were not deliberate’ http://www.kophaber.com/news_detail.php?id=4726

One of the supporters of so called Armenian genocide resolutions in U.S. Congress, Adam Schiff said “A committee about history is a struggle for distracting the truth. Turkey cannot rewrite history in exchange for good relations with Armenia.”


ANCA and other Armenian lobbying organizations stated that Armenia is forced to make dangerous concessions by Turkey and that Turkey’s moves towards establishing joint historians commission aims to call so called Armenian genocide into question and suspend its international recognition. ANCA’s aim is to provide recognition of so called Armenian genocide by U.S. Congress before establishment of a historians committee to discuss the events by keeping pressure.urging the Congress.

Let us go to a few years ago:

*In 2004, the Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform (VAT) was founded to exchange documents about the 1915 events by Austrian, Turkish and Armenian historians. After receiving 100 Turkish documents, the Armenians abandoned the project refusing to continue to fulfill their commitments and afterwards the Armenian foreign minister announced that they did not want to discuss the 1915 events with historians. (I. Press Release 11.1.2005 Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform – VAT

The Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform deeply regrets to announce that she will not carry through her starting initiative „The First Viennese Armenian-Turkish Round Table” (FVATR Vienna 2005) originally planned for spring 2005. The reason is that the Armenian partner has not provided us with the necessary confirmation as agreed in August 2004…….On the other hand, the Turkish partner accepted already to participate in the dialogue, in which each part was supposed to present 180 documents on the year 1915 showing their understanding of this delicate matter. http://www.turkishdigest.com/documents/VATpressrelase.pdf)

*Armenia refused the Turkish prime minister's and the Turkish Assembly's invitation announced on April 13, 2005 which suggested to establish a Joint Commission composed of historians from both sides and discuss the events which took place during the 1st World War.

*And the Turkish prime minister repeated the same invitation on February 2008 , in Munich at the 44th Security Conference where the Armenian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Oskanian also attended?

In neither of these invitations was there any precondition, unlike it is claimed by the Armenians.

***Why did the Armenian historian Sarafyan, who accepted the invitation of the then chief of Turkish History Foundation, Halacoglu, for cooperation to investigate Harput events, abandon the project, after talking the Armenian diaspora?

*The Ottoman and Turkish archives are open, unlike it is claimed by the diaspora. http://www.ankara.edu.tr/english/yazi.php?yad=36. http://www.tsk.mil.tr/ENGLISH/8_FRAGMENTS_FORM_HI... http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Documents... http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Documents... http://www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr/kitap/kitap.asp...

Even, Armenian historian Ara Sarafian from Gomitas Institute and Hilmar Kaiser searched the Ottoman archives (www.sarigelinbelgeseli.com

*In spite of this, why are the Armenian archives including the one in Zoryan Armenian Institute in Boston closed? Both Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation offered the Armenians to open these archives; but the directors of the Zoryan Institute replied that they did not have enough money to open the archives. Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation promised financial support.Why did the Armenians refuse this suggestion too? (Nüzhet Kandemir, http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/418517.asp). Note that Zoryan Institute has quite enough money to provide financial support for Taner Akçam who advocated the Armenian claims while working in Minnesota University until recently. Why have the Armenians always been terribly afraid of establishment of historical joint commissions?

Is it not striking that Sarafian, the head of the London-based Gomidas Institute, said Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s offer to Armenia to establish a commission of historians to resolve the Armenian issue was positive, but Armenia was the wrong address. He also said that freedom of expression for historians in Armenia is limited and the genocide issue has become a political tool. http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/10426...

If a genocide had really occurred, why did Brian Ardouny of the Armenian Assembly of America announce ‘We don’t need to prove the genocide historically, because it has already been accepted politically’? Why did the chief of the Armenian Archives in Armenia tell that they were not interested in the archives, but all they are interested is the world’s public opinion.

Or why have the Armenians not admitted to an international court yet?

In your life, have you ever seen a criminal who persistently calls the victim to bring his evidences? And, have you ever seen a victim who passionately accuses somebody of committing crime and giving him great harm but strictly avoids of bringing his proofs before the referees or going to court, and tells that he need not prove that person’s guilt, because the community has already accepted him as guilty?

In this situation would you not question the era you are living in? 5000 BC or 2000BC?

What else should the Turks do to face their history? Is it Turkey/Turks or Armenia and those who support them who are terribly afraid of facing their history?


Akasya Dogan

---

.

Read More

3401) 15 Characteristics Of The Armenian Narrative by Tal Buenos*

 

---

Related Post: 1915 Events: Critique and Exposition Of How Facts and Falsifications Mixed Up, Stirred and Served On A Golden Platter

---

8 May 2013 /
Following the outpour of media material on April 24 in memory of the dreadful events of 1915, it is important to take a step back and evaluate how this reflects on the Turk.

A recently published chapter by Uğur Ümit Üngör, titled “The Armenian Genocide, 1915,” in “The Holocaust and Other Genocides: An Introduction,” edited by Maria van Haperen et al. (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2012), is perfect for such an analysis. It does not introduce new aspects to the Armenian narrative of 1915. It unfolds the same story already told by scholars such as Vahakn Dadrian, Richard Hovannisian, Taner Akçam and Peter Balakian. It is not prototypical by any means; rather, it is perfectly typical. It stands out for its typicality, for being representative of the effort to strengthen the familiarity and acceptance of this Armenian narrative. Upon close inspection, one may glean certain overall characteristics of the Armenian narrative. The following 15 main characteristics point to a general theme: Turcophobia. . . .

1) European facilitation. The publication of this literature in Europe is likely not a coincidence and should be considered reflective of Turcophobic and Islamophobic attitudes that are prevalent in Europe. Such anti-Turkish content is not only emblematic of these phobias but may serve as a popular platform for their intensification and dissemination. One particularly troubling type of Turcophobic “literature” in Europe is the drafting of laws in parliament to cater to the anti-Turkish views held by constituencies with political influence.

2) No room for historical debate. The very title of Üngör's chapter shows an attempt to apply a political-legal term to the events of 1915, regardless of the hotly contested aspects of historicity. However, legal determination cannot precede a thorough examination of what actually took place. The unilateral description of the events as genocide shows a great level of distrust in what a committee of established historians of different nationalities may find. Ultimately, it shows intent to destroy Turkey's name.
Disregard of Armenian revolutionary committees

3) Little to no mention of the Armenian revolutionary committees. The role played by the Armenian revolutionary committees is typically played down and, at times, as in Üngör's chapter, there is no mention of them at all. The absolute omission of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation from the narrative makes the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) falsely appear to be the sole actor and therefore the sole bearer of responsibility. However, the revolutionary aspect of the events is fundamental to their fair and accurate description. Historically, “rebellion” is the most basic reason why the categorization of political massacres, as in modern-day Syria, is different from those of intended exterminations, as in Auschwitz.

4) Selective reference to Armenian nationalism. There is a tendency to eat the cake and have it too when it comes to Armenian nationalism. In discussions involving Armenian territorial claims post-World War I, there is a strong sense of Armenian nationalism, but it is concealed in the discussion of the years leading to 1915. In his brief recap of the ideological trends leading to the massacres, Üngör fails to mention Armenian nationalism, as if the Young Turks were the only nationalists in Anatolia.

5) The story always begins with Turkish action. The event that is described at the start of a narrative determines the perception of causality all throughout. The Armenian massacres may be put in the context of the 19th century campaign to rid Christian Europe of the Turk, but for Üngör there is no question that it starts with the CUP. For many diaspora Armenians, the narrative does not begin a single day before April 24, 1915. The Armenian narrative needs the Turks to be the cause, for otherwise the Turks cannot be guilty of genocide.

6) The Turks are “revanchists.” This French term describes nations that are warmongering because they seek to reclaim lost territories, and the Armenian narrative pins it only on the CUP after losing land in the Balkans. A narrative that is not Turcophobic would consider Christian revanchism since 1453, and Armenian revanchism since 1890, to be foundational.

7) The Turks wanted war. The distortion of the causes for World War I is a significant aspect of the Armenian narrative. The Ottoman state's preventive strike against Russia, following several threatening indications, is replaced by a claim that the “Young Turks had deliberately engineered an armed confrontation.”
Systematic destruction

8) The destruction was systematic. The emphasis on deliberation in the actions of the CUP is especially strong when describing the actual “process of destruction,” which for Üngör was “consistent.” This is claimed because of the desire to accuse Turks of premeditation and of having a plan. Regardless of the evidence, the Armenian narrative draws whimsical comparisons to the Nazi Germans and their level of intent and organization. This is designed to make the Young Turks go down in history as evil.

9) The CUP was homogenously national socialist. As part of the effort to Nazify the Young Turks, the Armenian narrative creates a cursory and simplistic image of Turkification that ignores local aspects as well as Ottomanist and Islamic streams within the CUP.

10) Muslims killed Christians, but not vice versa. The bilateral damage incurred by Muslim and Christian communities during this period of rising national claims for self-determination in the Balkans and Anatolia is presented in the Armenian narrative as unilateral. Only the massacres of Christians have a place in the narrative. Reading Üngör's work, one would conclude that the killings, dispossessions and deportations of Muslims in the Balkans never happened or have nothing to do with the Armenian issue. This is an extension of the Turcophobic elements found in the British narration of events in the 19th century, which highlighted the killings of Christians in Bulgaria during the local insurgency but understated the deportations and massacres of Muslims in Bulgaria during the Russo-Turkish War.

11) Propaganda and memoirs are presented as historical evidence and used selectively. Even Turkish propaganda is cleverly employed to present a Turcophobic narrative. Considering that Üngör does not discuss Armenian rebellion at all, his brief discussion of Turkish “manipulated photographs of alleged Armenian ‘terrorists'” gives an impression that the Armenian rebellion was altogether a Turkish invention that did not exist beyond the bogus images. Additionally, Russian propaganda is presented without question of authenticity or context. The central role played by Britain's wartime propaganda, known as the Blue Book, and its author, James Bryce, who had called for Armenian rebellion since the 1870s, in constructing the Armenian narrative is a prime example of this characteristic. A recent example would be Akçam's use of forged documents to promote Sarkis Torossian's story.

12) Slanted presentation of great-power involvement. The Armenian narrative is selectively critical of the politics of the international powers. Üngör says that the great powers were “driven by self-interest” when after the war was over “the Americans, French and British forgot their Armenian business partners,” yet to him they were anything but self-interested when they encouraged Armenians to rebel before World War I and supported national self-determination for Christians in Ottoman territory. This is based on a Turcophobic conviction that cooperation with the Armenians is morally sound but cooperation with the Turks is political.

13) The massacres were religious or racial in nature. The Armenian narrative shows the massacres as either religious, to rally Christian support, or racial, to provoke Nazi connotations. Being that there were no deportations of Armenians in certain areas and that there were no massacres prior to Armenian rebellion, it would be reasonable to consider that political reasons and security concerns caused the change. However, the Armenian narrative looks away from these historical aspects, possibly because the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide does not recognize political massacres as genocide.
Turkish diplomats' assassination rationalized

14) The assassinations of Turkish diplomats are rationalized. In order to protect its perceived moral leverage from suffering as a result of the violent assassinations of innocent Turks and non-Turks, the Armenian narrative seeks to rationalize these terrible actions. Üngör offers no mention or detailed discussion of the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia, but, instead, conveniently explains the assassinations by saying that “surviving family members of the victims felt deeply insulted by these politics of denial, which prompted a violent response from Armenian nationalists in the 1970s.” The idea that somehow there is an element of good reason in the assassinations, or that they were caused by Turkish politics, is Turcophobic.

15) The Turks are denialists. This is the most telling of the characteristics. The idea is to liken Turks to Holocaust deniers. There is a growing number of Turks who are willing to succumb to this pressure because they have been convinced that that is the responsible thing to do. However, denial is about refusal to believe, and the Turks who are at odds with the Armenian narrative are actually more eager than anybody else to tell the narrative of the events as they truly unfolded and without ignoring any aspect of Armenian loss.

The idea that the Turks should be excluded from commenting on their own memory, that they are so distrusted so as to always be suspected of undermining historical truths, is not only reflective of Turcophobia in the strongest of ways, but its popularity reflects how little awareness there is today of Turcophobia and its meaning. Turcophobia is so widely ignored that even Microsoft's spellchecker does not recognize it as a word.

How long will Turks suffer from accusations of denialism? Is the only way forward to disregard history and accept how the Turk is described in biased Western historiography, of which the Armenian narrative is only an extension? The modern Armenian narrative in the West was initiated by Bryce, who, since 1877, repeatedly stated in writing that Armenian nationalist endeavors should be supported because the Armenians are racially and religiously superior to Turks. To accept this aspect of Western historiography is to accept the Turcophobic beliefs that the Turk is inherently immoral and corrupt, excluded or looked down upon for not being of a European race and for not being of a European religion. To accept this false narrative because of current calls of denialism is to accept the Turk's position as the “other” who has no access to a Christian European tale. Turks have the right to explain that they are not in denial of Armenian suffering but that they are most certainly resolved to deny and weed out the Turcophobic roots of the current Armenian narrative.

History is filled with cruelty. Turcophobia, however, is the main reason why genocidal claims are still being made against Turks in the name of Christian Europe, Western historiography and Armenian nationalism. Where would one find similar genocide-related pressure over the bloody “Christian” crimes against Africans, Jews, Indians and Native Americans known as Indians?

It is time for the Turkish narrative on the history of European Turcophobia to emerge. The current accusation of denial is one chapter in this narrative, for it shows how the Turks are treated as outsiders who are told to shut up and accept the terrible things that are said about them, and are condemned when they vocalize their view of the past. It is time for Turks to be insiders, authors of their own narrative and masters of their own history.

*Tal Buenos has a master of theological studies from Harvard Divinity School (2005).

---

---

Comments:
Londoner, 12 May 2013 , 16:25
'denialist' is a very convenient title for those who do not want to study the facts (referring to the British, Russian and US documents and to some of the statements of the First Prime minister of Armenia would be ample) and dismiss anyone who disagrees with the genocide myth because of the known facts.

Araratian, 12 May 2013 , 04:46
Nick you are hillarious and ignorant, get yourself a culture about Lemkin. He himself stated that the idea to define the crime the Armenian were subject, leads him to coin the word Genocide. If the inventor of the word says it was a Genocide people like you or like this Tal Buenos are nobody compare to Lemkin on this issue!

Random Armenian, 12 May 2013 , 04:19
The government of the Republic of Turkey has been actively and deliberately covering up the Ottoman crimes of 1915, since the 20's and 30's. And this was before WWII and before word 'genocide' came into existence and before we Armenians started to raise our voices to make the world remember. They turned the subject into a taboo in Turkey, and forced their allies to stay silent about it. And this policy continues today. It is Turkey's narrative that has changed over the years in the face of facts and research. The claim from Turkey used to be that there was no massacre of Armenians. No Armenians had died. Now today we hear, "we never denied there were Armenian deaths." Tal Buenos is trying to distract from all this by attacking a straw man "Armenian narrative". The Armenian genocide is supported by Turkish and non-Armenian scholars. Tal Buenos is completely ignoring the facts of the Armenian genocide put forth by researchers. This idea that research into the Armenian genocide is somehow racism against Turks and islamaphobic appears to be latest talking point from Turkish quarters. They're projecting their own racism towards minorities of Turkey. Turkey and their appologists like Tal Buenos make it sound like they're fighting unfair attacks and historical narratives from Armenians. But it's the other way around. We have been trying to undo a very successful Turkish coverup of history which began with the founding of Turkey.

john the turk, 11 May 2013 , 23:26
How were you going to live in your turk free homeland with a ten percent of the total population? You were obviously trying to remove the Turks from their homeland in order to create an Armenia but Armenia slipped away from your hands for ever that's why you try to charge Turks in your Armenian brain. The genocide business is a hoax to cover up your motive

Ararat, 11 May 2013 , 21:20
@Sandokhan, you are not a man if you dont answer the following question: The Ottomans invaded and occupied the Armenian homeland in Asia Minor. The Armenians wanted to live in their homeland free of Ottoman occupation. According to your twisted Turkish logic, the Armenians "rebelled" and sided with the enemy and all that other delusional stuff and therefore the Turks reacted and got rid of over 2 million Armenians, exterminating 1.5 million of them, and confiscating their homeland in the process to secure Ottoman occupied Armenian territories. According to the Palestinians, and the entire Muslim world including you Turks, the Israelis invaded and occupied Palestine. The Palestinians want to live in their homeland free of Israeli occupation. Palestinians not only "rebelled" and put up fights many times with an army and rockets but they also have a foreign army "Hizballah" present in the occupied territories fighting along with the Palestinians and firing thousands of rockets into Israel. They also have the financial and military backing of countless Muslim countries bent on destroying Israel. Now, using the Turkish model and twisted logic, such as yours Sandokhan, my question to you is: Does Israel have the right to "relocate", expel and exterminate millions of Palestinians to secure the state of Israel because of the activities of the Palestinian militia, Hizballah and many more Israeli enemy combatants bent on destroying Israel to establish a Palestinian state on the occupied territories of Israel? I am waiting for your answer. For someone as vocal as you on the Armenian affairs, I can safely assume you are not a man if you dont answer my question.

sinan, 11 May 2013 , 20:40
Billy It is a famous Armenian lie that they had 1.5 M victims that Armenians try to spread however, truth always reveals

Nick, 11 May 2013 , 20:20
Dear Saaten. Clearly I have no issue with my interpretation of events. I do not labour under the the lack of information that Lemkin laboured under. You seem to have an issue with my gentle attempt to point out some obvious areas for concern. As I pointed out, Armenian cultural representatives would be better served if they dropped references to Hitler and the Nazis as they sought to clarify the perception that people have about the Armenian experience in 1915...if it is clarity that they want. There are times when it seems that clarity is not wanted- just blind acceptance and the acceptance of all that goes with it. Certainly, if they want the Turks to discuss with them this experience thy should consider presenting a case that is not strewn with inconsistencies, half truths and not a few total fabrications.

Uncle Billy, 11 May 2013 , 17:05
@ Sandokhan, how many ways are you going to use to justify the killing of 1.5 million plus victims and the annihilation of a whole minority group from their anceteral lands? Sooner or later you are going to run out of excuses and reasons. Keep working!

Saaten Maagar, 11 May 2013 , 16:59
Dear Nick, if Lemkin was 15 when the Armenians were being butchered, I do not think you were even born. So if you have any issues with lemkin's assesment you should have a bigger one with yours.

Nick, 11 May 2013 , 14:02
Dear Araratianfreak. Nobody ever bothers to try and contradict the “15 point” That said, I am always curious that people seem to think that a mere reference to Rafael Lemkin closes the argument. This is a strange circular logic that actually proves nothing. Lemkin’s observations on the Armenian experience were only as reliable as his sources of information and the acuity of his interpretation was determined by the cultural prism made available to him by his education. He was 15 when the Armenians were relocated. To illustrate, he chose not to use the word “genocide” to describe the events of South West Africa under German colonial administration even though this was clearly genocide which included mass murder, the summary execution of combatants and non-combatants alike, expulsion into the desert (Kalahari), the appropriation or destruction of property necessary for the sustenance of life and culture (cattle), slave labour camps, death camps, medical and anthropological specimen collection for racial studies institutes in Germany (which often required direct murder) and right down to a written extermination order. He chose not to define all this as “genocide” because of his perception of the natives in South West Africa and their relative cultural attainment which (he felt) directed their response to German colonial rule and contributed to their extraordinarily high mortality rate- believed to be more than 80%. I would hesitate to call him racist since this is a modern term and we look at things differently now. Armenians are trying to use the term “genocide” for political and cultural reasons and the word “holocaust” has been around for a long time in this particular meaning. Neither of the two superficial points you make address the basic questions that arise with repeated attempts by Armenian genocide campaigners to tie the Armenian experience to the Nazi driven holocaust in Europe that is both causative and ideological. Such a connection simply does not exist. Nor does it address the question that arises relating to parity of interpretation; if the Armenians experienced genocide then we should also be discussing the suffering inflicted on the peoples of the Caucasus by Russia in almost two centuries of serial genocides, often assisted by Armenians and which had a direct causative impact on what Armenians experienced in WW 1.

Sandokhan, 11 May 2013 , 01:25
@KAVAFIAN (“There was no rebellion, there was no treason.”): Exactly! Your Armenian leader Boghos Nubar told lies in 1918 en 1919 when he wrote that 200,000 Armenians sided with the war enemies of the Turks. >>>@ISSAC, all the Christian minorities (Armenians, Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Pontic Greeks) had been “wiped out” in the universe you guys have created. >>>ARARAT, according your logic then the whole world is occupied territory. Please distinguish international recognized borders and occupied territory (it’s internationally recognized that Israel occupies Palestinian soil). >> [Ararat:]“Second of all, 1,500,000 innocent Armenian women, children and elderly dont just perish..” Mr. Buenos, you should include one more characteristic in your list: exaggeration (statistics, support Armenian narrative, etcetera) .

Vartan, 11 May 2013 , 00:49
According to mr Buenos's pathetic logic The indigenous people of Anatolia , the Armenians needed to tolerate another six hundred years of domination by the invading Mongolian Turks , continue being called gyavur , being treated like second class citizens and taxed way more than the rest of the ottoman subjects specially during the war , in order not to have deserved to be massacred in there ANCESTREAL land . Turcophobia ? Whatever that means ! How do you explain this great nation turkey's illegal blockade of what's left of historical Armenia it ravished over six hundred years ? It's foot on tiny landlocked Armenia's throat ? Good luck to you sir in your petsuit of justice .

Issac, 10 May 2013 , 17:35
Tal Buenos: Well then please explain why the Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Pontic Greeks were also wiped out in the same period by the Turks.

Jacques Kavafian, 10 May 2013 , 17:21
This is the most ignorant rant I have read regarding the Armenian Genocide. The Armenian Genocide is one of the most studied topics on the face of this planet. There is no such thing as the "Armenian Narative". The argument that there was a rebellion is bogus. Armenians have always been poorly treated in Turkey and wanted some protection. There was no rebellion, there was no treason. That's the Turkish nonsense to somehow justify the Genocide. This topic has been studied ad nauzeum and judgement has been rendered. Turkey Committed Genocide and must accept this fact.

Ararat, 10 May 2013 , 11:58
Mr. Buenos, it is very obvious the main thesis of your article is to water down and trivialize the extermination of the Armenians as mere political killings and indirectly but cunningly legitimize the actions of the CUP by portraying the Armenians as revolutionaries and outsiders with designs on the Ottoman territory. First of all, the Armenians and the Armenian homeland in Asia Minor existed for thousands of years before the Ottomans set foot on these lands. Therefore there was no such thing as legitimate Ottoman territory but occupied Armenian territory. In other words, to claim the Armenians had designs on Ottoman territory is no different from saying the Armenians had designs on their own homeland. It does not make any sense. Second of all, 1,500,000 innocent Armenian women, children and elderly dont just perish because of political killings but because of a pre-meditated and state-sponsored extermination disguised under "relocation" from the war zones. But relocation to where? Not to a safer place inland into Central Anatolia but to Syrian desert with no chance of survival and return back to home. According to the twisted Turkish logic then one can safely conclude that, if the Armenian territory occupied by the Ottomans can be called as Ottoman territory then the Palestinian territory occupied by the Israelis can also be called as Israeli territory and not Palestinian territory. Therefore, the Palestinian nationalistic and revolutionary rebellions in Gaza and the West Bank can also be categorized as Palestinians having designs on Israeli territory thus the entire Palestinian population qualifying for "relocation", expulsion and eventual extermination by the Israelis. But as we all know, not just the Palestinians, but the entire Muslim world including the Turks on behalf of the Palestinians are up in arms calling for the destruction of the state of Israel because to them it is Israel that is occupying Palestinian territory and not the other way around. Perhaps this is the case because the Armenians are Christians but the Palestinians are fellow Muslims and different rules apply to Muslims. Can you Mr. Buenos explain this Turkish hypocrisy?

Araratianfreek, 10 May 2013 , 03:19
Dear Nick all the 15 points can be contradicted but the same space is needed it can not be done in a comment anyway it is the inventor of the word Genocide Raphael Lemkin that described it as Genocide and not the Armenians. The first time the word Holocauste was said in History is for 1909 Adana Armenians massacres it was described as Adana Holocauste by the french paper Illustration. The terms Crime against Humanity was first time in history used in 1915 during the Genocide by France, England and Russia warning the Ittihad . The term Extermination of the Armenian Race was said first by the Turkish Military court in 1919, the same Court that sentenced to death in absentia the Ittihadists Responsibles. As you see it is not the Armenians who label things. Talaat is even worse than Hitler and inspired him as did the Teshkilati Mahsuse since they preceeded the Ss and Hitler~!Last but not least Tal is not an Historian, all what he said represents his own opinion and History is not based on opinions but on facts. That nobody can change even after 97 years!

Sandokhan, 10 May 2013 , 01:04
In short we can say the Armenian version of the history is a racist story. Because in their eyes the Turks are barbarians who are not able to tell the truth.

Marawan, 09 May 2013 , 19:59
Most people when they see the name Tal Buenos, they just go to the next article unless you are a Turkish extreemist who embrace their new created history and hate all minorities.

David, 09 May 2013 , 19:52
It's time for Christophobic/Armenophobic "scholars" like you to stick to the historical facts instead of creating Disney-like revisionism of the mass murderers of not only the Armenians but Assyrrians,Greek, Yezidis, Kurds, etc. too. Nothing you can ever say will erase the "killing fields" of Turkey and the national disgrace and shame they brought to your country for the last 100 years from denialists like you. There is never any "justification" for mass-murdering defenseless women and children...period. You need to go back to college and study your history- then, you might understand why your own Govt. prosecuted your "heroic" young Turks/CUP and why they sentenced its proto-nazi leadership to death in absentia instead of reverently placing flowers on their graves in admiration through revisionism and propaganda masquerading as "scholarship". I'm embarrassed for the decent and educated Turks who know the difference.

john the turk, 09 May 2013 , 19:21
Dear Armenians even Truth can not hurt the shameless Armenians

Nick, 09 May 2013 , 18:29
It’s all very well calling Tal Buenos a “denial mercenary” but doing so without bothering to address any of the 15 points he describes merely acts as an illustration of points 1 and 2 of Buenos’ essay. In fact, reading through the 15 points it is hard to actually produce any decent contradictory argument and none of the critics posted below bother to try. The closest we get is a comment that simply illustrates Buenos’ points 13 and 15 and which describes a quote made by Buenos in an earlier article-"It is simply historically inaccurate, and morally misguided, to compare Adolf Hitler with Talat Pas,a -- or Tes,kilat-? Mahsusa with the Nazi SS” as being akin to denial of the Holocaust. Or to quote the critic directly: “The Armenian Genocide is not a matter of debate but a matter of fact, just like what happened to the Jews during the 2nd world war.” Any rational questioning of attempts to define the Armenian experience as something other than “genocide” is labelled as an example “Holocaust denial” but is, in fact simply a feeble and transparent effort to connect two completely different historical events in order to sanctify the Armenian tragedy, to put it beyond questioning and to use it as a political tool. The difference between Hitler’s Nazis and the CUP government in WW 1 is apparent to anyone who is bothered to look and a simple reference to any book, scholarly article or research paper by specialists on the Nazis and the Nazi period or on the development of Nazi ideology will draw a complete blank if it is seeking any Armenian connection and Turks-of any political description- simply do not appear. The Armenian ideological script writers would in fact do themselves a lot of favours if they dropped these spurious references to Hitler, the Nazis and the Holocaust altogether because to persist in this direction is simply to persist in a lie. Why should I believe in any narrative that is persistently prefaced by something that is demonstrably false?

Araratian, 09 May 2013 , 16:20
Tal Buenos is well known as a denial mercenary. Only Turksih papers gives him space for his rubbish writings he is always invited at the Turksih Embassy galas. His origins also are well known and a theologian should better dedicates himself to those issues instead of spreading falshood and hatered. The Armenian Genocide is a fact and is not subject to discussions and mental fruitlkess acrobacies. He is not only ignorant about Armenian Genocide but also about the Shoah, Tal read something about the jews Revolt in Munich before writing your paragraph 3 that I found really ridiculous!

reality, 09 May 2013 , 15:09
Money goes a long way to those who have no soul or ethics.

Garo Avedis, 09 May 2013 , 08:36
16)Turkey hides,aTurkey runs,Turkey guilty of genocide.you should have written a few sentances about the demostration.i have never read something that is so rubbish.

Ara, 09 May 2013 , 08:31
People like you are the reason that till now have prevented the acceptance of the Armenian Genocide by Turkish governments. despite overwhelming evidence you still put the blame on the victim. you have no shame!

Paul, 09 May 2013 , 01:17
Mr. Buenos is an apologist par excellence! If only Germany was as steadfast in denying what they did to the Jews and other minorities in WWII as Turkey has been about the Armenian (and Pontic Greek and Assyrian Genocides), he could have us all scratching our heads about the Holocaust, too.

Sandokhan, 09 May 2013 , 01:05
Mr. Buenos, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I want to share something related to your analysis too. You mentioned Ug(ur Ümit Üngör. You should know he hates the Turks. We have a firsthand witness of this hate. In a documentary called “The land of our grandparents“ (Dutch translation of “Het land van onze grootouders”) where he sold the viewers the Armenian version of the history, a witness saw his hate against the Turks. Between 36:41 and 37:47 the Turkish audio engineer, who accompanied him for days, mentions his hate against the Turks (Turkish viewers can affirm it). >>> Ug(ur Ümit Üngör is of Kurdish origin. This hate against the Turks can probably explained by the fact that the Turks “occupy” the soil Kurdish nationalists want. He even uses the word “colonization” for Turkish rule of Eastern Anatolia (see his article “Confiscation

Masis Ararat, 08 May 2013 , 20:30
Mr Buenos has been discredited in the past. One hopes he is a better theologian than historian. What matters at the end is the result. Killing Armenians was a sport of Abdul-Hamid. Over 100 thousand Armenians perished so it is no surprise that on the whole Armenians wanted out and revolutionaries took revenge. The Turkish government did not deserve their allegiance although a lot of Armenians continued to offer it. So those who talk about treason are ill-informed. A government cannot expect allegiance from citizens it massacres. Let us look at the result. An abominably immense crime against humanity and massive ethnic cleansing. Where are the Armenians ? Everywhere except their homeland of millenia. What about their property? May be it enriched many influential current Turkish families - perhaps Mr Buenos' sponsors? Who knows I don't. There are more honorable ways of earning a living Mr Buenos than to support an abomination.

Saaten Maagar, 08 May 2013 , 18:40
Mr. Tal, you need to stick to theology, a subject that you might know something about, not too sure about that either.

Sergey, 08 May 2013 , 17:49
Thanks to the author for this excellent summary of selective historical narratives blaming the Turks for all the injustices suffered equally by both Muslim and Christian populations during the WWI. The Turks and Armenians will truly find a path to reconciliation when they will revisit their selective historical discourses and will learn to respect each other's historical pain and sensitivities.

Ceygiz, 08 May 2013 , 17:35
It seems that you have a long record of Holocaust denial Mr Buenos. Lets look at what you said last January: "It is simply historically inaccurate, and morally misguided, to compare Adolf Hitler with Talat Pas,a -- or Tes,kilat-? Mahsusa with the Nazi SS -- because the former acted out of irrational hatred while the latter acted out of the natural need to survive" The Armenian Genocide is not a matter of debate but a matter of fact, just like what happened to the Jews during the 2nd world war. However, if I was to deny the latter, you would label me an antisemite, but it is alright for you to outright deny the extermination of my people- Utter hypocrite.

---

Source

---

Counter Comments by Sukru Server Aya

Lemkin’s coining a new word does not make him an authorized international judge. He just said when he was “heard it by Armenians”, not knowing that Dashnakist Armenians in the German Army under General Dro, (22.000 – 4800 SS troops) assisted Hitler in sending Jews to death camps. Suggest you . .

Continued at:

---

Direct Link To The Document

---

.

Read More

3400) A History of a Perfect Crime By Talin Suciyan

 

 Samatya (Raymond Kevorkian, Ermeniler, Aras Publ., 2012) . . .

May 12, 2013
The Armenian Weekly April 2013 Magazine

I spent my high school years in Samatya. The majority of my classmates were the children of the Armenians who had come to Istanbul from the provinces during the republican years. We were allowed to go out during our lunch breaks. Many of the students lived in Samatya and could go home for lunch. Yet, in the early 1990’s, when the political tension in the country reached its peak, because of the Kurdish issue, we were no longer allowed to go outside the school grounds during lunch breaks. . .

Although we used to work hard to not only be good citizens but the “best citizens”—we took compulsory national security classes taught by a high-ranking military officer, and would do our military exercises in the schoolyard so loud that half the district would hear our voices—it never guaranteed our security.

In those years, constant bomb warnings were proof of our insecurity. After each warning, we would go out to the schoolyard until the entire school was searched. Sometimes we would be asked to go home early. We hardly had any idea why a bomb would be planted in our school. No one would put these bomb warnings into context. There was nothing to understand; it was just like that. And so we got used to these warnings, along with the changing security measures that were an ordinary part of our school life.

During my doctoral research, I read Armenian newspapers from the 1930’s and had the chance to look at Samatya from a different perspective. Samatya was one of the districts where kaghtagayans were established. Kaghtagayans were kaghtagan (deportee or IDP) centers that hosted thousands of Armenians from the provinces. These centers functioned until the end of the 1930’s. Armenian newspapers published in Istanbul in the 1920’s and 1930’s were full of reports on the kaghtagans’ severe conditions in these centers, where they often had to live on top of one another. The community in Istanbul was responsible for providing food, work, and a sustainable life for these people. Yet, it was not easy, as the financial means of the community were shortened to a great extent, the court cases for saving its properties continued, and its legal status was in the process of complete eradication. And still, Armenians whose living conditions in the provinces were systematically decimated continued to come to Istanbul.

Armenians who remained in the provinces were threatened in several ways. Arshag Alboyaciyan referred to these attacks in his book Badmut‘iwn Malatio Hayots’:

In 1924, Armenians were leaving en masse since a group of attackers—15 people—were raiding their houses asking for money and jewels, beating them up, almost to death. This organization was called Ateshoglu Yildirim… They would put signs on the houses of Armenians and tell them to leave within 10 days… One day, they put a sign on the main church, giving Armenians five days to leave; otherwise, they said, ‘Ateshoglu Yildirim would burn you all.’2

Armenians understood that the organization was trying to intimidate them into leaving in order to take over their properties, along with the other Emval-i Metruke (Abandoned Properties).3 In November 1923, two prominent Armenians, on behalf of 35 Armenians from Malatya, sent a letter to Mustafa Kemal, asking for security and the right to live in their houses. They wrote that if their citizenship was not recognized and they were required to leave, that this should be told to them officially, and not by raiding their houses.4 The letter did not have a positive impact; on the contrary, the signatories were asked to leave the country, and the 35 families had to follow them.5 Over the following months, Armenians continued to leave Malatya to Syria or to Istanbul.

I first came across the Ateshoglu Yildirim cases through an oral history project I conducted for my doctoral research. My interviewee said there were others in Istanbul who could talk about this organization and its raids. He contacted one family, they said yes, but then changed their minds. It was during the same time that Maritsa Küçük, an elderly Armenian women, was brutally killed, two others were severely beaten, and another attacked in Samatya. The atmosphere of fear was once again at its peak for the Armenians, and I decided to stall my research on the topic.

Yozgat, Amasya, Sinop, Ordu, Tokat, Kayseri, Diyarbak?r, Sivas . . .And so it continued—Armenians were systematically forced out of Asia Minor and northern Mesopotamia throughout the republican years. They were essentially forced to come to Istanbul, looking for shelter, food, work, and a secure life, following the Settlement Law of 1934; sometimes through extraordinary decrees ordering them to leave a certain place and be settled in another; through racist attacks that occurred on a daily basis; or simply through the state’s refusal to open Armenian schools in the provinces, which was one of the “guaranteed rights” of the Lausanne Treaty of 1923.

Armenians who came to Istanbul remained at the bottom of all hierarchies. They were caught helpless between the institutional power structures of the Armenian community in Istanbul and the state. The latter cared about them the least. These centers were closed at the end of the 1930’s; yet, Armenians continued to come to Istanbul from the provinces throughout the republican era, and their socio-economic problems occupied the agenda of the community for quite some time.

An Armenian suspect was recently arrested for the murder of Maritsa Küçük and for the other attacks on elderly women in Samatya. On the same day, the Turkish media covered the arrest with a news item, disseminated by the police,6 implying that since the suspect was Armenian, no racism was involved. Hence, the issue has been resolved.

We know that law has little to do with truth or justice. On the contrary, the mechanisms of law create substitutes for truth or justice. The cases of P?nar Selek, Hrant Dink, Sevag Bal?kç?, along with the murder of Maritsa Küçük and the other attacks in Samatya, remind us of not only the impossibility of justice, but also the perfection of a crime, which continues to silence the witnesses.7

---

ENDNOTES

1. This article is a revised and expanded version of Malatya, Yozgat, Ordu ve Samatya,” published in Radikal I.ki, March 2, 2013.

2. Arshag Alboyaciyan, Badmutiwn Malatio Hayots‘ (Beirut: Dbaran Sevan, 1961), pp. 966–967.

3. For Emval-? Metruke See Nevzat Onaran, Emval-? Metruke: Osmanl?’da ve Cumhuriyette Ermeni ve Rum Mallar?n?n Türles,tirilmesi (Istanbul: Belge Yay, 2010), Ug(ur Ümit Üngör, Confiscation and Destruction: The Young Turk Seizure of Armenian Property (Continuum Publ., 2011), Taner Akçam and Ümit Kurt, Kanunlar?n Ruhu (Istanbul:I.letis,im Publ., 2012).

4. Alboyaciyan, Badmut‘iwn Malatio Hayots‘, p. 967.

5. Ibid.

6. See the press release of the Istanbul branch of the Human Rights Organization of Nov. 3, 2013, after meeting Murat Nazaryan.

7. See Jean-Françis Lyotard, The Differend: Phrases in Dispute. transl. Georges van den Abbeele (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988), p. 14.

---

Direct Link For The pdf Version

---

Source

---

---

I would have expected the young journalist Talin Suciyan, (also a well known human rights activist) to be more flexible and compassionate in her observations, rather than singling out only the “humans of Armenian ethnicity” inside the mixture of Turkish nationality, which embraces too many ethnicities. Complaining only about “those of Armenian origin” from the standpoint of human rights, is nothing more than “discrimination” of an ethnicity or race, whereas our DNA’s show that we are no different than each other. Hrant Dink was not a separatist, but he did the error of “messing up clean and dirty bloods of Armenians and Turks” (instead of the Rh’s which makes transfusions work fine) and it only took some fanatic freak to find an excuse to kill him and become an hero, which was protested by “hundreds of thousands of Turks marching on streets protesting this murder”. Did ever any Armenian protest of any murder of Turks? This demonstration alone was enough evidence that normal people have no discrimination for all other ethnicities which live in this part of the world under one flag. I will write my counter comments between lines, as I usually do. S.S. Aya Continued:

---

Direct Link To The Document

---

.

Read More

3399) Armenian Population in Eastern Anatolia 1878-1915

Armenian Population in Eastern Anatolia between Years 1878-1915
by Prof Dr Ata ATUN

Abstract

Most of the Armenian allegations on the Armenian relocation in the year 1915 based on the Armenian Patriarch's reports and the book titled “Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story” written by Mr. Henry Morgenthau Sr..

Mr. Morgenthau was the U.S. Ambassador in Istanbul from 1913 to 1916, his book on which the Armenian allegations mainly based on, when cross checked day by day with his diary, reveals the fact that it is tailored rather than conveying the real truth on what happened during this era.

The population and events recorded by various officials, organizations, Armenian Church ecclesiastics and local governments before Armenian relocation on 1915 and after the World War I, reveals the fact that the loss of lives during relocation is far below than the alleged fictitious number.

This paper, going through various non Ottoman documents, tries to reach to actual population before and after the relocation with the intention to figure out the number of loss of lives during this incident.

Keywords: Armenian relocation, 1915, Armenian population, Hearings in USA House of Representative, Deportation, . . .

Introduction

The Armenian population in eastern Anatolia just before the relocation, according to non Ottoman records, contradicts with the Armenian allegation of 2.5 million, which forms the basis of lives lost during the deportation in 1915.

The Armenian allegations based on mainly to the declarations of Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian on 1878, Patriarch Hovannes Arsaruni’s estimation through Mr. Kirkor Zohrab on 1912 and to book “Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story” written by Ambassador Henry Morgenthau on 1918 where a serious research revelaed later that the ghostwriter Morgenthau was Burton J. Hendrick. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences April 2013, Vol. 3, No. 4 ISSN: 2222-6990

Patriarch Nerses Varjabedian had forwarded statistics bearing large figures, as over 2.5 million on 1878 to Berlin Conference as the Armenian population living in eastern Anatolia.

The Armenian Patriarch Hovannes Arsaruni 1 (1912-13) estimated the Armenian population as over 2.1 million on 1912.

Both figures are not based on the birth or baptize or death records of the Patriarchate or to any kind of official register but purposely puffed up to demand autonomy from the Sublime Port of Ottoman Empire.

---

Prof. Dr. Ata ATUN
Near East University, Lefkoşa, T. R. North Cyprus
ata dot atun at atun dot com

---

Continued at:

---

Direct Link:
Armenian Population in Eastern Anatolia 1878-1915 by Ata Atun

---

.

Read More

3398) It's Time For Turkey To Recognise Historical Fact Of Armenian Genocide

It is now 98 years since 1.5m Armenians were systematically massacred.

By Benjamin Abtan, 20 April 2013

Recognising what happened is the only way to help us all move forward.

It is now 98 years since 1.5m Armenians were systematically massacred. Recognising what happened is the only way to help us all move forward.

It has been 98 years since - following a premeditated plan with a methodic implementation - one million and a half Armenians were massacred in the Ottoman Empire. The Armenian people were the victims of a genocide which would soon serve as a gruesome reference for those that followed. . . .

Today in Turkey, the mere enunciation of this historical fact still provokes ferocious opposition, sometimes even physical threats. Genocide denial serves as an encouragement to racism and hate against Armenians and other non-Muslim minorities. Some want to pretend that acknowledging the reality of the Armenian Genocide [2]is an attack on all Turkish people and on "Turkishness". It is not: it is a step towards justice.

Several years ago, the genocide of Armenians began to be commemorated in Turkey itself. The participants are still few but their number grows every day despite an official discourse of genocide-denial. Today, those among us who have taken part in these commemorations in Turkey are calling for solidarity beyond borders.

This year on 24 April - the widely recognised starting date of the massacre - we ask citizens, civil society leaders, antiracist activists, intellectuals and artists, of Armenian and other diverse origins, in Turkey and across the world, to unite in calling for the historical fact of the Armenian Genocide to be recognised at last.

Our shared initiative is one of solidarity, of justice, and of democracy.

It is an initiative of solidarity between all who fight for historical truth. Today the divide is not between Turks and Armenians, but between those who struggle for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, whatever their origins are and wherever they live, and those who promote denial. In a word, it is not a question of blood, but of ideas; not a question of origins, but of a common goal.

It is an initiative of justice. In the words of writer and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel [3], "Genocide kills twice, the second time by silence." Denial, then, is the perpetuation of genocide. Fighting against denial is trying to quell the trauma in Armenian communities from one generation to another. It is not an end to this part of history - because when it comes to genocide, there is unfortunately no true end - but it offers new generations the opportunity to look together towards the future.

Finally, it is an initiative for democracy. Echoing writer and Buchenwald survivor Jorge Semprun's frequent reminder, democracy requires vitality from civil society. Strengthening Turkish civil society by establishing bridges with the rest of the European civil society is strengthening democratic values, thus combating racism and promoting human rights, in Turkey as well as in the rest of Europe.

In solidarity, for justice and democracy, for the respect of the victims and their descendents, we will commemorate together the Armenian Genocide on 24 April, in Turkey.

Signed by:

Benjamin Abtan, President of the European Grassroots Antiracist Movement - EGAM

Cengiz Algan & Levent Sensever, Spokespeople for Durde! (Turkey)

Alexis Govciyan , European President & Nicolas Tavitian, Member of the Board of the Armenian General Benevolent Union - AGBU (Europe)

Meral Çildir, Member of the Board of Directors & Ayse Gunaysu, Member of the Commission against Racism and Discrimination of the Turkish Association for Human Rights - IHD (Turkey)

---

newstatesman.com

---

Reply by Sukru Aya

Link To The Document

---

Reply to the young Human Rights Activist Mr. Benjamin Abtan and his posting egam-eu.blogspot proving is bias and affiliation with the "genocide fanfare". You can watch his TV interview on:

dailymotion.com/video

where two persons of Jewish and Armenian ethnicity make sev eral comments under the "Human Rights" umbrella, without having read "anything tangible, not even the Armenian historians". More dramatic is the fact that Mr. Abtan does not know even the latest history of the involvement of Dashnakist "Armenian Legion" in wiping his grandfathers viz: “Secrets Of A Christian Terrorist State Armenia” and the fact that Armenians being at War with Turks is confirmed not only by the League of Nations General Secretary Nansen ( if-armenians-fight-with-us-against-turks ) but also by official U.S.A.documents : (U.S.A. Affirms Armenians Were At War). To call any act "genocide", the action of annihilation must be planned and executed by a government. But here again let us see what the League of Nations at that time said which cannot be refuted, since there is no higher authority:

Copy of “Note Verbal” by Secretary-General Sir Eric Drummond, dated March 1st, 1920.

Page 2: “Further, in Turkey, minorities were often oppressed and massacres carried out by irregular bands who were entirely outside the control of the central Turkish Government."

Sukru Server Aya

---

- Don't they know that the CEO of the Coco-Cola Company, headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, is a Turk, named Muhtar Kent? He is scheduled to be the luncheon speaker at the ATAA Convention in Washinton D.C, April 27th. ? (E.B.) -

Reply by S.S. Aya: - Of course they know Muhtar Kent, CEO of Coca Cola and his recent affiliation with a joint NGO group to reply the diaspora allegations. May be they imply that the Armenians in USA will boycott drinking Coca-Cola and that will make the company bust! They of course do not know that:

1- Coca Cola has a manufacturing plant in Turkey and several bottling plants, and they would not want to lose the Turkish market of 75.000.000 versus 500.000 Armenians in USA.

What a sick mentality to "bottle the genocide palaver in Coca-Cola container"! Or should they add "Armenian hatred in the formula", so all drinkers hate Turks?

2- See: Necdet Kent or Ismail Necdet Kent (1911 – September 20, 2002) was a Turkish diplomat who risked his life to save Jews during World War II. While vice consul-general in Marseilles, France between 1941 and 1944, he gave Turkish citizenship to dozens of Turkish Jews living in France who did not have proper identity papers, to save them from deportation to the Nazi gas chambers.

3- Muhtar Kent, is the son of Necdet Kent, to whom Jewish Diaspora owes so much for his saving Jews by thousands in France from Holocaust, when "Nazi Armenian Legion" were rounding them up in Europe. Just inform A.F.L. or other Jewish lobbies and let them handle the "treatment of their heros by Armenian Lobby and their pipe blowers". But I am afraid they do not know their own past!


4- ARMENIAN GENOCIDE?: What a Gigantic palaver based on grand-ma stories and hearsays but not a shred of document or logic or reason or numbers or eyewitnesses and most important at all "verdict by an authorized Iternational Court". Can you belie the following document or give me a contradictory documents? No? So why all this palavers and shoutings? Study your history and face realities Ahbariks!

5- Armenian Genocide? Did you read your own history for example: http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2011/07/3294-memorandum-presented-to-council-of.html If you do not have the courage to click and see the document, you must observe at least the following statement, which "flushes all GENOCIDE tunes, articles and endless palavers"!

“University of Bradford” Armenia and the League of Nations Documents from the United Nations Library, Geneva; League of Nations Archives Collections

Copy of “Note Verbal” by Secretary-General Sir Eric Drummond, dated March 1st, 1920.

Page 2: “Further, in Turkey, minorities were often oppressed and massacres carried out by irregular bands who were entirely outside the control of the central Turkish Government .

If you are still not convinced sent your comment to newsrush@gmail.com so that the whole world can read your "knowledge, logic and size of your global palavers".

Take Care, good luck,
S.S. Aya

---

.

Read More

3397) Secret Life of Professor Vahakn Dadrian

Vahakn Dadrian

Sexual harassment in educational institutions remains a pressing issue in many countries, including the USA. The recent scandalous Jerry Sandusky case, which sent shockwaves through the American society, demonstrated how persistent ignoring of the reports about sexual abuse in order to protect the reputation of the university allowed the predator to continue his criminal activity for many years. However, this case is not the first and is just one of the many, and sexual predators operated in university environment for decades. One such example is Vahakn Norayr Dadrian, Director of Genocide Research at a think tank called Zoryan Institute, who has a long history of sexual abuse.

We tried to shed some light on the obscure facts from Dr Dadrian's past. While getting into the details of Dr Dadrian’s biography, we also found weird contradictions in the information he provided about his early years, and we made a parallel research on that subject as well . . .

Education

Early years of Dadrian are shrouded in obscurity. He was born in Istanbul, and after completing a school moved to Europe for undergraduate education. However information about his education in Europe is conflicting, and tended to evolve over the time.

Dadrian’s resume of 1963, signed by him and attached to a potential employment-related correspondence said that he studied philosophy in Berlin, social psychology in Vienna and political science in Zurich. 1 But his 1968 resume stated that Dadrian did undergraduate studies at the Universities of Berlin, Vienna, and Zurich in mathematics, philosophy, and political science.2 In late 1980s Dadrian started writing on the topics of genocide and international law, and his resume was adjusted accordingly, stating that Vahakn N. Dadrian received his undergraduate education in Europe studying philosophy, mathematics, and international law at the Universities of Vienna, Berlin, and Zurich, respectively.3 According to Dadrian’s latest resume, he “received his undergraduate education in Europe at the University of Berlin (mathematics), the University of Vienna (history) and the University of Zürich (international law)”.4

The chapter dedicated to Dadrian in the book “Portraits of Hope: Armenians in the Contemporary World” by Huberta Von Voss mentions Dadrian “moving to Berlin at the end of World War II to study mathematics”. The book further states that “more years of study ensued in Vienna at the history seminar. Then he went to Zurich to study international law”.5 Dadrian himself stated in an interview that he studied mathematics in Berlin, and then went to the University of Vienna at the age of 21.6 As Dadrian was born in 1926, according to this interview he must have been in Vienna in 1947.

It is difficult to get a clue what exactly and when Dadrian studied in Europe. Since he moved to the USA in 1947, it was impossible to complete 3 Universities in 2 years, i.e. in 1945-1947.

Information provided by the archives of Humboldt University of Berlin (which was called Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität zu Berlin in 1940s) brings clarity to this issue. In reality, Dadrian moved to Berlin in January 1943, and enrolled to a philosophy class. He studied at the Faculty of Arts, while Mathematics was at the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences.7

In summer 1944 he went to Vienna University, where he attended lectures in history, philosophy and psychology at the Philosophical Faculty,8 and returned to Berlin in December 1944 to enrol to a pedagogy class. By the end of war in May 1945 Dadrian left Berlin University, never to return. 9 So it turns out that Dadrian has never studied math, and he did not move to Berlin “at the end of WWII”.

What is surprising is not the fact that Dadrian studied in Germany, which is well known for its quality of education, but the time of his studies. One can only wonder why at the height of the World War II out of all European countries Dadrian chose for his education Germany, which at the time was ruled by Nazis. It is known that the Nazis fired, deported or arrested all Jewish and dissident professors and students from Berlin University, and burned thousands of books from its library. It is also ironic that the future genocide scholar chose for his studies the same Vienna University that on the insistence of Nazis had expelled 2,200 students and teachers (most of them Jewish) and stripped of their academic titles hundreds of graduates, including famous writer Stefan Zweig, after Adolf Hitler annexed Austria in March 1938. 10 One possible explanation of young Dadrian’s choice of educational institutions could be an assumption that he believed in the future of the contemporary German regime.

According to the archives of Zurich University, at the end of 1945 Dadrian enrolled to the Department of Economics at the Faculty of Law of Zurich University, where he studied until the middle of 1947.11 The Department of Economics was a part of the Faculty of Law and Political Science until 1992, when it was split into the separate Faculty of Economics. The archive records of Zurich University contain no information on what subject Dadrian was studying and which lectures he attended, but considering that he was enrolled to the Department of Economics, Dadrian must have followed a course in economics.

None of the 3 universities has any record that Dadrian received any degree or any diploma.

It is remarkable that Dadrian never openly mentioned when exactly he attended the European universities, and his biographies vaguely mention “post-war” Berlin. Dadrian himself says that he was in Vienna at the age of 21, while in reality he was there at the age of 18, i.e. in 1944. And contradictory information that Dadrian provided about the disciplines that he studied in Europe makes one wonder about his reasons for doing so.

Sex offense history 

Vahakn Dadrian immigrated to the USA in 1947. In August 1954 he received his PhD in social sciences at the Chicago University. Soon after, on 4 January 1955, he was arrested in Chicago on sex crime charges involving a 10-year-old boy. According to the report in Chicago Daily Tribune, Dadrian was arrested in his home by a police officer on complaint of the boy's father and charged with crime against nature (sodomy) and crime against a child. The child told police that Dadrian had stopped him the street and persuaded to go to Dadrian’s home, asking the boy to carry a package. A contemporary press report: 

Chicago Daily Tribune; Jan 6, 1955; pg. A2 

HOLDER OF Ph.D. DEGREE FACING 2 SEX CHARGES 

Vahakn Dadrian, 33, of 5442 Harper av., who received a doctor of philosophy degree in social sciences from the University of Chicago last August, will be arraigned in Felony court today on two sex charges involving a 10 year old boy. Charges are crime against nature and crime against a child.

Dadrian, who said he came to this country in 1946 from his native Turkey and was married three months ago, was arrested yesterday in his home by Detective Vito Contino of the Hyde Park police on complaint of the boy's father. Contino said the child told police that Dadrian had persuaded him to go to the Harper av. address after stopping the boy on the street and asking him to carry a package.

University officials revealed that Dadrian's degree had been awarded last Aug. 27.

Jury indictment count 1. Name of complainant obscured for privacy	Jury indictment count 2. Name of complainant obscured for privacy	Jury indictment count 3. Name of complainant obscured for privacy

According to court records, Dadrian bailed himself out of the jail for $5000. 12
To help realize the present value of this amount, it could be mentioned that the amount of $5000 in 1955 is worth $43,638.06 in 2013 according to the calculator of the Federal Reserve Bank.13 The median U.S. family income in 1955 was $4,418. 14

Matt Capone (left) leaves Chicago's Cook County Jail with his attorney, George Crane.

Dadrian hired George M. Crane, a well-known defence attorney in Chicago. Crane defended more than 500 persons charged with murder, and among his high-profile clients was Matt Capone, the younger brother of the famous gangster Al Capone. Crane got younger Capone acquitted on murder charges. Dadrian waived the jury trial, probably at the advice of his attorney. Apparently, the skills of the prominent attorney greatly contributed to the judge finding Dadrian not guilty on 25 May 1955.

Considering that Dadrian lived for many years in Europe, and then in the USA without having any permanent job, was able to pay the bail equal to the median US family income, and hired one of the best lawyers in town, he clearly had financial means. He might have been supported by his elder brother Vahe, who already lived in the USA by the time Vahakn moved there, or used the funds of his late father, Hagop, who was a wealthy lawyer and landowner in Istanbul. 15
There were many wealthy and prominent Armenians in Istanbul, and even now there’s still a large and thriving Armenian community there.

In late 1973 Dadrian applied to the Circuit Court of Cook County with a petition to expunge all records of his criminal case, and the permission to do so was granted. The complainant who was ten in 1955 died prematurely in 1985 at the age of 41. However the subsequent events showed that Dadrian’s arrest in 1955 was not just a coincidence.

Despite the criminal incident in Chicago, Dadrian managed to pursue a career in the field of education. Already in October 1955 he left Chicago and became an assistant sociology professor at the Washington College in Maryland.16 But soon after, in March 1956, Dadrian resigned, claiming that he was going to write his second doctoral dissertation in political economy at the University of Zurich. 17

However, instead Dadrian took part as a researcher in an opinion research project by a New York advertising consultant James Vicary in fall 1956 – winter 1957,18 which achieved widespread notoriety for producing fraudulent results. In the same year of 1957 Vicary claimed that he was able to substantially increase sales of Coca Cola and popcorn in a movie theater by using subliminal advertising, flashing the messages "Drink Coca-Cola" or "Eat Popcorn" on the screen every 5 seconds, for less than 1/1,000^th of a second, while an audience was watching a movie. After much criticism, Vicary admitted in 1962 that he'd made up the whole story in an effort to revive his failing marketing business. 19

In March 1957 Dadrian moved to the remote University of Idaho to work as acting assistant sociology professor. 20 Later Dadrian mostly worked as an assistant sociology professor in various US universities, and in 1971 he was appointed a sociology professor at the State University of New York – College at Geneseo. But in 1981 Dadrian was again accused of sex offences, this time sexual harassment of his female students.

That year, an outside arbitrator found him guilty of four sexual harassment charges, all referred to one student. She charged "improper physical contact" when Dadrian tried to hug and kiss her in his office, and on the same day he made inquiries into her sex life. Twenty one days later Dadrian again made "improper physical contact" when he pulled her by the arm in the hall in an attempt to talk to her and "physically detained" her when he backed her into a corner. 21

Though three other female students accused Dadrian of similar behaviour towards them (plus one girl accused him of a non-sexual offense), only one case was considered. The arbitrator dismissed another four sexual harassment charges by two girls because of untimeliness, as any charges had to be filed within approximately one year of the incident to be considered, and other students did not complain until the first girl did. Dadrian was found not guilty on another two charges, including an attempt to kiss a female student, because the arbitrator found the testimony of two girls pressing those charges to be “contradictory”. 22

As result, Dadrian was suspended for one month without pay, but was not fired. The reason was that the arbitrator considered these incidents to be isolated events rather than reflections of a longstanding pattern of behaviour. Another key factor in the decision was the location of Geneseo and the content of student population. Since most of the students were from small towns the arbitrator concluded that many of the students were "unsophisticated, impressionable, and immature as compared to a larger college.” 23 This was quite a bizarre argumentation for the decision that allowed Dadrian to continue harassment of students for another decade.

The decision led to a student protest on the day of Dadrian's return to the classroom, and concerned students, staff and faculty formed Geneseo Committee Against Sexual Harassment, which collected over 1,000 signatures on the petition asking SUNY administrators to investigate the case further to "protect our students from further harassment by Professor Dadrian in the months and years to come." 24 The committee stated that it had “uncovered further information that contradicts the arbitrator's assertion that Dadrian's behavior was “an expression of impulsiveness and poor judgment.””25

But the protests had no effect, and Dadrian evaded the punishment again, until another incident in 1990, when yet another female student pressed sexual harassment charges against him. The incident took place when Dadrian kissed the 18-year-old freshman student on the lips after she helped him rehang a banner welcoming him back to school after attending a conference.26

The student filed a formal complaint, which the school investigated, and found substance to the allegation. The 64-year-old professor was offered a chance to resign, but he appealed the decision, and the matter was submitted to binding arbitration. Arbitrator Carol Wittenberg found Dadrian guilty of sexual harassment, and the school dismissed the professor in April 1991.27 A year later Dadrian applied to the Court of Appeals of New York, contesting the decision of the SUNY Geneseo, but his motion for leave to appeal was denied, i.e. the Court did not allow the appeal to proceed.28

Conclusion

Dadrian was fired from SUNY Geneseo in 1991, i.e. some 20 years ago. But his story demonstrates how a shrewd sexual predator can evade punishment for decades and present himself as a reputable educator, which allowed him to continue his activity in the university environment. It is quite possible that the real extent of harassment is much larger, as not every student dares to press charges against a professor. The bizarre decision of the 1981 arbitrator who considered the college students to be “immature”, and the professor’s molestation acts to be “singular events” despite numerous complaints indicates the failure of the university system to protect the students. If Dadrian’s 1955 criminal charges had been considered when employing him as a teacher, or if he had been removed from the University after the first proven harassment incident, it could have saved the students from decades of further sexual harassment.

---

1 V. N. Dadrian to Irving Louis Horowitz, April 24, 1963, Transactions-Horowitz Archive, Pennsylvania State University Libraries, http://collection1.libraries.psu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/transaction/id/1280^↩

2 ‘Back Matter, About the Authors’, Journal of Peace Research 5, no. 4 (1968), http://www.jstor.org/stable/422473. 2

3 ‘Contributors’, Genocide Studies and Prevention 1, no. 2 (September 2006): 225–226, http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/genocide_studies_and_prevention/v001/1.2.contributors.pdf.3

4 ‘Vahakn N. Dadrian. Brief Biography and Bibliography of Published Works’ (Zoryan Institute, July 17, 2009), 4, http://www.zoryaninstitute.org/Announcements/Dadrian%20CV%20July%2017,%202009.pdf. 4

5 Huberta Von Voss, Portraits of Hope: Armenians in the Contemporary World, trans. Alasdair Lean, Berghahn Series (Berghahn Books, 2007), 62, http://books.google.com/books?id=r3vbswx_1TEC.5

6 Alyssa A. Lappen, ‘Armenia’s Tears’, FrontPage Magazine, May 2, 2005, http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=8749.6

7 Dr Winfried Schultze, Head librarian, Universitätsarchiv, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, ‘Re: Diploma’, October 31, 2012, email communication.7

8 Mag. Barbara Bieringer, Archiv der Universität Wien, ‘Wahakn DADRIAN’, November 16, 2012, email communication.8

9 Dr Winfried Schultze, Head librarian, Universitätsarchiv, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, ‘Re: Diploma’.9

10 ‘Memorial Book Dedicated to the Victims of National Socialism at the University of Vienna 1938’, University of Vienna, accessed April 12, 2013, http://gedenkbuch.univie.ac.at/index.php?id=433&L=2; The Associated Press, ‘University of Vienna Honors 2,200 Jews Expelled by Nazis’, Haaretz Daily Newspaper, July 2, 2009, http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/2.209/university-of-vienna-honors-2-200-jews-expelled-by-nazis-1.279264.10

11 Inge Moser, Mitarbeiterin Aktenerschliessung, Universitätsarchiv, Universität Zürich, ‘Re: Diploma’, November 5, 2012, email communication.11

12 People of the State of Illinois v. Vahakn Dadrian, 55CR-129 (Criminal Court of Cook County 1955).12

13 ‘The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis’, accessed April 12, 2013, http://www.minneapolisfed.org/.13

14 Youth Indicators, 1996 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996), 44, http://nces.ed.gov/pubs96/96027.pdf14

15 Von Voss, Portraits of Hope: Armenians in the Contemporary World, 62; Lappen, ‘Armenia’s Tears’.15

16 ‘College Enrolls 467; Adds 12 To Staff’, The Washington Elm (Washington College, October 8, 1955), http://www.archive.org/details/washingtonelm195458wash.16

17 ‘Dadrian Resigns; To Continue Study’, The Washington Elm (Washington College, March 3, 1956), http://www.archive.org/details/washingtonelm195458wash.17

18 Dadrian to Horowitz, April 24, 1963.18

19 S.O. Lilienfeld et al., 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions About Human Behavior (John Wiley & Sons, 2011), 38–39, http://books.google.com/books?id=8DlS0gfO_QUC.19

20 ‘Austria, Turkey Natives Hired to Teach at Idaho’, Spokane Daily Chronicle, March 20, 1957, http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=0FBYAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7_YDAAAAIBAJ&pg=7122,4891564&dq.20

21 Julienne Bostic, ‘Geneseo Prof. Suspended in Sexual Harassment Case’, Albany Student Press, March 3, 1981, http://library.albany.edu/speccoll/findaids/issues/1981_03_03.pdf; Edwin Darden, ‘Professor Suspended For Harrassment’, Livingston County Leader (Geneseo NY, February 4, 1981), http://fultonhistory.com/Newspaper%2017/Geneseo%20NY%20Livingston%20Leader/Geneseo%20NY%20Livingston%20Leader%201981/Geneseo%20NY%20Livingston%20Leader%201981%20-%200071.pdf.21

22 Darden, ‘Professor Suspended For Harassment’.22

23 Ibid.23

24 ‘Over 1000 Sign Sex Harassment Petition’, Livingston County Leader (Geneseo NY, March 11, 1981), http://www.fultonhistory.com/Newspaper%2017/Geneseo%20NY%20Livingston%20Leader/Geneseo%20NY%20Livingston%20Leader%201981/Geneseo%20NY%20Livingston%20Leader%201981%20-%200166.pdf; Associated Press, ‘Geneseo Fires Professor For Sexual Harassment’, Albany Times Union, April 25, 1991, sec. Local, http://albarchive.merlinone.net/mweb/wmsql.wm.request?oneimage&imageid=5599449.24

25 ‘Over 1000 Sign Sex Harassment Petition’.25

26 Associated Press, ‘Geneseo Fires Professor For Sexual Harassment’.26

27 Ibid.27

28 Vahakn N. Dadrian v. State University New York/Geneseo, 186 AD2d 1099 (Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Department 1992), http://ny.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19921007_0050968.NY.htm/qx; Vahakn N. Dadrian v. State University New York/Geneseo, 81 NY2d 702 (Court of Appeals of New York 1993), http://ny.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19930107_0040169.NY.htm/qx.28

---

Source

---

Some Reference Sources

---

Direct Link To The Mentioned Sources

---

.

Read More