Tolerance.ca
Director / Editor: Victor Teboul, Ph.D.
Looking inside ourselves and out at the world
Independent and neutral with regard to all political and religious orientations, Tolerance.ca® aims to promote awareness of the major democratic principles on which tolerance is based.

Re: “TV debate programme suspended because of references to Armenian genocide: YOU ARE BEING UNFAIR

Share this article

by Ergun KIRLIKOVALI

I watched the same program via satellite and thought Nisanyan was abusive, aggressive, and unsophisticated. While these may not be sufficient justification to ban a TV program, insulting and libelous language used by NIsanyan could get him into legal trouble in any country around the world.

Re:  https://www.tolerance.ca/ArticleExt.aspx?ID=89179

___________________

Re: “TV debate programme suspended because of references to Armenian genocide:,Romania - Defence strategy review sees press as threat to national security. 

I watched the same program via satellite and thought Nisanyan was abusive, aggressive, and unsophisticated. While these may not be sufficient justification to ban a TV program, insulting and libelous language used by NIsanyan could get him into legal trouble in any country around the world.

Case in point: The Turkish professor Halacoglu produced documents proving his assertions and offered them to Nisanyan who dismissed them with a brief look saying they were at once fake, inapplicable, and misinterpreted. And then he insulted the Turkish scholar in front of millions watching.

I am all for uncensored, free exchange of ideas, but not at the cost of defamation and libel. As long as your organization blindly and automatically supports an Armenian falsifier and a Turk-hater--just because the TV program featuring him was banned for one show for Nisanyan’s excesses but without addressing the slanderous behavior also—you lost your credibility with me.

You should stand for principles, not partisans, and show at least minimal effort to be fair.

Sincerely,

Ergun KIRLIKOVALI
Irvine, California, USA
 





Post your answer
Comment on this article!
The attitute of the Armenians towards the scholars who do not support their thesis
By zekiye on July 2,2010

Let us look at the other side of the coin and concentrate on the attitute of the Armenians towards the scholars who do not support their thesis:

The home of American Professor Stanford Shaw of the University of California-Los Angeles was firebombed in retaliation for his academic courage in disputing the Armenian genocide claim, in 1977 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/oct/16/armenian-crime-amnesia/

http://209.232.239.37/gtd1/ViewIncident.aspx?id=56624     

 

Sixty nine academicians who specialized in Turkish, Ottoman and Middle Eastern studies from 44 different American universities and colleges  published a declaration in The New York Times on May 19, 1986 and declared:

 …….No signatory of this statement wishes to minimize the scope of Armenian suffering. We are likewise cognizant that it cannot be viewed as separate from the suffering experienced by the Muslim inhabitants of the region. The weight of evidence so far uncovered points in the direction of serious inter-communal warfare (perpetrated by Muslim and Christian irregular forces), complicated by disease, famine, suffering and massacres in Anatolia and adjoining areas during the First World War. Indeed, throughout the years in question, the region was the scene of more or less continuous warfare, not unlike the tragedy which has gone on in Lebenon for the past decade. The resulting death toll among both Muslim and Christian communities of the region was immense. But much more remains to be discovered before historians will be able to sort out precisely responsibility between warring and innocent, and to identify the causes for the events which resulted in the death or removal of large numbers of the eastern Anatolian population, Christian and Muslim alike………… the history of the Ottoman-Armenians is much debated among scholars, many of whom do not agree with the historical assumptions embodied in the wording of H.J.Res.192. ….Such a resolution, based on historically questionable assumptions, can only damage the cause of honest historical enquiry, and damage the credibility of the American legistlative process.

The producers of the ‘historical documentary film Sarı Gelin (www.sarigelinbelgeseli.com) suggested to   interview some of these academicians. However they were rejected because these academicians and their families were threatened by the Armenians, via telephone calls and letters, in 1986 for signing this declaration.  Justin McCarthy’s family had to get police protection. Prof. McCarthy himself was threatened with losing his job if he continued his research. http://turkishweekly.net/comments.php/id2418/top/comments.php?id=594, http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/69histors-charny.htm, http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/intimidate.htm

The Armenians sued Bernard Lewis, the French historian famous for his Middle Eastern and Ottoman studies,  in France, in 1993 just because he wrote in Le Monde that 'the 1915 events were not ‘genocide’.

American judge Samuel Weems’s life was  threatened  by the Armenians since he published his book ‘A terrorist State: Armenia’.

 In Netherlands, Turkish origined party members who told that they did not agree with the Armenian thesis were discharged from the party, because of the pressure of the Armenian voters of the country.

Additionally, Turkish university students studying in the USA are under threat of Armenian students, just because they reject the Armenian claims. In some universities it reaches to such an extreme point that one young university student needs police escort.

'Oath of Asala' which is a branch of Asala declared that they would spare GAKAVYAN's life in case he abandoned this apology project and disclosed the names of the people who urged him to do so, according to the Armenian newspaper "Azg",http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalHaberDetay&ArticleID=921474&Date=14.02.2009&CategoryID=98. The petition of Dr. Armen Gavakian from the Macquarie University in Sydney, who is also co-chair of the Turkish-Armenian Dialogue Group would read  "I apologize to the Ottomans and Turks for murders committed in the name of the Armenian people and I empathize with the feelings and pain of the Ottomans and Turks." http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/10904739.asp

 

Recently, French Jack Lang who was one of the strongest supporters of 2001’s Armenian bill in French parliament, and was head of the then Parliamentary Foreign Relations Commission said he had voted against a controversial bill adopted by the French parliament making it a crime to deny recognition of 1915 incidents as “genocide”, because the action was abused for election interests. "The denial bill was passed with the aim of an election investment, not because they understood the pains of Armenians. Accordingly it is dangerous that history is made by politicians," he said. The Armenian diaspora in France directed fierce criticism at Lang over his recently published remarks. Soon afterwards, he declared that he has not changed its position and continues to fight for that worldwide genocide of the Armenian people is recognized, and especially in Turkey. http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2009/01/2729-armenian-tuggery-intimidation-in.html, http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2009/02/03/genocide-armenien-le-mea-culpa-de-jack-lang-enflamme-le-net_1150313_3224.html

 

And at present saying what happened in 1915 is not genocide could be life threatening in Republic of Armenia.  Imagine giving a conference with Turkish academicians there. And did you hear any Armenian who attempted to hold a conference advocating that Armenian genocide did not occur, in Armenia? Even Armenian historian Sarafian, the head of the London-based Gomidas Institute, said  "Freedom of expression for historians in Armenia is limited and the genocide issue has become a political tool and for historical investigations Armenia is a wrong address

. http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/10426989.asp?scr=1.

And it is a fact that even books written by Armenian leaders and historians which criticize the Armenian Dashnaks like the book of Katchaznouni, the first prime-minister of the Armenian state, Dashnagzoutiun Has Nothing to do Anymore, the book of K.S.Papazian ‘Patrionism Perverted’ are banned in Armenia.

In spite of all these facts, the Armenians and you the Western and biased journalists continuously attack the Turks, claiming that the Armenian thesis can  not be discussed in Turkey, since  freedom of speech is absent.

Could anybody tell me, if Armenian thesis were banned in Turkey, then how could the Armenians hold a conference completely about their own thesis on April 24, 2010 in Ankara? How could the Armenian historian Ara Sarafyan give a conference on the thesis of Armenian genocide in İstanbul and discuss them with the Turkish citizens? http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=102831

And if all the historians who do not support the Armenian thesis were people hired by the Turkish government, and if the Turkish government pays historians if and only if they support the Turkish thesis, as claimed by the Armanian diaspora, then how has Fatma Muge Gocek, a Turkish origined scholar  who supports the Armenian thesis been able to be a board member of the Institute of Turkish Studies financed by Turkish government in Georgetown University, Columbia (http://www.turkishstudies.org/about.html)? How could she give conferences supporting the Armenian views up till now? She is the second Turkish origined academician the Armenians approve after Taner Akçam http://www.armeniangenocide.com/showthread.php?t=2471http://www.eraren.org/index.php?Lisan=tr&Page=Makaleler&MakaleNo=3008  (Can you imagine Taner Akçam, who advocated the Armenian claims in Minnesota University up till now and was financed by Zorian Armenian Institute as confirmed by the university authorities, give conferences against the Armenian thesis?)

 And as a most important point, Turkish historians, Turkish prime minister and Turkish Assembly several times suggested Armenia to discuss these events together with historians from both sides and historians from other countries. Everybody  in Turkey knows very well that those who advocate the Armenian thesis most passionately are the Armenians themselves.  Could anybody tell me again if Turkey was a place where Armenian thesis were banned, then why did Turkish prime minister and Turkish Assembly  several times call on Armenia to discuss these events with whoever they choose?

No wisdom can overlook this hypocrisy of Western journalism.

The From German General Bronsart von Schellendorff’s testimony which refutes Armenian claims
By zubeyde on July 1,2010

2

The German General Bronsart von Schellendorff’ssecond observation:

‘ Talat was not an unbalanced man, a revengeful murderer but a statesman who was far-sighted. According to him, the Armenians were very useful (efficient) citizens during peace time, although they were agitated and raged being provoked by the Russian and the Russian Armenians. He hoped that they would be able to give life to fertile and profitable soil in Syria and Mezopotamia being away from the effect of Russians and Kurdish dispute.

‘He also foresaw the ‘so-called Christian hunt’ propaganda of the foreign press while defining the relocation of the Armenians. So he wanted to be far away from every kind of violence. He was right; what he got afraid occurred! Propaganda worked and foreign people were made believe in this stupudity! It should be thought that the so-called events took place within an army which was an ally of Christian states and employed many Christian soldiers and officers in it’.  

 ‘Now I want to talk about the immigration issue: In the Turkish Empire, the vilayets are nearly free from the center due to the empire’s large area and its inefficient substructure. For example:  The Ottoman governors have more authority than our presidents.  Depending on this, they advocated that they could evaluate the developments in their area better than the government. So, the orders of the Internal Affairs Ministry were not fullfilled as it should have been.

 ‘To transfer thousands of Armenians and additional thousands of Muslim immigrants to the settlement places, to nourish them, to find home for them were unusual and difficult tasks and exceeded the capacity of the few and unqualified officials. Just here Talat interfered with the situation using every kind of facility, in a devoted manner. The orders which were sent by him to the jandarme and the governors should still be present. Emergent help of the Army was being asked by telegrams sent to Ministry of War from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which I was informed, due to my charge. These calls were taken seriously and this duty was being implemented as much as the army could. The Army presented its own food, vehicles, homes, doctors and medical equipments which it itself was deficient in, just for the aim of help. Unfortunately, thousands of Muslim immigrant and immigrated Armenians died not being able to stand the difficulties of this walk.

‘Here, one asks if it was not possible not to give the decision of immigration, predicting such situations. It was already a well known fact that it was not possible to stop the Turkish immigrants because of their rightful fears of Armenian wildness and savageness. Additionally, it should be approved that the Armenians should have been sent away from the areas where they had uprised! Additionally the results of this should have been standed.  

‘….Talat fiercefully resisted to expelling all the Greek in the Mediterrenian voiced by the military wing. Because there, only they were working as ‘spies’.  They did not attempt dangerous uprisings as the Armenians did, although it sounded reasonable for them.

(Bronsart von Schellendorff, Talat Paşa için Şahitlik, Ermeni Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4 (Aralık 2001-Ocak-Şubat 2002), p.79,81).

 

The third important inspection of General Bronsart von Schellendorff: About misbehaviours against the Armenian convoys:

‘Now let me tell about the events which took place against the Armenian convoys. The Kurds made use of this opportunity  which perhaps they would never seize again, and they robbed the Armenians who had attempted wild and savage attacks against the Muslims before and therefore they hated and they killed them if necessary. The misery trip of the Armenians had to follow the way through many Kurdish provinces! Because there was no other way to  Mezopothamia.  

‘ The hearings about the jandarme who accompanied the Armenian community in companies (bölük) is different from each other.  Sometimes they defensed the Armenians against the Kurdish  guerrilla bravely. It is also said that they sometimes left them and ran away. Additionally it is many times claimed that they cooperated with the Kurds or they themselves robbed and killed the Armenians’.

‘…..However the senior military officials gave immediate and hard punishments as soon as they were informed about these outlaw behaviors. Let me tell that Vehip Paşa, the Commander of the East Army judged his two military officials in the court and had them executed by shooting, because of this reason.

‘Enver Paşa punished a Turkish general who was the governor of Halep, by expelling him and sentencing him to a long prison punishment’.

‘I think these examples will prove that the anti-Armenian incidents were not approved by the administrators. Talat can not be kept responsible for these events; these developments occurred 2000 kilometers away from him and as it was told before the jandarme was educated only by the French until the war burst.    Additionally,  it was war time and the customs had become wild. I want to remind you the wildness that the French committed against our prisoners and wounded soldiers’.  

[Bronsart von Schellendorff, Talat Paşa için Şahitlik, Ermeni Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4 (Aralık 2001-Ocak-Şubat 2002), p.81].

From German General Bronsart von Schellendorff 's testimony
By zubeyde on June 30,2010

1

The German General Bronsart von Schellendorff worked in Ottoman General Staff as Senior Chief Staffuntil 1917 . Here  are a few excerpts from his declarations about immigration and resettlement of the Armenians after the murder of Talat Paşa in Germany:

‘The published advertisements, provacative brochures, weapons, ammo and explosives etc in total were proof of the fact that the uprising was being prepared by a third side. It was so overt that Russia provoked, supported and finansed this uprising. The entrique against the high rank soldiers and officials in İstanbul was displayed just at that time. The Muslims who could be summoned to military service were already in the Turkish Army. So the Armenians did not face any difficulty to attempt a horrible massacre in a society which was not capable of defending himself. Because, they attacked not only from the Russian side, from the back of the Turkish Army in the East but they also exterminated the Muslim folk who lived in the region. As a wittness, I want to note that the dimensions of the wildness displayed by the Armenians,  was far worse than the so-called Armenian wildness for which the Turks were accused later. First, the Turkish Army interfered with the situation, in order to keep its relations beyond the front safe. But the Army had to admit to the Jandarme since it had to use its all power to overcome the Russian superiority and the uprising was spreading all over the empire [Bronsart von Schellendorff, Talat Paşa için Şahitlik, Ermeni Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4 (Aralık 2001-Ocak-Şubat 2002), p.78,79].

Turks cannot face the turth, therefore they have to accuse others to cover up the truth
By Zareh Sahakian on June 30,2010

 

There is a good reason why Reporters Without Borders are condemning the decision by the Turkish authorities to ban a program that dares to discuss the Armenian Genocide.

Click for complete article :  http://www.tolerance.ca/Article.aspx?ID=89350&L=en

Post a comment

Postings are subject to the terms and conditions of Tolerance.ca®.
Your name:
Email
Heading:
Message:
Follow us on ...
Facebook Twitter