Bush to Congress: Don't cross Turks on Armenians: The Swamp
The Swamp
Posted October 10, 2007 12:52 PM
The Swamp

by Frank James

Much of the world acknowledges the genocide of as many as 1.5 million Armenians by Ottoman Turks between 1915 and 1923 , a genocide that's often called the first in a century of genocides--the 20th century.

But it's taboo to talk about the genocide in Turkey where many Turks deny the mass murders ever happened.

And apparently, because of increasing pressure from Turkey, it’s now taboo as well for the U.S. Congress to pass a resolution calling on Bush Administration foreign policy to take account of the Armenian genocide.

President Bush came as close as a president comes to publicly begging Congress not to pass the resolution.

House Resolution 106, which is to be considered this afternoon by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, starts thusly:

Calling upon the President to ensure that the foreign policy of the United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide documented in the United States record relating to the Armenian Genocide, and for other purposes.

That language seems straightforward enough. But the Turkish government so fiercely opposes the resolution that U.S. officials have clearly been warned that the resolution's passage could jeopardize Turkish cooperation on Iraq.

That would be disastrous for U.S. troops in Iraq since much of the materiel and oil that keeps them going passes through Turkey, the U.S.'s longtime and NATO member.

So worried is the Bush Administration, that President Bush appended some remarks about his opposition to the resolution to comments he made this morning on the South Lawn on a completely different matter, improvements to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act:

Bush said:

On another issue before Congress, I urge members to oppose the Armenian genocide resolution now being considered by the House Foreign Affairs Committee. We all deeply regret the tragic suffering of the Armenian people that began in 1915. This resolution is not the right response to these historic mass killings, and its passage would do great harm to our relations with a key ally in NATO and in the global war on terror.

To drive home the message he sent Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates out to underscore the difficulties that would be created for U.S. efforts in Iraq if Turkey decides to stop cooperating with the U.S.

SEC. RICE: We have just come from a meeting with the president and from a meeting with our team in Iraq and in the field, and we just wanted to make a brief comment about the Armenian Genocide Resolution that is before the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee today. And we are all in agreement that the passage of this resolution would be very destabilizing to our efforts in the Middle East, very destabilizing to our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, because Turkey, as an important strategic ally, is very critical in supporting the efforts that we are making in these crucial areas.

I just want to note that General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker brought up the issue of this Armenian Genocide Resolution, as did Admiral Fallon, and ask that we do everything that we could to make certain that it does not pass.

I'm going to turn to Secretary Gates. But let me just say that this is not because the United States fails to recognize the terrible tragedy of 1915, the mass killings that took place there, that President Bush had spoken about this issue repeatedly throughout his presidency. We have encouraged the Turkish government to work with the Armenian government to put together a way to overcome and reconcile these horrible -- this horrible past and these terrible differences. We believe that there is some improvement in Turkish- Armenian relations.

So this is not to ignore what was a really terrible situation. And we recognize the feelings of those who want to express their concern and their disdain for what happened many years ago. But the passage of this resolution at this time would indeed be very problematic for everything that we are trying to do in the Middle East because we are very dependent on a good Turkish strategic ally to help with our efforts.

And maybe I could turn to Secretary Gates for a couple of comments.

SEC. GATES: Just a word or two. The reason that the commanders raised this issue as our heavy dependence on Turkey in terms of resupply in Iraq -- about 70 percent of all air cargo going into Iraq comes -- goes through Turkey; about a third of the fuel that they consume goes through Turkey or comes from Turkey. They believe clearly that access to airfields and to the roads and so on in Turkey would be very much put at risk if this resolution passes and the Turks react as strongly as we believe they will.

Just one other small fact is that, as you know, we're airlifting these MRAPs, these Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, right now into Iraq; 95 percent of those MRAPs going into Iraq right now are flying -- are being flown in through Turkey. And so our heavy dependence on the Turks for access is really the reason the commanders raised this and why we're so concerned about the resolution.

Since what's on the table in the House is a resolution that doesn't need a presidential signature, not a bill making law, the president can’t exercise a veto like he has recently on legislation he has found objectionable.

All he can do is jawbone Congress and raise the prospect of the U.S. military being punished if Turkey retaliates, which the administration clearly believes is likely judging by the urgency it attaches to this issue.

To many minds, the situation the U.S. finds itself in with Turkey is akin to being blackmailed.

"Is Turkey blackmailiing the U.S.?" a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Dana Perino at today's press briefing.

"Absolutely not," she said.

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo


Let me see. There was no genocide in Armenia, no genocide in Germany, no genocide in Africa, no genocide in the Soviet Union, there were WMD's in Iraq, the Jap's didn't rape and kill half of China, and the list goes on. Dang, the last 100 years were great weren't they? If the governments say so, it must be true.

I would like the Tribune to publish the name of any congressman who votes to pass this resolution. America certainly does not need them re-elected!

Another fruit of this disasterous war in Iraq. We are stretched so thin, and our position is so precarious that other nations can blackmail us into pretending that history did not happen.

The Bush Administration makes us look weaker every day.

The cradle of democracy??? How is Bush different from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ?? Both are bound by denial compain. Bush has no moral justification to deny something he publicly aknowledged many and many times. Shame on Turkey and shame on the Bush administration.

If the issue is historical accuracy, then the fact that the Ottoman archives are open to historians and that Turkey has been pushing for a historical commission should negate any need for politicians to play historian.

That the Armenian archives remain closed and they flatly reject the proposal for a historical commission suggests that the historical record is not of paramount importance here.

Why worry about accurate history when you reporters and politicians will simply repeat whatever claim you make without any critical analysis?

For the record - contrary to the claims of this article, I have taught in Turkey for two years and have never encountered any Turk that denies that massacres occured. They are, rightly, offended that none of this legislation being passed around the world and few of the international press even bother to mention the massacre of Ottoman Muslims during the Armenian uprising.

If the sponsoring politicians are, as they claim, merely seeking to take the moral high ground from which to address issues like Darfur and not just pandering to special interest groups, then I expect we will soon see a resolution explaining what happened to the entire Muslim population of present day Armenia, where Armenians were a minority?

Just because we don't like Bush doesn't mean that everything he says is wrong. Bush and Rice are right about this issue. Politicians do not write history. Let the historians debate whatever happened 100 years ago.

My Grandparents were killed at the hands of the Turks. Are people not allowed to defend themselves?
Please List all Politicians those that do not vote for this!
Since when do Countries dictate to the US on what laws we pass? Is the US controlled now by Turkey and Israel?
Armenian Archives? Philip, I am sure you know of the Black Book.

There has rarely if ever existed a muslim majority in any part of present-day armenia. Armenia, since the adoption of Christianity as its state religion, has been a Christian nation 301ad, and this is what made it a target to the pan-islamic, pan-turkish radicalism of ottoman Turkey. *much like the pan-islamic propaganda we hear today encroaching upon our nation* we cannot allow those who deny truth a moment to pollute minds and sway democracy. both president bush and congress know that the genocide occured; both will admit to it, but because of turkey's evermoreso islamic government will be eager to deny the truth to "protect our troops" this is utter B.S. Turkey didn't allow the US to use it as the precious ally it proports to being when our war with iraq started and now endangers the stability of iraq with trying to attack the kurds in the north pulling apart whatever gains we've made in that torn country i beg to question, whose side is turkey really on, for all the tip toeing around this important ally, why are they so bold to ignore our interests and why are we so okay with letting them get away with it... turkey is no ally to the US. it is no ally to NATO, it is no ally to EU it only serves its own interests as it did when the young turks commited genocide.. some things never change.

Is Turkey blackmailing the US.

Armenian resolution aside, of course they are. Why wouldn't they.

The Middle East sees the US
as a huge pot of trillions of dollars and a lot of military power. Does anybody think we don't have to pay for using
Turkey to get our arms and supplies into Iraq.

Of course, if Bush, Cheny, clueless Condi, Rumsfeld and the neocons hadn't gotten us into this trillion-dollar sectarian war in the first place, we could judge the Armenian resolution on its own merits. Now a yes vote could result in even more Americans dying as
Turkey takes steps to increase the chaos in Iraq--steps that are well within their power to take.
A yes vote on the resolution could also cost the American taxpayer additional trillions. No matter who the next President is. In the foreign policy arena, the leading Dem and Repub candidates are
virtually identical, warmongers all.

More inability of Frank James to show objective journalism:
"But it's taboo to talk about the genocide in Turkey where many Turks deny the mass murders ever happened.

And apparently, because of increasing pressure from Turkey, it’s now taboo as well for the U.S. Congress to pass a resolution calling on Bush Administration foreign policy to take account of the Armenian genocide."

Again, what is the point to this? It happened 90 to 100 years ago. The folks responsible for this horror are no longer alive.

I can see it now, though. While dismissing genocide under Hussein today, in 100 years the Demoncrats will finally recognize that Hussein killed more than 1 million of his own people and condemn Iraq -- in 100 years.
Clinton ignored the genocide in Rwanda in the 1990s only to say now that he was wrong to ignore it. But I will give Slick Willy credit that it only took the Democrat 10 years to wake up to the genocide rather than 100 years.
But really why do we need to condemn people or punish people for acts that occurred generations before they were around and are the not the ones who did the bad deeds?

I am a turkish american and frankly I am sick and tired of hearing the genocide claims.
I don't care if it passes or not. let it pass so they can wollow in their in mellow drama.

In response to Tavit - yes, people are allowed to defend themselves. However, the Armenian fight for indepence was not an act of self-defence. The deportation was a result of the uprising, not vice versa - an uprising that included the seizure of an entire city, Van. Sixty percent of the inhabitants were slaughtered, as is necessary when trying to carve out a homeland in regions where you represent a minority.

Yes, I have heard of the Blue Book (I presume you meant Blue Book and Black Book was a typo). The British freely acknowledge it was produced by their propaganda office during the war.

Foreign Office spokesman, Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale, said "the British Government had condemned the massacres at the time. But in the absence of unequivocal evidence that the Ottoman administration took a specific decision to eliminate the Armenians under their control at that time, British governments have not recognised those events as indications of genocide".

Despite this, Armenian campaigners continue to have the Blue Book reprinted. It is this sort of behaviour that will keep historians coming back to this issue - some very reputable ones have no hesitation in pointing out some of the holes.

Congress will be squandering US influence in the region for no good reason - the debate will not die because it is a case of Liar VS Liar and while each side can empirically demonstrate the other sides dishonest campaigning, it will rage on.

This one is for those who say leave it to the historians.

Apparently, politicians have no business messing with history. Well, if only our politicians had heeded the historical lessons of the Gulf War, and listened to people like Powell and Schwarzkopf, we'd never be in this mess in Iraq in the first place. Politicians must know and deal with history.

Second, others argue that we should leave it to the historians to resolve, and then they make the point that historians disagree as to whether it is a genocide. Hello? You don't see the contradication in those two statements. Some historians will always be bought off to spew their lies. Some historians still deny the Holocaust (David Irving is one). The fact is, the vast majority of historians acknowledge that this was a genocide (99% of them), so saying it's in dispute is really a lie.

I'm sorry but, whether you agree with the purpose of the resolution or not, it is a very important issue. Why is it important? Gee, why do you think it is important to talk about the Holocaust. 1.5 MILLION Armenians died. How can we condemn the leader of Iran for denying the Holocaust , claim we have a moral high ground, and then flat out refuse to acknowledge this genocide or the genocides that took place anywhere else for that matter. I don't know if it should be congress standing up and saying "this happened", but somebody should and our historians sure as hell aren't for the most part.

Omer Z Erden: you are an Idiot with a capital I!

I am another Turkish American. I am also a veteran. Just reminding the politicians, there is also Turkish Americans here living too. we have votes too...

Thank you for all of the posts regarding not just the history but personal experience regarding this dark piece of history. I was not aware of this event, so I'm glad this resolution has brought up the subject.

On the subject of genocide, let's not forget the dark history of the beginning of this country that resulted in the deaths of God-knows how many Native peoples. Congress should pass this resolution not on any moral high ground.

What can Turkey REALLY do? How much money does the US bring into Turkey every year (in aid and military spending)? Are they really going to walk away from that? I doubt it.

Four years ago we paid Turkey $20-$25 Billion in aid and loans to let us stage the war effort from Turkey ( http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/02/18/sprj.irq.erdogan/index.html ) . I think they are just looking for more $$$.

But hey, what’s a little revisionists’ history between allies. The Bush administration doesn’t take responsibility for what it did last week. They can hardly hold their allies to a higher standard.

If this works Bush should keep an eye on the mail for a letter from the Japanese. Nanking wasn’t so bad……

Actually, Rachel - when this resolution first appeared in 1985, 69 historians protested it on grounds of historical interference by politicians and on grounds of accuracy. This list included people like Lewis and Davison. If you wish to compare a scholar was is described by the Encyclopedia of History and Historians as the most distinguished in his field to a crackpot like Irving, you are free to do so.

The loudest protesters in France were also their historians. Veinstein, who the French government rates highly enough to have appointed to the College de France, also disputes the Armenian version of events. Pierre Nora claimed "The French parliament is being held captive by Armenian pressure groups."

This is not a historical issue - it is a nationalist one. No sooner will the ink be dry than the Armenians will start pushing for land restitution. At worst, they would have made life worse for Turkey by ruining its relationship with the US - and if the US should also suffer as a result of this, well, too bad. That seems to be the attitude.

Rachel, no one is denying what took place. It happened, it was wrong. But why do we need some House resolution today?

One thing this item does do is to let the Loony Left play their anti-Semite card, they love to play so much.

I am wondering when our legislators stop implenting policies imposed by certin interest groups and lobbies. It is election time and members need to pay a lot of attention to Armenian lobby but US has to pay for the bill.
Turkish government is very open to get together with Armenia and propose that both parties open up all historical documantation and leave the desicion to what happened during this unfortunate event to the historians and settle it this way, instead of taking advantage of ability to lobby in third party governments.

"One thing this item does do is to let the Loony Left play their anti-Semite card, they love to play so much."

Posted by: John D | October 10, 2007 3:11 PM

How on Earth does acknowledging the Armenian massacre play to anti-Semities, Dyslin? Or even better, why don't you scan this thread for anything remotely anti-Semitic, ok?

And let me remind you that it is YOU who is the biggest anti-Semite here. I'm a "self-loathing Jew" because I don't support President Bush's Iraq policy or wish to invade Iran?

You are an anti-Semite and a phenomenal jacka$$.

The Turks don't have to give up the tens of billions if the US Congress approves a resolution confirming a genocide.

They just have to get really, really angry. Bush/Cheney and Clueless Condi will be so terrified at even minimal disruptions to their massive war machine in Iraq that they will fork over more tens of billions to the Turks.

Pass or fail, this resolution's gonna be expensive.

But what to legislators care. They're all rich and getting richer from "campaign contributions."

My Grandparents were killed at the hands of the Armenians, like millions of other Turks during first world war. Looks like it is okay if Turks are killed and it is genocide if Armenians are killed. Don't forget that Armenians lived happily several hundered years under Ottoman Empire. If politicians are writing the history, I hope they are not be blind to see the other side of the story. Clarification of this is a job for Historians not for politicians.

The Armenians who keep their archives close and do not want any more investigation into this want the resolution passed...and the Turks who keep their Archives open and invite historians from both sides to investigate this claiming the Armenians partnered with the enemy and massacred Turks want the resolution not to pass. On the other hand, the Senators from California are siding with the large Armenian population and doing all they can to pass the resolution discounting any future consequences to satisfy a few at the expense of the whole US. I guess if there were a large Turkish minority, then, their Senators would have done the same. What a great system. The end result if the resolution passes Armenia will be even worse off (and it is really bad as I've been there), the Armenian population in California will stay in California instead of moving back to Armenia, more US casualties, and US will lose the only muslim country that supports it in the Middle East....nice. The judge and the jury all at once.

I am turkish, my famillycame to turkey from eastern europe in 1900's becouse of violance against turks and muslims in eastern europe. there are people who killed by armenian gangs in my family. Do u think only TURKS are wrong people in this region? go look at armenia to see what does human rights mean in armenia! Just search little! Dont blame me(25 year old) becouse of acts happen 100 year ago. We also suffered from mass killings by armenians, greeks... It was a stupid war, thats all!

Instead of trying to satisfy a minority Armenian population at the expense of the rest of the US population, why can't the US support the historical analysis Turkey proposed with people from both sides. If the Armenians are correct, then they have nothing to fear, and their initial accusations will be proven. If however, they are exaggerating, then the truth will surface. Apparently Turks are simply admitting the massacres but not to the same extent as what the Nazis did - they do not want the Genocide label. After all, Jews got killed because they were Jews, not because they sided with the enemy or attacked the German population. It really is comparing apples and oranges. If the Armenians want to help Armenia, they can relocate to Armenia with all their money, and not force the US into a position where we risk the lives of our people so that they can feel good about their history.

So-called Armenian genocide is an international lie! During the 1st world war, Armenian gangs together with other big states tried to commit genocide to Turks but They couldn't succeed, then they began to accuse us! We were only protecting our homeland. We didn't invade armenia, but 7 imperialist state tried to invade Anatolia.Armenians were provoked towards to us by them, and we drove them to other countries for their and our security.

Turkey offered opening offical historical archives regarding that era and creating a internatinal team of historians who can once an for all resolve this issue.
Why Armenians refuse this ? Do they expect people to beleive them because they say so. What about old Turkish people who tell us the stories of Armenian militia attacks to Turkish villages killing innocent people. Are they lying??. What about objective European historians supporting Turkish claims. Are they lying too??
Think about it, Ottoman Empire was about to collapse, Turks were fighting to save their country, at their weekest point, Armenians who have lived with Turks hundreds of years wanted to seize the opportunity , claim the land and created their militia attacking Turkish villages aiming forcing them out of the area using any means, including killings.

My personal idea is that was a tragedy, both sides commited crimes. It just makes me angry that Turkish side is being pushed to the corner depicted as murderers while Armenians do not accept any responsibilty on this mess.

It is deeply saddening to hear all of this commentary without one mention that this may be "history" to some of you who want to discredit Armenians' claims, but that it is "reality" for most Armenians. If the genocide really did not occur - someone please someone explain to me how today there exists such a huge and expansive armenian diaspora?? what happened to the millions of Armenians who lived in Ottoman Turkey for centuries? Why would they be gone today? Why would perfectly content people, who are not only villagers and farmers but bankers and attornies, have left numbering the hundreds of thousands. Mass exodus does not just happen because of "internal" problems. If that was the case, African Americans would have left N. America all together this past century. No, Armenians were exterminated... They were forcibly driven. Finally, if this resolution doesn't blame turks today but those who committed the acts then. I can understand why turks today may take the defensive on this issue because it makes their culture/people look bad... there are many proud nations who stand up today still proud after admitting their trespasses against humanity (the US, Germany, UK, etc etc) Those of you who are turks and reading this, I'm sure some of you died. I'm sure a few of my ancestors were able to kill yours- and that is inexcusable as well but history tells us that it was that administration who not only tried to remove armenians, but also greeks and other christians in the region to promote its pan-turkish agenda. now if those people took arms to defend themselves, then i'm sorry to state but they had every right to protect themselves and their property. As for the 40 days of musa dagh. MUSA DAGH is a real place - not just a book. My grandparents come from there, they did fight this genocide, they did survive. In the process, they may have killed some of yours and I am truly sorry for that. I am. My question is: Are you remotely sorry for my loss as a human being? Probably not, because you were taught that this is a lie, your government still tells you to not utter a word about it lest you be jailed, fined or murdered even. I can understand your pressures, but allow this to pass. I envision all of us to grow as a community and share our rich heritage with one another. There is too much anger and hate in this world to continue fueling this flame. Every utterance of denial is another fire lit in a young armenians heart. And contrary to what Talaat and his comrades planned, we exist today and we are your neighbors and we are strong. your ignorance makes us stronger. put your national ego aside and try to empathize, you will see its much easier to love and armenian than to hate one.

Obama Barrack recently said that preventing genocide was not a good enough reason to stay in Iraq. Jimmy Carter only a few days ago took great offense that anyone would label what was happening in Darfur as "genocide".

But somehow Congress thinks that taking a stand on a genocide from a hundred years ago is so important that it is willing to ride roughshod over our national interests to do it.

This is hands down the worst Congress the American people have ever elected.

"But somehow Congress thinks that taking a stand on a genocide from a hundred years ago is so important that it is willing to ride roughshod over our national interests to do it."

Moral Relativism?

Which is more important: truth and morality or playing politics with someone trying to blackmail you?

To some, unfortunately it is the latter. How dare, Turkey, a so called, "Ally", try to blackmail us. That isn't much of an ally in my opinion.

Also, if they are such a great ally, why were we prevented from opening a northern front when we invaded Iraq. (Although, I must say that I was opposed to the war from the beginning.) Let's not forget that Turkey wouldn't permit us to go thru their airspace at the time, peventing both men and supplies be sent.

Turkey is also a very good example of what everyone, in the U.S., is opposed to. Freedom of speech. Even if you try to discuss the Armenian Genocide you can be guilty of a Federal Turkish Law, be tried and imprisoned. And that's just for talking about it. I don't know how many Turkish citizens have be imprisoned for that and one journalist was assasinated because he wrote about it.


Perhaps this reminder of the past from the US Congress would be a good thing, in light of the current plans by Turkey to invade and punish the Kurds in N. Iraq?

It should be interesting to see how GWB frames a Turkish invasion of N. Iraq. (Kurdistan)

Whatever happened in the history is Turkey's and Armenian's problem not us?

Turks are helping us more than Armenian...

In Afghanistan:

Turkey offered the United States use of its airspace and air refueling for US aircraft deploying to the region. Turkey would later provide significant forces as part of ISAF.

Armenia: nothing

In Korean War:
Did Armenia help us during the Korean War? No...

But 721 Turks died, 2,111 wounded for us during the war..

What about Armenia:

Did any Armenian soldier died for us?

What they did for us..:


Please think about it...

Mr. David,
You should get your facts straight. There are Armenian soldiers in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm sure it can't be many since they don't have a large army. But they are there.

During the Korean War, unfortunately they were a captive nation within the Soviet Union. You can figure the rest out for yourself.

I love a good discussion, but please get the facts right.

First of all I'd like to say that I am Turkish and that i'd like to see Turkey and Armenia discuss this matter as freely as we are doing right now.

Somewhere among the comments was said morality and truth should be more important than playing politics for national benefits.
I am totally agreeing to this.

So it would be wrong not to call a genocide happened genocide but it would also be wrong and immoralic to call something genocide what didn't appear to be one.

I think here Armenians and supporters of their view of point would respond that in this case there really was a genocide.
On the other hand Turks and supporters of their view od point would say there was none.

So what now? Both sides using lobby actions to convince parliamentarians and politicians to get or not get laws or declarations through?

I always believed if someone beeing accused to commit a crime he is not guilty as long as the delict is proofed.

So therefore we would need a tribunal, an objective one of course.

I don't think that parliaments under the influence of lobbies fighting for their interests and threatening politicians not to vote for them is capable of beeing an really objective tribunal in this cause.
At all I believe as I said above earlier by playing politics we are on the wrong path.

Because what is happening right now is nothing but playing politics whether it is decided for the Armenians or the Turks.
In both cases it would be a `political` signal.

Therefore I appreciate the idea of getting Armenian, Turkish and objective researchers and historians together to form an international investigation using all of the Armenian and Turkish materials to come to a point which both would have to accept.

In fact only this would be claiming for morality and truth.

"Even if you try to discuss the Armenian Genocide you can be guilty of a Federal Turkish Law, be tried and imprisoned ... I don't know how many Turkish citizens have be imprisoned for that" - Alex Van Zantwyk

Aha. Turkey is not a federal state - it doesn't have any federal laws. Are you sure that there are scores of people on death row for talking? :) I will enlighten you on how many people are in jail for talking/writing about this issue: None. Until today nobody has been sent to jail (or was even convicted of anything) for talking/writing about the events. There have been many private complaints filed against some authors, but that's it. Even that's about to change very soon. (Make some research if you don't believe me)

There are many books in many languages on sale in Turkey that advocate both positions, from a variety of authors. Are you sure that you know Turkey? Maybe you should go there and get some first-hand experience. It is not Zimbabwe!

As for this resolution issue: An Armenian ex-minister said last year that foreign politicians were using these events to THEIR OWN POLITICAL ADVANTAGE, dishonoring the memory of such a tragedy. He was referring to the French politicians in that case, but the same applies here. It is not the job of parliaments to decide what happened a century ago. They should simply stick to making sure that free academic debate can take place today - that's it.

History is not in the domain of politicians.

There is a tremendous amount of documentation that verifies, depicts and shows the chronology of the planned Genocide and certainly this is not the place discuss each and every point.

I will leave this discussion with the following:

In 1919 nearly 400 "Committee for Union & Progress Party" officials, aka "The Young Turks" (this was the Ruling Party at the time), were arrested. Its leaders, Enver Pasha, Cemal Pasha, and Talaat Pasha, who had already fled Turkey, were tried by a Turkish military tribunal, found guilty of war crimes and sentenced to death.

The tribunal substantiates the key charge of premeditated mass murder organised by C.U.P.

It was after Mustafa Kemal created the new republic of Turkey that they decided to change their story and began denying that anything ever happened. Unfortunately they have tried to change history by eliminating and denying their history.
The mounds of information substantiating the Genocide of the Armenians by the Turks is unending. Including reports from all of the foreign diplomats present in Turkey at the time.

Mr. Tarim,
I use the term Federal in its broadest sense. You may change it to National, State, or any other term that describes a country's laws.

As you obviousely know I am refering to Turkey's law "Article 301" which states: "A person who, being a Turk, explicitly insults the Republic or Turkish Grand National Assembly, shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months to three years." Discussing the Armenian Genocide appears to fall into this category.

So much for "Freedom of Speech"

One of the most famous Turk's that were charge with this "dastardly crime" was Nobel Lauriete Ohan Parmuk. Another that I am aware of, that was either tried or charged, not sure which, is a woman author
and I'm afraid I can't remember her name, who wrote a book that included a story within the book about the Armenian Genocide. Then of course there was Hrant Dink, a jounalist, who was assasinated because of his stance on trying to get the Turkish Govt. and the Armenians to try to resolve their issuses.

Could you please give us an idea as to how many books are on sale in Turkey that discuss the Armenian Genocide. Would it be one, hundreds, thousands. I certainly don't expect specific numbers, just a broad general idea.

US threatens Turkey every other year on this. Turkey will retaliate even if it means hurting her own interests. When additional lives have been lost, I hope the US Congressman can explain to the US public why they decided to politicize a historical incident, and why they took the easy way out. They could have mediated an agreement where the archives are fully investigated without prejudice. Instead they yielded to the will of the few who share only their side of the events that took place in 1915. For those of you who believe Turkey is not an important ally in the Middle East....just wait another 5 years and see what can happen.

This is a difficult debate. Being 50% Armenian and one of the only non-fluent speaking Armenians in my family, I obviously believe that this as much as any other issue should be recorded in the history books. It is our duty as an advanced society to keep record of every major event in history. Maybe I believe this should be recorded moreso because of my own personal reason for interest. The problem is, this may not actually be the most tactful way to go about this. The truth of this history will pass on for hundreds of years at least, regardless of whether or not we officially record it. Perhaps after this excursion in Iraq is complete, the time to officially record this will be right. I must recognize President Bush for the difficult situation that he finds himself in. Morally, he must choose to either record the truth of the past as it actually happened, or he must keep silent the truth because it would be a more strategic course of action that we should expect from our Commander in Chief.

Im glad I don't have to make such difficult decisions. Even if I ever actually land a job as a Police Officer (I'v been trying for some time), I doubt I will be faced with such a dilemma.

First of all I have to say that I am in the US military and stationed in Turkey right now. This resolution could have a very negative impact on our relations with a great ally and severely impact our operations in Iraq and on the GWoT...Bush is right on this one. I'm not saying that Armenian Genocide did or didn't occur, but we have to look at what passing this resolution will do.

Oh please,
Do you honestly believe the left has no ulterior motive behind this,....just like they do regarding any peice of feel good legislation they come up with?

Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "o" in the field below: