Armenia: the end of the debate?

[Anoush]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

This B'itch has an agenda. Like Catharsis said above, unfortunately thanks to the signed protocols we will see more denialist low lives who are paid by our enemy or otherwise has an agenda to deny the Genocide. They wouldn't dare to do it to the Joos as the Joos would not stand for it. They have the whole world in their little palm.

[Catharsis]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

This B'itch has an agenda. Like Catharsis said above, unfortunately thanks to the signed protocols we will see more denialist low lives who are paid by our enemy or otherwise has an agenda to deny the Genocide. They wouldn't dare to do it to the Joos as the Joos would not stand for it. They have the whole world in their little palm.

Weakness in all its manifestations is always inviting.

[Diranakir]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

The following is my comment on Dyer's vicious opinion piece. I sent it to every
web based news site I could find it posted on. Since he is published in 175 different places he will be very difficult to counter. Clearly he is a gold mine for the Turkish denialist juggernaut (along with Stephen Kinzer):

Mr. Dyer has clearly ventured beyond the limits of his craft and abandoned rudimentary norms of objectivity with the cavalier and false assertions he makes in his piece on the Armenian Question (End of The Debate?). One can only ascribe this to an Olympian contempt for Armenian history. If this is so, he should have left the subject alone and concentrated on areas in which he is better qualified. It would certainly be in Mr. Dyer's interest to see the debate end with the publication of this atrocious opinion piece, before anyone had the chance to look into his assertions. He needs to be quoted here: " Armenians who made it alive to Syria, then also part of the Ottoman empire, were not sent to death camps. Indeed, they became the ancestors of today's huge Armenian diaspora." Indeed! Apparently Mr. Dyer has never heard of, or chooses to ignore, the infamous graveyard of almost all the Armenians driven out of Anatolia, Der Zor in SYRIA., where they perished in their hundreds of thousands from death marches, starvation and the thrashing of Ottoman swords and clubs. THEY, of course, did not have the distinction of being the ancestors of today's "huge" Armenian diaspora, as he puts it. And, of course, he would have us believe that all of this was mere happenstance unconnected with any policy! A very fine distinction
that only someone who had spent a lifetime studying, teaching and propagating history could make! Rubbish!

[AlphaPapa]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

Speaking of 'end of debate'

PanARMENIAN.Net/ The influential Swedish newspaper Metro refuses to publish any article which may have a reference to the Armenian Genocide , Ara Papyan , historian, diplomat and currently the head of the Modus Vivendi center told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter.

According to the expert, editor-in-chief of Per Gunne refuses to place any article in the newspaper about the Armenian Genocide, because he is "no longer sure if there was genocide or not."

“The same change in policy has been adopted by another Swedish daily, Svenska Dagbladet, which, through the well-known journalist Bitte Hammargren, now uses the media expression of “Armenian massacres”, as opposed to the legal term “genocide”.

“These are not mere words, but represent policy. Policies have changed immensely lately, and they have changed after that unfortunate pair of protocols normalization of the Armenia-Turkey relations was signed, “ Ara Papyan said.

Earlier, fact of the Armenian Genocide was questioned by the well-known Canadian Embassy magazine. Following the signing of the protocols Embassy magazine in its October issue placed an article in which, inter alia, states: ''The Armenians of Armenia have made a deal and set up a joint historical commission to determine what actually happened in 1915''.

In the publication the author comes to the conclusion that ''what happened to the Armenian population was not a genocide''.

[Diranakir]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

The whole thrust of the current stage of denialism is to prevent, at ANY cost, the labeling as genocide of the Armenian Genocide, even if that means reluctantly admitting there was massive slaughter or massacres of even hundreds of thousands of Armenians. One of the prime arguments employed for defeating the idea that there was a deliberate, state planned genocide of Armenians is to hold up the Shoah as, in effect, the only true genocide in modern history and then point out all the differences between it and what happened to the Armenians, as if there aren't differences between every genocide that arise from different locations, times, conditions. This accomplishes two things: it denies that the Armenians suffered genocide (one wonders what the denialists would say about Rwanda, Cambodia, East Timor, Darfur, etc, but they do not say. . . .) and it severs the oft cited link between the Armenian genocide and the Shoah, as embodied in Hitler's famous words. In addition, if one looks into what Mr. Dyer has written on the Armenian Genocide (though he does not call it that) one is struck by the generous, compassionate allowance he makes for the mental and emotional distress suffered by the perpetrators of the genocide and which he presents as making the "crime" ( his own term) perfectly understandable. He tells us they were running scared and didn't quite know what to do. They were in "panic" at imminent victories of the allies with a southern assault, all aided by Armenians (who were fighting for their life and had no state institutions they could fully rely on). Gripped with this "panic" they methodically went through every Armenian town, village and hamlet in Anatolia over a period of at least two years and coolly told everyone to get out and march for the deserts of Der Zor, all to prepare for an assault that never happened! Ridiculous! And does he show a shred of sympathy for the distress of these innocents torn from their homes to be tortured in death marches and sent to their death? He does not. All his sympathy is for those in Ottoman uniforms. This is the measure of the man, this high paid and very successful "historian".

[Armanen]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

I like your posts so far Diranakir. I hope you stick around!

[Diranakir]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

Thank you very much. This thread is a very big deal to me. I may not comment on a lot of other things, but I'm glad to have the place to post my
thoughts if I feel the need. I will be sticking around one way or the other.

Best, Diranakir

[Catharsis]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

Speaking of 'end of debate'

PanARMENIAN.Net/ The influential Swedish newspaper Metro refuses to publish any article which may have a reference to the Armenian Genocide , Ara Papyan , historian, diplomat and currently the head of the Modus Vivendi center told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter...

Here is the whole article by Ambassador Ara Papian:

The First Fruits of the Protocols

BY ARA PAPIAN

Apologists for the Armenia-Turkey protocols denied all the warnings that there would be negative effects on the Armenian Genocide recognition process, while I, alongwith many others, foresaw that negative consequences would manifest themselves even in those countries that have already recognized the Armenian Genocide. Unfortunately, that turned out to be the case.

Example:
Canada is one of those few countries where both the parliament (in 2002 and 2004), as well as the cabinet (in 2006) have recognized the Armenian Genocide. Consequently, since 2004, no self-respecting member of the media would ever publish or broadcast any article or program denying the Armenian Genocide. Moreover, when, in February of 2006, as a reaction to my mentioning the Armenian Genocide as part of a farewell interview to the influential Embassy magazine, the ambassadors of Turkey and Azerbaijan complained, the editor of that periodical responded, without any intervention on my part, that, “the fact of the genocide cannot be disputed, as it is not subject to any doubts”. Clear and precise.

And what do we have now? Only ten days after signing the protocols, the very same Embassy magazine (on the 21st of October, 2009) published an article by Gwynne Dyer, where it is said that, “the Armenians back home have made a deal … [which] create a joint historical commission to determine what actually happened in 1915”. The author’s concluding remarks of the article state that, “It was not a genocide…”. And this in Canada, which has recognised the Armenian Genocide. As people on the streets say, we have messed with Canada, and she will not forgive us. People don’t forgive those who mess around with them, even in international relations.

And now for yet another prediction. After the protocols get ratified (God forbid), it would mean legally doubting the Armenian Genocide (please save your arguments for the Canadian courts), upon which the Canadian courts will be filled with applications against the prior governmental declarations for having “insulted honour and dignity”, seeing as we have insulted the Turkish state – and, of course, Canadian citizens of Turkish descent – in a yet-to-be-proven crime (genocide), subject to discussion by some sub-commission.
Since the Canadian court system provides for monetary compensation with regards to moral damages, I would therefore like to call for an extra line in next year’s state budget of the Republic of Armenia, of a few hundred million dollars (nothing less), to pay for moral damages. Ultimately, we are the ones who are going to billed for these complaints.

[Diranakir]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

One fallacy implicit in Mr. Dyer's argument deserves further attention: that the Armenian Genocide, while a "crime", was a rational response to perceived dangers.
This is false. While it was carefully planned, it's effect was to impoverish and economically weaken Anatolia for the duration of the war. Bridges and other buildings and infrastructure were destroyed simply because they had been built by Armenian hands; the skilled working class -- carpenters, tool makers, farmers, bakers, etc. -- were sent away to their deaths while the Turkish population that remained didn't know where to get bread and had to go miles away in search of it, sometimes having to go the long way because they had just destroyed Armenian-built bridges. The genocide stopped the huge grain harvest that was waiting to be taken and the crops rotted in the field, leading to very short rations for the entire populace that remained. In almost every practical respect the genocide was a disaster for Turkey, not to mention its ultimate defeat in the war. The genocide was motivated by the irrational need to destroy Armenian and Christian life in Anatolia in the false belief that this would make the country a better place. It was sustained by holding out the possibility of short-term enrichment for miserable peasants and officials both great and small. Its roots go back to the "Hamidian' massacres where hatred of Armenians combined with the prospect of filthy lucre began to form the genocidal logic that came to fruition in 1915. Its goal was both irrational and abysmally immoral, like the Shoah.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Armenia: the end of the debate?

You make it sound as if he were random pimply faced kid with a blog. To the contrary, his resume looks quite impressive:

"GWYNNE DYER has worked as a freelance journalist, columnist, broadcaster and lecturer on international affairs for more than 20 years, but he was originally trained as an historian. Born in Newfoundland, he received degrees from Canadian, American and British universities, finishing with a Ph.D. in Military and Middle Eastern History from the University of London. He served in three navies and held academic appointments at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst and Oxford University before launching his twice-weekly column on international affairs, which is published by over 175 papers in some 45 countries."
http://www.gwynnedyer.com/

"Isn't actually employed as a journalist"???? Are you serious? He's been published in over 175 papers newspapers globally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwynne_Dyer

I'm sharpening my scissors.