International Turkey is Angry that the Massacre of 1,500,000 Armenians is Finally Being Recognized a "Genocide"

lol


And Westerners babbling about genocide denial is hilarious considering that Anglo-Saxon countries have been masters at it.

For example My Lai is presented as an aberration but we now know that MANY such massacres were conducted against the Vietnamese civilians by Americans (see the Nick Turse book), and their South Korean lackeys.

Most recently American criminals waged a war of aggression against Iraq followed by NATO destruction of Libya. So if I were them, I would keep my mouth shut before accusing others.

Lol, you should educate yourself in the genocides Mao and Rwanda. Or maybe read a book on the birth of Islam. That religion was founded on genocide and occupation. You're just another typical anti American hijacker. You can't go one thread without talking about the evil Americans/white people.
 
Doubtless he was arguing/stating that those events are NOT THE TOPIC being discussed in this thread.

If someone would like to discuss those topics, or the genocide of the native Tasmanians or any other group, feel free, but just yelling into every conversation 'yeah, but, the USA...!' is ridiculous.

The Turks are currently deflecting by yelling "yeah, but, the Nazi...!"
 
Armenian Genocide of 1915: An Overview
By JOHN KIFNER, THE NEW YORK TIMES.


On the eve of World War I, there were two million Armenians in the declining Ottoman Empire. By 1922, there were fewer than 400,000. The others — some 1.5 million — were killed in what historians consider a genocide.


As David Fromkin put it in his widely praised history of World War I and its aftermath, “A Peace to End All Peace”: “Rape and beating were commonplace. Those who were not killed at once were driven through mountains and deserts without food, drink or shelter. Hundreds of thousands of Armenians eventually succumbed or were killed .”

The man who invented the word “genocide”— Raphael Lemkin, a lawyer of Polish-Jewish origin — was moved to investigate the attempt to eliminate an entire people by accounts of the massacres of Armenians. He did not, however, coin the word until 1943, applying it to Nazi Germany and the Jews in a book published a year later, “Axis Rule in Occupied Europe.”

But to Turks, what happened in 1915 was, at most, just one more messy piece of a very messy war that spelled the end of a once-powerful empire. They reject the conclusions of historians and the term genocide, saying there was no premeditation in the deaths, no systematic attempt to destroy a people. Indeed, in Turkey today it remains a crime — “insulting Turkishness” — to even raise the issue of what happened to the Armenians.

In the United States, a powerful Armenian community centered in Los Angeles has been pressing for years for Congress to condemn the Armenian genocide. Turkey, which cut military ties to France over a similar action, has reacted with angry threats. A bill to that effect nearly passed in the fall of 2007, gaining a majority of co-sponsors and passing a committee vote. But the Bush administration, noting that Turkey is a critical ally — more than 70 per cent of the military air supplies for Iraq go through the Incirlik airbase there — pressed for the bill to be withdrawn, and it was.

The roots of the genocide lie in the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

The empire’s ruler was also the caliph, or leader of the Islamic community. Minority religious communities, like the Christian Armenians, were allowed to maintain their religious, social and legal structures, but were often subject to extra taxes or other measures.

Concentrated largely in eastern Anatolia, many of them merchants and industrialists, Armenians, historians say, appeared markedly better off in many ways than their Turkish neighbors, largely small peasants or ill-paid government functionaries and soldiers.

At the turn of the 20th Century, the once far-flung Ottoman empire was crumbling at the edges, beset by revolts among Christian subjects to the north — vast swaths of territory were lost in the Balkan Wars of 1912-13 — and the subject of coffee house grumbling among Arab nationalist intellectuals in Damascus and elsewhere.

The Young Turk movement of ambitious, discontented junior army officers seized power in 1908, determined to modernize, strengthen and “Turkify” the empire. They were led by what became an all-powerful triumvirate sometimes referred to as the Three Pashas.

In March of 1914, the Young Turks entered World War I on the side of Germany. They attacked to the east, hoping to capture the city of Baku in what would be a disastrous campaign against Russian forces in the Caucuses. They were soundly defeated at the battle of Sarikemish.

Armenians in the area were blamed for siding with the Russians and the Young Turks began a campaign to portray the Armenians as a kind of fifth column, a threat to the state. Indeed, there were Armenian nationalists who acted as guerrillas and cooperated with the Russians. They briefly seized the city of Van in the spring of 1915.

Armenians mark the date April 24, 1915, when several hundred Armenian intellectuals were rounded up, arrested and later executed as the start of the Armenian genocide and it is generally said to have extended to 1917. However, there were also massacres of Armenians in 1894, 1895, 1896, 1909, and a reprise between 1920 and 1923.

The University of Minnesota’s Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies has compiled figures by province and district that show there were 2,133,190 Armenians in the empire in 1914 and only about 387,800 by 1922.

Writing at the time of the early series of massacres, The New York Times suggested there was already a “policy of extermination directed against the Christians of Asia Minor.”

The Young Turks, who called themselves the Committee of Unity and Progress, launched a set of measures against the Armenians, including a law authorizing the military and government to deport anyone they “sensed” was a security threat.

A later law allowed the confiscation of abandoned Armenian property. Armenians were ordered to turn in any weapons that they owned to the authorities. Those in the army were disarmed and transferred into labor battalions where they were either killed or worked to death.

There were executions into mass graves, and death marches of men, women and children across the Syrian desert to concentration camps with many dying along the way of exhaustion, exposure and starvation.

Much of this was quite well documented at the time by Western diplomats, missionaries and others, creating widespread wartime outrage against the Turks in the West. Although its ally, Germany, was silent at the time, in later years documents have surfaced from ranking German diplomats and military officers expressing horror at what was going on.

Some historians, however, while acknowledging the widespread deaths, say what happened does not technically fit the definition of genocide largely because they do not feel there is evidence that it was well-planned in advance.

The New York Times covered the issue extensively — 145 articles in 1915 alone by one count — with headlines like “Appeal to Turkey to Stop Massacres.” The Times described the actions against the Armenians as “systematic,” “authorized, and “organized by the government.”

The American ambassador, Henry Morganthau Sr., was also outspoken. In his memoirs, the ambassador would write: “When the Turkish authorities gave the orders for these deportations, they were merely giving the death warrant to a whole race; they understood this well, and in their conversations with me, they made no particular attempt to conceal the fact.”

Following the surrender of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, the Three Pashas fled to Germany, where they were given protection. But the Armenian underground formed a group called Operation Nemesis to hunt them down. On March 15, 1921, one of the pashas was shot dead on a street in Berlin in broad daylight in front of witnesses. The gunman pled temporary insanity brought on by the mass killings and a jury took only a little over an hour to acquit him. It was the defense evidence at this trial that drew the interest of Mr. Lemkin, the coiner of “genocide.”

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/timestopics/topics_armeniangenocide.html
 
Last edited:
The Turks are currently deflecting by yelling "yeah, but, the Nazi...!"

This is standard operating procedure for the East. Israeli gov. apologists do the same thing: when faced with criticism of their treatment of Palestinians, they claim they are being singled out and there are worse countries than them. When Gulf Arabs are criticized for their slavery/indentured servitude, they bring up American slavery and colonialism.

It's always deflection , refusal to accept responsibility and acknowledge the truth and smear critics as Islamophobes or anti-Semites.

Erdogan has recently accused Europe of Islamophobia for not accepting Turkish membership in the EU. Meanwhile he pushes an Islamic supremacist agenda at home and is busy competing with the Saudis to build mosques overseas to increase Turkish influence. It's always a case of pushing Islamic culture and evangelism in non-Muslim countries but Muslims countries must remain securely Muslim ,no questions asked.
 
fisticuffa's glass jaw getting touched repetedly by the western jab.

The sad part is that he illustrates the mindset that is used to obscure and deflect any recognition of this in Japan. It's all a big foreign conspiracy, everybody else was just as bad or worse so why should Japan be bullied? Just lies designed to slander Japan, which, if you think about it, was basically the poor victim in WWII, even though we won't take that narrative head on in public, but, you know, it's true.

Japan is one of my top 3 favorite nations. But TS is right that their commitment to whitewashing their past, and deflect blame from themselves onto others, is probably the single worst aspect of modern Japan. Compared to Germany, it's night-and-day.
 
Pretty much. Apparently no-one else can genocide as teh Nazis did it best.

The Germans committed genocide in Namibia (early 20th century) and lessens learned in Namibia were applied to the Holocaust. Yet no one ever talks about the Concentration camps and genocide in Namibia . Wiki says it is considered the 1st genocide of the 20th century.

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

How come the ADL, Simon Wiesenthal center and America media don't publicize this as much as the Holocaust. Even amongst genocide victims some are more equal than others.
 
The Germans committed genocide in Namibia (early 20th century) and lessens learned in Namibia were applied to the Holocaust. Yet no one ever talks about the Concentration camps and genocide in Namibia . Wiki says it is considered the 1st genocide of the 20th century.

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

How come the ADL, Simon Wiesenthal center and America media don't publicize this as much as the Holocaust. Even amongst genocide victims some are more equal than others.

It's actually pretty sad how little attention it gets. Thomas Pynchon's novel "Gravity's Rainbow" is pretty much the only place the Herrero genocide gets attention.

Ironically the fictitious Hitler quote about the Armenian genocide (Hitler almost certainly did not say it, and there is no evidence of it) gets infinitely more play.

The other hidden 20th century genocide is Pakistan's genocide in Bangladesh in 1971. Literally never mentioned. Nobody cares, just Muslims genociding Muslims = irrelevant.
 
Fuck, we used concentration camps back in the Boer War. The US apparently used them first when they were kicking the Cherokee off their land.
 
Will Obama Call Armenian Massacre a Genocide?
Thomas Seibert
04.13.15

1428916672632.cached.jpg

Ankara is terrified that the president will follow Pope Francis’s lead and use the g-word to describe the killing of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire 100 years ago.

ISTANBUL—By using the word “genocide” in remembering the victims of the killing of hundreds of thousands of Armenians by Ottoman Turks a hundred years ago, Pope Francis has angered Ankara. But even worse for Turkey’s government, the pope may have opened the way for Barack Obama to follow suit.

Every year, Turkish politicians tend to get nervous in the weeks before April 24. The big question asked every year is whether the U.S. president will use the g-word in his traditional message to mark the day the first Armenians were rounded up in Istanbul in 1915. So far, Obama has pleased his ally in Ankara by avoiding the much-feared word, opting for the Armenian term “Meds Yeghern”—great calamity—instead.

But this year, on the 100th anniversary of the massacres and death marches that killed up to 1.5 million Armenians, things might be different. “Will Obama say ‘genocide’ like the pope?” the Turkish news website Radikal asked Monday.

Armenia certainly hopes so. President Serge Sarkisian, who attended the Mass in Rome where Francis spoke, welcomed the pope’s “powerful message to the international community” and told the AP that “the words of the leader of a church with 1 billion followers cannot but have a strong impact.”

The fact that the pope has used the word will raise pressure on Obama and other world leaders to do the same. A use of the word “genocide” by the U.S. president would be a fatal blow to Turkey’s efforts to block broad international recognition of the mass killings as an attempt to systematically wipe out a whole people. It could also lead to compensation claims against Turkey.

Armenians in the United States immediately called on Obama to follow the pope’s lead. Aram Hamparian, executive director of the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), said in a statement that Francis had set the stage “for President Obama to honor his own pledge to recognize this horrific crime.” Hamparian recalled that Obama had spoken of genocide before becoming president. Recognition by Obama now would “end a truly shameful era of complicity in Ankara’s efforts to deny the truth and obstruct justice for this crime.”

ANCA also said 15 U.S. senators had signed a letter to the White House calling on Obama to recognize the genocide when he marks the centennial of the killings later this month. A similar letter in the House also was being drawn up.

No wonder the government in Ankara was livid after the pope’s sermon on Sunday. The foreign ministry summoned the Vatican’s ambassador, Antonio Lucibello, to deliver a strong protest and recalled the Turkish ambassador at the Vatican, Mehmet Pacaci, for consultations. Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu accused Francis of spreading “hatred and animosity.”

The pope’s statement hit Ankara out of the blue. In recent weeks, Ambassador Pacaci comfortably predicted that his lobbying work in the Vatican had made sure the pope would not speak of genocide. When Francis shattered Turkey’s hopes, it came as a “shock,” as the mass-circulation newspaper Hurriyet put it.

With his sermon, the pope also blew a big hole in Turkey’s plan to deflect attention from the approaching centennial of the Armenian killings. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has invited world leaders to Turkey on the days around April 24 to commemorate the Turks’s victory of the World War I battle of Gallipoli. He even invited Sarkisian, who declined.

As Turkey’s prime minister before becoming president last year, Erdogan issued a statement that for the first time acknowledged the suffering of the Armenians, although it stopped short of an apology. In another effort to blunt Armenia’s push for international recognition of the genocide, Erdogan has suggested creating an independent committee of historians to look into the events of 1915. He also promised that Turkey would abide by whatever conclusion the experts would draw.

But the pope’s statement has in effect killed Erdogan’s strategy to prevent genocide recognition by major international players and keep global attention to the Armenian issue as low as possible as the centennial approaches. “1915 crisis with the pope,” blared Hurriyet’s front page on Monday. The pro-government Star told the pope to “mind your own business.”

While some intellectuals and academics in Turkey call on their country to face the past and acknowledge that genocide took place in 1915, most Turks agree with the government that the killing of the Armenians was part of the chaos that accompanied the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire and point out that many Muslim Turks were killed as well. The country’s two biggest opposition parties joined the government in criticizing the pope’s remarks.

Given that political atmosphere in Turkey itself, Francis’s statement gives Erdogan and the government of Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu a chance to portray Turkey as a victim of foreign powers ahead of parliamentary elections on June 7. Francis was “the pope of the Armenians,” the pro-government newspaper Turkiye said Monday.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/13/will-obama-call-armenian-deaths-a-genocide.html
 
Last edited:
How come the ADL, Simon Wiesenthal center and America media don't publicize this as much as the Holocaust. Even amongst genocide victims some are more equal than others.
The DC Holocaust museum is, obviously, focused on the Holocaust but the one time I was there had several large exhibits discussing other genocides current and historical.

As for why it isn't publicized as much, I'm sure you can come up with all sorts of silly justifications about "media influences" but the reality is likely a lot more tame: The Holocaust was more recent, the Holocaust is tied to a world war in which our country participated (and is a post hoc justification), the Holocaust killed far more people, relatively large numbers of relatives of victims as well as survivors of the Holocaust live here.
 
Told you so they always taunt each other to start a war especially Catholic and Christian religions. People are just to gullible to see they are on the crooked team of religions. Then Turkey is offended then boom. Same old replay formula for 1000 years plus going strong.
 
It's actually pretty sad how little attention it gets. Thomas Pynchon's novel "Gravity's Rainbow" is pretty much the only place the Herrero genocide gets attention.

Ironically the fictitious Hitler quote about the Armenian genocide (Hitler almost certainly did not say it, and there is no evidence of it) gets infinitely more play.

The other hidden 20th century genocide is Pakistan's genocide in Bangladesh in 1971. Literally never mentioned. Nobody cares, just Muslims genociding Muslims = irrelevant.

Some reasons for Muslim Ummah and the world's blindness to this atrocity are: Pakistan is more powerful than Bangladesh and has the backing of the Arab oil sheikdoms plus was an important Western ally. The Gulf Arabs backed Pakistan against Bangladesh. Plus Bangladeshis are lower on the racial hierarchy amongst Muslims.

Muslims can sanctimoniously preach about Islam being anti-Racist but Muslim societies and Islam is more racist than the West. The Bangladesh/Bengali genocide was motivated in large part by racial/caste hatred. The Pakistani leadership at the time were known to make racial deragotory comments about Bengalis.

" According to R.J. Rummel, professor of Political Science at the University of Hawaii,"

The genocide and gendercidal atrocities were also perpetrated by lower-ranking officers and ordinary soldiers. These "willing executioners" were fueled by an abiding anti-Bengali racism, especially against the Hindu minority. "Bengalis were often compared with monkeys and chickens. Said General Niazi, 'It was a low lying land of low lying people.' The Hindus among the Bengalis were as Jews to the Nazis: scum and vermin that [should] best be exterminated. As to the Moslem Bengalis, they were to live only on the sufferance of the soldiers: any infraction, any suspicion cast on them, any need for reprisal, could mean their death. And the soldiers were free to kill at will. The journalist Dan Coggin quoted one Pakistani captain as telling him, "We can kill anyone for anything. We are accountable to no one." This is the arrogance of Power.[81]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocide

Pakistan ofcourse is continuing its final solution: to purify Pakistan of non Sunnis, especially Hindus and Christians. Yet the world is silent and the West does not sanction or otherwise proscribe the Pakistani establishment. Only recently Pakistan was admitted to CERN. Contrast this with how Iran is demonized and made into a pariah.

It really is beyond Chutzpah how Pakistanis ,and Muslims who support them, whine about racism , Islamophobia , Western aggression and Drone strikes when Western military action pales into insignificance compared to Pakistan's atrocities.

-

Another genocide that is ignored is the Malay Indonesian genocide against the Melanesian East Timorese, but this in my observation has gotten far more press than the Bangladesh genocide. Out of a population of 750,000 the Indonesians killed 250,000 East Timorese.

Again Muslim Ummah , Muslim League and Muslim groups are silent on this. You see when Muslims commit genocide against non-Muslims or Muslim groups deemed inferior humans, it is nothing but a footnote .

Sudan is another example: while the war between the North and South is complex, Arab supremacist and anti-Black racism played a leading role. Muslim Ummah again pretty silent with their outrage.

Ethnic cleansing of Christians in the Near East elicits no emotion from the Ummah .
 
Last edited:
Armenian Genocide Denial Law In Cyprus Expected To Increase Tensions With Turkey
By Cristina Silva
April 02 2015

rtr4n9r3.jpg

Armenians protesting Turkish genocide denial demonstrate at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, Jan. 28, 2015.

The Cypriot Parliament passed a resolution Thursday outlawing the denial of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The move to make it a crime to deny that Ottoman Turks committed genocide against the Armenians a century ago is expected to increase tensions with longtime enemy Turkey amid stalled peace talks between the two nations.

"Today is a historic day," Speaker of Parliament Yiannakis Omirou said, according to Reuters. "It allows Parliament to restore, with unanimous decisions and resolutions, historical truths."

The Greek-dominated part of Cyprus was one of the first countries to recognize the Armenian killings as genocide. It is commemorated on April 24, the anniversary of the murder of Armenian leaders in 1915. Turkey recognizes that many Armenians died during World War I but denies that the deaths resulted from genocide. Armenians and their supporters accuse Ottoman leaders of systematically massacring 1.5 million Armenians and deporting many more.

Debate over what happened has long been a source of tension between Turkey and other nations, including Cyprus, which has a significant Armenian population. Since invading in 1974, the Turks have occupied northern Cyprus, where they set up a "Turkish republic" recognized by no other country.

United Nations officials are slated to visit Cyprus next week for peace talks between Greek and Turkish Cypriot leaders on the long-stalemated conflict. Espen Barth Eide, the U.N. secretary-general's special adviser on Cyprus, will "follow up on the encouraging indications received during his last trip to the island regarding a possible resumption of the negotiations," U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq told reporters in New York this week. "Maybe we can take some optimism and say that we will not only be back on track but actually we may be able to accelerate the talks and have a faster process than we originally lacked."

http://www.ibtimes.com/armenian-genocide-denial-law-cyprus-expected-increase-tensions-turkey-1867718
 
Last edited:
It's actually pretty sad how little attention it gets. Thomas Pynchon's novel "Gravity's Rainbow" is pretty much the only place the Herrero genocide gets attention.

Ironically the fictitious Hitler quote about the Armenian genocide (Hitler almost certainly did not say it, and there is no evidence of it) gets infinitely more play.

The other hidden 20th century genocide is Pakistan's genocide in Bangladesh in 1971. Literally never mentioned. Nobody cares, just Muslims genociding Muslims = irrelevant.

Holodomor and the 10's of millions of deaths in the Bolshevik revolution doesn't get much play either. China's great leap forward doesn't either really.

Could have something to do with the soft spot for communism within Western Academia.

19th century sure was a bloody one when you add it all up.
 
The DC Holocaust museum is, obviously, focused on the Holocaust but the one time I was there had several large exhibits discussing other genocides current and historical.

As for why it isn't publicized as much, I'm sure you can come up with all sorts of silly justifications about "media influences" but the reality is likely a lot more tame: The Holocaust was more recent, the Holocaust is tied to a world war in which our country participated (and is a post hoc justification), the Holocaust killed far more people, relatively large numbers of relatives of victims as well as survivors of the Holocaust live here.

Speaking about that Holocaust Museum: I saw a program on Public Broadcasting about 15 odd years ago where a Roma community representative said he had to fight tooth and nail to get on the board of the Holocaust Museum .

The Herero genocide was only slightly earlier than the Holocaust , earlier by about 34-37 years. It was only about a decade before the end of WW1. If number of victims is all that mattered then why don't we hear as much about the 12-15 million Russians killed in WW2 as we hear of the people killed in the Nazi extermination camps.

The US were the ones most involved in defeating Japan in WW2 but compare the publicity given to German atrocities vs. Japanese atrocities. Japan has been able to get away relatively Scott free by the Western intelligentsia while Germany looms large as the ultimate villain.
 
Doubtless he was arguing/stating that those events are NOT THE TOPIC being discussed in this thread.

If someone would like to discuss those topics, or the genocide of the native Tasmanians or any other group, feel free, but just yelling into every conversation 'yeah, but, the USA...!' is ridiculous.

I don't know why those guys don't want to create their own threads to analyse those other genocides that they are so passionate about either, instead of hijacking this one from the Armenians.
 
Why are they so anal about it? pretty much everyone who lived at the time are dead now, its not the same government either.

Are they afraid they will be forced to pay reparations to Armenia?
 
Why are they so anal about it? pretty much everyone who lived at the time are dead now, its not the same government either.

Are they afraid they will be forced to pay reparations to Armenia?

It may just be misplaced national pride.

For a century, school children in Turkey are taught that the Ottomans were there proud forefathers, therefore they think that they must defend all those long-dead murderers at all costs. To criticize those butchers from the Ottoman Empire mean you're criticizing them personally and their (current) country as a whole, that sort of nationalistic nonsense.

As mentioned before, it's currently considered a "crime against Turkishness" for a citizen of Turkey to even acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, subject to arrest and prosecution by the Turkish government, and most Turks are okay with that "law".

Frankly, I think they'd find something better in their national history to place their pride on, if they look hard enough.
 
As mentioned before, it's currently considered a "crime against Turkishness" for a citizen of Turkey to even acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, subject to arrest and prosecution by the Turkish government, and most Turks are okay with that "law".

Frankly, I think they'd find something better in their national history to place their pride on, if they look hard enough.

A law around questioning the official historical narrative in regards to a genocide? That sounds familiar.

It always makes it look like they are covering something up.
 
Back
Top