Spridon:
I can understand that your lack of objectivity pertaining to Turkey is motivated by your hatred for anything/anyone Turkish. I cannot however comprehend your hypocrisy. Before you label the legitimate Ottoman response to Armenian terrorism as "genocide", before you advocate PKK terrorism, you should first acknowledge true genocides, such as the ones perpetrated against Camerian Albanians and Aegean Macedonian Slavs. Similarly, you should acknowledge and apologize for the genocide attempts against Turkish Cypriots between 1963-1974. All of these were innocent people targeted by Greek fascism for no reason at all! When will Greek occupation of Cameria and Aegean Macedonia end? When will the true owners of these territories be able to return to their homeland? To be a true democrat, you must acknowledge the sins of your own society first. Before advocating independent "Kurdistan", you should demand that the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) take her rightful place among the community of nations. Spiridon, you claim that you transcend 'nationalism' so as to reach 'human understanding'. Why then don't you analyze the impact Greek Orthodoxy plays on maniacal Greek nationalism? For instance, why don't you tell us the role it played in the genocides of Camerians Macedonians, and Turkish Cypriots?

Spridon:
I can understand that your lack of objectivity pertaining to Turkey is motivated by your hatred for anything/anyone Turkish. I cannot however comprehend your hypocrisy. Before you label the legitimate Ottoman response to Armenian terrorism as "genocide", before you advocate PKK terrorism, you should first acknowledge true genocides, such as the ones perpetrated against Camerian Albanians and Aegean Macedonian Slavs. Similarly, you should acknowledge and apologize for the genocide attempts against Turkish Cypriots between 1963-1974. All of these were innocent people targeted by Greek fascism for no reason at all! When will Greek occupation of Cameria and Aegean Macedonia end? When will the true owners of these territories be able to return to their homeland? To be a true democrat, you must acknowledge the sins of your own society first. Before advocating independent "Kurdistan", you should demand that the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) take her rightful place among the community of nations. Spiridon, you claim that you transcend 'nationalism' so as to reach 'human understanding'. Why then don't you analyze the impact Greek Orthodoxy plays on maniacal Greek nationalism? For instance, why don't you tell us the role it played in the genocides of Camerians Macedonians, and Turkish Cypriots?

Yabanci

I by no means intend to bring in a red herring into this argument. It is the many Armenians who bring up the issue who themselves say that there grievances are part of the general fight against all genocide recognition. You seem to hold what happened to the Native Americans in a different standard to what happened to the Armenian's. Which is my whole problem with the issue. It is a very good example on how some Armenian's are more motivated by revenge and hence hatred which is no good. you say that "justice and retribution for the slaughter of Native Americans is not only a vibrant and well funded project in American government, but taking responsibility for U.S.-perpetrated injustices is a key feature of America" If so why does the Senate not simply and legislatively acknowledge what happened to the Native American's as genocide. And if the status quo on the Native American issue is good enough for you why do you not support a similar tact on the Armenian issue.

You make it seem that it is something to be proud of when you say "avoiding hypocrisy is not the central goal of a democratic government". So simply because Armenians have wealth and power and Native American's do not is good enough for one horrible thing to get attention and the other not?

Dont you agree that the reason the congress will not legislatively (binding or not binding) admit that what happened to the Native American's is tantamount to genocide is because America does not want to legislatively admit a dark period in its history.

It is absurd for America to be pointing its finger. You know very well that is finger has been festering in crap. Any logical person can smell that a mile away. Turkey does have a lot to be self reflective about. But so does America. But simply accusing another country does not wash America's hands clean.

kvartiry gorod zelenodolsk prodazha kvartir aleksandrov g yubileynyy sdayu kvartiru prodazha kvartir g izhevsk prodazha kvartir m tulskaya perplanirovka kvartir prodazha kvartir aleksandrov gostinichnye kvartiry goroda ekaterinburga snyat kvartiru novorossiysk

Hello, nice site :)

Hello, nice site :)

Dear MJC,

You seem to base your conclusions on American opinion and politics. It is important to note that though the amount of Turkish people living in Germany, France, and other parts of Europe greatly and overwhelmingly outnumber Armenian people, the European Union has embraced the need for the Armenians to get closure from this ugly part of history. Obviously, the principles that seem to validate your point here do not apply there, where in the case of France, it is law that one cannot deny it.

Another interesting side note to the EU's purpose in addressing the issue of the Armenian Genocide, is to get Turkey to come to terms with her human rights violations that are ongoing to this day. I believe that the idea in this case is to get Turkey to agree to the past in order to learn from this unfortunate part of her history, in order to not repeat it.

As we know, Turkey is posturing in ways that tell us that she will strike against the Kurdish people in Northern Iraq, though the problem she is having with the rogue element of Kurdish resistance (PKK) is within Turkey proper.

The conclusion is that it is not dependant on the lobby power of the Armenians, who are admittedly more in numbers in the US. It is a moral issue to hopefully make Turkey rethink her position on her present and future actions, especially against her minorities and special groups.

I have found a very well researched thesis from 1988 that describes Turkey as having between 15,000 and 20,000 political prisoners. It is important to note that the figures cannot be properly tallied since Turkey refuses to provide them. I suspect that the problem since then has worsened based on the Islamist government in power and the agenda they enforce versus the secular modus of the government when the above figures were sited. The other reason I believe the figure to be very much higher, is that the relationship the state has with the minorities like the Kurds these days has worsened since then.

I would be very happy if some savvy reader proved me wrong but would like to know the recent data on Turkey's human rights violations and tally on the political prisoners.

Is there anyone capable of researching these statistics?

Spiridon,
Montreal Canada

Yabanci wrote (to Victoria): "basically, it seems as if you just discovered turkish politics last week, with the rest of america." It's stereotypng. It's logically bankrupt, intellectually lazy, morally irresponsible, politcally shameful, and just plain wrong."

Victoria's statement might be stereotyping, but I think her statement is also true (about America, not about you). Americans know very little about Turkey. They seldom visit there, preferring to travel to Greece or Italy, and have no idea where or what Turkey is. Unless they have been sent there by the military or the State Department, you will find a real lack of knowledge and understanding of Turkey. That is part of Turkey's problem when it comes to the Armenian resolution and other issues--they and their politics are unknown to most Americans. There are few Turkish immigrants in the US, and there is no real constituency for Congress to react to. That is one of the reasons that the Turks depend on the Jewish lobby to carry their water often in Congress and with the American public.

oops, sorry. a correction on my last post. the link to Amar Bakshi's relevant article, "Istanbul Protests: 'Curse the PKK, Curse America'" is supposed to be this:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/america/2007/10/istanbul_protests_curse_the_pkk.html

-Yabanci

Victoria,

God, I don't know where to begin with you. It's frustrating, but I'm trying to stick with you because I care about the topic. Please listen, from one human being to another, this situation may require a little self reflection on your part: I have to agree with Spiridon, instead of offering a rational argument as a response, you are offering disjointed and angry responses.

Here is an example. In one of your responses you made this accusation to me:

"STRANGER/YABANCI- basically, it seems as if you just discovered turkish politics last week, with the rest of america."

It's just amazing to me where you came up with this. It is so far from a serious or useful argument I'm really surprised that you'd be willing to put your name to it. The goals here for many of us are to articulate constructive ideas, learn new ideas and maybe even persuade someone to develop a better understanding of an important topic. I just get the feeling that your not approaching this debate with any of these simple goals. You obviously have some rhetorical skills, and perhaps you like to exercise them, which is fine, but I believe you might have it in you to take your contribution up a level. Make a coherent arguement if you'd like. I'd love to hear it.

Now, to your unfortunate accusation that I "just discovered Turkish politics last week" I provided a polite answer in Turkish. I did not ask (in Turkish) whether or not you are Turkish, since one's national affiliation doesn't have much to do with whether or not someone is making a good arguement. My reason for writing to you in Turkish was to demonstrate that if I speak Turkish, it probably means that I just didn't start learning about Turkish politics last week.
Again you couldn't be more wrong in your assumptions about me. (This is an instance that provides an opportunity for you to do some self-reflection on how you have been approaching these discussions).

I don't even care about that part as much as I do the last part of your statement: "it seems as if you just discovered turkish politics last week, with the rest of america." It's "the rest of america" part. Are you saying that "the rest of America" is ignorant?

Who exactly is the rest of America that you are talking about so condescendingly: is it Staten Islanders? Democrats? Cub scouts? African-Americans? Would you say that African-Americans are ignorant? Because they do make up a substantial part of the rest of America that you are talking about?

If you suggested that "the rest of African-America" is ignorant, it would be pretty upsetting to most of us, including you. My point is, the ridiculous thought processes that leads one to say such an ugly thing about any racial group, is the same thought process you use when you say something stupid to me like: "basically, it seems as if you just discovered turkish politics last week, with the rest of america." It's stereotypng. It's logically bankrupt, intellectually lazy, morally irresponsible, politcally shameful, and just plain wrong. Even if you're using it in defense of the most well- meaning political issue in the world. Since you like us to cite sources, Walter Lippmann's groundbreaking book "Public Opinion" amazingly details how stereotyped political understandings get converted into political movements, most tragically movements towards war.

Mr. Bakshi's (another writer from the PostGlobal Project) journalism demonstrates -with supporting video- that Anti-Americanism is a component of the rallying towards war. Find it here:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/nikos_konstandaras/2007/10/turkeys_past_victories_spawn_t/all_comments.html

It's alarming to me. Oversimplified and stereotyped ideas of America-the-enemy are being used by some to rally others to support a war. People will die. People will get killed and a tragically constructed idea of America will play a part in that killing. Stereotyping and hate talk about America often goes on unchecked because it is somehow politically permissable. We often fail to discern what is legitimate criticism of US policy, and what is hateful ranting. Unfortunately hateful ranting is part of this movement towards war. I can direct you towards dozens of Turkish speaking websites where the evidence is indisputibly anti-American. It is not harmless. It's dangerous not only for Americans, but also for my beloved Turkey. And YOU, Victoria, are complicit when you indulge in such behavior.

These articles provide us an opportunity to discuss this problem. So I'm glad we're talking.

-Yabanci

Two items of interest:

CNN reporting that Armenian Resolution vote shelved for now

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/10/25/us.turkey/index.html

And yet another article by one who disagrees on whetherh or not this was genocide from George Mason University:

(Link is at http://hnn.us/articles/43738.html)

The Armenian Resolution: Pure Grandstanding
By Timothy R. Furnish
Mr. Furnish, Ph.D (Islamic History), is Assistant Professor, History, Georgia Perimeter College, Dunwoody, GA 30338. Mr. Furnish is the author of Holiest Wars: Islamic Mahdis, Their Jihads and Osama bin Laden (Praeger, 2005). He is the proprietor of www.mahdiwatch.org.

House Resolution 106, first proposed when the Democrats took over control of Congress back in January 2007, was just voted out of the Foreign Affairs Committee last week and, according to Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), will pass before Congress adjourns next month. H.R. 106 puts the government of the United States on record as affirming that the Ottoman Empire pepetrated “genocide” on its Armenian subjects, killing at least 1.5 million of them between 1915 and 1923; furthermore, it “calls upon the President to ensure that the foreign policy of the United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide….”1

The Republic of Turkey recalled its ambassador, Nabi Sensoy, and “warned the vote threatens its strategic partnership with the U.S.” 2 A senior Turkish general officer said that passage of this resolution could permanently harm U.S.-Turkish military relations.3 Yet the Democrats are plunging ahead with this legislation, willing to risk further alienating our major ally in the Islamic world at a time when our list of allies there has grown quite thin and just when we need them most. Why?

For one thing, the bill’s primary sponsor, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), represents the district with the highest concentration of Armenian-Americans in the country (California’s 29th, which includes Glendale, with the largest Armenian-American population of any city in America: 85,000, or about 40% of the urban headcount4 ). The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, of course hails from California herself and knows full well the political power of the Armenian-American lobby. (And over in the Senate, Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has co-sposored the resolution,5 despite the fact her own husband, while in office, opposed it.)

No doubt the resolution, in no small measure, is aimed at further embarrassing the Bush Administration (“See, the same folks who brought you Gitmo and Abu Ghrayb support what the Sultan did to the Armenians!”), even as the Democrats claims that it has primarily an apolitical, utilitarian cast. According to Rep. Schiff, “How can we take effective action against the genocide in Darfur if we lack the will to condemn genocide whenever and wherever it occurs?"

This logic is really quite unconvincing. Must Congress pass a resolution retroactively condemning slavery in the Old Confederacy before we are morally justified in opposing modern human trafficking? But even giving Mr. Schiff and the Democratic leadership the benefit of the doubt and not chalking up their fervent support for H.R. 106 to anything as crass as making political hay, or raking in Armenian-American campaign contributions, we are still left with a major problem.

The whole basis of the bill—the “genocide” alleged—is historically unverifiable as such.

Of course, questioning the Armenian “genocide” is a politically-incorrect sin today, on a par with questioning global warming. After all, we are continually told that the “consensus” of experts—historians or scientists, respectively—supports each claim, er, unvarnished truth. H.R. 106 has no fewer than 14 points alleging to corroborate historically the genocidal nature of the very real Ottoman massacres of Armenians around, and after, World War I.

But in fact there are a number of problems with the received “truth” about what happened to Armenians in the late Ottoman Empire. There is a scholarly consensus of about 1.2 million Armenian deaths (although the Armenian groups claim more, and the Turks considerably fewer). But just how and why that many Armenians were killed—and whether it constitutes “genocide”—is still being hotly debated by historians, contrary to what the House Democrats think. Genocide is “the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political or cultural group.” To prove that the Ottoman Turks committed genocide, one must adduce evidence of just those points. The three legs upon which the genocide claim usually rests are: 1) the post-WWI Ottoman courts which tried some government officials for the massacres; 2) the alleged depredations of the Teskilat-i Mahsusa (Ottoman “Special Forces”); and 3) the memoirs of one Naim Bey. 6 However: the original Ottoman legal documents no longer exist; no one has ever proved the involvement of the Ottoman Special Forces in the killings; and the “memoirs” of Naim Bey—who allegedly provided evidence that Ottoman officials ordered the “genocide”—are suspect at best and may have even been forged.

No one can deny that hundreds of thousands of Armenians were killed: Western sources, and Armenian eyewitness survivors, attest to that fact. But to this day no one has found the Ottoman “smoking gun” that proves, beyond the shadow of a doubt—and don’t we want a rather high bar of proof for something as serious as genocide?—that the authorities in Istanbul ordered the “deliberate and systematic destruction” of the Armenians in the eastern part of the Empire.7 Perhaps those records are tucked away in some dark corner of the Basbakanlik, waiting to see the light of day. But the few Western scholars who can read Ottoman Turkish tend to shy away from this topic; and those who do study the Armenian question either cannot work in Ottoman, or are not given access—all of which tends to back up what Zbiginew Brzezenski said recently: “I never realized the House of Representatives was some sort of academy of learning that passes judgment on historical events….;” and whether what happened to the Armenians “should be classified as genocide or a huge massacre is, I don’t think, any of its business.”8

Steny Hoyer tried to reassure the Turks by telling them that this resolution is “not about your government.” The Majority Leader, unlike some in the press,9 seems to realize that it was not the Turkish government that killed Armenians—it was the old Ottoman imperial one. And one might reasonably wonder why the modern Turks are so paranoid about claims of genocide being perpetrated by their predecessor regime. However, that scimitar cuts both ways: one might also ask why the Democrats in Congress are so eager to pass a meaningless, toothless resolution condemning a government that hasn’t existed for 85 years— in the process estranging us even further from one of our few close allies in the Muslim world—when the historical record fails to support their opportunistic legislation

Dear Victoria,

Instead of offering a rational argument as a response, you are offering disjointed and angry responses.

Please tell us what you feel is the root cause for Europe to disallow Turkey to join the EU after 40 years of trying.

Let us get this discussion back on topic.

Thank you.

Spiridon-
1) you cannot speak to peoples intentions and be expected to have any claim of impartiality

you simply dont know-

2) there was no denigration of jews
metnioning an unequal comparison of the holocaust to the AG isnt a denigration

3)when you post a link it should support your contention
you contend that turkey is spending millions

all your link (from an armenian source) states is that a delegate was sent to dispute the claim of the AG

4) again, your second link is about an 87 year old armenian recounting his story in a nursing home
no mention of language, and only one sentence at the end from a rep from turkey-

"We don't accept any charge of genocide . . . It was really a civil war," he said."

your extreemly assumptive conjecture is 3 times longer than the statement!!!

which also has etcetera marks in the middle- what was cut out?

for the record spiridon- i read all links
try to see all sides

and i ALWAYS let people speak for themselves

i dont look at a turkish site to find out about armeinian actions and vice versa

both your links were by armenians, which is fine- but you surmised without any support whatsoever alot of subjective opinion giving- which your welcome to- but call it what it is

and again- you speak for other people and put in negative intentions that are your own-

you just simply cannot speak for others intentions
well you can, but you lose all credibility and reveal your own intentions when you do so

and your final assumption

"P.S. Your INTENT to talk about language and usage is a nice cheap trick.".

are you crazy? i DIDNT MENTION LANGUAGE OR USAGE

and THEN you insult something i didnt even do!!

"I just thought I would mention this to satisfy your handler's questions about effectiveness on your part.
I hope you are being well paid to promote an ethically insupportable position."

this is a disgusting accusation, and ridiculous

are you saying that you think my points are so well made that someone is paying me to sit here and write???

now, as youll notice- i put in 2 links AND the paragraph supposrting my contention-
it is well known that professor lewis does not think the slaughter in turkey of armenians was a genocide-

and backed it up with the first link of completely impartial source
the second link is biased, but is only used to substantiate that professor lewis was bullied in his career- something easily verified

since you yourself are using internet sources, and you are denouncing the internet as a resource, are you denouncing your own links, or are you outright being a hypocrite?

as to your insulting and false allegations, i see you cannot have a discourse of any intellectual validity

so i do not allow myself to be insulted ad infinitum
if that is your level of discourse i have no desire to respond to your posts uless you develop more courteous habits

this doesnt mean i will stop posting, just not respond to ad hominem posters
peace

Dear Victoria,

I think Mr. Fein was very clear in what he meant to convey. He intentionally used Professor Lewis to denigrate both Armenians and Jews and this is clear in his attempt to intentionally misquote Professor Lewis.

You can call my reasoning on the matter faulty but I am sure you will agree, you are not the authority on the matter. The sources you site are used without pointing to actual published sources outside of the net and the links you list are set up to support a monochromatic view on the details.

Dear Victoria, I am not sure of your intent but the Turkish government has been spending millions of dollars to affect US and global public opinion about the aggressive and brutal subjugation of her minorities.

http://www.anca.org/press_releases/press_releases.php?prid=340

Of particular interest is the following since it points to the conscious intent by Turkey to compose a revisionist history and thereby soften her image. Anyone with at least some understanding of history will see this attempt as laughable, as your attempt to intellectualize the issue on the basis of language rather than focus on the facts, leaves the window open for even more slaughter as we are witnessing presently against the Kurds.

http://www.cilicia.com/armo10b-h.html

Dear Victoria, I suggest that you do some actual reading rather than rely on websites that can be put up and taken down in a matter of minutes. Point us to some actual historical sources that are responsible for their content, not some website set up for the purpose of perpetuating hate literature on the victims Turkey intends to brutalize as she has done in the past.

P.S. Your intent to talk about language and usage is a nice cheap trick. You are not solving a problem, you are creating one. I just thought I would mention this to satisfy your handler's questions about effectiveness on your part.

I hope you are being well paid to promote an ethically insupportable position.

Spiridon
Montreal Canada

'Anonymous' Yabanci: You beat me to it ;)

Spiridon and MJC:

I'll have to admit that I've been enjoying your elevated spirits in your fight. I've seen many occasions to intervene but I don't know if I could keep up. From an outsider perspective, I don't think that the two of you are at odds as much as you probably think you are. I find enough traces of reason and intellect in MJC's arguments to say to Spiridon that perhaps MJC is not as much of a monster as you have concluded from a few of his boorish remarks. I think you two have lots of potential to stand down a bit and try to hammer out some reasonable consensus, or at least an agreement to disagree. The potential is certainly there, though I think MJC would really have to emphasize his humanist concerns and downplay his apologist support for national interests (there's plenty of humanist positions in your arguments anyway, I don't think I'm asking you to do anything that isn't part of your outlook ). I'm not just trying to be a peacemaker here. It would be very useful for the whole purpose of this discussion if the two of you could try to meet the challenge of forging some reasonable consensus. I'm riveted!

-Yabanci

Spiridon, your philosophy seems to be, when presented with facts or opinions contrary to what you believe, attack the poster. But what can you expect from someone whose military wears skirts? :-)

i have to comment- people are really unnecessarly insulting in here.

SPIDON- just using logic- your argument fell apart-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"1) As a Jewish American, old enough not only to live through the German internment of the Jewish people (though he did not experience it first hand) and subsequent attempt by the Nazis to eliminate the Jews in the most horrific and morally bankrupt ways, Professor Lewis has never nor would ever deny the holocaust."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

professor lewis did not deny the holocaust- he denied the armenian genocide

with the contested insertion-

"[was the same as what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany and that]"

is not holocaust denial at all
it is an observation of an unequal comparison

without contested insertion

" the point was that was being made was that the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire is a downright falsehood."

is a denial of the armenian genocide

http://domainhelp.search.com/reference/Armenian_Genocide

( i deleted the long list of scholars for brevity)
A small number of Western academics, few of whom could be considered authorities on the matter, including Bernard Lewis (Princeton University), have expressed doubts as to the genocidal character of the events. They offer the opinion that the weight of evidence instead points to serious intercommunal warfare, perpetrated by both Muslim and Christian irregular forces, aggravated by disease and famine, as the causes of suffering and massacres in Anatolia and adjoining areas during the First World War. They acknowledge that the resulting death toll among the Armenian communities of the region was immense, but claim that much more remains to be discovered before historians will be able to sort out precisely responsibility between warring and innocent, and to identify the causes for the events which resulted in the death or removal of large numbers in eastern Anatolian.Republic "

it is on the link under opposition

heres from an article called "bullied histroians"

"Since the Armenians must hold on for dear life their entire raison d'etre (i.e., the "Genocide"), anyone who dares question their version of events must be attacked.... whether the aggression consists of opening up a lawsuit (as with PROF. BERNARD LEWIS, in France), attempted murder (as with the bombing of Prof. Stanford Shaw's Californian house) or, more typically, their reputations must be destroyed, as in the case of Judge Sam Weems, who was falsely accused by Armenians of being a "convicted felon," among other character assassinating remarks."

http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/lowry.htm

FOR ME- THE JURY IS STILL OUT ON THE ISSUE

however- namecalling and derogatory remarks do not lend to your own impartial credibilty

Dear MJC,

If that is as close as we will get to an apology from you, I say that you have made a great effort toward recovery from ignorance.

As a man of reason, I will boldly say that your prognosis is good, since the opinions you still hold are based on loose and unsupportable rumours. Given your illustrated ability to read,(with some help, it must be said) you will be fine.

Keep it up: One day you will be free from your affliction.

Hopeful (but not holding my breath),
Sincerely,

Spiridon
Montreal Canada

My, my, now I am a bigot? I guess that's what happens when one goes on travel and misses a few days--he becomes the subject of abusive comments.

-I did not provide a link for the Fein article because I did not know that was a requirement....but I did cite the source.

-I have absolutely no connection with Fein or the Turkish coalition of America-- I found the article simply through a Google search. I have never heard of Fein or that group before. But so what if I did? I would say that AMViennaVA is Armenian, Spiridon has said that he is Greek, Yabanci is a Turk. Everybody has a background.

Just as a point of reference for Spiridon, not only have I met people with numbers tatooes on their arms, but I visited Dachau back in the late 70s when I lived in Germany. There is no adequate description for the horrors that occurred there, no words can convey the atmosphere that still hangs over that place. I remember all too well the crematoriams that still had a horrific odor, the showers, where human beings were murdered in cold blood. As soon as I entered that place, I wish I had never set foot in it. 30-plus years later, the memory still sends a chill over me and makes me infinitely sad for all those who died so horribly. Perhaps that experience, and seeing what the Nazis did, the cold, cold hearted and cold blooded systematic way that they killed the Jewish people-that was genocide. From what I have read and heard, the terrible things that happened to the Armenians were horrible and cruel. But the Turks were not Nazis, and what was done was not the same.

I truly believe that all you care about the Armenians, Spiridon, is that you are Greek and you, like the Armenians, hate the Turks. In that way, you are the one with the problem with bigotry. Also in that way, you have no objectivity at all in anything to do with Turkey. All you know is that the Turks pushed the Greeks out of Turkey and into the Aegean about 85 or so years ago. I think that all of you are hanging on to grievances for too long--which takes me back to an earlier point I made.

@ AMVIENNAVA,

I wrote the last part with your stylistic overtones, because I like them muchly.

I am glad you approve.

Spiridon
MTL, QC, CA

Spidon @October 23, 2007 4:43 PM: :)

Dear ANONYMOUS,

Quoting Mr. Bruce Fein, 'scholar of The Turkish Coalition of America', verbatim, MJC posted the following, and I quote verbatim:

"If the resolution's proponents had done their homework and put aside religious bigotry, they would have reached the same conclusion as author and Professor Bernard Lewis of Princeton University: "[T]he point that was being made was that the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire was the same as what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany and that is a downright falsehood. What happened to the Armenians was the result of a massive Armenian armed rebellion against the Turks, which began even before war broke out, and continued on a larger scale." "

I will say again, the above is written by Mr Bruce Fein, "Scholar with The Turkish Coalition of America", in which he asks us to accept that he is quoting Professor Bernard Lewis of Princeton University.

1) As a Jewish American, old enough not only to live through the German internment of the Jewish people (though he did not experience it first hand) and subsequent attempt by the Nazis to eliminate the Jews in the most horrific and morally bankrupt ways, Professor Lewis has never nor would ever deny the holocaust.

2) The quote equates what it claims to be denial of the holocaust and the Armenian Genocide on the basis that a known Islamic scholar (Professor Lewis) said it since he is apparently being quoted. This is false. He is misquoted and intentionally so to advocate not only a passive hatred for the Armenians but also the Jews.

I quote again, this time more specifically:
" "...[T]he point that was being made was that the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire was the same as what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany and that is a downright falsehood. What happened to the Armenians was the result of a massive Armenian armed rebellion against the Turks, which began even before war broke out, and continued on a larger scale." "

3) Mr. Bruce Fein, the "Scholar with The Turkish Coalition of America" also tells us that that if we knew the facts we would agree with a known scholar who is then subsequently misquoted by Mr. Fein "the scholar".

4) Mr. Bruce Fein, the "Scholar with The Turkish Coalition of America" then tells us that we are religious bigots for not agreeing with Professor Lewis who should know, though is grossly misrepresented by being misquoted.

I will quote more specifically:
" "If the resolution's proponents had done their homework and put aside religious bigotry, they would have reached the same conclusion as author and Professor Bernard Lewis of Princeton University:..." "

Dear Anonymous,
For your information, Professor Bernard Lewis of Princeton University said the following when asked about the Armenian genocide, after he was proven to be heavily biased to support the Republican position on Turkey in such a way so as not to anger the country into retracting its support for the Iraq effort:
"The point that was being made was that the massacre of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire --[was the same as what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany and that]-- is a downright falsehood. What happened to the Armenians was the result of a massive Armenian armed rebellion against the Turks, which began even before war broke out, and continued on a larger scale."
Please note that what I have in parenthesis --[]--is the addition Mr. Bruce Fein, "Scholar with The Turkish Coalition of America" has added to Professor Lewis' statement, just after he calls the proponents of the Genocide Resolution "religious bigots".

The moral issues involved in Mr. Fein's attempt to portray anyone who does not agree with his fabrications, "religious bigots":

1) As a "scholar", Mr. Fein is showing a less than scholarly approach in his monochromatic arguments.

2) As a "scholar", Mr. Fein is showing a complete disregard for scholarly pursuits by misquoting a known scholar of great repute internationally.

3) As a "scholar", Mr. Fein accuses us of being "religious bigots" while advocating a religiously bigoted position to insult not only the 'Armenian Christians' but also the 'Jews'.

4) As a "scholar", Mr. Fein thinks it it is OK to not only grossly misquote Professor Lewis but also to insult his religious affiliation by calling him bigoted in the collective bigotry he claims we hold in advocating a position other than the one Mr. Fein wants us to support, and also insulting the Jews in knowingly denying them the resolve of the past injury caused to them by the Nazis.

Dear Anonymous,
I fail to see how your position supports the claims Mr. Fein is making and also the claims MJC is making in supporting Mr. Fein.

Anonymous, I think you are a poser too, just like MJC and Mr. Fein.
Anonymous, I think you are also a bigot, since the position you defend is clear on this matter.

Anonymous, I think you need to cultivate your balls because to stand up and get all twisted that we do not agree with you and the perverted rejects you defend, while posting without a name is... well... You know... Juvenile and "slippy" sloppy and very lippy.

I hope that settles the matter on your "scholars"

Spiridon
Montreal Canada

ANONYMOUS @October 23, 2007 2:05 PM: I prefer exchanges with 'known' handles. Any idiot can be 'anonymous'. Heck, I've been 'anonymous' at times; I sometimes even correct for it.

Dear Spiridon, AMViennaVA, and Armenius,

I've been posting comments on the discussions stemming from the Washington Post Global article about Turkey's move to war and anti-Americanism. Please join me, I would love to see your contributions. Here's the link:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/america/2007/10/istanbul_protests_curse_the_pkk.html

-Yabanci

Spiridon- You did not seem to understand the point made.
The point was not answered by a good/terrorist-bad/terrorist thesis.
The gist was, that you decided to completely ignore the many facts given by MJC for a variety of excuses.

1) That no link was provided

However ENOUGH information was given to allow you to find the link yourself.

INVALID REASONING

2) Just insulting the MJC as an extremist bigot

INVALID

3) Further insults to the author as a radical
and questioning motives because he may be
turkish?

INVALID

So your entire reasoning process is based upon the counter view coming from- well- someone whose views oppose yours?

So I take it then, that some terrorists are good, and their cause just- and some terrorists are bad, and their cause unjust?
How about both being bad?
I will be the first to agree that one persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter.
But you didn't adress any of the points brought up in the article, which I find intellectually slippy.
You are attempting your own moral legislation by acsribing values to the suffering of the different groups.
By your reasoning, MJC has no validity because-
he has an opposite stance and opinion?
Your analogy to the SS and Nazis is a dull and low emotional tactic.
Drawing a comparison between MLK,Jr and MJC- just plain makes no sense.

Im not making a statement one way or the other about the issue here.
I just find your reasoning processes equal to- if not more (as you engaged in childish name calling) bigoted.

ANVIENNA- you entirely missed and completely missed the point in your rush to be clever.
It is not a statement saying the PKK are the same armenians from 1915.
With or without the contested historical massacres,they are no longer with us.

It was a comment on the reasoning of Spiridon who rejected the evidence presented as unworthy of attention or response- by pointing out (correctly) that he would not hesitate to give the al-qaeda the same (mild) designation -
when in fact- by his own words- he gave them a WORSE designation.
Also, you should provide refernces for your stats.

I am somewhat amused at people's capacity to justify their own decidely prejudicial and biased views- while denouncing others for doing the same thing.
Either Spiridon has concrete answers or rebuttals for the historical accounts made in the article -which cites among others, the Col. Furlong, Rep to Woodrow Wilson, Capts. Niles and Sutherland, Mourad Toplaian- the abscence of Armenian initiative to present evidence to the World Court- the illegality of even questioning the genocide (as though it were established) in European law (which cannot be separated from Europes 40 year long exclsuion of Turkey from the EU)

I find it remarkable that you claim to be impartial, when you are clearly Anti-Turk in your
in your comments.
Now, would you care to address the article and it's historical validity- or would that be too logical and devoid of bias?
I make this observation, mostly from your slanted wirtings- and also from your telling characteriazation of the new government of Turkey as "islamist" when to date- it has expanded freedoms formerly denied by the secularists.

typetext: When do you define to be an appropriate time to raise the question? When everyone has died?

An eloquent and timely commentary on the moral and historical issues. But something nags at me- why did the US Congress choose this precise moment to bring forward a resolution on this important period? I have not yet read a convincing explanation.

I would like to apologize to the contributers of this discussion for addressing my above comments to anonymous; not once making reference to the Armenians. While the topic of discussion is pretty specific, I was too busy thinking in inferences.

I am glad you are here and contributing AMViennaVA, Yabanci and Armenius or my rambling often would make no sense at all.

Dear ANONYMOUS,

Your question:
So it is not alright to say the Al-Qaeda is a menace that must be put out of business?
They only killed 3,000 Americans.
The PKK has killed 10 times that- 30,000

You have raised an excellent point.

First, we must not think in terms of body counts since the matter of killing is an issue that bears the same moral consequence regardless of the accounting. What is 3,000 Americans and untold others that Al Qaeda has killed, versus the 30,000 (give or take a couple of thousand) that were killed by the PKK?

Secondly, we must not be thinking in terms of the body count per nationality. Death to an American is no less or more serious than death to a Canadian or Afghani or Russian or Chechnyan... etc, etc. Death especially from the needless cause of terrorism is always morally objectionable.

If we consider that the PKK has been confirmed by the European and American governments as being a terrorist organization, similar to Al Qaeda, in that the intent in both cases is to advocate their agenda through the use of violent means, we are missing the point. We cannot talk about terrorists without drawing some distinctions, based not on their similarities but the inherent differences between them, since viewing terrorism as an abstract and forgone conclusion, we are exempting any possible solution to the problem it seeks to address.
Like anything else, terrorists do not live in a political, spiritual and cultural vacuum. Why else would we need also to distinguish their intent in contrast with our intent to “eradicate” the terrorist? There has been lots of talk by the terror apologists that our approach to the problem is terrorism in kind. We cannot go around calling each other terrorists because we will get nothing done in solving the problem. We need distinctions.

The distinctions:

The PKK is an organization that seeks to instigate change in the political process through violent means. While it is true that it has caused too much suffering on account of the tactics it has employed, we must not get bogged down by doing body counts which only serve to legitimize its intent.

Al Qaeda on the other hand seeks to reaffirm the spiritual and cultural differences between itself and the ‘Judeo/Christian West’. The moral authority that is advocated by the leadership of this group, as derived through the actions of this group, is meant to lead to the participant’s salvation and promote their religious/cultural agenda. Though Al Qaeda has made attempts to affect political change, its raison-d’etre is essentially spiritual or religious.

Another distinction between the two organizations is that while the PKK is structured as an organization, with leadership that is accountable to those it represents, Al Qaeda essentially is a loose band of disaffected and spiritual co-conspirators seeking to affect change which agrees, but does not need to be sanctioned by the structured leadership of the group, which by the myth status these leaders seek to impose on the group, distinguish themselves from it and as such are not held accountable. Al Qaeda is structured more as a religious off-shoot of Islam and it’s leadership holds a prophetic distance.

What distinguish the two terror networks in the end are the ends they seek. While the PKK seeks a ‘rational’ and ‘finite’ solution to the problem of political legitimacy for the people it represents, Al Qaeda in contrast seeks a solution that by its very nature is ‘irrational’ and ‘ongoing’: The participants in the actions sanctioned by Al Qaeda essentially seek a form of salvation that cannot be limited to a single act of devotion since devotion is not ‘finite’.

We cannot sanction terrorists but we can say that one type of terrorist is considerably more dangerous than the other. If the PKK seek a political solution, the ‘finite’ solution would be to examine the political means by which this organization will be silenced for good. In the case of Al Qaeda on the other hand, the solution is much more complex since political means will not satisfy the criteria it seeks.

Conclusion:

If we can infer from the demands of the PKK that a political solution is possible, we can say that the Turkish government would be wise to consider the means necessary to remove the problem of legitimacy from this group and therefore solve the terror problem it poses. Historically the Ottoman Empire and now present day Turkey have subjugated and brutalized minorities within their control. What is sought not only by the PKK and other networks like it in Turkey is recognition for the minorities these organizations represent.

If Turkey corrects its human rights record and decentralizes the power the military now holds; clarifies the intentions of its ‘Islamist’ government and seeks cooperation with its neighbours, it stands a good chance of survival. If Turkey seeks to perpetuate the stubbornness and bravado it has shown since its arrival in Europe, it risks annihilation not by any exterior source but from within.
I have said it before and will repeat it again: Turkey must survive and become more cooperative with her neighbours or the alternative becomes dangerous for Europe and the west. Europe and the NATO allies are looking for ways to help Turkey but the matter is left with Turkey to decide. We cannot do the work of rebuilding the political infrastructure necessary to kick start her failing democracy.

As for the matter of Al Qaeda, it is best left for another discussion. The problem and danger posed by this group is much more complex.

Spiridon
Montreal Canada

The more Turkey reduces the role of the grim faced generals (whose sad faces look like they just quit smoking!) the more peace would come to Turkey and the two nations that Turkey is made of up: Turks & Kurds.
Turkish gernerals are relics of the fascist era.

Anonymous @October 21, 2007 11:02 PM: Thank you for clarifying that the PKK are Armenians from 1915. That was truly informative. (I hope you can discern the sarcasm; what you posted is irrelevant to this discussion).

However, if you want to mention the Kurds, you must also provide an explanation of:

1. The 30000 (actually in 1995 it was 35000 - I guess some of them have been resurrected) were mostly Kurds, killed by the Turkish army who destroyed more than 3500 Kurdish villages. It is a reason many Kurds found refuge in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, of all places.

2. Why does Turkey still have such a severe problem with its minorities. There are those who (correctly in my opinion) believe that it does because Turkey has not yet accepted the truth about its history.

Majority of those 30,000 persons who have been killed have been KURDS. They were murdered by the annihilation campaign of the Turkish army in the Turkish part of Kurdistan. The Turks have killed Greeks, Armenians, Kurds.......The rain water & time has washed away the red color on the mountains of Kurdistan of more than 1 million Kurds that were killed ny Mustafa Kamal and his henchmen. The attack on Kurdistan by the thugs of Turkish army will be very expensive..it may be the demose of the hungry, fascist, corrupt, and racist state known as Turkey

So it is not alright to say the Al-Qaeda is a menace that must be put out of business?

They only killed 3,000 americans.
The PKK has killed 10 times that- 30,000.

by Craig Chamberlain
Turkish Temper Tantrum
October 20, 2007 01:00 PM EST

If the Armenian genocide of 1915 wasn't a genocide then why are the Turks so enraged whenever the subject comes up? Yes, it's true that the massacre happened during a time of war and that some Turks lost their lives. But the campaign was nothing more than an attempt by the failing Ottoman government to wipe out the Armenians. After all they weren't Turks and they weren't Muslims so why have them around.

Not that the Armenians were the first victims of Turkish agression. For over a century the Turks ruled and brutalized the Balkans, with acts of violence and forcibly taking Christian children from their homes and making them Janisarries in the Ottoman army. (Now all of that is in the past, although if Erdogan has his way the old Turkey might emerge again.)The Greeks who had been living in Asia minor since the bronze age were forcibly expelled by the Turks after world war one. The Kurds had every shred of the culture buried by the Turks(the Turks went so far as to deny that they Kurds even existed, referring to them as "mountain Turks).

In the old days the Turks targeted their victims for religious reasons. Non Muslims were the victims of their violence. After the rise of Ataturk Jihad was replaced by Turkish Chauvinism. Now Turkey is trying to combine the two. Erdogan is trying to create a new Islamism at home and nationalism abroad.

That being said Congress has better things to do. If they want to deal with genocide why not deal with the situation in Darfur, which is ongoing, instead of talking about something that happened in 1915? The answer is that Congress likes grandstanding and chest thumping, they just don't like to take any action.

Instead all they do is agitate a very touchy country, a country that already wants to invade Iraq so they can launch a new campaign against the Kurds(if Erdogan has his way he'll turn the hunt for a few PKK rebels into a new genocide) though it seems after Erdogan has gotten to rattle the saber he's backing down. The situation in Iraq is still dangerous, even after the success of the surge, and we couldn't have allowed the Turks to invade the Kurdish region which happens to be the most stable part of Iraq.

As allies the Turks are valuable, but not irreplaceable. Under Erdogan relations have gotten worse from cool to downright frozen. Still it would be in the interests of the United States to keep the Turks on our side. Congress should abandon the resolution, there's nothing that can be done about it. If they want to stop violence let them stop something that's still ongoing. The Turks are going to be Turks no matter how Congress votes.

Hello World folks!

Why this planet earth has had quite a few of the very worst human-crimes as: mass-murdering, massacres, genocides in several continents, spreading from all world corners as: asia, europe, east europe, middle east, to american continent! Many many genocides have known and recorded! While misters Allah, Jesus Christ, Budha, and all the alikes could only prove to themselves and all mankind as the so-called the "n'existe plus!" (means no longer exist in English)!

Who on earth can believe that the so-called: "God" (if exists? in term of human self-misconcepted) can help this sinful and treacherous and murderous human being?
While these human-being folks or human-erectuses are definitely in love with their everyday treachery-of-all-sorts and murdering-of-all-sorts and born-to-count-money-and-enjoy-sex-and-lie-only mostly! and only very few of them are living like saints or angels in this filthy and odorous world! (i.e., few are good and too many are bad as proven)
It is quite funny as while seeing Billions of world folks have pointed their asses relentlessly into the sky to pray their god everyday!!! but funnily, this world can only have only one way to head into its own destiny is the destination of destructions of all sorts and murdering of all sorts each others as all seen in the world corners everyday!
Sad! sad! sad! this rotten world! that we all have to live in and smell this bad-smell!
It seems to be that this sinful world can only be taught by few asteroids heading in from the heaven as did before to cleanup this dirty world!

For sure! This world citizens do need to come back to live with their valuable conscience that has been lost for a long time ago!

Thanks

conscience-to-the-world

The current menace in the region which is the threat of Turkish miltary intervension in Kurdistan shows the insecurity of Turkish junta. They want to be the bully of neighberhood...Kurdistan wants peace but is prepared to defend against the criinal manuvers of a criminal junta. Kurdistan has defended itself against invaders..just look at the graveyards of the previous occupiers.....A great Kurdish poet, Abdulla Pashew once wrote anout the huge sacrifices of Kurdistan this way:
Unknown Soldier

When a delegation goes to a country
they lay wreath of flowers on the unknown soldier,
if tomorrow
a delegation comes to our country
and asks me where is the grave of unknown soldier?
I say Sir!
on the banks of any river,
on the rocks of any mountain,
under the tree of any garden,
on the benches of any mosque and any church
under any piece of any sky
over any piece of any land,
in this country of Kurdistan,
do not be scared
just lay your head down
and place your wreath....

The current menace in the region which is the threat of Turkish miltary intervension in Kurdistan shows the insecurity of Turkish junta. They want to be the bully of neighberhood...Kurdistan wants peace but is prepared to defend against the criinal manuvers of a criminal junta. Kurdistan has defended itself against invaders..just look at the graveyards of the previous occupiers.....A great Kurdish poet, Abdulla Pashew once wrote anout the huge sacrifices of Kurdistan this way:
Unknown Soldier

When a delegation goes to a country
they lay wreath of flowers on the unknown soldier,
if tomorrow
a delegation comes to our country
and asks me where is the grave of unknown soldier?
I say Sir!
on the banks of any river,
on the rocks of any mountain,
under the tree of any garden,
on the benches of any mosque and any church
under any piece of any sky
over any piece of any land,
in this country of Kurdistan,
do not be scared
just lay your head down
and place your wreath....

Additional notes on MJC's post.

I have located the article in question and indeed, it was published in the Washington times Newspaper on Oct. 16, 2007 and copy/pasted by MJC verbatim.

Link to the article:
http://washingtontimes.com/article/20071016/COMMENTARY02/110160004

On page 2 of this article, at the very bottom you will find the following credit:
Bruce Fein is a resident scholar with the Turkish Coalition of America

The link to the Turkish Coalition of America:
http://www.turkishcoalition.org/

****

Of special interest to the topic:
The Washington Times Newspaper also published an unsigned editorial on Friday, October 19:
Eradicating the PKK (heading)
The Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) is a menace that must be put out of business.(subheading)

****

My opinion:

1) A serious historical editorial without verifiable sources is sure to raise eyebrows especially if it's author is an admitted "scholar" with the entity that seeks to deflect blame from itself for a charge of genocide.

2) A serious historical editorial will attempt to examine both sides and not attempt to present a monochromatic interpretation.

3) A serious historical journalist would not use one verifiable source in print and that source be only a holocaust denier.

4) An unsigned editorial is always a red flag of heavy bias and when it incites violence (even against shenanigans), it is usually known as 'RADICAL':

Eradicating the PKK
The Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) is a menace that must be put out of business.

5) Quoting Bernard Lewis, is... well... just like quoting Bernard Lewis. NO EXPLANATION REQUIRED HERE.

****

Questions:
We have heard a lot of accusations of improper money exchanges by the "Rich Armenian Community" and members of the US government scheduled to vote on the genocide resolution.

1) What, if any amount of money is Mr. Bruce Fein receiving or has received for the purpose of spreading "Foreign State Propaganda" in the US National Capital?

2) What connection does MJC have with Mr. Bruce Fein and/or the Turkish Coalition of America?

****

I hope this clarifies a thing or two about a thing or two.

Spiridon
Montreal Canada

Dear Arminius,

I vote for MLK and think that MJC is a poser.

We have entertained MJC's theatrics before in the discussion and though he sites sources, his sources must be verified. Many in the discussion have sited sources but the ones that stood up to scrutiny resulted in a resounding resolution accepting the charge of genocide both in the case of the Jews and the Armenians. The United States is not the first country to adopt a motion for the Armenian matter and it will not be the last. The vote in the US is not the issue, since governments never are quick enough to dissuade the offending states from further state sponsored ethnic violence. The real objective is to engage enough conscientious individuals to act within the offending countries, obliging their governments to accept these crimes and in so doing know that their governments will act responsibly in the future or be held responsible and accountable.

I am not a historian but I remember the Kurdish displacement in Northern Turkey and Iraq in the 90's, resulting in a humanitarian catastrophe. I have seen the devastation from ethnic cleansing caused by the Tutsies and Hutus in Rwanda. I can read in a variety of sources the ongoing trouble in Sri Lanka and Kashmir. If anyone is so curious they can use Google maps to look at the Sudanese refugee compounds in Dafur and their burn-out huts, while they wait patiently for the International Observers to intervene(they are still waiting while their indigenous tribe is whipped out slowly). Who now remembers the Berbers of North Africa unless they have had special need to research them? Who among us will tell any of these people that we did not act because someone presented material that needed to be verified, but the sources were hard to locate since they are all dead and, the volumes in which their testimony is kept cannot be released because it does not suit our 'National Interest'?

There are many excuses for inaction and most of them are strategically employed. If as he claims he is a man of action, all I am able to infer by his actions is that MJC is actively seeking inaction.

I have said it before, it does not matter what the v