“Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?”-said Hitler speaking with his friends, here is his full speech.
:dubious: :dubious: :dubious: :dubious: :dubious:
Bosda – ? The relevance of that link is… ?
Unfortunately, the two have a lot to do with each other, I think. Putting aside the issue of who should have Nagorno-Karabakh aside (because both sides have supportable claims), both sides are using the genocide to justify their current positions. There are Armenians who are saying, “The Turks committed genocide against our people, and that’s what they (because Azeris are a turkish people) are doing now in NK. So we need to reclaim that land.” And they use the genocide as a modern justification for the war in NK. And, there are Azeris who are saying, “The Armenians are lying about their claim to NK, and they’re lying about the genocide.”
The genocide is being used as a political weapon to help stir up hatred between the two groups.
The OP:
[ol]
[li]Denies a well-documented historical event.[/li][li]Uses specious arguments utterly without merit, and similar to disinformation promoted by neo-Nazis to discredit the existance of the Jewish Genocide 1938-1945.[/li][li]The Turkish Government has waged a disinformation campaign on this topic for years, and is currently trying to get into the EU, thus providing a reason for “stepping up” that campaign.[/li][li]There is little or no Turkish community represented on the Board; thus the presence of both the O-Poster and a second disinformation source is quite unusual. Would they care to discuss how they each arrived here for the first time, just to object to historic fact? Coincidences like that are like 2 stars going nova simultaniously. I am not obligated to believe in pixies & unicorns.:dubious: [/li][/ol]
It is not usually something I’d consider, but in a case like this, the possibility should be discussed, without name calling, but it should be discussed.
Actually, I’ve heard references to the Armenian genocide periodically for most of my life.
Generally, they take the following form: “Nobody talks about the Armenian genocide.” Also that Hitler quote.
Apologies for sounding quip; I don’t mean to make light of that horrific event. Still, there are a number of 20th century genocides that I’ve heard less about.
Bosda:
Possible, but not necessarily. It is my understanding that defensiveness/denial/hostility among Turks with regards to this issue is surprisingly widespread.
The Armenian genocide claims surfaced during 1950 and they were originated in USSR. The reason for this was to prevent Turkey from becoming close allies with US. The well document is actually one document which is called Blue Book and it is a known fact that it has been published by the Wellington House Britain’s propaganda division. The purpose of the book was to show the enemy as monsters. The writers James Bryce and Arnold Toynbee were not witnesses to the Armenian massacre stories, provided by Armenians and missionaries. Toynbee himself later characterized the Blue Book as war propaganda. The Blue Book could not even be used by the British Themselves during the Malta Tribunal.
U.S. War Correspondent George Schreiner (THE CRAFT SINISTER, 1920), a real eyewitness to Armenian relocations, wrote: “Of the real causes the world knew nothing, and still knows nothing really worth knowing. The press everywhere had been used to mislead readers, and when the warring governments began to deluge the world with ‘colored’ books, most of us took their contents to be gospel truth.”
A very interesting book about this subject is Armenia by Samuel Weems. You might be interested to know that 90 % of his research came from Armenian archives.
The fact of the matter was during WWI British published this book and they helped Armenian gangs so they could further weaken the “sick man” In return Ottomans put a relocation program in place . I have no doubt that many Armenians died during relocation but you have to consider the fact that Armenian gangs killed a lot of Turks and relocation was the only solution that an already weakened Ottoman Empire was able find.
---- The Armenian genocide claims surfaced during 1950 and they were originated in USSR.
LOL. Only to the extent that the word “genocide” was first listed in the dictionary during the 1950s.
One contemporary witness was the Ambassador to Turkey from the US, Henry Morgenthau Sr. A July 10, 1915 cable stated:
Interestingly, one Talaat Pasha, the Turkish interior minister, wasn’t shy about Turkey’s activities: reports of his meetings with Morgenthau make chilling reading.
Oh yeah. There’s that paper The New York Times. It spoke of Turkish “massacres”, “slaughter” and “atrocities” beginning in March 1915. Headlines in October read, “800,000 ARMENIANS COUNTED DESTROYED”.
Source: Gratefully taken from Samantha Power, A Problem From Hell, 2002. See Larry Borgia’s link.
Having seen Ararat,, I don’t think it superior to Elia Kazan’s America, America on the same subject, and, frankly, Arshile Gorky was more driven to hang himself by the loss of his paintings in a studio fire than by the Armenian Massacres of his youth.
Most eggregious, however, is its reliance on the “Hitler Quote;” “Let’s kill the Jews - who remembers the Armenians?” - on 3 counts:
- Hitler never said it.
- The idea that the Armenian Massacres need ball its jack to the Jewish Holocaust in order to obtain any purchase on History’s conscience.*
- Hitler never said it.
Pure speculation, but as rotten and (to someone like myself who’s always otherwise admired the Turks) unworthy of the Turks as Armenian Massacre Denial is as I’ve encountered it on the internet, the alternative could only be worse: since the actually killing was largely vended out to the Kurds (yes - those same people whose grandchildred we felt so sorry for in the aftermath of the Gulf War - sins of the fathers, I guess), it would be a sad possibility for the Turks to lay blame for the killing on them, claiming that while preoccupied with the “barefoot war,” as the Turks call their ordeal of 1914-18 against superior odds, one ethnic population took advantage of the situation to fall upon another. The only thing preventing this cop-out is the Turks’ refusal to recognize the Kurds as a seperate ethnic group, instead calling them “Mountain Kurds.”
*We shoud feel pretty badly about the Armenians regardless of the Holocaust. We should also feel bad about the thief on Christ’s left side: whatever he stole, that was still a pretty horrible punishment to pay!
I have visited the Museum of Tolerance, part of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, in Los Angeles, three times. Part of the exhibit describes the genocide of Armenians, including it with other such mass murders. 
I figure that if the Wiesenthal Center deems the genocide to be historic, it is not my position to maintain that they are mistaken.
Looking over the lists of massacres in this thread it seems to me denial by the perpetrators is the norm. The Germans are almost unique in this regard.
I’m dating an Armenian (technically, an American of Armenian descent) who lost family to the Turks during the Armenian genocide. I first read about it a few years ago in a book which talked about the events which led up to World War I, before I started dating this fellow. While I’m afraid I’ve forgotten the title, I wasn’t aware of any anti-Turkish, pro-Armenian, or any other type of bias. Karen Armstrong also, I think, touches on it in The Battle For God.
To me, people who deny the Armenian genocide ever happened are in the same league as Holocaust deniers or people who deny there’s genocide going on in Rwanda and should be treated the same way.
CJ
Left-Hand Thief: Crucifixion? Gimme a break! It wasn’t that big a de–
Mel Gibson: Look, do you want to be in the movie, or don’t you?
L-H T: Oh, maaaan!
M G: Aaand . . . Action!
In addition to the horrific actions discussed in this thread, one aspect of this thread that has yet to be mentioned is the cartoon. As always, it is well-drawn with the “nipples on the knees” we have come to love. The part I find historically interesting is that the Turk doing the covering up is wearing a fez. The Turkish Parliament under Ataturk abolished the fez in 1926, as part of its attempted alignment with things Western (along with changing the script from Arabic to Latin and granting some rights to women).
The article says the genocide proceeded until 1922, but that the cover-up ran from that time forth. It’s just funny to me then that the Turk sweeping everything under the rug is wearing a fez. I guess no sense ruining a good stereotype with history.
Please elaborate on points 1 and 3. My reading of the evidence suggests otherwise.
Another poster provided this link, which gives the full alleged quote, along with a detailed citation:
http://www.armenian-genocide.org/statements/hitler.htm
The full speech by is here:
http://www.adolfhitler.ws/lib/speeches/text/390822.html
The bottom of my 2nd link notes that, "* there is controversy on the authenticity of this speech see Nuremberg International Military Tribunal Trial of German Major War Criminals vol. 14, 44-47… The document was discussed (but not submitted as evidence) by Prosecutor Alderman as Exhibit USA-28 was subsequently published in NCA, Volume VII, pp. 752-754, where it was given the number L-3 and was supplied to the prosecutors at Nuremberg by Lochner, and had in fact been published by him in 1942. "
There are also links to 2 studies of the speech’s provenance. Which I have not evaluated.
As an Armenian, I find it absolutely fascinating to witness a discussion centered on the Armenian Genocide not involving Armenians or Turks (and this, right here on SD. 
)
So, if you’ll permit, just a few notes on this issue/thread, my opinions only:
A large focus of this discussion has been on the figures. 1 million, 200 thousand, 1.5 million - the only thing that the historians CAN agree upon, is that it’s extremely difficult to establish a figure that is more concrete than a mere estimate. The ottoman empire census records are clearly not very accurate for that period of time (and as far as I know, there wasn’t an official census until much later on) and neither are records kept by the Armenian prelacy. In any case, the exact figure doesn’t really matter.
Would a deliberate, planned and orchestrated extermination of a ethnic or religious group be any more or less heinous if 100 thousand were killed, or 300 thousand? Should the perpetrators of such extermination be treated any differently based upon the numbers? I don’t think so; mind you, that last point is moot since the actual perpetrators are long gone. But clearly, the dispute about the exact number murdered becomes largely irrelevant when considering the general scope of the atrocities.
About the Hitler quote:
In fact, it’s actually a ‘quote-of-a-quote’ and is largely uncorroborated. As the links indicate, the source documents can be traced, however there is some controversy as to its authenticity. The quote may be true - and quite likely it is. But, personally, I dislike when I see/read otherwise sound, well-researched papers/documents use this quote out of some sort of ill-concieved idea that it will garner more attention. Unfortunately, sometimes it only serves to discredit the research, or worse, distract from the actually issue. Does it really matter what Hitler said, or did not say? Countless Armenians were deliberate deported or slaughtered - I don’t think a quote by Hitler should have nearly the importance that it has been given. Other Armenians may disagree with me.
Lastly, I read further up the thread about ‘opening the Armenian archives’. In fact, they have always been open. Even some Turkish scholars have based some of their research on the matierial available therein. Recently, the “Armenian Question”, as it’s know in Turkey, has gained a greater profile there, as well as in the Western world. This could be attributable to Turkey’s inevitable ascension into the EU, coupled with the 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide a month ago. With greater profile, comes greater controversy it seems. Several prominent Turkish authors and others in Turkish academic circles have courageously begun to publish works that question the official Turkish government position, and this, despite a prohibitive environment (according to the Turkish penal code, it is a criminal offense to teach, translate or publish material that refers to the killing of Armenians during WWI as a genocide.) One may refer to Dr. Taner Ackam, Ahmet Altan, Orhan Pamuk, or Elif Shafak. Perhaps through their courage, and the courage and persistence of those like them, the veil of denial in Turkey will one day be lifted.
BTW, sorry about the lengthy post - I couldn’t resist!
Just wanted to add another cite to the thread. Crime of Silence is a recounting of a mock trial conducted in 1984 about the Armenian Genocide. And, here is the verdict of the trial, which discusses much of the evidence on both sides. And, finally, here are some more arguments against the deniers.
Until Cecil’s articles, I had no idea about the genocide. Interesting, and infinitely sad, reading.
(note: my wife is Turkish so it is clear where I stand on the issue)
The mock trial mentioned above is interesting, and unusually balanced for an armenian site (not that turkish sites are balanced or trustworthy, mind you). There are a couple of things that do not sum up, however: it is stated there that the Andonian papers (the only direct proof of an open policy of genocide by the Ottoman Gov’t) are true.
This is hardly so, and even armenian sources (and all indipendent historians) acknowledge that (cfr Yves Ternon, which is convinced of the genocidal intent of the massacres, but admits that the Andonian papers cannot be taken as proof).
I have seen a copy of one of the Talaat telegrams in the Armenian Museum in Isfahan: it seems to have been written by a five year old retard, all intent in stating as clearly as possible that he is responsible for the genocide in less than five lines (‘with no regard for the life of women and children’; honestly…)
While the falsifications of the papers are not proof that a genocide didn’t happen, they are usually proof enough, if quoted as authentic, that the source is biased.
Second: the activities of sedition and rebellion of the armenians are minimized; they were not at all limited to the Sasun rebellion and the defense of Van. There had been numeror acts of terrorism (or sabotage, depending on your point of view), and an active partecipation of armenian soldiers within the ranks of the russian army. The majority of the atrocities committed by the armenians toward the turks do not predate the deportations, this is true, and therefore these can’t be used as a justification as the turkish side does, but the threat constituted by the armenians behind the turkish lines was clear and present.
This does not justify the massacres, but constitutes an extreme difference with the Shoah, where the jews did not constitute a threat at all for the germans, and were exterminated per se.
Yudhisthira -
Appreciate your views on this issue however all can be answered. Genocidal intent is clear and has been established - without “Andonian” telegrams - though the (entirely Turkish) case against these has been refuted BTW. Are you familiar at all with the Ottoman Military Tribunals that were conducted in 1919? Are you also aware of the numerous statements and memoirs of CUP central commitee members and Ottoman officials that were also made after the war? And the Ottoman Parlimentary inquiry (of 1918) that was made into the massacres? Additionally of course there are the reports of the German, Austrian, Italian and American Ambassadors that detail conversations and statements made by Talat, Enver and Djemal concerning the intent of the (so-called) deportations? Are you aware that secret telegrams (not sourced to Andonian) are avaliable that likewise detail intent to exterminate Armenians and not merely deport them? Yes - all this and more. in fact quite a bit more direct evidence of such orders then even can be found in the case of the NAZI efforts against the Jews - where no actual orders for extermination of the Jewish people exist - however - of course - in each case it is clear what occured regardless.
The “provocation” thesis - that Armenian “rebellion” and/or actions on the part of Armenian “gangs” and such forced Turkish action is likewise untrue. German archival reports indicate that all was quiet. Other reports show this to likewise be the case. In fact it can be shown that the majority of Turkish reports to the contrary were developed for propoganda purposes to justify actions. Much like US (so-called) proof that Iraq was developoing nuclear weapons post first gulf war these incidents were quite old - or as you said occured well after the deporations and the great bulk of the Armenian Genocide occured. There was no Armenian rebellion, there were in fact quite few acts of sabotage and sedition - most of the Turkish reports of such are unfounded and many are just quite absurd - and all were part of an organized campaign on the part of the Turkish CUP to fan the hatred toward the Armenians as part of the extermonation campaign that relied quite heavily on secret special organizations (containing released murderers from prisons), gangs of hyper nationalistic Turks who commited a great many massacres of Armenians and Greeks years before the war (beginning in 1913) and of course use of Kurdish nomadic chieftans who had regularly raided sedentary Armenian villages for over 100 years with impunmity (one of the chief causes of Armenian discontent throught the prior century and continuing) and also the racial/religious hatred that had built p against the Armenians and other Christians due to numerous factors was also used to incite the local populations against them - and of course greed - in the form of looted property was also a big motivator (at all levels). It is as incorect to blame the Armenians for this disaster as it would be to blame the Jews for the Holocaust. And BTW - the Nazis most certainly did blame the Jews for their ills - and used nearly the exact same language as the Turks use against Armenians - “Stabbed us in the back” “traitors to the nation” etc etc Each of these charges is more of a testament to the hyper-nationalistic and hate filled mentality of the perpetrators and not an indication of sedition on the part of the victims. Remember - both nations were ruled by revolutionary nationalistic parties with a doctrine of racial superiority that were born from the trauma of war and empire collapse and each was fighting - in their minds - for the salvation of their nation. Each scapegoated minorities and had their (racist) rational for hatred of the minority group. Each also had clear economic motivation (and some would say class isues played a factor) to destroy the minority group and take their assets. In each case substansial sums were confiscated. And of course in each case the genocides were conducted under cover of war.
Elsewhere the Hitler quote is mentioned. Not that it prooves the Genocide - it is immaterial - but this quote is likely accurate - it was accepted as authentic and verified at Nuremburg triels but was not entered into evidence because of the existance of other versions (notes) of the speech(s) given by Hitler that had been directly obtained by the note taking officers thus simplifying defense efforts to challenge - and where the Armenian Genocide portion was immaterial to the reason why it was entered as evidence. It should be noted that there exist several other very similar quotes (completely authenticated) made by Hitler concerning the Armenian Genocide dating back to 1931.
If I am able I will post an essay I have written that briefly outlines the build up to and rational for the Genocide that addresses causation further - however I would like to add here now that the Genocide was witnessed by multiple corroborated sources. For all who observed aspects of the terrible campaign against the Armenians in action it was most clear that it was an organized extermination campaign. You seem like a decent person - and regardless of your spouses Turkish anscestry - or for Turks who are defensive and nationalistic and refuse to believe that such things could be done - it happened. There is a great deal of scholarship that describes what occured and has analised the process of it. Don’t fall into the denialist trap. It is a most ugly thing. And it is entirely unbecomming anyone who believes themselves moral and just in this lifetime.