Battle over Armenian genocide fought on U.S. soil
Image via Wikipedia
“60 Minutes” aired a segment Sunday night on the Armenian genocide of 1915 that is worth watching. It’s not a subject that gets a lot of media attention and thus, not one a lot of people know about.
Ottoman Turks deported and killed Christian Armenians, a minority in the predominately Muslim region. Moreover, historians argue that the genocide served as an example to Hitler. Turkey, however, has long said that what happened during World War I under the Ottoman Empire does not constitute genocide.
Today, Congress is debating whether the U.S. government should officially recognize the Armenian genocide. It’s something they’ve argued about before, and it’s an issue President Obama himself has taken up, but one that has been left unresolved because of a fear of damaging U.S./Turkey relations.
Here is a peek at the 60 minutes segment…
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
It about time the Armenian Genocide is getting coverage by the US media. Millions of Armenians lived in Eastern Anotolia until 1915-18. What happened to them if it were not a genocide? The Turkish government carried out a plan to exterminate the entire Armenian nation. Good Job 60 minutes for your coverage of the Armenian Genocide.
I
Armenian thesis of genocide depends on forgeries, falsified documents and lies. Here are a few of them:
1)The number of Armenians who were relocated: The number of the Armenians who were relocated was reported as 600-700 thousand by Bogos Nubar Pasha who attended to the talks of Sevres Treaty as a chief of Armenians;
however this number is given as 1.5 million, 2 and even 2.5 million by different by some Armenian sources. However, 1.5 million was the total number of Ottoman Armenians including those who live in the West Anatolia (therefore who were not relocated) according to Encyclopedia Britannica’s 1910 edition which was edited by an English editor. It is another striking point that the total number of Ottoman Armenians was increased to 2.5 million in 1953 edition of the same encyclopedia which was edited by an Armenian editor.
2) Aram Andonian’s book (The telegrams which were claimed to have been sent by Talat Pasha to order the massacre of the Armenians which were pressed in the book of Aram Andonian in 1920, in three languages): It was proven by both the Turkish and foreign historians that these telegrams were fake too.
After these telegrams were published in Daily Telegraph in England, in 1922, the English Foreign Ministry made a scrutiny and denounced that they were prepared by an Armenian association
3)Diary of American Ambassador Morgenthau published in 1918. Professor Heath Lowry, an American historian from Princeton University displayed that the events depicted in the book depended on lies or half true events, by comparing the information Ambassador Morgenthau sent to American Foreign Ministry, with those written in the diary, in his book entitled ‘The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story’, in 1990.
Moreover, after the Ottoman State was defeated in the 1st World War in 1918, the French and English invaders arrested 144 high level Ottoman veteran or civil officials including the ex-prime ministers, ex-deputies, governors and many newspapermen, and banished them to Malta Island, claiming that they were responsibles for the death of Armenians.
The English seized all the Ottoman Archives and also all other archives in other cities, like those in Urfa Governer House. No evidence could be found neither in the Ottoman and English Archives. The Americans, whom the English applied, failed to find any proof in American Archives and reports of American Orthodox church or missioners either. Nor could Damat Ferit Pasha, then the Ottoman Prime Minister who was in absolute collaboration with the English could find any evidence. And, they had to make all these 144 Ottomans free in 1921, since they could not find any proof to be able to verdict them.
Can you imagine a genocide on which no kind of proof can be found, even when the members of this criminal government have been taken prisoners and when all her archieves are under control of the invader accusers and given under directory of an Armenian?
II
If The Blue Book, the telegrams of Aram Andonian and the diary of Ambassador Morgenthau (which had already been published then) were reliable proofs, why did the English, French and Americans not use them ?
Additionally, during the trial in Berlin of the Armenian assassin Soghomon Tehlirian, who had murdered Talat Pasha in Berlin on March 15th, 1921, none of the Andonian documents was allowed to be entered into the court proceedings as evidence (Dashnakists’ book Justicier du Genocide, 1981, p.213).
4)The cover photograph of the book of Tessa Hoffmann: German Greek scholar Tessa Hoffmann printed the painting of Russian artist Vasili Vereshchagin entitled ‘The Apotheosis of the Franco-Prussia War of 1871, depicting a mass of skulls which was probably painted after 1878, as if it were the photograph of 1915 Armenian genocide, in the cover of his book and had to admit her forgery during the trial of Doğu Perinçek held in Switzerland in March 2007, in which she was listened as a wittness.
Interestingly, Tessa Hoffman is a scholar of genocide.
5) Atatürk’s photograph: The large poster with ‘FACE OF DENIAL-DOES NOT LIE’ related to a conference given by Dr Vahram Shemmasian, Ardashes Kassakhian and Dr Levon Marashlian, at UCLA on April 14, 2005, organized by Armenian Genocide Commemoration Committee of Alpha Epsilon Omega, (http://www.genocideevents.com/cities/losangeles.html.
The photo depicts the founder of the Turkish Republic, Ataturk, sitting on a chair outside a house with the corpse of a young girl with her innards exposed to the elements. Soon, the original of this photo was found by the Turks:
It was a photograph of Ataturk for his wife Latife Hanım as a souvenir, posing with some ‘cute dog puppies’ at his feet. Two photos were printed in the July 1, 2005 issue of Hurriyet (http://webarsiv.hurriyet.com.tr/2005/07/01/665930.asp), as ‘a forgery scandal’.
Then, what UCLA’s ethical committee did was to erase the handwritten note and doctor a photo of Armin Wengler in place of the puppies.
It is another outstanding point that no dissenting comments were ever heard. What UCLA’s ethical committee did was to erase the handwritten note and doctor a photo of Armin Wengler in place of the puppies.
III
6) Falcified allegations of speeches attributed to Atatürk: The first claim about Atatürk was that he was one of the witnesses, who supported Armenians in the “Court Martials” in İstanbul.
In this claim, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was confused with the Chairman of the “Court Martials”, Mustafa Kemal, whose nickname was Nemrud. During the trials in İstanbul, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was in Ankara as a leader of the national struggle.
James H. Tashjian, the Armenian editor of the Armenian periodic ‘The Armenian Review’ stated that Mustafa Kemal, then a Pasha, never appeared before such a tribunal, nor did he render such a statement
(The Armenian Weekly Boston, Mass, USA, March 20, 1982 and The Armenian Review Volume thirty five, Autumn 1982);
however James H. Tashjian was fired from his work later on.
The second claim was about the statement, which attributed to Atatürk, given to Los Angeles Examiner in 1926. However, it was proven that this claim, which was made by Armenians in various platforms, was false. There was no evidence that a Swiss journalist, who was called Emile Hilderband, came to Turkey. Moreover, it was not found a journalist named Hilderband in the documents of Swiss authorities.
The third claim about Atatürk was put forward in Yeni Binyıl newspaper on 8 October 2000. According to this claim in his speech in Turkish Grand National Assembly, on 24th of April 1920, Atatürk condemned the leaders of Jön Turks for their genocide policies. After the research of the speech records of Turkish Grand National Assembly in both open and secret sessions, it was proven that Mustafa Kemal did not make such speech.
One of the last claims about Atatürk was put forward by European Parliament, Foreign Affairs Committee’s report on Turkey on 22nd of November 2001. In the footnote of this report claimed that Mustafa Kemal gave a speech in Turkish Grand National Assembly on 10th of April 1921, in which he said Jön Turk regime followed genocide policy against Armenians in the First World War. After the research of the speech reports of Turkish Grand National Assembly, it was seen that Mustafa Kemal did not speak in Turkish Grand National Assembly in April 1920. He even did not attend any session of Assembly during April 1920.
IV
A quote attributed to Adolf Hitler in which he purportedly responded to a query about his planned annihilation of European Jewry, by quipping: ‘Who, after all, speaks today of the extermination of the Armenians?’, on August 22, 1939, a few days prior to his invasion of Poland (Obersalzberg speeches).
IX
Contrary to Richard Hovannisian and other Armenians, the Nuremberg transcripts through their preservation of U.S.-29 (798-PS), U.S.-30 (1014-PS), and the notes of Admiral Boehm (which are corroborated by the relevant passages from the diary of General Halder), in no way authenticate the infamous Hitler quote. On the contrary, by establishing the actual texts of Hitler’s Obersalzberg speeches they demonstrate that the statement is conspicuously absent from Hitler’s remarks. The assertion that Hitler made a reference to the Armenians in any context whatsoever is without foundation. (Heath W Lowry, The U.S. Congress and Adolf Hitler on the Armenians, Political Communication and Persuasion. Vol 3, No 2, 1985 Crane, Russak & Company Inc. http://www.tetedeturc.com/home/spip.php?article565
According to the Armenians the speech had been introduced as evidence to the Nuremberg Tribunal (L3 document, USA-28 document (www/cwporter/com/gl3.htm.) which was defined as ‘forgery’ (David Irving, ‘Nuremberg: The Last Battle’, 1996, p.100).
A certificate dated, 25 June 1948 signed by Paul A Joosten, General Secretary of the International Military Tribunal states that L3, USA-28 Photostat document submitted as evidence has been withdrawn, in accordance with Rule 10 of the Tribunal but held in the National Archives.
Mr Carlos Porter, who found these documents made the following important warning:
‘’Note: This translation attempts to retain the style and punctuation of the original, which is not correct in German: full space before colons and commas, no full space before following word. The document contains not one single sharp S (§ ) a standard letter in the German alphabet. C.Porter.
V
The most dramatic lie is about the outcome of the Armenians who were relocated. Because the majority of these Armenians returned to their homes.
Because, on December 18, 1918, a law which let the Armenians return to their homes and claim their properties was issued by the Ottoman State. Here are non-Ottoman evidences:
*In a report prepared by the Armenian Patriarchate in 1921, the Armenians who lived on the Ottoman territory in Anatolia, Middle East and those who returned to their previous locations were shown as 644 900. It was added that the Armenians who became Muslim, who were hidden and who did not encourage to return their homes were not included but they were assumed to be 20 000 (US ARCHIVES NARA, Mikrofilm No.T1192, Roll8; Department of State Papers….,860).
*In an article published in Der Neue Orient Magazine, it was reported that the number of Armenians in Ottoman Armenia was thought to be 470 000 (including those who lived in İzmir and İstanbul but excluding the Armenians who escaped to Caucasia). Additionally more than 30 000 Armenians lived in Adana and 40 000 in Aleppo (Der Neue Orient May 1919, p.178)
*The Armenian population in Cilicia (Çukurova) was reported as 218 000 in a document dated July 1920 (US ARCHIVES NARA, Mikrofilm No: T 1192R 2;860J.01/395. Appendix. From Acting High Commissioner Dulles to the Foreign Minister).
* In a memorandum presented by Bogos Nubar Pasha, chief of the Armenian delegation in Paris Conference which started in December 1918, it was announced that 150 000 Armenians were given financial support and taken to Cilicia from Syria, by the French government (US ARCHIVES NARA T1192. Roll 4.860J.01/431).
VI
And here are evidences about the Armenians who returned to their houses: These Armenians cooperated with the French and English armies and fought in these armies individually wearing their uniforms. Here are archive evidences:
*Boghos Nubar Pasha: ‘In 1919 and 1920, when the Kemalists attacked to the French soldiers, the Armenians made war for France in Maraş, Haçin, Pozantı and Sis. The French succeeded to take back Antep, by the help of the Armenians. Therefore, the Armenians are an ally of France’ (USARCHIVES NARA T1192. Roll 4.860J.01/431).
*A decision made by The American Committee for the Independence of Armenia which was presented to the Lausanne Conference on January 16, 1923: ‘As the minister Bellet declared, the Armenian legionelles (lejyonerler) joined to France after being promised that autonomy would be introduced to Cilicia and therefore they occupied Cilicia in 1918 (carrying the flag of France) . (US ARCHIVES NARA T1192. Roll 4. 860J.01/562).
*A list of the Armenians who fought in the French Army and died had been displayed under the title of ‘The Armenians who died for France’. In the list, the cities where these soldiers were born were also stated and nearly all of them were Ottoman Armenians (http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Palais/2230/ww2.html)
*’The Armenians informed the Allies that they would establish an army of 150 000 soldiers and attempt to establish an independent Armenia in the east (From Berlin November 6, 1917; vorzulegen z.G.K.:W.L.R.Nadolny. German Archives of the Foreign Ministry, Bd.48,R.14097, No.7169).
*’ Armenians massacred many Turks, in the district of Erzincan and surroundings where the Russian retreated’ (The telegram sent by Kühlmann, German ambassador of İstanbul to German Foreign Ministry. German Archives of the Foreign Ministry, Bd. 47, R.14096, No.7165, No.591)
VII
Now I want to ask the Armenian diaspora:
‘If all the scholars of the world, including the international scholars of genocide, support your thesis of genocide, then WHY HAVE YOU SPENT THIS EFFORT TO FALSIFY ALL THESE DOCUMENTS? WHY HAVE YOU NEEDED LIES? WHY ARE YOU AFRAID OF DOCUMENTS SO MUCH?
What is the reason of your strict resistance to present your thesisin historical commissions made up of historians from both sides and other countries?
What kind of a truth are you seeking? The one which exists or the one you want to imagine?
And I want to ask the world opinion:
Your sensitivity about the news condemning genocides, mass murders is appreciable. But while doing this, are you ready to be unbiased? Will you be able to discard all the prejudices the history has instilled you up till now? Will you be able to prefer scholar research rather than your prejudices?
Will you be able to acknowledge the great massacres inflicted on the Turks and Muslims by the Armenians before and after 1915 and condemn the Armenians who slaughtered the Turks and Muslims and buried them into large holes and even threw alive children into these holes in the Eastern Anatolia?(see diary of Russian Lieutenant Colonel Twerdo-Khlebof ‘I wittnessed and I Lived Through Erzurum, 1917-1918′; http://www.tsk.mil.tr/ermeni_sorunu/arsiv_belgeleriyle...).
(Ahmet Refik Altınay. İki Komite ve İki Kıtal. İstanbul, 1919;p.71-72; 321-23).
So, I am afraid, it is actually you the world opinion who faces a big examination!
1
Whoever tells about topics which obviously abolish their imaginary past, are labelled as ‘deniers’, as ‘agents of Turkish government’, or ‘people hired by the Turkish government’ or ‘disingenous scholars/authorities’ Turkish nationalists’, ‘Turkish racists’. And, here are the names of Armenians who comply with the these terms:
“Garo Pasdermichan (Pastirmaciyan), the Ottoman deputy of Erzurum and commander of all the Armenian officials and soldiers of the Ottoman Third Army which joined the Russian Army in 1914, was the main denier and Turkish racist. Because, he wrote in his book ‘Why Armenia Should Be Free’ (Boston, Dec.1918, Hairenik Publishing Company p. 16-17) that annual Congress of Armenian Party Dashnagzoutiun was held in Erzurum in August 1914, before the war broke, and Turkish emissaries offered Dashnaks an autonomous Armenia (made up of Russian Armenia and the three Turkish vilayets of Erzurum, Van and Bitlis) under the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire’, if they joined the Turkish side and stopped supporting the Russians. He also stated that the executive committee of the Dashnagzoutiun rejected the proposal! The other Armenian members were E.Aknouni, the representative from Van, A.Vramian, and the director of the Erzurum Armenian schools Rostom
The Armenian members of this parley were the well-known publicist E.Aknouni, the representative from Van, A.Vramian, and the director of the Armenian schools in the district of Erzurum, Mr Rostom.
The other Armenian members were E.Aknouni, the representative from Van, A.Vramian, and the director of the Erzurum Armenian schools Rostom
2
Another main denier was Boghos Noubar Pasha, the Armenian National Delegation President in The Paris Peace Conference 1919 who also stated that the Turks offered them autonomy in August 1914, much before the deportation, but they rejected this proposal and placed themselves without hesitation on the side of the Entente Powers from whom they expected liberation [Papers relating to the foreign relations of the United States The Paris Peace Conference 1919 (United States Government Printing Office, 1948, Vol IV, p 139-157)].
Armenian Boghos Noubar Pasha, who told that ‘150 000 Armenian volunteers in Russian Army were the only forces against Turks’ (Times of London , 1919 Jan 30 Link: http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2007/10/2013-150-000-armenian-volunteers-in.html) was obviously a denier and agent of Turkish government.
Hovannes Katchaznouni, the first prime-minister of the Armenian state founded in 1918 and the prime authority of the Dashnagzoutiun Party who wrote a book ‘Dashnagzoutiun Has Nothing to do Anymore’ was also another chief denier. Because, in his book which is banned in Armenia at present, he stated that
*it was a mistake to establish the volunteer units.
*They were unconditionally allied with Russia,
*They massacred the Moslem population,
*The Armenian terrorist acts were directed, at winning the Western public opinion.
3
*British occupation aroused hopes of the Dashnaks,
*They were provoked by imperial Sea to Sea land demand,
*They had not taken into consideration Turkey’s power,
* They should have used a peaceful language towards the Turks but they (Armenian Dashnaks) rejected the Turks who suggested to negotiate with them and they went on making war
(KS Papazian the writer of ‘Patriotism Perverted’ published in 1934, in Boston, also confirms this Turkish suggestion. Note that ‘Patrionism Perverted’ is banned in Armenia).
*The decision of the deportation of Armenians was a rightful measure taken by Turks.
*Turkey had acted with an instinct of self-defence.
*Their government was a Dashnak dictatorship.
*The fault was within the Dashnak Party. They should commit suicide. They had nothing to do.
Vratsyan, the last prime minister of Dashnaks who wrote in an article published in December 3 1920 issue of Araç, that they transformed Armenia to an arenna of endless wars with its neighbours for the Entente Powers (RGASPİ fond 80, list 4, file 83, sheet 136) was another chief denier and agent of Turkish government.
4
Armenian Messrs. Ahonian and Hadissian who were the spokesmen of the Armenian delegation of the New Armenian Republic and visited Sultan Mehmet VI, Vahdeddin in Istanbul on September 6, 1918 were also Turkish nationalists. See the telegram sent by Mr Ahorian to the Armenian Prime Minister Kachaznuni:
‘On September 6th, we presented our congratulations on his accession to the throne. We submitted our best wishes for the development of the Empire and its well-being and stated that the Armenian nation would never forget that it was the Ottoman Government which first conceived the idea of founding an independent Armenia, and recognized it, that the Armenian Government would do everything possible to protect friendly relations between the two countries and to strengthen them. His Majesty thanked and stated that he was very happy at seeing the envoys of independenbt and free Armenia, that he wished not only her development , but that she be strong in order to retain her independence. His Majesty is entirely convinced that friendly relations will always exist between the two neighboring countries, Turkey and Armenia, in order that both of them may develop. He concluded his remarks by stating that he was very hapy to see that Armenia had the strength to found an independent state which was able to send envoys to Istanbul, and repeated his best wishes for our country’. (Erich Feigl, A Myth of Terror, Edition Zeitgeschichte Freilassing, Salzburg, Austria p.97)
5
The Armenian Soviet historian A.A.Lalayan who stated that the Dashnaks displayed extreme courage to massacre Turkish women, children and ill and old people (Contrarevolyutsionnıy ‘Daşnaktsutyun’ İ İmperialisti-çeskaya Voyna 1914-1918 gg.’, Revolyutsionnıy Vostok, No.2-3, p.92, 1936) and who also quoted the following report of a Dashnag officer, Aslem Varaam written in 1920, in Beyazit-Varan was an Armenian denier and he was also hired by the Turkish government . The report of Aslem Varaam was
“I exterminated the Turkish population in Bashar-Gechar without making any exceptions. One some times feels the bullets shouldn’t be wasted. So, the most effective way against these dogs is to collect the people who have survived the clashes and dump them in deep holes and crush them under heavy rocks pressed from above, not to let them inhabit this world any longer. So I did accordingly. I collected all the women, men and children and extinguished their lives in the deep holes I dumped them into, crushing them with rocks.”
A.Lalayan, Revolutsionniy Vostok (Revolutionary East) No: 2-3, p.92 vd, Moscow, 1936; Istoricheskie Zapisky No 2, p.101, 1928
Armenian T. Haçikoğlyan who told that the Dashnaks eradicated thousands of Turks with their bloody hands (T. Haçikoglyan, 10 Let Armyanskoy Sttrelkovoy Divizii ,p4-6. İzdatelstvo Polit. Uprav. KKA, Tiflis, 1930) was also a denier and agent of Turkish government.
6
The Armenian poet Mikael Nalbandyan who wrote these lines in his poem ‘The March of People of Zeytun, was another denier and Turkish nationalist:
‘..Şad ısdrugner yeğan azad/Miyayin menk mnank hılu hıbadag/Zeytuntsiner mer zposank/E baderazm yev arşavank/ Sur, tur, kıntag yev hıratsan/ Mer khağalikın en havidyan….’
(A lot of slaves were set free/ Only we were left who were obedient/Amusements of us, people of Zeytun are/ War and raid/ Our inexhaustible toys are/ Sword, saber, bullet and gun…….) (Nor Knar, p99). Zeytun was one of the places where the Armenians rebelled and massacred the Turks and Muslims.
The Armenian journalists of Armenian newspapers published in İstanbul, like Hayrenik, were also deniers, since they praised the Ottoman government for letting the relocated Armenians return their previous locations in 1918 and allocated 2 million liras for their return. They were deniers since they also critized the Russians and other states for using the Armenians as their tools.
7
KS Papazian the writer of ‘Patriotism Perverted’ published in 1934, in Boston was also a denier. Because:
Papazian critized A. Khatisian and the then prime minister S.Vratzian for not publishing the text of Treaty of Gümrü which they signed on December 2, 1920 to put an end to the war between Turkey and the Armenian Republic on December 2, 1920, which coincided with the entrance of Bolsheviks in Armenia.
Papazian also stated that the Armenian prime minister Simon Vratzian applied to the Turkish government on March 18, 1921 and asked military help of the Turks against the Bolsheviks!
Even Gourgen Mıgırdıç Yanıkyan (age 78), the Armenian murderer of Los Angeles prime consul of Turkey Mehmet Baydar (age 49) and the co consul Bahadır Demir (age 30) in Santa Barbara, in 1973, was a real denier, Turkish nationalist and agent of Turkish government. Because he admitted in his trial on June 13, 1973, via his attorney Lindsay that he (Yanıkyan) had been a member of an army made up of 10 000 volunteers to fight against the Turks in Armenia, in the beginning of March 1915 and in chief of this army had been an Armenian general called Andranik.
8
This had been prepared as four parties and had started to battle with the Turks in Iğdır, under the leadership of Russian general Dron and had proceeded to Van, they had occupied Van and meanwhile had destroyed and had fired Turkish villages (Dışişleri Bakanlığı <Santa Barbara Suikasti. Telephone from Washington Embassy to the Turkish Foreign Ministry, 15.6.1973, No:220 and June 21, 1973. No:225)
Of course, even these few examples give great harm to the present Armenian thesis and lead people to question the Armenian’s innocence, their predominance in Ottoman population, and most importantly their genocide thesis. Of course, the fact that Turks offered the Dashnaks an autonomous Armenia (made up of Russian Armenia and the three Turkish vilayets of Erzurum, Van and Bitlis) under the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire’, if they joined the Turkish side and stopped supporting the Russians, the other fact that the executive committee of the Dashnagzoutiun rejected the proposal in August 1914 before the war broke and that they rejected all other Turkish calls of negotiations repeated during WWI too, are the major points that are not wanted by the Armenians to be known
9
Of course they fear a question of why the Turks did offer autonomy to Armenians if they decided to eradicate them.
And they fear the question of why and how the Armenian prime minister Simon Vratzian applied the Turkish government on March 18, 1921 and asked military help of the Turks against the Bolsheviks, in spite of the fact that the Turks committed a (so-called) genocide and murdered 1.5 million Armenians!
They also are very frightened of the question how the Ottoman Government eradicated 1,5 million of Armenians but in spite of this it was the Ottomans who first conceived the idea of founding an independent Armenia, and recognized it first. Moreover, it was the Ottoman Sultan who first wished not only the development of Armenian Republic, but that she be strong in order to retain her independence! Astonishingly, it was the Ottoman Sultan, who stated that friendly relations would always exist between the two countries
That is, the Armenian ancestors who created their history (the top representatitives of the Ottoman Armenians, Dashnags and prime ministers of Armenia), the Armenian historians and poets who wittnessed this period and even the Armenian murderers of Turkish diplomats are the main deniers!
10
So, it is not surprising that both the book of Hovannes Katchaznouni, the first prime-minister of the Armenian state, ‘Dashnagzoutiun Has Nothing to do Anymore’ and the book of K.S.Papazian ‘Patrionism Perverted’ are banned in Armenia. It is also a fact that all the copies of the book of Hovannes Katchaznouni, in all languages were collected from the libraries in Europe by Dashnags. The book is included in the catalogues but no copies can be found in the racks.
It is not surprising either that, the Armenians even claim that nobody called A.A. Lalayan, the Soviet-Armenian historian, ever lived!
Yes, they can ban the books of the makers of their history, they can buy politicians by their votes and urge them to accept historical resolutions and memorial laws in their parliaments, they can threaten the historians who do not support their thesis, they can sue them, they can even bomb their houses (http://209.232.239.37/gtd1/ViewIncident.aspx?id=56624), they can make the world opinion blind by their propaganda and may deceive some of them, but they can never ban scholar thought and silence all the historians of the world!
Note that Pierre Nora, president of the association ‘Liberty for history’ founded in 2005, has recently stated that the history should not be a slave to currency or written under the dictation of competing memoirs; in a free state, it does not belong to any political authority to define the historical truth and restrict freedom of the historian under threat of criminal sanctions. In a democracy, freedom for history is the freedom of all (http://www.lph-asso.fr//articles/46.html, . http://www.lph-asso.fr//tribunes/49.html)
Now do you understand why the Armenians are fiercefully against the esatablishment of historical commissions composed of historians from both countries and other countries?
Also do you understand why Prof Richard Hovannisian from California University, a prominent character of the Armenian diaspora, said that establishment of such commissions was very dangerous
(http://www.kophaber.com/news_detail.php?id=4726).
[...] ‘60 Minutes’ Airs Armenian Genocide Segment… [...]