Announcement

**Nick_A** · 10-11-2007, 11:50 AM

[QUOTE] Battle of Watertown Select posts per page 1 post per page 4 posts per page 8 posts per page 12 posts per page 16 posts per page
This forum is for discussion of current events in the United States. These discussions are for persons of all faiths. Please be courteous, even to people with whom you disagree. Posts will be removed that advocate violence, contain personal insults, or violate the Rules of Conduct in any way.
See also: Israel & Palestine, Islam, Global Justice, Global Current Events
Your host: Innerpoint
Sign in to reply

Messages: 1 - 14 (14 total)

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 2:10 PM 1 out of 14

The Battle of Watertown currently being fought in Massachusetts puts the forces of politics and self esteem on one side against morality and respect for the value of the lives of our fellow man on the other. Gradually it is beginning to expand beyond Watertown into neighboring communities and even beyond.

The Battle of Watertown is being fought over whether or not to recognize the Armenian Genocide. There is a bill before congress, HR 106, currently being debated to decide if the Armenian genocide should be recognized and our president should refer to the Armenian genocide as a genocide or not.

The opposing side is the Anti Defamation League or ADL which also has a program in Watertown called 'No Place for Hate" But since genocide denial is considered an expression of hate, Watertown has separated itself from the program.

To back up for a moment, here is a good summary of the controversy:

'Never again' for Armenians too

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-myers1may01,0,2074553.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

Several American Jewish groups abandon their anti-genocide zeal when it comes to Turkey's massacre of Armenians.

This is why it is troubling that some major Jewish organizations have lined up in support of Turkey's efforts to keep the U.S. Congress from recognizing the Armenian massacres as an act of genocide. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the American Jewish Committee (AJC), the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and B'nai B'rith International recently conveyed a letter from the Turkish Jewish community opposing a resolution recognizing the genocide.

The ADL and the JINSA also added their own statements of opposition, suggesting that the massacre of Armenians was a matter for historians, not legislators, to decide.

Because there are some Armenians in Watertown, protests went up against the ADL. Distinguished Jewish men like Dr. Michael Siegel told Mr. Tarsy, the local head of the ADL on no uncertain terms that his stance was pure hypocrisy.

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 2:11 PM 2 out of 14

404 Not Found

http://blogs.townonline.com/watertown/?p=4152

Dear Mr. Tarsy:

As a long-time ADL supporter, it is with great disappointment that I write you today to express my disgust with your organization�s refusal to publicly acknowledge the Armenian genocide, and in particular, your July 26 response to the recent controversy in Watertown, in which you refused to acknowledge the genocide, and instead, stated that the question of whether a genocide occurred: � was one to be resolved between the two countries � Armenia and Turkey.�

Can you imagine if an organization gave a similar response to a question about whether a Holocaust occured, killing 6 million Jews? Can you imagine what we would say if an organization refused to acknowledge that the Holocaust occurred, instead stating that this is an issue that needs to be resolved between Israel and Germany?

And can you imagine if an organization gave a response similar to that given by ADL president Abraham Foxman�s answer to a question about why the ADL did not support Congressional action to recognize the Armenian genocide: �The Turks and Armenians need to revisit their past. The Jewish community shouldn�t be the arbiter of that history, nor should the U.S. Congress.� Can you imagine if an Armenian organization refused to recognize our Holocaust and tried to block government recognition of the Holocaust, evading the question by stating: �The Jews and Germans need to revisit their past. The Armenian community shouldn�t be the arbiter of that history, nor should the U.S. Congress.�

I�m afraid that for groups which deny the Holocaust, more than just historical indifference or ignorance is at the heart of that denial. What you and I both know is at the heart of Holocaust denial is anti-semitism and hatred. Unfortunately, the Anti-Defamation League�s refusal to acknowledge the Armenian genocide smacks of the same, or at least it leaves that impression. Is this truly how the ADL wants to portray itself? Not only is the group alienating its non-Jewish allies, but many Jewish supporters, like myself, cannot act too quickly to distance ourself from the organization in light of these hateful and hurtful comments.

Genocide denial is precisely the opposite of what the ADL is supposed to stand for. Ironically, by refusing to acknowledge the Armenian genocide, and by having the gall to do so in front of a community made up of a large number of Armenians, the ADL is demonstrating or introducing hatred, rather then keeping hate out of Watertown.

Because the ADL�s statements, actions, and position are so starkly in contrast with the mission of Watertown�s No Place for Hate organization, I have no choice but to call for the organization to sever its ties with the ADL, and to re-organize under another name but without the ADL affiliation. I would certainly hope that you will reconsider your position and publicly acknowledge the Armenenian genocide and apologize to the Armenian community in Watertown so that such an embarrassment is not necessary.

Just as there is no place for Holocaust denial and the underlying hatred associated with it, there is no place for denial of the Armenian genocide. If anyone understands the implications of genocide denial, shouldn�t it be the ADL? Shouldn�t it be us Jews?

Michael Siegel, MD, MPH

Professor

Associate Chair of Academics

Social and Behavioral Sciences Department

Boston University School of Public Health

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 2:14 PM 3 out of 14

The battle is growing. Mr. Tarsy finally showing a little conscience and courage defies the national ADL

Local chapter breaks with ADL position
Armenian genocide at issue
By Keith O'Brien, Globe Staff | August 17, 2007

The local chapter of the Anti-Defamation League broke ranks with its national leadership yesterday amid growing outrage by area Jewish leaders over the ADL's refusal to acknowledge the World War I-era mass killings of Armenians as genocide.

In an emergency meeting yesterday afternoon, the regional ADL board adopted resolutions calling on the national organization, which has refused to recognize the Armenian genocide, to change its policy, according to a source familiar with the proposal.

Also, Andrew H. Tarsy, the ADL's New England regional director who had defended the ADL's position as recently as Tuesday, reversed course, saying the ADL should acknowledge the genocide.

"I strongly disagree with ADL's national position," Tarsy said in an interview with the Globe, declining to explain his change of stance. "It's my strong hope that we'll be able to move forward in a relationship with the Armenian community and the community in general."

The developments were the latest turn in a national debate that began weeks ago in Watertown, home to more than 8,000 Armenian-Americans.

Some residents were upset to learn that the ADL was the sponsor of the town's antibigotry program "No Place For Hate." Many began calling for Watertown to pull out because the ADL refused to acknowledge the genocide.

On Tuesday, the Watertown Town Council voted unanimously to rescind its relationship with No Place For Hate. And by yesterday, residents in Newton, Belmont, Somerville, and Arlington were rethinking the program, and local Jewish leaders were renouncing the ADL's stand.

ADL leaders agree that Armenians were massacred by Ottomon Turks during World War I. The ongoing debate focuses on the Armenian stance that what happened was genocide and the ADL's refusal to acknowledge that.

A resolution pending in Congress would formally recognize the deaths as genocide. The ADL's national director, Abraham H. Foxman, has said that the human rights organization has no position on the issue. But he has also questioned whether what happened was genocide and said he believes that Congress should not be considering the matter.

The board of the regional ADL refused to release the text of the resolutions it adopted yesterday, in deference, one source said, to the national organization. The board would not comment further. James Rudolph, the regional board chairman, said he may be able to say more today, when he expects to hear back from the national office. Foxman did not return a call seeking comment.

But Tarsy's remarks made clear that the regional arm of the ADL was prepared to part ways with the national office on the issue of Armenian genocide, a move welcomed by the leader of the Armenian National Committee, based in Washington, D.C.

continued

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 2:16 PM 4 out of 14

"It's a positive move," said Aram Hamparian, executive director of the Armenian National Committee. "It's the New England ADL trying to bring the national ADL over to the right side of the issue."

From 1915 to 1923, Ottoman Turks massacred as many as 1.5 million Armenians in what is now modern-day Turkey. Armenians, historians, and some European nations have recognized the killings as genocide. But the Turkish government has refused to accept the genocide label. And some Middle East specialists suggest that the national ADL, a group founded in 1913 to fight anti-Semitism, may be refusing to acknowledge the Armenian genocide under pressure from Turkey, a rare Muslim ally to Israel.

"Why are they taking this position? Because they're being pressured to," said James Russell, the Mashtots professor of Armenian studies at Harvard University. "Because Israel is in a very dangerous neighborhood and Turkey, at the moment, is a friend and military ally."

Such politics, once international, became local this summer when Watertown residents realized that the ADL sponsored the town's "No Place For Hate" program, which is dedicated to challenging bigotry.

The program was positive, most agreed. Under the program, communities organize diversity days and other events focused on challenging bigotry, and after a year they receive placards to be posted, declaring the community as "No Place For Hate."

The debate quickly became about something bigger, hurting the reputation of an organization that has spoken out against Holocaust denial, ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, and genocide in Darfur.

"I'm a longtime supporter of the ADL, and I think the work the organization has done has often been stellar," said Rabbi Ronne Friedman, senior rabbi of Boston's largest synagogue, Temple Israel. "But I'm really saddened that Abe Foxman, the national director, has failed to affirm the historical fact of this genocide, and I really think that failure represents a moral myopia."

Friedman said he spoke about this issue during services last week and urged his congregation to reach out to Armenian-Americans and let them know that many Jews stand with them.

Jews, being victims of Adolf Hitler's genocide plan, should understand the importance of this issue, Friedman said.

"Hitler referenced the Armenian genocide as proof that the Germans could move forward with impunity in the defamation of the Polish population, men, women and children," Friedman said. "So the idea that we'd fail to recognize historical fact and fail to ensure that the Armenian-American community is affirmed and supported in its quest for justice and truth -- I think that's terribly unfortunate."

Officials in other "No Place For Hate" Massachusetts towns were rethinking their involvement in the program. In Newton, officials were drafting a letter demanding that the ADL change its position.

"We're incredulous," Marianne Ferguson, chairwoman of Newton's Human Rights Commission, said of Foxman's refusal to characterize the Armenian massacre as genocide. "To try and come to understand how they came to this conclusion . . . it's mind-boggling."

Ralph Ranalli of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Keith O'Brien can be reached at [email protected].

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 2:18 PM 5 out of 14

What does Andrew Tarsy get from his show of conscience and courage? He is fired by Abraham Foxman national head of the ADL.

Jewish groups pressure the ADL
Urge recognition of genocide
By Michael Levenson, Globe Staff | August 21, 2007

Local Jewish groups rushed yesterday to sign a letter urging the Anti-Defamation League to acknowledge the massacre of Armenians by Ottoman Turks as genocide, increasing pressure on the ADL after it fired its New England director for endorsing the emotionally charged position.

Nancy K. Kaufman, executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston, e-mailed a letter yesterday to some 40 prominent Jewish leaders in Massachusetts, asking them to support the ousted director and to recognize the genocide against Armenians.

"We must never forget the Armenian genocide and maintain our guard against those who deny its occurrence," the letter said.

Within hours of sending the letter, Kaufman said that 11 groups had signed and that more were expected to do so shortly.

"I have never gotten such unanimous support for any position by the JCRC as I have in the last few days on this one," Kaufman said. "It doesn't matter where people are on the political spectrum -- left, right, middle -- people are really standing behind this because it strikes at the core of what it means to be a Jew and never again means never again."

Signers of the letter include the Combined Jewish Philanthropies, the Russian Community Association of Massachusetts, the Hillel Council of New England, the Bureau of Jewish Education, and the David Project Center for Jewish Leadership.

Kaufman said her group, which represents 41 Jewish organizations, unanimously approved a resolution in 2005 calling the massacre an act of genocide. "We just felt we needed to be on record," Kaufman said. "We needed to be in solidarity and in support of the Armenian community locally."

The rift opened last week after the Town Council in Watertown, home to 8,000 Armenian-Americans, voted unanimously to pull out of an ADL program called No Place for Hate. The town was protesting the ADL's refusal to acknowledge as genocide the slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians by Ottoman Turks starting in 1915 in what is today Turkey.

After the vote, the ADL's New England director, Andrew H. Tarsy, who had initially defended the ADL's position, said the massacre was genocide. Then he was fired by the national ADL.

The ADL's national director, Abraham H. Foxman, said the ADL has no official position on the genocide issue. But it does not support US legislation that would affirm the genocide label.

In an open letter, the ADL has called the bill pending in Congress "counterproductive" and said the organization, founded in 1913 to fight anti-Semitism, worried what effect it would have on Jews in Turkey.

The controversy has since drawn in Jewish leaders across the region, not all of whom are in agreement with the local ADL. Grand Rabbi Y.A. Korff, a chaplain of the City of Boston, said the local chapter made a mistake in breaking ranks with its national leaders, who he said are better suited to assess "very sensitive international and diplomatic nuances and ramifications."

continued

**Nick_A** · 10-11-2007, 11:53 AM

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 2:19 PM 6 out of 14

"As with any organization, you can't have different chapters going their own way, and basically that undermines the national organization," Korff said in an interview from Jerusalem. "In my view, the essential issue is how does a national organization make these decisions, and who is in the best position to make these decisions."

Barry Shrage, president of the Combined Jewish Philanthropies, said he supports Tarsy and the local ADL. "I think that Andy and the board of the local ADL did the right thing and did what they thought was right, and in this case, the local organization is a lot closer to what needs to be done than the national is," Shrage said in an interview from Jerusalem.

Rabbi Barbara Penzner of Temple Hillel B'nai Torah in West Roxbury, said the local ADL was standing up in the tradition of its late former leader, Leonard P. Zakim, for whom the bridge over the Charles River is named. "I think the ADL national has made a huge mistake, and even if they explain that there's political and organizational issues, we as a community ought to stand for the moral high ground," Penzner said.

� Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

So the conflict grows and the lines are drawn. We have the people of morality and the people of politics. Morality asserts the necessity of recognizing the truth of the Armenian Genocide if "Never Again" is to have any meaning, while politics prefers genocide denial in the face of Turkish political opposition.

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 2:25 PM 7 out of 14

A while back I used the term "Jewish Hypocrisy" to describe what is happening here and was shouted down. Now respected Jewish men are using the same term:

The politics of hypocrisy
By Evan R. Goldstein

Sat., August 25, 2007

Abraham Foxman has become a menace to his own legacy. That is a shame because it is a good and decent legacy. Over the course of a career spanning 42 years at the Anti-Defamation League, Foxman has been an ardent champion of civil rights, a tireless defender of the separation between church and state against those who insist on tearing it down, and a consistent watchdog of the fever swamps of extremism, into which he has shined the bright lights of opprobrium on bigots of all stripes. These achievements should all be applauded.

And yet Foxman has also shown himself to be both morally obtuse and ethically challenged. One of the more egregious instances of such impropriety occurred in 2001, when a congressional probe revealed that Foxman had helped orchestrate fugitive commodities trader Marc Rich's controversial pardon from then president Bill Clinton. Rich had fled the country in shame to avoid federal charges that he had cheated the government out of $48 million and had traded with the enemy. The timing of Foxman's personal appeal to Clinton on Rich's behalf was no coincidence. A few months prior to that, the ADL had received a $100,000 pledge from Rich. In short, Foxman had prostituted the ADL's credibility for a deep-pocketed - and exceedingly shady - donor.

All of which takes me back nearly nine decades to Ottoman Turkey, where over one million Armenians perished in a horrific spasm of organized slaughter. This historical episode has become a political flashpoint in Washington, D.C., where all kinds of influence peddlers have been engaged in a fierce struggle over whether Congress should officiallycodify the Armenian massacre as genocide. The Turkish government has spent millions of dollars and twisted countless arms in an effort to trounce this resolution. More troubling, it has been able to enlist the support of the ADL - along with other Jewish organizations - in its campaign of denial.

Let us be clear from the outset: This debate is not about the veracity of scholarship or the merits of comparative historical interpretations. Academic authorities agree on this matter, and the evidence that the campaign against the Armenians constituted the first genocide of the 20th century is overwhelming and incontrovertible. Instead, the debate is about politics, in particular the important multilateral relationship between Israel, the United States and Turkey - one of the world's few Muslim-majority countries that is also a democracy. As the ADL put it in a recent statement: "Turkey is a key strategic ally and friend of the United States and a staunch friend of Israel, and in the struggle between Islamic extremists and moderate Islam, Turkey is the most critical country in the world."

continued

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 2:28 PM 8 out of 14

Foxman has particularly distinguished himself by indulging in spineless acts of rhetorical ambiguity, declaring that "this is not an issue where we take a position one way or the other. This is an issue that needs to be resolved by the parties, not by us. We are neither historians nor arbiters." This from a man who rightfully claims that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial amounts to an attempt to destroy Jewish identity! This from the leader of an organization that has rightfully called on the world not to avert its eyes from the genocide underway in Sudan's Darfur region! (One wonders what Foxman would do if Khartoum were on friendly terms with Jerusalem.)

This bizarre and shameless display of hypocrisy gradually came under fire from Armenian civil rights groups and a small cadre of outraged Jewish journalists, in particular those congregated around the engaging - if unfortunately named - online magazine Jewcy. All this protest came to a climax last week when Andrew Tarsy, the New England regional director of the ADL, publicly broke with the national position, which he characterized as "morally indefensible." (I hasten to add that Tarsy apparently only took this drastic step after his efforts to quietly work within the organization to change the national position were stymied.)

"I have been conflicted over this issue for several weeks," Tarsy told The Boston Globe. "I regret at this point any characterization of the genocide that I made publicly other than to call it genocide. I think that kind of candor about history is absolutely fundamental." Tarsy's heroic stand has earned the young activist a great deal of admiration in the Boston-area, where the ADL has a rich legacy of combating bigotry. Not surprisingly, it earned him nothing but scorn from Foxman, who promptly fired him.

But the outrage only grew, and Foxman ultimately decided out of "concern for the unity of the Jewish community at a time of increased threats against the Jewish people, to revisit the tragedy that befell the Armenians." And upon "reflection, we have come to share the view of Henry Morgenthau Sr. that the consequences of those actions were indeed tantamount to genocide." This statement, which the ADL released on Tuesday, is stunning on account of its total lack of integrity.

First, note the disingenuous way Foxman lays the groundwork for his disgracefully belated admission of the obvious, by attributing his reversal to the risk of disunity within the Jewish community. What does the unity or disunity of the Jewish people have to do with distinguishing between historical fact and malicious fabrication?

continued

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 2:29 PM 9 out of 14

Second, note how Foxman completely fails to grasp the fundamental significance of Morgenthau's legacy (which he was nonetheless clearly intent on co-opting). Serving as America's ambassador in Istanbul at the time of the genocide, Morgenthau alerted his superiors in Washington that the ongoing persecution of Armenians was "assuming unprecedented proportions," ultimately characterizing Turkish aggression as an "effort to exterminate a whole race." (The word "genocide" was not coined until 1944.) And although the American response to Morgenthau's cables was dreadfully feeble, his actions testify to the ethical imperative of bearing witness and acknowledging inconvenient truths. In contrast, Foxman's statement of contrition diminishes the importance of the truth.

Third, note the weasel words "consequences" and "tantamount" - why not just say it was genocide? Long notorious for running the ADL like a personal fiefdom, Foxman has always resisted calls to plan for his eventual departure. In response to a 2003 effort by regional lay leaders to force Foxman's hand on this matter, he blithely told the Forward that when "I'm ready to retire or do something else, I will notify my lay leadership." As someone who believes in the enduring value of the ADL's work on behalf of a more tolerant and pluralistic America, I hope Foxman realizes the time has come.

Evan R. Goldstein is a writer in Washington, D.C. and a contributing editor at Moment magazine.

doxieman122
9/25/2007 7:24 PM 10 out of 14

Any Jewish or Holocaust related organization that would deny any documented genocide or ethnic cleansing -- the Armenian genocide, the Khmer/Cambodian genocide, the ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia, that going on now in Darfur -- loses all moral standing with me.

How does that make them different than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, exactly?

Sobeit9
9/25/2007 8:25 PM 11 out of 14

I both appreciate and applaud your courage to write what you did since there is so much animosity associated with this issue. Consider what is going on in Florida politics between these two men of politics:

http://www.graberforcongress.com/article.php?id=5

Graber, who is Jewish and the son of Holocaust survivors, called Wexler an "embarrassment" to the Jewish community for opposing a resolution in the House that recognizes the deportation and killing of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire as genocide.

It's getting rough out there.

nieciedo
9/25/2007 11:04 PM 12 out of 14

I could have sworn this all happened weeks ago.

Anyway, I've always said that the treatment of Armenians by the Ottoman Turks is a genocide and should be recognized and condemned as such.

Do I get praise as a person of courage, now, too?

I pointed this out before but the Union for Reform Judaim (then the Union of American Hebrew Congregations) formally adopted a resolution condemning the Armenian genocide as genocide in 1989. See here.

nieciedo
9/25/2007 11:06 PM 13 out of 14

BTW,

I was part of that demonstration at the 92nd St. Y.

And could you be any more condescending in your comment about the "young kids in [sic] Jewcy?"

Rashi
9/26/2007 7:47 AM 14 out of 14

I have read the history of the Armenian Genocide. I abhor it. That any Jew ignores it is to say the least inappropriate. What makes matters worse is that the perpetrators ignore and deny it. In doing so they join a long list of Islamic adherents that refute genocide, including those who support the ongoing murder and rape in Darfur. This notably includes the OIC (Organization of Islamic Conference) that supports the government of the Sudan in its continuing efforts to kill and rape women and children.

Hmmmm......It seems as what actually is considered "disruptive" and "insulting" is the words of highly respected Jewish men also concerned with this Jewish hypocrisy. And, as I've said, I salute their moral character.. Yet this thread is also deleted for being "insulting" and "disruptive" and breaking term of service.

Anyone can see the truth here. A discussion was beginning that could have been productive for the pending H. Res 106 but it was deleted with its initiator being guilty of being "insulting" and "disruptive." I don't mind being kicked off of such a site. As one who has experienced the results of the Armenian genocide and its denial, I feel it my obligation to oppose it in whatever form it appears. In this case, I urge you to oppose it as well. Don't support those who encourage genocide denial by denying its discussion at critical times. We owe at least that to those who have suffered so much.

**Joseph** · 10-11-2007, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by Nick_A View Post

I hope to make my experience part of a larger article that deals with the affect of the Internet on encouraging the acceptance of genocide. Though sites are owned privately and can say what they want, this doesn't change the effect they can have and if advertisers should support them. This is our choice. The bottom line is if we support these sites by giving them awards of encouraging advertisers. Our personal decision must be based on how we abhor genocide in all its forms

Now that H Res. 106 has been adopted by the foreign Affairs committee, regardless of attempts to suppress information or to deny necessary discussion. Of course it will face stiffer resistance in the Senate since at the time of this writing the bill in the senate has 32 co-sponsors which is not a majority.

What determines support of recognition of the Armenian genocide? This is a many sided question. It would seem though that the Jewish community that suffered the holocaust and knows the importance of "Never Again" as a reality would support recognition at the cost of upsetting Turkey. Yet I've been surprised by how many Jewish groups in the United States opposed recognition. This surprised a great many moral responsible intelligent and respected Jewish men as well who wrote articles condemning this attitude of looking the other way given their history..

It is quite normal then for people within the Jewish community to take a stand. I know if Armenians were denying the holocaust, I would say this is wrong and the holocaust must be affirmed. I would completely agree with the U.N. and its creation of a worldwide day to commemorate the holocaust.

Satellite Articles and latest stories | The Jerusalem Post

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1129540644360&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Breaking news about Satellite from The Jerusalem Post. Read the latest updates on Satellite including articles, videos, opinions and more.

Armenians need the help of the Jewish community to acquire recognition of the Armenian genocide. However, I've learned to my horror that such discussion is considered by those willing to deny genocide as both "insulting" and "disruptive" warranting condemnation and banishment.

I participated on Beliefnet.com as Sobeit9 to try and induce thought and in this case to encourage thought amongst Jewish participants. Being part Armenian and having lost family to the genocide, I naturally want it recognized since having visited Armenian homes I've witnessed the psychological damage of this non-recognition.

However, Beliefnet has proven itself so concerned with preserving an image of the Jewish community that it has suppressed the argument being waged within the Jewish Community as to the Armenian genocide, that it supports the righteous indignation at presenting the problem calling it "insulting" and "disruptive."

Of course the question of Jewish opposition could be considered insulting and disruptive to a genocide denier but the point is if people should be allowed to take a stand before a vote in the House is taken? Beliefnet management does not believe so and succeeded in suppressing any discussion before the vote. I was warned against being "insulting" and disruptive" and finally banned in favor of denial of necessary questions concerning non -recognition of the Armenian genocide. My last e-mail from Beliefnet reads:

Now when you read this it is natural to think I'm this bad guy. Remember now, all I'm doing is raising questions and primarily posting articles and excerpts by respected Jewish men. Since I came back to Beliefnet I posted two threads which I will copy here. This is "insulting" and disruptive" since it provokes nasty responses. Beliefnet has chosen to side with those who get insulted and disrupted by being asked to take a stand on an important question of the day. I invite you to read these two short threads that were deleted and me condemned. You tell me if it isn't really the content that is the problem to them. I knew it would probably happen so I copied them and sure enough I was right. The first is an invitation to discuss the issue on the current events board.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK dear reader, be honest. Is there anything so horrible here? Yet this thread was deleted, Now you will think that my insulting and disruptive manner will make itself known in the other thread with the substance in it. OK lets see:

Nick, no offense but it seems like you badgered these guys so much, they got sick of you. All of them said they recognized the genocide but you didn't seem to let it go and from the Jewish point of you, why do they have to be arbriters of this struggle? Most Jews (those that are familar with the issue) support us and some do not (mostly for geo-political reasons) and that is too bad. They should not have deleted the thread but it looks like you were preaching to the choir over there.

**Nick_A** · 10-11-2007, 01:06 PM

Joseph

If there was a similar sort of "Battle of Watertown" that was related to Armenian or Russian interests, I would welcome the chance to stand up to authority especially when time was critical in relation to H Res 106.

Some were on our side and some were not. Others are influenced in their decision by this form of suppression and genocide denial. When it comes time that it is necessary to ask for a bit of consideration in respect for the tragic sufferings of so many people, it is time to hang it up and give the Devil his due.

I for one do not intend to let genocide denial rule the day but invite people to honestly discuss it. Why politics can win out over morality and what we need to see in ourselves to try and prevent it from happening again is something everyone calling themselves a human being should impartially consider. "Never Again" should mean something.

Inviting necessary discussion is not badgering. Perhaps if the choir is more full and louder, it could better influence the political Jewish groups The fact is that being both jews and Armenians have similar experiences means it should be discussed and the importance of opposing genocide and genocide denial should be emphatically agreed upon if "Never Again" is to have meaning.

**phantom** · 10-11-2007, 01:14 PM

Joseph, I concur. Moreover, applauding the dixie guy for having courage is a bit dramatic, don't you think? Do you think a Jew would applaud an Armenian for saying there was a Holocaust. There's nothing courageous about speaking the well-known truth. I see how they could have felt you were condescending and preachy. Moreover, it appears the forum is supposed to be about religeon, and this topic is not about religeon.

**Nick_A** · 10-11-2007, 01:43 PM

Phantom

Joseph, I concur. Moreover, applauding the dixie guy for having courage is a bit dramatic, don't you think? Do you think a Jew would applaud an Armenian for saying there was a Holocaust. There's nothing courageous about speaking the well-known truth. I see how they could have felt you were condescending and preachy. Moreover, it appears the forum is supposed to be about religeon, and this topic is not about religeon.

With all the denial going on and people are afraid to commit in the face of it, it is courageous for some to take a stand. I've tried to speak to rabbis about this and they refuse. They are afraid. Unlike the holocaust, The Armenian Genocide is not a well known truth. I'll bet Dr. Siegel got some nasty mail when he rendered an opinion. If people don't wake up to see something wrong, then everything stays as it is.

For the life of me I cannot see how stressing the importance through discussion of recognizing the intentional destruction of over 1.5 million people can be preachy or condescending. How is one condescending when looking at mutilated corpses and suggesting that people having similar experiences should seek a better way other than denial and platitudes.

And just to let you know, the board it was on is called "Current Events' and there for the discussion of such issues provided they are considered acceptable issues.

When such threads that provide facts and invite people to discuss them are deleted, it is a contributing factor to genocide denial which IMO is about as low as it can go on the Internet. Denying the truth is as bad as celebrating the demeaning lies of propoganda. And, as usual, after all is said and done, our foolishness insures the next genocide.

**Nick_A** · 10-13-2007, 07:57 AM

I feel that I should further clarify this question of courage. Of course it doesn't take courage to recite platitudes about being against genocide but it does require courage to speak the truth as to why understanding does not progress beyond platitudes and is content with the acceptance of genocide.

I am considered insulting and disruptive. What does this actually mean? The connotation is that it is something bad but Jesus was considered both insulting and disruptive. He was killed for that reason. Does this by definition make him bad? So in reality calling people insulting and disruptive only means a decision has been made as to right and wrong.

It takes courage to be insulting and disruptive or as Simone Weil said to "annoy the Great Beast."

The preferred course is to recite a few platitudes and forget about the Armenian genocide. But there is a minority that are willing to be insulting and disruptive. One such person is Yair Auron

Page not found - Armenia Foreign Ministry

http://www.armeniaforeignministry.com/conference/yair_auron.pdf

Acts of genocide can be committed only when the balance of power is such that the perpetrators have complete power over the victims. Such a state of affairs is dependent to no small degree on the behavior of the "third party "-those not involved directly, the side that always comprises almost the whole of human society.

When genocide is being committed there is always a "third party," which can be divided schematically into three groups:

� Those who assist the murderers for various reasons, including the fact that since the murderers are the "strong ones" it is better to be "on good terms" with them.

� The comparatively few who, for moral, ethical, or compassionate reasons, come to the aid of the victims. (When these are non-Jews who aided Jews in the Holocaust, they are recognized in Israel as "Righteous Gentiles.")

� The by-standers, the vast majority that remains on the sidelines and does nothing.

Obviously the "righteous gentiles" are the ones being insulting and disruptive. They are showing the courage to deal specifically with the problem as opposed to spouting platitudes.

A question, whose importance cannot be exaggerated, immediately comes to mind: Don't those who stand by and do nothing share some of the responsibility, and perhaps even some of the guilt, for the crimes committed, which they witnessed but did nothing to prevent?

Yes, and this is of course the damage done by institutions like Beliefnet that suppress necessary discussions that could serve to shed moral light on this question of genocide. It is best to accuse those desiring developing understanding in the face of opposition of being "insulting" and "disruptive."

It is important that Israelis, and Jews in Israel and elsewhere, as members of one group of victims, ask themselves very difficult questions, such as how they should relate to the justified demands of other victims of genocide that the murderers of these victims, or their heirs, and the world, recognize the crimes perpetrated against them.

It is also important that we, as individual Jews and as Israelis, acknowledge the crimes perpetrated against other victims of genocide, and that we consider how the State of Israel should relate to their demands for recognition.

These questions are exemplified by the very real and actual situation that Israel faces today: Israel, directly or indirectly, supports Turkey's efforts in denying the fact that there was a genocide of the Armenians. This situation calls for a response by individuals and institutions, and by Jewish society both within Israel and elsewhere.5

It is inevitable that Israeli pupils' and young adults' knowledge about the genocide perpetrated upon the Jewish people ("The Holocaust happened to us") will be greater than that of similar disasters that befell other peoples. However, shouldn't this knowledge, and the fact that

the Jewish nation is a people that survived such destruction, together with the fact that the Holocaust has such a central place in the Jewish national identity, be factors in making them more sensitive to the calamities of other peoples?

There are two approaches in Israel about exposing young Israelis to knowledge about the genocides of other peoples. One opposes it, arguing that it will detract from the uniqueness of the Holocaust and allow these young people to compare it with other genocides and to perceive it in relative terms--considering it as but one of many such atrocities would greatly diminish the historical value of the Holocaust. The other school of thought finds the Israeli education system almost entirely focused-exaggeratedly and inexactly-on the Jews as victims, while intentionally or unintentionally ignoring the mass murders of other peoples throughout history, especially in the twentieth century.

In order to overcome the problematic nature of both of these approaches, there have been suggestions to emphasize the unique characteristics of the Holocaust by comparing it with other genocides, and by doing this to prompt the pupils to deepen their knowledge about the Holocaust, while keeping in mind the historical importance and significance of other genocides.

The supporters of this approach claim that such a comparative element can help Israeli pupils examine the Holocaust from a broader and more comprehensive perspective, one more universal in terms of both the Jewish experience and that of mankind as well.

***

One of the factors underlying the historical consciousness of a society is the question: What can a society know, and what does it want to know about the historical truth of its own past and that of other societies? It appears that the glaring absence in the collective Israeli (and sometimes Jewish) consciousness of what has happened to "others," about "their genocide," is a moral issue that Israelis and Jews should deal with. What happened to "us" and what happened to "others" do not contradict each other but, rather, mutually complement one another. Learning about both can create the desirable synthesis between the unique and the general, and thus add moral and spiritual significance and universal import to the memory of the Holocaust, and to thejust demand of the world to never forget it. We should not fear that such a synthesis may relativize the Holocaust or weaken its unique Jewish aspect: on the contrary-it will increase theuniversal awareness of the significance of the Holocaust.

The guiding principle in teaching Holocaust and Genocide, in our opinion, is that the value of human life is universal, and that this is true for each and every human being, no matter what his or her race, religion, or nation.

I can understand why the Jewish community would not want the Holocaust to become just another genocide. But the question is if the idea of "just another genocide" could be morally outgrown? Can the Armenian Genocide rise to the importance of the Holocaust? Can Mankind ever morally come to appreciate that all genocides are equal in their horror? Can we come to appreciate the horror or must they always be "just another genocide?" Must the necessary questions be considered "insulting" and disruptive" or can we ever admit the human condition that allows us to accept and perpetuate genocides and consider what can be done to elevate consciousness of our moral lack?

The questions are hard enough but when institutions like Beliefnet seek to suppress the necessary questions that lead to the appropriate discussions on the grounds that they are "insulting" and "disruptive", then it contributes to this offense against moral Man known as genocide denial. It does take courage to admit the hypocrisy natural for the human condition rather than spew platitudes and I applaud the ones with courage as in Watertown where men of principle were unafraid to take a stand. They are a courageous contrast to "The by-standers, the vast majority that remains on the sidelines and does nothing."

**Nick_A** · 10-17-2007, 11:09 PM

How low does it go? I asked a friend to join Beliefnet and invite a person claiming insult and disruption to discuss the Armenian question on this thread. He joined, wrote and got a reply that left him speechless and for Mike, that is something. I forward this reply for your consideration:

From: nieciedo
Received: Wed, Oct 17, 2007 - 10:43:13 PM
To: Mike369,
CC:
Subject: RE: discussion

Sobeit is a crackpot and obviously sufferings from a serious obsessive/compulsive disorder.

He had repeatedly violated Beliefnet's Rules of Conduct and was disciplined just the way that I had been disciplined when I too overstepped those bounds.

The issue of the Armenian genocide is a moot point. It already happened. It is on the floor of the United States Congress. The Union for Reform Judaism issued a resolution recognizing the genocide 10 years ago. It is only the actions of a few idiots who have made this an issue.

Sobeit, however, was unable to resist condemning the entire Jewish people as hypocrites because of the foolish actions of a few high-profile windbags like Abraham Foxman. His posts veered inevitably into insult and attack and were dealt with.

I would request that you never contact me again.

Thank you.

Do you see the danger in what institutions like Beliefnet invite? I'm the one saying that the Armenians need the support of the moral jews and introduce distinguished moral jews and their support of recognition to invite a show of support or a defense of denial.

Now all of a sudden this person is insulted because I condemn all Jewish people which is absurd and only means people aren't open to thinking. I'm the one stressing the division. Instead of discussing an important situation by coming here, these people live in their denial. Have you read any insult and attack from me? Yet it is this mentality that is defended by Beliefnet by suppressing the facts, catering to those claiming "insult" and disruption" and eliminate those that bring reason to this very important assertion that the Jews and Armenians must stand together in solidarity in recognizing and admitting genocide.

This is one of the problems I think we underestimate in discussing genocide. We believe people, except for the perpetrators, are concerned with the truth. Genocide is such a horror that it is easy to assume this. However, it has become shamefully obvious to me that self justification is more important. To accept the fact that we contribute to genocide denial in this way is too insulting and disruptive to take seriously

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana

If we deny genocides the reality of what they are is forgotten and must repeat. Santayana had the depth to realize it. Unfortunately they seem few and far between

**Nick_A** · 10-19-2007, 03:42 PM

The Turkish Penal Code Article 301, makes it a crime to insult "Turkishness," l don't have to remind you of those killed for insulting "Turkishness."

This is another aspect of the question of this thread which is the advisability to support the "insulted" and "disrupted"

I was made aware of this post on Beliefnet concerning me:

GeveretMozes
10/18/2007 10:13 PM 7 out of 8

B"H

Sobiet has problems here because he is a relentless anti-Semitic troll.

I am trying to inspire discussion on the situation in the Jewish community that is dividing the moral and political mind. I seek to get more support for H Res. 106 which apparently appears doomed for now. It would have been nice to get some people to talk to their congressmen supporting recognition of the Armenian Genocide. But efforts supporting genocide denial do not allow it.

Apparently, just the thought that there may be division in the Jewish community is seen as anti-Semitic. Reading the above threads and the one on Jewish Hypocrisy primarily consists of quoting articles by respected Jewish men. But to bring up the question is apparently insulting and disruptive to Jewishness.

I'm not perfect. If I can admit division in any group someone wants to put me in, I'll do it. How can it be anti-Semitic to describe a national debate.

But it is just this name calling that is catered to by Beliefnet because it is their regulars that do it. To appease these minds and their complaints of insult, management is willing to suppress information concerning attitudes towards recognition of the Armenian genocide. All the articles deleted were by respected Jewish men of principle The messenger bringing it to the attention of an online community is called an anti-Semeitic troll and supported by management as insulting and disruptive.

I'm not putting it on the same level of course but can you see the connection between insulting Turkishness and insulting this expression of Jewishness? Each is condemning in its own way. The condemnation is based on a misguided egotism rather than reality. Of course taken to the extreme, it is just these attitudes that make all abuse including the extreme of genocides justifiable.

We really must think hard when we support this mindset. Though it seems trivial, in reality it is only a micro version of a mindset that has justified the most horrid abominations.

This has been a worthwhile experience for me because it is the first time I've experienced prejudice and genocide denial. If nothing else it is a reminder of how Armenians and moral Jews aware of their history, must unite together against genocide denial in order to admit to ourselves what we are capable of. It is only through admitting what we are capable of that "Never Again" can become a reality. As long as we continue to deny, the more the next genocide is assured:

�First they came for the Communists, and I didn�t speak up, because I wasn�t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn�t speak up, because I wasn�t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn�t speak up, because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.�

Martin Niem�ller, German pastor and a Nazi regime dissident, 1946.�

Announcement

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!)

Beliefnet: Its Unfortunate Little Secret.

Beliefnet: Its Unfortunate Little Secret.

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment