Latest:

Sassounian: Why Would Armenians Go to Akhtamar, and Become Tools of Turkish Propaganda?

Ever since the genocide, after nearly a century of banning Armenian church services, the Turkish government has finally decided to allow a one-time celebration of Mass to be held at the 10th-century Holy Cross Church on Akhtamar Island.

Questions have been raised about the prudence of attending the Sept. 19 church services to which the Turkish government has invited Armenians from around the world, members of the international media, and foreign ambassadors and dignitaries. Those calling for a boycott indicate that the true aim of the Turkish authorities is to score propaganda points with the European Union and the United States, by feigning tolerance towards Christians and other minorities. In reality, successive Turkish governments have carried out a systematic policy of eliminating all visible signs of Armenian presence throughout Western Armenia (Eastern Turkey) for over nine decades, during which more than 2,000 Armenian churches and monasteries have been destroyed or converted into non-religious use. The Holy Cross Church itself was targeted for demolition some years ago, but was saved by the intervention of a local Turkish official.

Critics of those traveling to Akhtamar also object to the Turkish government’s classification of the historic church as a “museum,” and holding services only once a year. After many requests and complaints, Turkish officials have finally promised to place a cross on the church’s dome.

There is no reason for Armenians to be grateful to a country that, after confiscating and destroying thousands of churches, is now allowing a religious ceremony in a single church, which it classifies as a museum. This church and thousands of others should belong to the Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul, and services should be held as needed, without governmental permission or interference.

Last week, tempers flared in Armenia when the Holy See of Etchmiadzin announced its intention to send two clergymen to the Sept. 19 ceremonies. His Holiness Catholicos Karekin II usually consults with Armenian officials before taking decisions on matters involving foreign countries. Since he was absent from Armenia while this announcement was made and possibly unaware of the objections raised, His Holiness now has the opportunity to make a final determination regarding the sending of representatives of the Holy See to Akhtamar. As Armenians in Turkey are not permitted to freely express their views, church officials and lay leaders outside Turkey should take the initiative to condemn the Turkish exploitation of Armenian religious ceremonies.

The Foreign Ministry of Armenia announced that it has not received an official invitation from Ankara to send a delegation to the Holy Cross Church. It is hoped that if and when such an invitation is extended, the Armenian government would reject it. Yerevan handed the Turks a propaganda victory last year by signing the Armenia-Turkey protocols. Participating in the Akhtamar church services would be tantamount to presenting the Turks an undeserved additional reward.

There are indications, however, that this time around the Armenian government may not be as accommodating. Eduard Sharmazanov, spokesman of President Serge Sarkisian’s ruling Republican Party and Member of Parliament, harshly criticized the planned church services, calling it a “publicity stunt” and a “provocation” to mislead the international community.

In addition, a subcommittee of the Public Council, an advisory body formed by Sarkisian, issued a statement urging Armenians to boycott the Holy Cross church services. It called on all self-respecting Armenians to refrain from participating in “this cheap Turkish show.” Giro Manoyan, spokesman of the opposition Armenian Revolutionary Federation in Yerevan, also advocated boycotting the church services and criticized the Holy See of Etchmiadzin for planning to send two clerics to Akhtamar.

A clear indication of Turkish disinterest in preserving Armenian churches is the interrogation by the secret police of several thousand families who have offered to host Armenian visitors in the nearby city of Van on Sept. 19, due to a shortage of hotel rooms. Turkish officials are suspicious that host families may be forcefully Turkified or Kurdified remnants of Armenian Genocide victims. By this appalling action, reminiscent of Nazi Germany’s Gestapo tactics, the Turkish regime is showing its obsession to keep track of its citizens’ ethnic origin. In fact, after this racist investigation, a number of families have been officially banned from hosting Diaspora Armenians in Van.

Armenians who naively plan to attend religious ceremonies in “a museum” would inadvertently legitimize the confiscation of a historic Armenian Church and promote a political show staged by Turkish authorities.

It is perfectly understandable that Turkish leaders would want to create a positive image in order to facilitate their country’s entry into the European Union, and counter Armenian efforts for the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide. It is far less understandable, however, why Armenians would help advance the Turks’ anti-Armenian objectives.

737 Comments to “Sassounian: Why Would Armenians Go to Akhtamar, and Become Tools of Turkish Propaganda?”

  1. Katia K,
     
    Shad shnoragalyem.
     
    Ragnar,
     
    You can respond factually or otherwise as you wish to the few [of many] facts I and others have posted, perhaps starting with defending your claim about “the juridical sense” which I discussed a few days ago.
    I make no apology and I agree to no ground rules. I will deal with your claims factually and analytically, and I will not resist ridicule where you deserve it. You pose as a lofty academic when you are not one, and you occasionally drop an academic name to impress as if you are part of the club. You are instead a wretched fraud. And that’s before we look at your vicious anti-Armenianism.
     
    You can start showing good faith by dropping the Turkish stance of portraying the Genocide as merely something Diasporans assert.
     

  2. avatar ragnar naess // October 13, 2010 at 2:56 pm // Reply

    jda
    I dont have time for more posts of the type you have produced so far. Unless we agree on certain premises for the debate we will get nowhere. There will be no way to prove the other one wrong or substantialize assertions. A sensible start will be to agree on some tenets of historical method. At least as a start we must roughly specify some requirements of historical method. Do you agree on this?

  3. Apres JDA jan.. shat apres…

    Not sure if I did not click send or somehow my comment got lost but in there I said that I dont’ care what Ragnar said but what I think of him remains as is.. and i am not going to apologize for it…i say it how i see it and what i see i dont’ like.. at least not the fake Ragnar…

    Also Ragnar is very meticilous as he uses lines from other posts that everyone of us commented… it is a bit weird that he keeps a file on each of our comments and picks and chooses very short and specific words from an entire comment to use for his advantage.. but then again we already know how it works…

    Ragnar I still think you are a deniar of The Genocide so stop trying to convnice me otherwise.. i wish and i hope that what you represent is neutral and your goal is to normalize and make things better for Armenians when it comes to Turks but please.. who are you kidding?

    Apres Katia jan.. yes qo tsavt tanem… well said..

    Gayane

  4. Katia, thanks for the Balakian excerpt.  It is sad that with so much evidence which was known from the beginning, we have to face doubts and denials and demands for historical commissions to ‘find’ the truth.
     
     

  5. avatar ragnar naess // October 14, 2010 at 1:24 am // Reply

    All our discussions are there, Gayane, in the right column on the frontspiece of AW, under the heading ” commented”. And sice I am continuously being asked about my opinions and what I have said it is only natural that I go back to look at what has been said, isnt it? As I also have said many times I have learned a lot from it.
    To avoid any misunderstanding or more wild attempts to portray me as something I am not, like jda has repeatedly done so far but hopefully will abstain from now when he purports to deal with facts and analysis, I want to repeat that my point of departure has been – and is - my concern with human rights in Turkey. Turkey’s failure to go into the reality of the crimes of the ittihadists and the appalling consequences for Ottoman Armenians  is a very important part of Turkey’s problems. As Akcam says, Turkey can never be truly democratic unless Turks go into this dark period in an honest and comprehensive way. Yersterday I posted a letter with a commentary to an interview with Mehmet Fatih Öztarsu who is working on reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia and who was interviewed in an Armenical periodical “Sobesednik”. The interview is reprinted in a Turkish version in “Turkish Forum” on october 4 with the title 
    Ermeni medyasinda ’müslüman soykirim yapmaz’ röportaji,
     When asked about the Armenian Genocide by the Armenian interviewer, he gave one of the typical answers frm Turks who are very far for handling this in a satisfactory way. He used a lot of space to talk about the old friendship between Armenians and Turks, a strange way to answer an accusation about murder. Then he mentioned the allegations of Armenians collaborating with the Russians and the need to “remove them from the dangerous war zone”, as if it was some kind of humanitarian action. I wrote that this is totally inadequate as an answer, and in order to try to start a debate and hopefully have some impact I pointed 1) to the fact of Armenians being deported from all parts of Anatolia, nor only the war zones. I mentioned Eskisehir as an example, a city with a very small Armenian population, a population with no record of any rebellion or revolutionary actiuvity, 2) the admission of Talaat that those who committed atrocities were hardly tried and punished at all. What does this say about the intent of the government, I asked. I believe it is important that Turks are confronted by outsiders, and that it is done in the form of dialogue where they are challenged to relate to the facts and interpretations of the outside world.
    However, I am waiting for an answer from jda, to see if we can develop a meaningful exchange of arguments.

  6. I agree with Ragnar that it is important that Turks are challenged by non-Armenians as well (thank you), when they make distorted claims about the Genocide and promote the typical propaganda line of removing Armenians from a war zone.  That is the reason that AG recognition work is important.  Unfortunately, 95 years later, the message still has to get out there so that Turkey can’t just sweep it under the rug, twist the truth, and turn Ottoman Armenian history into a ‘footnote.’  Karekin has some great points about trying to connect in meaningful ways with everyday Turks to stimulate internal change, but the work of challenging the government position and creating external pressure is also needed.

  7. Thank you Ragnar for taking the steps to question a Turk. even though the arguments the Turk presented were,, i believe, the same arguments you presented here on our forums.. no? .

    However, with this, you are now portraying a different stand of it and tilted a bit more toward the Armenians….

    I am still not 100% convinced and I still believe you are an enigma…..

    However, can you provide us the link to this “turkish forum” that you commented on? did you write your comment in Turkish or English? I would like to read it myself if you dont’ mind.

  8. Ragnar,
    Take refuge wherever you wish: in the “crass anti Turkishness” of Armenian posters, in your nonexistent qualifications, in my poor manners insufficient to placate an Orientalist. You don’t need my agreement to answer my criticisms, no matter how long you delay, no matter how many phony objections you post.
    You said that you were warned about me. You were warned by a Turk poser who hates Armenians. Heed the warnings. As long as you post lies and diversions, I will come after you.
     
     

  9. jda,
     
    We’ve been engaged in a lengthy discussion with the chorus of RNs with their anti-Armenianism in “What Davutoghlu Fails to Understand.” Based on it I’d humbly advise you not to open up another debate that’d substantialize your assertions. I have serious doubts that the chorus of RNs may use sources, references, and quotations that you’d offer only to strengthen the denialist counterarguments of the Turks. Note the recently changed, more pro-Armenian, tone. Thought-provoking, isn’t it?

  10. avatar ragnar naess // October 14, 2010 at 1:34 pm // Reply

    gayane
    the link is
    http://www.turkishforum.com.tr/tr/content/2010/10/04/ermeni-medyasinda-%e2%80%98musluman-soykirim-yapmaz%e2%80%99-roportaji/
    you will find my comment below. I write in Turkish since this is the way to reach the most traditional Turks I believe. My Turkish is not perfect but it should be understandable. But I will also write in english when there are relevant articles in English
    The man I adress says very different things from what I have been saying, Gayane

  11. Msheci and Gayane are right that Ragnar swings back and forth between tilting toward Turks and then toward Armenians.  No wonder it is hard to know who we are talking to and what he is all about.  We have spent a lot of energy trying to sort it all out with him and what do we really know?
    jda, you are a wonderful defender of our cause.  Use your energy well.
     

  12. Ragnar.. you must know Turkish very well to be able to read all that in the article and then post your comment.  I am sure you don’t know Armenian right? Too bad.. Maybe you need to spend few years living in Armenia and study there like you did in Turkey..You did live in Turkey correct?

    I would like to see your comments about Anti-Armenianness from the Turks side and you condeming them as you do to the Armenians for being “Anti-Turkishness”… In our previous posts on different topics we asked you to direct us to such Turkish forums where you commented … do you have any examples of those?

    Msheci du chisht es.. ayo… arten erevuma te inch dzevi marta es mer xpnvatsa…dodosha..inch anun asem vor iran lav nkaragri… de arten gites…

    JDA.. qefs galisa qo gratsnerits… huysov em im gratsa haskanum ems..:)

    Gayane

  13. Dear jda,

    I am confident that you can fend for yourself just fine, but for the record, I want to second Msheci’s thoughts about indulging Ragnar’s need of debating an established historical fact. His intentions have become even more questionable in light of his comments on the Turkish sites. Although he argues a storm about our style of debating he has failed to articulate what exactly and specifically we are debating about. Out of respect, we first attempted to furnish him with reputable sources, quotes and citations, but we soon realized that he was not interested in the thousands of authentic incriminating testimonies and acclaimed work. To our dismay his comments mirrored the state funded aggressive denial and cover up allegations that Turkey is engaged in and is spending millions on. The millions have also bought unethical academics and historians such as Lowry willing to utilize academics to discredit the witnesses of the time, to call the Armenian experience a lie and the written testimonies and documents forgeries. This denial falls in line with the classic psyche of an abuser who having gotten away with years of unchecked abuse resorts to practiced tactics of cheating his way out of punishment by first saying that his victim is lying, then making her testimony questionable by discrediting her and claiming her documents to be forgeries, then saying she brought all this on to herself, and finally by enforcing amnesia with a silent treatment. There were many pointed questions and valuable citations that I addressed to Ragnar in a recent post and he has been giving me the silent treatment. Better yet, instead of answering my questions he insinuated that he is “not responding to certain individuals who are not being respectful”. Well that’s a cowardly stance. If you can’t answer questions do not resort to attacking the person making them. Face the facts, face the questions. By the way, respect is earned, and reducing a serious crime to an academic pass time and engaging the victim party in conversations questioning the veracity of their claim is not only indecent, it is cruel. I also noticed that when facing the danger of losing his audience Ragnar does a 360 and throws in comments he knows we want to hear in order to keep us in this ridiculous discussion.
    Turkey can pay millions to lure wannabe scholars to cover up and distort the Genocide, but it cannot hide the 1.5 million skeletons in its closet.
    This cruel denial not only is not allowing the relationship between the perpetrator of the crime and the victim to ease into a civilized relatioship by allowing both parties to have mental and spiritual closure, it points to the lack of conscience of the Turkish state.

  14. Katia jan,

    you are so right about the fact that “when facing the danger of losing his audience Ragnar does a 360 and throws in comments he knows we want to hear in order to keep us in this ridiculous discussion.” I noticed that, too.

  15. Of course he does… which is why i always question his motives… but he does not like it and he would not talk to me unless I say something he may find a bit favorable for him…i am on his black list..right Ragnar??

    It simply a ungoing motion of comments over comments that are sooo confusing that sometimes I had to look away..this goes to Karekin too….these two men truly give me motion sickness…cant figure them out…

    Gayane

  16. Gayane, sometimes you are just so funny!
     
     

  17. avatar ragnar naess // October 15, 2010 at 1:57 am // Reply

    I agree it is very funny. you are simply programmed som that you cannot realize that you are looking for enemies and if you dont find them, you invent them. I started collecting all my statements in the Davutoglu debate where I confirm 1)the catastrophy that befell the Armenians was by far much greater that the ones that befell other groups, 2)<Turkey is denying this, 3)Turkey should go into the question honestly, 4) Turkey should make repairs. So I never changed my basic attitude. But then of course msheci started pestering me on “WHAT CRIME”. And it appeared that we disagreed on one point. You faithfully steared into the areas where we disagreed, that is faithful to a philosophy of “nobody understands us! We are surrounded by enemies! Those who pretend they are friends are in reality Turkish agents!”.   

  18. Mersi Boyajian jan…:)  inch anem???.. try to keep it silly sometimes before i give myself a stroke cause of them two plus the other stooges who raise our blood pressure..

    Glad to have you on our team to keep things cool and under control…you have the patience and that is great…glad to have a balance in our group..:)

  19. Great to hear from you Gina!

    Gayane, you are hilarious… I love the way you lighten things up with your sense of humor…

    Boyajian… always eloquent and classy…

  20. Ragnar,
     
    You should use your cognitive wattage by addressing your argument to a more fitting target, Turkish nationalists. In Turkey, minority Christians for well over a century have been depicted by the state and its willing fascist followers as the agents of foreign powers.  This is known as Sevres syndrome. It is not an affliction Armenians have. We don’t view you as a Turkish agent. As far as your writings go, you do fall into line with many propagandistic points our enemies make. If the Turkish slipper fits, wear it.
    You are free to express your opinions, but they are poorly constructed and offered to promote you to a hostile audience, whose generosity and patience you have taxed. Maybe you can plague the Tamils, Cambodians or Darfurians on their websites.
     
     

  21.  
    Ragnar,
     
    I agree that you made the Armenian-slanted statements you mention above several times. These statements along with your provocative comment regarding what Armenians would have done to Muslims had they been in control in the villayets after the Treaty of Sevres; as well as your careless characterization of AW commentators in Today’s Zaman as ‘expressing crass anti-turkishness which is rarely challenged’; your general tendency to insert doubt about intent in the upper echelons of the CUP; all presented to a pro-Armenian diasporan website chat group, have created the image of a confused or confusing person with ambiguous motives.  Sorry.
     
    Sorry also if this has been unfair to you.  Sorry if you inadvertently stepped into a wasp nest because you were naive to the strong present day component of residual pain of the AG in Armenians.  Sorry if sometimes language translation problems were an issue.  Sorry that you are not aware that you have let yourself become biased by some of the clever denialists out there and some of the anti-Armenian propaganda promoted by Turkey. Sincerely.
     
    But mostly I am sorry that the Armenian nation still has to fight for the justice that is unquestionnably due her.

  22. avatar Kiazer Souze // October 15, 2010 at 1:50 pm // Reply

    Why have Armenians lowered ourselves to debating the Armenian Genocide with Turkish denialists? The only thing you have accomplished in this forum, is that you have given the efendis more circular arguments to throw at you for you to chase your tails on.
    Instead of debating, you should be putting pressure on ANCA to dig up the bones in Der Zhor so that we can get our genetic information back and see how they died. Were they burnt alive? Were they butchered? Were they shot (doubtful)? Were they starved to death? As of right now, we don’t have any information on our great grandparents. We should be thinking about a genetic database for all Armenians. With today’s computers, that shouldn’t be to hard to accomplish.
    You should also be putting pressure on Armenian Supermarkets to stop selling Turkish goods (Jon’s). You should be spending your time more productively instead of wasting it with these scum.

  23. avatar ragnar naess // October 15, 2010 at 5:34 pm // Reply

    kiazer Souze
    Well, Sassounian wants to target a denialist agency, the Turkish government’s web on historical matters. I only hope he will do it with arguments. The idea is good, but then you have to argue with a denialist about the Armenian Genocide.
    Boyajian
    I will not repeat our disagreements. Wish you luck!

  24. “…minority Christians for well over a century have been depicted by the state and its willing fascist followers as the agents of foreign powers (a little bit of historical truth alas!).  This is known as Sevres syndrome (more truth). It is not an affliction Armenians have.”

    (He speaks for all Armenians we suppose!)

    And then this gem, right next line:

    “As far as your writings go, you do fall into line with many propagandistic points our enemies make.”

    Nope.  No syndromes here!  His superior genes guarantee it! 

  25. I agree with KS. At the very minimum, ANCA and other Diasporan groups and groups from the Republic should have entered negotiations with the Syrian government to have a monument erected in Deyr Zor, a dessert where Turks burnt alive and starved to death hundreds of thousands of Armenians. Long overdue!

  26. avatar Kiazer Souze // October 16, 2010 at 7:38 pm // Reply

    Ragnar (if that is your name),
    What in the world did you try to say? I didn’t understand your point? Are you really a historian? Did you say it in gibberish?  You need to move on and accept the fact that your grandparents were rapists and murders. The same with you Murat.

  27. KZ,

    Ragnar is a Norwegian. He uses his real name.

  28. KS.. Unfortunately Ragnar is not a Turk…part of me wished he was cause then i would say he does not know..but he is from Norway and he knows very well what happened but he is taking and protecting the Turkish side of matters…

    Yes it is unfortunate..but that is the truth..

    Murat… all i can say is WOW.. you never cease to surprise me with your Anti-Armenian comments…

    G

  29. avatar ragnar naess // October 17, 2010 at 11:25 am // Reply

    Kiazer Souze
    I believe what I wrote was obvious, but I’ll try to clarify
    you wrote:
    Why have Armenians lowered ourselves to debating the Armenian Genocide with Turkish denialists?
    It seems you will never debate with what you call denialists. Now Sassounian wants to sue Turkey or accuse Turkey of lies in their official wesites regarding the events of 1915. To my mind this is a good idea. He may of course do it but if he doesnt ARGUE, also arguing back if the Turkish authorities argue,  it makes no sense to accuse them. I believe he must debate, as we understood the word. So with all due respect your comment doesnt make sense.

  30. avatar Kiazer Souze // October 17, 2010 at 1:36 pm // Reply

    The first thing I want to address is the naivete of some of the Armenians on this blog. Why in the world would you discuss or test the veracity of your grandparents memories with Turkish paid scum when 99.9999% of world genocide scholars (those that have credentials and well respected) have concluded that it was Genocide? Do you really think that Turkish paid scum are going to come around to a discussion with scholars? No, they would rather have discussions with ordinary people so they can plant their poisonous seeds of doubt (further completing the genocide). Interestingly, I have tried to post a lot stronger comments but, unfortunately, I have been censored so that armenian weekly can facilitate the completion of the Turkish government’s work in finalizing the Genocide.
    Don’t forget that Armenia and Turkey signed the protocols on condition that there would be no preconditions (Armenia would not demand that Turkey recognize the Genocide before signing and Turkey would not demand return of liberated Armenian territories to Azerbadeljanis). The Turks have reneged on their agreement and instead are attempting these kinds of discussions in order to finish up on the Genocide. Just think what they would do when you open a discussion on Kemal Ataturk and his dark and ugly past.
    I would say to you all, spend your valuable time and resources in digging up the bones of our ancestors, recognizing our cultural contributions in the United States and the rest of the world and giving the proverbial middle finger salute to those who want to poison our waters, lands, culture, language and our memories.

    On a side note, I will never ever post on Asbarez again as they censor comments. If my comments continue to be censored just for pointing out the truth, then Armenian Weekly will suffer the same fate.

  31. avatar Grish Begian // October 17, 2010 at 11:22 pm // Reply

    Dear Ragnar,

    I wonder 95 years after First Genocide of Century, Armenians around the globe has to debate with worthless Turkish paid historians, where their rotten pockets is full of Turkish delight!! I wonder sometimes if Rwandan’s nationals or Bosnian Muslims still arguing and debating about the facts of Genocide that happened to their own people, yet the number of dead were way lower than Armenians!!

  32. avatar ragnar naess // October 18, 2010 at 3:39 am // Reply

    Kiazer souze
    I know about the Armenian pain because of the unbeliewvable crime that was committed against them. I do not deny that there was a genocide as I have said innumerable times in these debates. I only affirm it with certain qualifications. Of course you may see me as an enemy because of these qualifications.
     Sassounian’s idea is good because it will show that Turkish scholars are way off the mark. They have no credibility. But if you scream at them that they are scum and say that 99.99 of all genocide scholars agree, people will not listen. You will only be heard by a small part of the world and probably only by a small part of the Armenians. If the world – that is the knowledgeable people – are to listen, you must present ARGUMENTS.  - I am sorry and I understand your pain, but I have simply presented my opinions as others here do  

  33. avatar ragnar naess // October 18, 2010 at 3:45 am // Reply

    grish begian
    I am sorry that you experience it in this way. See what I wrote to Kiazer Souze. Sassoiunian’s idea of accusing the official Turkish websites means that one has to ARGUE. You have to argue in order to expose the Turkish denialists to sensible people around the world. Honestly, in any dispute. will you reach the ones who are not yet convinced bny calling them rotten and accusing them of being on the Turkish payroll? Armenians have just lost in a court case because they accused Guenter Lewy of being on the Turkish payroll. I understand your pain and frustration, but are you sure you are on the right track?

  34. Ragnar,
     
    Assuming arguendo that you are naive rather than just another style of denialist, your remarks that we should argue with Nazis is ridiculous. The entire Turkish state not only denies Genocide, but it also villifies Armenians in the same way Nazis villified Jews. Please read Mr. Kirlikovali’s comments in these pages that Armenians are all frauds, in 1915 and today. He is the personification of the state – he is the President of ATAA, and he last February dined with Erdogan. Or how about Tan welcoming the dancing Genocide enthusiasts outside his embassy on April 24, one of whom carried a sign bragging about the rape and torture of Armenian women.
     
    Armenians are not required to argue with Turk Nazis. They are required to see the enemy clearly, and to protect themselves.  Would you have told Manouchian to argue with the Gestapo, or to kill his tormentors when he had the chance while fighting the Nazis? We don’t use violence, but neither do we parlay with a state and much of a nation that wants us dead.

  35. I don’t have to argue with a Turk about what I know first-hand from my miraculously-escaped grandfather and what a Turk knows from his distorted history book. We can argue till the cows come home and this is just another way of delaying and ultimately killing the justice for Armenians. Technically, how many decades a nation of 10 mln victimized Armenians can argue with a brainwashed nation of 73 mln unrepentant Turks? Or assuming we technically can, how can the Turkish murderer state admit guilt as a result of argument and conviction knowing that admission will inevitably lead to the need for apology and retributions? Germans could do it, but we’re dealing with Turks whose national self-consciousness is still evolving from nomadic origins. Evidence-based arguments have already been laid out by the reputable body of genocide scholars, historians, international lawyers, and parliamentarians. Turks presented their laughable counter-arguments that most of the scholars and increasing number or genocide-recognizing countries do not accept. What else is there to argue? Advanced by the community of concerned nations, the recognition process has entered its final stage: apology and reparations.

  36. avatar Kiazer Souze // October 18, 2010 at 9:12 pm // Reply

    I agree with mjm and jda. What I am saying is to deffer to the reputable genocide scholars and historians if any of the Turkish paid scum want to have so-called discussions. They can refer to Wikpedia on the Armenian Genocide. And no, no one can change or add anything on the topic of the Armenian Genocide on Wikpedia. One can also Google all of the news articles of the time that describe it as the “Armenian Holocaust” long before the Jewish Holocaust was recognized.
    I don’t know where this term “argue” came from. The Genocide cannot be argued, debated or questioned. It is a historical fact that can be researched through the Google newspaper articles of the that time.

  37. KS, I have to agree with you here.  The vast majority of the commentators on this site are not genocide scholars and would probably do better to let the experts handle the debates/arguments with the deniers.    But I still love reading all the passionate comments and personal stories from others on this site.

  38. avatar ragnar naess // October 19, 2010 at 1:15 pm // Reply

    Fair enough! If you do not want to argue with Turks, dont do it! Then I guess you disagree with Sassounian, and that is also fair enough. In my part of the world i see politicians arguing, not for years, but for decades, about the merits of  basic political questions and strategies. What is to be the role of the state versus private businesses in economy? What is to be the role of the state in social policy as opposed to private organizations and NGOs? To what extent is political power and representation to be centralized, rather than meted out to local representative bodies? We see politicians and others argue and argue about this, and it is their only means to secure followers. Political Arguing is the main vehicle of attracting support and building up political pressure, apart from military force. But you claim to have another strategy?

  39. Ragnar, you misunderstand me.  I am happy to argue with you; my opinion, based on my knowledge against your opinion based on your knowledge.  But, in the realm of ‘I think vs. you think’, I think we have both seen the limits of that discussion here.  Remember, you bowed out of that recently?
    What I was talking about above is different.  If the discussion involves the disputing of imaginative twists on truth from genocide deniers, which I have seen plenty of here, than I know the limits of my knowledge of specific resources and historical minutiae and gladly defer to those more expert in the field.
    As for opposing parties, whether political or private, arguing for issues and changes that they believe in, I agree there is value and sense in people talking as opposed to taking up arms against one another to force one sides will over the other.  If only Ottoman/CUP/Ittihadists had understood the art of discussion, honest negotiation, and honoring one’s commitments, than we wouldn’t be here arguing now, would we?

  40. On the other hand, Boyajian, we’ve exchanged 512 comments arguing mainly with the chorus of ragnars with their anti-Armenianism in “What Davutoghlu Fails to Understand.” Have you seen a different chorus of him when he re-surfaced in this discussion? And he’s not even a Turk, but a Turk-sympathizer and apologist who, as he asserts, has done research and fieldwork in Turkey and has read some accounts, predominantly denialist, though. Can you imagine how a brainwashed Turk would set blood hammering in our temples with his or her ignorance and obstinacy to acknowledge barbaric crimes of their grandparents? It is my strong conviction that along with occasional conferences or dog & pony shows that Turks would from time to time stage as PR stunts, as in Akhtamar, our strongest weapons: international recognition and legal actions must continue. I have no doubt in my mind that Turks started fidgeting because of these actions and not out of untypical for them feeling of remorse or regret for guilt.

  41. avatar Grish Begian // October 19, 2010 at 6:12 pm // Reply

    Dera Ragnar,
    and I wonder according to your own comments, if those honorable politicians, still debating about the root cause of First World War and Armenian Genocide, during their “coffee breaks”…
    The defense team of Guenter Lewy, was sooo rich and supply of money was soooo good, that nobody wanted to drag the outcome of “Genocide verdict” for another 95 years, but the DEFENSE TEAM sympathizers..

  42. Hi msheci!  Are you saying that after 512 exchanges in which we debated, argued and discussed with Ragnar, that it is ironic that he should now scold Armenians for not wanting to argue?
     
    I’d have to say that Ragnar has remained fairly consistent in his “I’m just not sure that intention has been ‘proven’ in the upper echelons of Ittihadists,” doubt-inducing agenda. Of course he is entitled to his views.  But I don’t have to agree with or like them.
    I welcome arguments/discussions/debates with those who are open to reviewing and reconsidering their views in light of new information but find it very frustrating when someone poses as if he were interested in “finding out” but really just wants to push his own agenda. I admit that I am very suspicious of those who advance the denialist propaganda, especially when they are not Turks themselves.   At least with Kirlikovali, Murat, Robert, and Ahmet the agenda is obvious, the motive is clear, and you never wonder what they really think.
     
    Also, I agree that Turks squirm in response to our actions in the geopolitical arena and that the pressure must not let up now.  We get closer to achieving the aim of recognition and reparation everyday.  It shouldn’t surprise us that Turkey pushes back against our pressure.  It is an ugly thing to have to admit that your grandparents became such zealous adherents of pan-turanism that they forgot morality and engaged in barbaric campaigns to eliminate Armenians and other Christians.
     
    Perhaps we Armenians are guilty of too zealously pursuing justice, but somehow I don’t think 1.5 million murdered souls would think so.

  43. HI Msheci.. always a pleasure reading your comments… we miss you…

    Boyajian jan.. as you said.. we have not seen any progress in Ragnar after our first long dicusssions and now this one..but i enjoy reading comments from you, mhm, jda, msheci, Grish and KS and how you stop Ragnar in his tracks…he is stuck in his own world and what frustates me the most is that he is not a Turk and yet he pushes an agenda sprinkled heavily with Turkish influence……he throws a candy or two to sweeten the deal when he knows he has been pushed in the corner but he has no where to turn to but bail…but even all that… he remains true to his agenda.. such a hypocrite…. hmmm i wonder what country his actions are similar to…. HA.. of course.. his beloved loghum eating country Turkey…I also question his motives and his dedication to his belief…that there is evidence of “intent” … why concentrate on this particular stupid factor when one is not part of something Turkish..What is in it for him? …but of course we know what is in it for him..

    G

  44. avatar ragnar naess // October 20, 2010 at 7:48 am // Reply

    boyajian
    my arguement was mainly against kiazer souze who seemed to applaud Sassounian’s idea of exposing lies on official turkish wesites but at the same time says that he will not discuss with denialists. It was not against you. And of course it is true that we have been listening to the arguments of each others now in dialogues with more than one thousand posts in sum. I believe this was good and I certainly learned a lot

  45. Boyajian,

    I agree that “Ragnar has remained fairly consistent in his “I’m just not sure that intention has been ‘proven’ in the upper echelons of Ittihadists,” doubt-inducing agenda.”

    I wonder why. One possible explanation is that this is the cornerstone argument in his research, that’s what he has already put in his research papers and that’s what he has already presented to audiences. It takes not only integrity but also courage for an academic to publicly revise a thesis that he/she has been defending for some time. Ragnar lacks either one or both of these characteristics. I would not be suprise to find out that he has changed his view privately but feels insecure to accept his mistake. Ragnar is not a prominent figure in the area and the issue of a “genocidal intent” is his bread and butter. He may be afraid of losing his credibility if he makes any revisions. So all he may be doing is trying to convince himself and us that his original hypothesis still has a strong foundation. Of course, some of his comments on this forum and Today’s Zaman indicate that he may have integrity problems, as well.     

  46. avatar ragnar naess // October 21, 2010 at 2:54 am // Reply

    Gina
    one of the reasons I after a long discussion find these discussions less interesting is that many of you – to my mind – portray a lack of will of going into arguments actually posed. You can find many of my arguments in the two long discussions I have participated in. About intent: I try to stick to the general MORAL  issue in the question of the Armenian genocide. It is much easier to argue – and convice the sceptics – about the immense moral responsibility of the ittihadists for deporting people without adequate means, and without punishing those who attacked the convoys. This alone should convince anybody and would to my mind be a better platform for the Armenian cause than the present platform which you believe in, and feel a loyalty to. Instead you take a detour which to my mind actually makes it more difficult to argue the Armenian cause (and you will have to argue, trust my words, the failure of the discussion after Sassounian’s recent article on attacking official Turkish websites is very revealing for the contradictions between the need to argue and the fear that by arguing you somehow admit doubt…and this you cannot afford even if it obviously is wrong, by arguing you bolster your case, but you may risk modifying cherished truths…..how frightening!!….). About intent in thev juridical sense – look at the reasons given by Antionio Cassese for why the case of Darfur is NOT genocide. Look at the juridical answer to the Bosnians when they in court held Milosevich responsible for genocide. From this I am very uncertain about how the AW would fare in court. The question of retroactivity is just the top of the iceberg. The ICTJ says “genocide” but fails to specify which perpetrators. To argue for genocidal intent in Reshid is much easier than in talaat. But foy you the genocidal intent ion the leading cadres, even long triome premeditastion, is holy truth, not to be questioned. And again I do not claim to be right. Maybe I am wrong. I claim the right to say that it is much more complicated to argue INTENT in leaders far from the scenes of the atrocities on the ground, than intent in some of the people on the ground, like Krstic in Srebrenica. On the other hand it is very easy to show the RESPONSIBILITY of leaders. So Milosevich was rightly found guilty in not hindering genocide. After the war japanese generals were executed on these grounds. Maybe I am worng but if the ones I argue with are not ready to refer to my actual arguments but insted take the easier course of wondering about my motives, my interest diminishes. It was interesting to see your mutual loyalties, the small remarks in Armenian to each other. This is a sign of loyalty, and I applaud it. But if it consistently takes the form of insulating oneself from relating to arguments, my interest is worn down. So again I want “politely to extricate myself” from the discussion, as Boyajian once said, but in the hope that you evcentually will see me as a person who really cares about the Armenian cause, but – maybe wrongly – has certain doubts about the received version.

  47. Ragnar,
    You are not a historian, and have no academic training or research as to the Genocides of Christian Armenian, Pontic, Assyrian and Greek subjects. You are not a lawyer, much less a human rights lawyer competent to discuss the Genocide Convention. Your academic background is in Latin.
    Yet you purport to lecture this audience about your peculiar reservations about whether Talaat would be convicted in Ragnar’s make believe court of law. You are correct that “in the juridical sense” of whether a particular defendant would be convicted is always uncertain until it happens.
    Historians deal with source materials and explanations for events. They are not historical Judge Judies, which it seems you aspire to be. They reach conclusions, not legal judgments. Why don’t you enroll in Donald Quataert or Niall Feguson or Donald Bloxham or Daniel Goldhagen or Taner Akcam’s courses to find out why they as first rank historians affirm the Genocide. Then ring up Geoffrey Robertson QC, and run your amateur legal beliefs by him.
    If you doubt Talaat’s guilt, its your problem, not ours. It means at best you are ignorant. But its a persistent and willing ignorance. You’re just another enemy of truth, quite a self-indulgent one at that.
     
    Yes, do go away.
     
     

  48. Some queries for Ragnar:
     
    1.  Ragnar, is it lack of ‘will’ or lack of ‘expertise’ that limits some of the depth of arguments, do you think?
     
    2.  Also, is it arrogance raising its head when you say you are ‘losing interest’ in this site?  You came here looking for what?  You want honest, open discussion with Armenians to understand how they think?  No problem.  You want to believe you are on an academic site with genocide scholars whose expertise you can challenge?  Not the best place for this.  Here is where you meet a mix of people representing many levels of understanding and education, varying diasporan backgrounds, and unique personal family stories of survival and loss.  The whole gamut.  What are you looking for?
     
    3.  You say you hope that we “evcentually will see me (you) as a person who really cares about the Armenian cause, but – maybe wrongly – has certain doubts about the received version.
    The truth is that I would feel very bad to find out that I have mistreated you because of suspicion or misunderstanding and not given fair ear to your assertion that you care about the Armenian cause.  But can you take some responsibility for having alienated yourself and raised suspicions with many here because of some crass remarks and turkophilic assertions you made?  Have you searched yourself for bias against Armenians based on your many years of close association with Turks.  No need to defend your friendship with Turks.  Just wondering if you perhaps came here with preconceived ideas which you now think differently about?
     
    4.  I happen to agree that the ‘moral’ angle is powerful and should be pursued fully.  I have always argued from this position.  But didn’t you once challenge me on this with your intent argument?  Which is it that you believe?
     
    5.  Which arguments are we insulating ourselves from?  Do we have to dignify every effort at denial and distortion?  Should we not be wary of those who appear to align themselves with such denial?  We are still licking our wounds from the first genocide, why should we not reject the ‘completion’ of this genocide delivered in the form of historical denial and doubt?
     

  49. Ragnar… and as we said in the past and saying it now.. you put yourself in this situation with the intent to throw the actual subject matter off balance and inject with your Turkishness loving mind and soul (again minus to few comments that actually made sense.. but i repeat.. you only had few and few out of thousands is not much)…however, when you find yourself pushed in the corner and you see there is no where to go (this is after many presented you with many facts and arguments) you bail..you did that in our last discussion…we are stating facts here…

    SO please stop justiying your actions by using us and i wish you can be up front and honest for once..clear the gray cloud over your head and let the sun shine.. and by letting the sun shine, you can bluntly tell us what your intentions are.. …..

    But I believe Gina covered it well.. I can totally see you defending your thesis and not wanting to back down.. apres Gina..good point…

    G

  50. Gina, your speculation may be right.  All I know is that we Armenians need and welcome friends who support our cause because they know it to be true and moral.  Those who complicate the issue by espousing theories that were borne out of denialist propaganda and historical revisionism should expect a hard ‘push back’ from us.  Are we ‘too sensitive’ to tolerate questions that challenge our view or that arise out of uninformed speculation?  Perhaps.  But it is a hyper-sensitivity that comes from the ongoing assault by the perpetrators who deny history and are essentially negating our right to our ancestral home.

1 12 13 14 15

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

*