Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Truth and the Armenian genocide
Jewish World Review ^ | August 23, 2007 | Jeff Jacoby

Posted on 08/23/2007 6:05:10 AM PDT by theothercheek

Was there an Armenian genocide during World War I?

While it was happening, no one called the slaughter of Armenian Christians by Ottoman Turks "genocide." No one could: The word wouldn't be coined for another 30 years. But those who made it their business to tell the world what the Turks were doing found other terms to describe the state-sponsored mass murder of the Armenians. ...

Was there an Armenian genocide during World War I? The Turkish government today denies it, but the historical record, chronicled in works like Peter Balakian's powerful 2003 study, "The Burning Tigris," is overwhelming. Yet the Turks are abetted in their denial and distortion by many who know better, including the Clinton administration and both Bush administrations, and prominent ex-congressmen-turned-lobbyists, including Republican Bob Livingston and Democrats Dick Gephardt and Stephen Solarz.

Particularly deplorable has been the longtime reluctance of some leading Jewish organizations, including the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, to call the first genocide of the 20th century by its proper name. ...

The Armenian genocide is an incontestable fact of history. Shame on anyone who refuses to say so.

[NOTE: This is an excerpt, because Jacoby cites gut-wrenching contemporaneous eyewitness accounts and I wanted people to be prepared for what they would read before they clicked on the link to get the whole story.]

(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: armeniangenocide; genocidedenial; islamofascists; jacoby; jihad; neveragain; turkey; worldwarone; ww1

1 posted on 08/23/2007 6:05:13 AM PDT by theothercheek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: theothercheek
What was it Hitler said when planning the genocide of the Jews?

I think someone said he would be damned by history for this and Hitler replied words to the effect of "who remembers the bitter criticism of the Armenian killings now?"

2 posted on 08/23/2007 6:10:52 AM PDT by Stepan12 ( "We are all girlymen now." Conservative reaction to Ann Coulter's anti PC joke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

Yes, this is so. I also believe that since the Turks never admitted that they committed this crime against humanity - ie, they “got away with it” - every other genocidal murderer who followed Hitler thinks he has a chance of getting away with it too.


3 posted on 08/23/2007 6:16:43 AM PDT by theothercheek ("Unless we stand for something, we shall fall for anything." - U.S. Senate Chaplain Peter Marshall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: theothercheek
every other genocidal murderer who followed Hitler thinks he has a chance of getting away with it too.

Saddam Hussein grossly miscalculated then. Saddam and Co. however are the exception. No other genocidal murderer was held fully accountable post-1945, in other words got their due punishment.

4 posted on 08/23/2007 6:20:47 AM PDT by SolidWood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SolidWood

They weren’t killed because they were Armenian. They were killed because they were Christian.


5 posted on 08/23/2007 6:24:17 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

They were also killed because they were Armenian. Call it the double-whammy. But in support of your point, historians are taking a second look at the Armenian Genocide in light of the rise of Islamofascism and - like Jacoby does in this column - have started to apply the term “jihad.”


6 posted on 08/23/2007 6:29:36 AM PDT by theothercheek ("Unless we stand for something, we shall fall for anything." - U.S. Senate Chaplain Peter Marshall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy; Kolokotronis; kosta50; kronos77; kawaii
They weren’t killed because they were Armenian. They were killed because they were Christian.

And the Turks repeated this against the Greeks, particularly in Smyrna in 1924. The nation of Turkey is built upon a foundation of blood.

7 posted on 08/23/2007 6:31:35 AM PDT by FormerLib (Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: theothercheek

Before the planning of the final solution Hitler asked, “Who remembers the Armenians?”


8 posted on 08/23/2007 6:32:43 AM PDT by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theothercheek
The Ottoman Turks were not alone. This SEPTEMBER 24, 1915 NY Times article headlines 500,000 ARMENIANS SAID TO HAVE PERISHED. Washington Asked to Stop Slaughter of Christians by Turks and Kurds.

I don't believe that the government of the modern Republic of Turkey founded in 1923 (years after the actions of the Ottoman government) denies the massive number of deaths which IMO begs the question why don't we blame the government of modern Germany for the crimes of National Socialists?

9 posted on 08/23/2007 7:04:19 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theothercheek
That fact that the first Christian country must not be acknowledged for suffering a genocide tells much about those who take offense by the mere sight of the Cross. It also tells how different the value of a Christian life is. It also tell us that we are far from wanting to be equal.
10 posted on 08/23/2007 7:30:06 AM PDT by SQUID
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael
which IMO begs the question why don't we blame the government of modern Germany for the crimes of National Socialists?

The modern German government does not tolerate those who deny or minimize the crimes against humanity of their predecessors.

That is the difference. If it was a predecessor government solely and such policy is repudiated, then why not condemn the barbarity and genocide of their predecessors?
11 posted on 08/23/2007 8:08:51 AM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: All
Armenia sided with Russia against the Ottoman Empire. When Russia left the fighting after the revolution Armenia continued to fight on the Allied side until the Ottoman Empire surrendered in October 1918.

Massive civilian casualties among the Armenian enemy of the Ottoman Turks? yes; but a genocide? The Jewish population in National Socialist Germany had no army that was at war with the National Socialists.

Does it matter to a victim, massacre or genocide? No.

(You would think that it does not matter to the victim, but if you read the WSJ article below you'll see that it very possibly may matter to some seeking more than revenge.)

I noticed one news item in a search that reported "Armenia's prime minister says he is ready to negotiate with Turkey's new government after more then 90 years of severed ties." I believe that it is a July 31, 2007 article.

Are you unwilling to accept negotiations unless the modern Republic of Turkey accepts all responsibility for the Ottoman Turks? Should the Turks simply write-off the Ottoman Turk civilians who were massacred by the other side during the war. Is that a condition too?

Armenia joined the communist in 1920 I believe and was a "republic" in the U.S.S.R. The modern Republic of Turkey was a loyal, valuable ally and friend of ours throughout the Cold War.

Obviously the Soviets had much to gain by maligning NATO member Turkey.

This genocidewatch.org page has a WSJ article that discusses the matter sans emotion.

It asks, is "genocide" the wrong word?

"Turkey's official position is that, while the deaths were horrific, they weren't genocide."

Let's not ever, ever resolve this if modern Turkey doesn't call it genocide? Let's have laws that mandate that our students be taught that it was genocide? Let's brand opponents "racists" unless the opponents are approved by those who call it genocide? That's what the WSJ article is about. That's what this is all about as Mr. Mark Geragos is quoted "our ultimate goal . . . is for Turkey and the U.S. to officially acknowledge the genocide."

12 posted on 08/23/2007 9:01:03 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush
RE: Modern Germany does not deny "crimes against humanity of their predecessors"

Good point.

The modern Republic of Turkey does not deny the horrific killings and expulsions, it's labeling the civilian deaths genocide that's the problem. BTW, wouldn't the Ottoman Turks have killed all rather than expel hundreds of thousands if they intended genocide?

13 posted on 08/23/2007 9:15:26 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael

I wonder what would of happened if American Indian tribes decided in 1917 that they would have an uprising while we fought World War I. As it was the British didn’t commit genocide against the Irish after the Easter Rebellion but didn’t hesitate to use harsh measures against those who took part.


14 posted on 08/23/2007 10:21:09 AM PDT by Swiss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Swiss
IMO you have some very good points. It was war. Does not excuse the horrific killings (on both sides) of course. That goes without you having to say it too.

I'm finding that this is very possibly a no dialog need apply thing. What's this?

"ARMENIA MAY NOT HAVE US AMBASSADOR FOR SOME MORE TIME

"Until the issue of the Armenian genocide is resolved or the adoption of Resolution 106 finishes, it is possible that there will be no U.S. ambassador to Armenia for some more time, Shaharist Melkumyan, member of the Armenian Cause Office, shared her opinion with reporters today.

"'USA understands that this process will still go on since it has raised a lot of noise. They have not decided yet who to send as an ambassador and future developments are unforeseen,' she said.

"'Our disposition on this issue is very clear – an anti-Armenian ambassador who rejects the genocide or is prone to do so must not be in Armenia,' office member said."

It appears to be dated 23/08/2007.

So if we don't do it their way the United States of America can pound salt?

This is so incredible perhaps someone out there can correct the impression that this gives. To wit, is Mr. Rudolf Perina the ambassador or the Charge d'Affaires? This Armenian government item says "RA Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan received U.S. Charge d'Affaires in Armenia Rudolf Perina." dated Thursday, 12th of July, 2007.

Resolution 106, Affirmation of the United States Record on the Armenian Genocide Resolution

I still ask if it absolutely was genocide why did the Ottoman Turks chase the Armenians out? The National Socialists would have killed them, especially since there were combatants among the Armenian civilians and it was war.

The modern Turkish government has called the killings and expulsions horrific, they acknowledge that it did happen.

15 posted on 08/23/2007 4:17:43 PM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SQUID

THANK YOU!!!!!


16 posted on 08/23/2007 6:19:15 PM PDT by theothercheek ("Unless we stand for something, we shall fall for anything." - U.S. Senate Chaplain Peter Marshall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael

The Wall Street Journal has several Armenian Genocide deniers on its staff, including Dennis Frantz (head of their mid-east bureau, basedin Istanbul), Tunku Varadarajan and James Taranto.


17 posted on 08/23/2007 6:21:47 PM PDT by theothercheek ("Unless we stand for something, we shall fall for anything." - U.S. Senate Chaplain Peter Marshall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael

Until the modern Turkish state calls the killings what they were - genocide - they have the blood of their forebears on their hands.


18 posted on 08/23/2007 6:24:38 PM PDT by theothercheek ("Unless we stand for something, we shall fall for anything." - U.S. Senate Chaplain Peter Marshall)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib

...is built upon a foundation of blood.
~~~~

Don’t interpret this as support for turkey, but all nations are founded in blood. All freedom is founded in blood. All evil is founded in blood. Everything that matters is founded in blood. If it wasn’t, it wouldn’t matter.


19 posted on 08/23/2007 6:31:42 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

>>>They weren’t killed because they were Armenian. They were killed because they were Christian.<<<

True. My wife is Armenian. Some of her Christian ancestors were given the ‘opportunity’ by the Turk Islamists to convert to Islam, or die. They refused to convert, so they were murdered.

Islamists are mean, evil SOB’s, with no conscience whatsover. They are true instruments of Satan, who, as we know, was a murderer from the beginning. Best to kill them now before they kill again.


20 posted on 08/23/2007 6:44:43 PM PDT by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
According to the CIA fact book our staff includes "chief of mission: Ambassador (vacant); Charge d'Affaires Anthony F. Godfrey." (But this CIA info is outdated, I do believe that Rudolph Perina is now US Charge D'Affaires to Armenia, having been appointed in July of this year.)

So there's no ambassador. I guess that news article I posted above is accurate. That is, unless the U.S. accepts Armenia's claim of suffering genocide at the hands of Turkey they refuse to have normal relations with us.

Also there's some information on Armenia's dispute with Azerbaijan; to wit, since the early 1990s Armenia forces occupies 16% of Azerbaijan and "over 800,000 mostly ethnic Azerbaijanis were driven from the occupied lands and Armenia; [while] about 230,000 ethnic Armenians were driven from their homes in Azerbaijan into Armenia."

21 posted on 08/23/2007 10:27:43 PM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: theothercheek
The modern Republic of Turkey admits that it was horrific for civilians during those years of war, W.W.I and local wars and unrest -- and as I read the descriptions it certainly was unbelievably inhuman.

Turkey refuses to call it genocide but they too say that it was horrific; also there is absolutely no doubt that Ottoman Turks suffered hundreds of thousands of dead also.

I kept running across references to insurance and Armenian genocide as I researched.

Here Congressman Schiff's Armenian Genocide Insurance Bill is described. . .

There were 350,000 hits in my search for, Armenia genocide insurance. I just grabbed the first one, it dates from 2003.

Perhaps insurance would not cover acts of war but could be made to pay the families of victims of a genocide.

Genocide or not it was a horror. The Armenian population was totally outnumbered but did fight back.

As I've asked above, if it was truly a genocide why did the Ottoman Turks expel hundreds of thousands of Armenians, the National Socialists attempted to kill all their victims.

22 posted on 08/23/2007 11:00:25 PM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mamelukesabre
Don’t interpret this as support for turkey, but all nations are founded in blood.

You missed the point. The Turkish nation is built upon genocides.

23 posted on 08/24/2007 5:33:26 AM PDT by FormerLib (Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib

The guilt ridden elitist commie scum say the USA is built upon genocides.


24 posted on 08/24/2007 2:22:25 PM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mamelukesabre

In case you forgot Hitler’s decree, here it is. The intent was to wipe out Poland and all Polish people, language, and culture.

‘I have issued the command — and I’ll have anybody who utters but one word of criticism executed by a firing squad — that our war aim does not consist in reaching certain lines, but in the physical destruction of the enemy. Accordingly, I have placed my death-head formations in readiness — for the present only in the East — with orders to them to send to death mercilessly and without compassion, men, women, and children of Polish derivation and language. Only thus shall we gain the living space (Lebensraum) which we need. Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?’


25 posted on 10/11/2007 9:35:59 AM PDT by ctlive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson