Nazi Guilt Vs Anti Turkism

Nazi Guilt vs. Anti Turkism The history channel created a documentary discussing Nazi Germany, Hitler, and the story of the Germans who tried to assassinate Adolf Hitler. This documentary was created very recently probably in response to the new Tom Cruise movie Valkyrie directed by Bryan Singer. The idea is conscience versus country. The Nazis had created great crimes against humanity especially against the Jewish people. Armenians try to equate Ottomans and especially Turks to the Nazi Germans even though there is serious doubt, by world renowned historians who study Ottoman History such as Dr. Bernard Lewis, that an Armenian Genocide ever took place.

The Germans have since been vilified all over the world even if they had nothing to do with Nazi Germany. However, unlike the Jews and everyone who blame the Nazis for genocide, the Armenians blame the Turks for genocide rather than simply the Committee of Union and Progress.

Instead of saying "The CUP Ottoman Empire committed genocide," Armenians say "The genocide committed by Turkey" or "Turks". They justify this by saying, "well the Turks still deny it." The problem is, the Holocaust is a proven genocide, but the alleged Armenian Genocide has never been proven.

The reason some people believe it is proven, is because Armenians continue to distribute forgeries to journalists and historians around the world hoping to find someone that will support their cause for reparations. They find many, maybe because the person they find is Islamophobic, maybe has anti-Turkish tendencies already, or simply because of their ignorance of history.

While the Germans still carry the guilt of Nazi Germany, the Turks carry an artificial guilt that is created by Armenian propagandists.

The Armenians find the Armenian Genocide narrative extremely unifying for Armenians, keeping generations of Armenians working toward a common cause and keeping them organized and preventing assimilation of Armenians in Western societies. While the Turks are only beginning to learn about the many organizations of Armenians that have been laying the seeds of propaganda throughout the West. Some Armenians still hope that one day the Turks will accept their version of history, apologize, and pay reparations for losses they believe they received.

The truth is far from it. The delusion is created by their own refusal to come to terms with their loss in World War I as part of the Allies.

Accepting loss is much more difficult then assuming that they are the victims equal to the Jews.

The worst chapter of this story is that the real victims, the Muslim villagers throughout Anatolia who suffered millions of losses at the hands of the Allies and Armenian Revolutionary Federation are being blamed for genocide.

If you wonder why so many people believe in the Armenian Genocide, you should understand that the dead cannot speak, but the ones who survive can. It is because of this reason, that the Armenians have been able to spread their misinformation, because they lost the war, but they survived it in large significant numbers.

They claim they lost millions of lives but in reality those statistics come from migration not of death tolls.

Read More . . .

Who Should Apologize ? Turks or Armenians?

Who Should Apologize? Turks or Armenians? The question has been asked thousands of times, usually by foreigners who do not know the history of Ottoman-Armenian and Turkish-Armenian relations. They do not know who to point to and blame. They see the world in black and white, they are looking for an evil to blame. The Armenians want to blame the Turks for an Armenian Genocide. The Turks want to blame Armenians for a Turkish Genocide. Who's to blame?

Most Europeans and Americans grew up learning about the horrible history of the Holocaust. They saw documentaries, videos, and read books about the horrors of Nazi Germany. They see it and they wish they could stop it but know that it is in the past.

Hence, when they are older, they grow up looking for this evil, trying to find where evil is and pretend they can save the world from it.

When they meet an Armenian who tells them of 1915, describing it like the ARF (Armenian Revolutionary Federation) as a systematic genocide equal to the Holocaust, they become activists they decide they now think they know where evil is. Then the Armenian tells them that the Turks "still deny it to this day," and now they have a new "evil" to fight against, the Turks.

What they don't realize is that they are only hearing a distorted story created in 1915 after a gruesome and tragic WWI loss by the Armenians who's rebel groups sided with the Allies against the Ottomans, as a persuasive essay meant to convince Americans and Europeans to bring aid to the poor Christian Armenians.

Using their gruesome stories (some of them true, some of them distorted or exaggerated, and some of them with misidentified villains), for generations they have convinced churches, diplomats, and even nations to send millions of dollars in foreign aid to Armenians and the country of Armenia.

The problem is, they have not been able to accept their inevitable loss in World War I, some of them still think the war is not over and that the Lausanne Treaty of the 1920s will be voided and the outcome of World War I will be different!

Yes, many Armenian nationalists believe they can still win World War I, in the 2000s. Other Armenians believe they can at least seek revenge on Turkey for 1915 by painting the Turks as evil villains equal to the Nazis.

This hate campaign is nothing more than racism combined with Islamophobia, Anti-Turkism, and revenge. It is also a unifying cause for the Armenians, keeping their culture in tact, making Armenians around the world harder to assimilate into the countries they live in.

They believe this unification created by an ancient common foe, will keep them together.

Armenia, in shambles with poverty and political turmoil needs help, and they use the Armenians around the world to send aid to these countries on the pretext that the Armenians suffered genocide because of their neighbors the Turks.

When the reality of their situation was, they fought a war on the Allied side, and when the Allies abandoned them they suffered at the hands of local inhabitants seeking revenge for the Allied-endorsed slaughter.

Hundreds of thousands of Armenians, Turks, Kurds, and other Muslims died in this conflict. And all by fighting rebels, or each other, or the government. There was no systematic genocide. There were no death camps. There were no weapons of mass destruction. And as with all wars, many innocent people died. Many of them from diseases and starvation.

Even the Ottoman army had to go to war hungry and diseased, the Ottoman government was bankrupted but tried all it could to feed its Armenian and Turkish citizens even the ones that were relocated because of hostility or possible rebellion.

Later the leaders of the Ottoman Empire during that time were assassinated one by one by Armenian assassins seeking revenge for what they were led to believe was genocide. Communication being a problem at the time, rumors always spread fast, and when stories of Armenians being massacred spread, it didn't matter who the perpetrators were, historians conclude it was local inhabitants seeking revenge from Armenian rebels or money/food during a time of crisis, but eventually many of them were falsely led to believe it was murder by the government.

The relocation orders only enforced their beliefs in the rumors, even though it was a standard procedure by all European nations at the time to put down rebellions quickly during war-time.

Hence, today we ask who should apologize? The Turks who were fighting for their survival in World War I and whose government tried their best to keep a multi-ethnic society together and stop an Armenian rebellion at the same time? The Armenians who voluntarily rebelled and the Armenians who were forced to rebel by the rebels (they killed their own people and church leaders who opposed rebellion)? What about the Allied powers whose diplomats and leaders encouraged Armenian rebellions while at the same time demanding more rights for Armenians from the Ottoman leaders?

The reality was this was a war. Massacres were common (on all sides). Disease was common. Food shortages rampant. Disease abundant. Survival of the fittest was the only thing that mattered during these times, if you were alone you were robbed or killed for the few pieces of clothes on your back. It was a troubling tragic time, and it all could have been avoided if someone hadn't killed the Archduke.

The fact is, no one needs to apologize, they simply need to move on. Sure you can blame the British for encouraging Arab and Armenian rebellions, you can blame the Russians for killing the Jews, you can blame the Armenians for killing the Turks and Kurds, and you can blame the Kurds and Turks for killing the Armenians, you can blame the Austrians for starting wars, you can blame the Serbs for assassinating Austrians.

The Europeans and Americans understood this blame game, hence why they let it go and stopped thinking about it.

Though when they did seek revenge and punishment, the Versailles Treaty, well that just created World War II! Hence, before you start World War III, stop blaming each other for the past and move on. Before you cry out "genocide", understand that the Holocaust was a very unique case and that no two wars are the same and genocide is a blanket term that can be applied to any war where innocent people died (which is every war)!

Read More . . .

Why Do The Turks Always Refuse To Admit The Armenian Genocide?

Armenian Terrorism = ASALA This is a question for a world renowned historian to answer, this very question was asked by Le Monde to Dr. Bernard Lewis an Ottoman and Islamic Historian, a New York Times Best Seller Author:

Ottoman and Islamic Historian, NYT Best Seller Bernard Lewis wrote:

You mean, the Armenian version of the history? There was an Armenian problem for the Turks created by the advance of the Russians, and also there was a population with an anti-Turkish sentiment in the Ottoman Empire who sought independence, and they overtly sympathized with the Russians advancing from the Caucasus. Also, there were Armenian bands, the Armenians bragged about their heroic exploits . . in resistance, and the Turks had trouble to maintain order under the prevailing war conditions. For the Turks it was necessary to take the punitive and preventive measure against a hostile population in a region threatened by foreign invasion. For the Armenians it was liberating their land. However, both parties agree that the repression was geographically limited; for example, those measures did not affect the Armenians who lived in the other parts of the Ottoman Empire.

No one has any doubt that terrible events took place; the Armenians, as well as the Turks suffered and perished in equal measure. Yet, no one will be able to tell what the circumstances were like, and how many people died. Consider, for instance, the case of Lebanon [Beirut] that took place recently and in full view of the entire world. During their [the Armenians] relocation to Syria [an Ottoman province at that time] hundred thousands of Armenians died on account of famine and epidemics. However, when you brought up the question of "genocide", you imply that there was a deliberate policy of extermination, to annihilate systematically the Armenian nation. This is very doubtful. The Turkish documents prove an action of relocation, not extermination.

Read More . . .

Why PBS Never Air Pro-Turkish Documentaries To Be Fair?

it is about PBS Airs a Documentary Promoting Armenian Genocide "A Family Erased"

"A Family Erased" is a documentary by Armenian director George Kachadorian, depicts the journey his father and two sisters take to Eastern Turkey to find the lost homes their family had migrated from in early 1900s. The documentary has the theme of the Armenian Genocide acknowledging it and promoting it's awareness through this personal anecdote.

It is true that during 1915 and before many Armenians had migrated from Turkey, some to Erivan province where the Armenian Revolutionary Federation was powerful and recruiting soldiers for their rally against the Central Powers as they awaited aid from the Allied powers.

The story of 1915 is a fascinating one, because it is about a people who were hijacked much like the extremists hijacking Islam today; the Armenian people were hijacked by the various rebel groups, much like gangs in a city and those who opposed these gangs were murdered or tortured. The Armenian church was taken over as teaching centers for revolution rather than religion as atheist/agnostic Armenian Revolutionary Federation members began to smuggle thousands of weapons across from the Iranian and Russian borders to prepare for rebellion against the Ottoman Empire.

The rebellion did not begin because of World War I, the rebellion had begun back in the 1890s when European powers began to request that the Ottoman Empire grant more rights to the Armenian people living in the Ottoman Empire. Though the Armenian people lived well, some of them even becoming governors of Ottoman provinces, they had a few less rights because the Ottoman Empire was an Islamic Empire but tolerated all Christian minorities.

The fighting in Eastern Anatolia as well had been there since the dawn of time, even before the Ottomans as Kurdish, Armenian, Byzantine, and later Turkish forces often clashed in the vast open mountains of Eastern Anatolia.

When the rebellion got completely out of control, causing serious damage to the Ottoman war effort in World War I, the Ottoman leadership in 1915, a few months after the rebellion in Van city (where the Armenians captured an Ottoman city for the Allied Russians), decided that it was time to take emergency action to cease the rebellion. They decided to relocate Armenians only in Eastern Anatolia of suspected rebellion hotspots to the Syrian Ottoman territory. Nonetheless, the forced migration took a death toll on the Armenian population, as money was scarce in the Ottoman Empire, food shortages, the spread of violent diseases -- so much so that the Ottoman army itself went into battle starving and diseased.

Though many Armenians died, some of them leaving behind their homes and property, there was a very high survival rate. The reason Armenians claim genocide today is because once they reached Syria, many of them took Allied warships to France, Russia, the United States, and Britain. Some crossed the border to Iran and Russia disappearing from Eastern Anatolia.

And since the Turkish archives were closed up until 1990s, scholars merely assumed that the Ottoman Empire had exterminated the Armenian people. However now, these same scholars having the ability to research the Ottoman Archives and being able to visit mass graves of Turkish and Armenian villages, have now decided to not accept the Armenian Genocide thesis as it once stood.

Many world renowned scholars, such as Dr. Bernard Lewis (who once believed in the Armenian Genocide but now does not) now realize that the Ottoman Empire did everything in its power to make sure the innocent Armenians survived, they simply wanted to disrupt the ARF operations that took place within the civilian population (much like terrorist cells) in a quick fashion. Though it cost many Armenian lives, it also cost many Turkish lives as well, and the rebellion did indeed weaken. The Western Turkish-Armenians were never even touched, so how could it have been a genocide?

If the Turks just wanted Armenian money, why didn't they just take the money from the Armenians in Western Turkey who were wealthier?

If there was a genocide, why can't they find any mass Armenian graves in Syria?

Is it just possible that perhaps the Armenians that died in small numbers were because of Kurdish bandits and raiders robbing vulnerable travelers being migrated to Syria?

Is it possible that the Ottoman Empire simply wanted to stop a rebellion in war-time rather than a diabolical plan to kill all Armenians?

PBS has decided to air this documentary, but isn't PBS suppose to be fair, why is it that they never air pro-Turkish documentaries to be fair? Isn't censorship of one side of the story a way of propaganda? Write a letter to PBS if you believe it isn't fair.

We only get to the truth through debate and open uncensored discussion, not through documentaries alone.

Read More . . .

How Does The Armenian Hypocrisy Work? & Cumhuriyet Bayram with the Diaspora

Apparently Asbarez Armenian Daily doesn't know what October 29 is, it's the anniversary of the declaration of the birth of the Republic of Turkey-- it is Turkey's 4th of July. It is not Ataturk day. You'd think they could get something that simple right.

From Asbarez Armenian Daily

Armenian Youth Federation Demonstrates Against Gala Honoring Ataturk

LONG BEACH, CA--Over 50 members of the Armenian Youth Federation (AYF) converged around the perimeter of the Long Beach Hilton Hotel Saturday night to demonstrate in protest of an annual banquet honoring the establishment of the modern Turkish republic and its founding father, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. . .

"Hosted by the Association of Turkish Americans of Southern California (ATASC), the Turkish Republic Day Ball differentiates itself from other benign cultural or social events due to its desire to celebrate the founding of the modern Turkish Republic," said Vache Thomassian of the Armenian Youth Federation. "This event, which deifies Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and other Turkish "founding fathers", seeks to commemorate the establishment of a Republic built on the ashes of 1.5 million victims of the Armenian Genocide; a feat we believe is not worthy of celebration."

For four hours demonstrators, lined outside the hotel, chanted slogans and read short statements highlighting Turkey's past and present human rights violations, while a smaller group of AYF members inside the hotel silently demonstrated in the lobby, wearing t-shirts depicting a bloody Turkish flag and the words "republic of inhumanity."

"On October 29, 1923 Ataturk's Republic of Turkey was formed and recognized as the successor state of the Ottoman Empire," Arek Santikian screamed into a megaphone outside the hotel. "This Republic continued the oppressive and murderous policies employed by the Ottoman Empire, continuing to repress minorities, squash free speech and deny the Armenian Genocide."

Chants and statements read by AYF members outside the hotel echoed throughout the hotel lobby, reaching all the way to rooms on the hotel's top floors, according to AYF members stationed inside the Hilton.

Meanwhile, two members, inside the banquet, shouted "recognize the Armenian Genocide" repeatedly during a moment of silence held in memory of "Turkish victims" killed by Kurds, a repressed minority currently under siege in Turkey.

The demonstration's objective, according to the AYF, was to remind the event's patrons of the historical truths surrounding the establishment of the Turkish Republic.

"Undeniable human rights violations such as the denial of the Armenian Genocide, the occupation of Northern Cyprus, the massacre of Pontic Greeks, repression of minority populations and outright rejection of free speech are issues which must be brought to like during such a 'celebration'," said Thomassian. "Although we feel every ethnicity and nation has an indelible right to observe their respective cultural milestones, this instance is one which the AYF cannot remain quiet."

The demonstration was a success, according members posing as guests in the lobby. "Everyone inside the hotel lobby was talking about the demonstration and the Armenian Genocide," Thomassian said, adding that even detectives on scene sympathized with our cause.




Professor Taner Akçam submitted the below text to IC and it is being published by his kind permission. The Middle East Studies Association Committee on Academic Freedom wrote a protest letter to the Turkish government concerning his case, which can be found here. Donations to the work of the Committee on Academic Freedom may be made here.


On November 30, Turkish Forum mobilized an e-mail campaign against the “Taner Akçam conference.” Members were also urged to attend the symposium and a “pre-meeting for Turks,” coordinated by Ibrahim Kurtulus.

I [Akcam] forwarded this information to the event organizers with a request that appropriate precautions be taken. I let them know that if they were going to allow intruders from Turkish Forum to leaflet my presentation and disrupt the symposium, I wasn’t going to participate. Yeshiva was concerned. An organizer who had attended the CUNY gathering on November 1 assured me that security would be increased.

As a pre-emptive step, the event committee informed the Turkish Consulate that the law school symposium was intended to be general in scope, comparative and scholarly in approach, and not focused on either Taner Akçam or Turkey. They made it clear that any disruption similar to the CUNY incident would not put Turkey in a favorable light. A Turkish consular official disavowed any government involvement in the disruption at CUNY, which he attributed to “the actions of civilians” in grassroots organizations. There was nothing the Consulate could do about them, he said. The organizers stressed that they intended to take extra security precautions and that the Consulate ought to think hard about what would happen if the symposium was invaded and its participants attacked.

Just one day before the symposium there was another phone conversation between the Turkish consular official and the organizers. He assured them that no disruption would take place and only two or three Turkish representatives would attend.

The government kept its word. The symposium was peaceful and no leaflets were distributed. The Turkish consular official attended with ATAA President-elect Gunay Evinch, both of whom were scrupulously polite. It was as though three intense weeks of mobilization had never happened.

For many Turkish intellectuals, freedom of speech has become a struggle in North America as well as in our native country. What is happening to me now could happen to any scholar who dissents from the official state version of history.


Read More . . .

What Does Obama Have To Say On The Armenian Genocide?

A person from the crowd asks Senator Barack Obama, "[Will you support S.R. 106, and will you speak to Joe Biden about his support]?" Senator Obama then responds discusses the events of 1915 and condemns the Turks for committing this genocide against the Armenian people. . .
He says "[The genocide that DID happen to the Armenian people. The Turkish government has been in denial and others too and it has become a sore spot in diplomacy, I'll check with my staff before I sign on to that resolution.]".

One question that would be asked is why he readily accepts the Armenian Genocide when he is not a historian and is not qualified to comment on this controversial issue. He didn't say "I believe" or "I think", he claims it did happen for sure, ignoring the historical disagreement on the issue.

Joe Biden his running mate, at the time of the video, he was not his running mate, but he as well has been a sponsor of Armenian Genocide bills and supported any tactics that could damage Turkish-American relations.

For decades the Democrats have sided with Armenians and Greeks, while the Republicans have sided with Republicans.

Though there are many Turks who support the Democratic party, eventually the Turks will unite together with the Republicans and begin to form strong opposition to future Armenian Genocide Resolutions. After all, the Republicans and especially Senator John McCain, has been very supportive of Turkey, Turkish relations, and opposed the Armenian Genocide resolutions and has never used the word Armenian Genocide.

It seems the Democrats will constantly say positive things about Turks in front of a Turkish audience, then turn around and say horrible things about the Turks when in front of an Armenian audience. Eventually this double standard by the Democrats will byte them in the future. The Turks will not tolerate being blamed for something they believe they have not committed.

The debate of the Armenian Genocide continues, but it is clear that the Turks will be a major Republican voting bloc in the future. After all, the Armenians are a major Democratic voting bloc already, very few of them ever vote Republican, and they have positioned themselves time and time again as the Anti-Turkish voting bloc.

Close to the election, Senator Obama has continued his support for Anti-Turkish policies, and so has Senator Joe Biden. His socialistic policies, inexperience, naive view of foreign policy, and his support for Anti-Turkish organizations such as the ANCA, have put him at odds, and as a result the Turks will not vote for Senator Obama.

Read More . . .

Who Is Yusuf Halacoglu?

Yusuf Halacoglu's Position on the Armenian Genocide
* Turkish Historical Society
* Yusuf Halacoglu's Position on the Armenian Genocide
* Recent History

Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu is a world renowned Turkish professor of history and former president of the Turkish Historical Society. He is an expert on the Armenian Genocide allegations and Turkish-Ottoman history.

Yusuf Halacoglu was born in Adana, Turkey in 1949. In 1971 he graduated from the History Department in Istanbul University. He joined Istanbul University's Modern History staff in 1974. In 1978 he obtained his doctorate and became an associate professor by 1982, and a full professor by March of 1989.
Turkish Historical Society

Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu joined the Turkish Historical Society, and was appointed as Head of Ottoman Archives in the Directorate-General of State Archives and by 1990 he became its deputy director-general. Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu resigned that post to work at Marmara University in Istanbul in 1992. In 1993, he was appointed Director of the Turkish Historical Society.

As director of the Turkish Historical Society, Yusuf Halacoglu began to increase research on the 1915 events between Ottomans and Armenians. Numerous hate campaigns had begun to target Turks as perpetrators of genocide around the world run by Armenian organizations as well as increase in Armenian terrorism in 1980s targeting US, French, and Turkish citizens had begun in the United States. These campaigns prompted the Turkish government to work with the Turkish historical society to research the 1915 era of the Ottoman Empire and what had happened to the Armenian people.

It was always common knowledge in Turkey that the Armenians were relocated after numerous rebellions to aid the Allies in World War One. However, accusations of genocide were not well known until the 1980s.

Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu worked with others to catalog Ottoman archives that related to the treatment of Armenians. By early 1990, the Ottoman archives were opened to the public, though millions of archival documents still had to be cataloged, funding and manpower was a problem.

Yusuf Halacoglu's Position on the Armenian Genocide

Nonetheless today, thousands of historians interested in the Armenian Genocide allegations come to Istanbul every year to research the events. This is the reason why the Armenian Genocide thesis was so well accepted, because Ottoman archives were not available for research; today, the Armenian Genocide thesis is under heavy criticism and is not as widely accepted anymore as it was in the 1980s. Researchers and famous historians of Ottoman and Islamic studies have argued against the Armenian Genocide, such as world renowned historian Dr. Bernard Lewis and Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu.

Yusuf Halacoglu, had uncovered thousands of documents that questioned long-held beliefs that the Turks were cruel to the Armenian people. Uncovering archival material on Ottoman orders and reports, Yusuf Halacoglu wrote in his books that evidence was simply not there to support a genocide conclusion. In contrast, Yusuf Halacoglu writes in his book "The Story of 1915: What Happened to the Ottoman Armenians?":

Yusuf Halacoglu wrote:

Research shows that in 1915, the relocated Armenians and Greeks received 3 krs. (Ottoman currency) a day if they were adults and 60 paras (Ottoman currency) a day for food...Talat Pasha had instructed that Armenians' debts to the state should not be collected.

Yusuf Halacoglu explains that the government spent money on the Armenian relocations for providing the Armenian people with food, water, protection, and shelter and that they also spent significant time writing laws, regulations, and telegrams to ensure that the Armenians reached their destinations and were able to resettle in their designated relocation areas.

In addition, Yusuf Halacoglu provides proof that many Armenians during the same government were given permission to return to their homes and their property was returned to them.

Yusuf Halacoglu explains that the reason for the lower population is the significant Armenian migrations through Allied ships which had helped Armenian populations of the Ottoman Empire migrate to Russia, America, and France, where there are significant populations of Armenians today.

Yusuf Halacoglu wrote:
I always receive proposals from Dashnak (Armenian Revolutionary Federation) members who want to find out what really happened. If Armenians are sincere, it will be known soon.

Recent History

Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu released several books dealing with the Armenian Relocations of 1915 in Turkey. He has even released English books such as "The Story of 1915: What Happened to the Ottoman Armenians".

Yusuf Halacoglu was recently removed from Directorship of the Turkish Historical Society for reasons that were never clarified but may have been related to the erratic political movements by the AKP government during the summer of 2008. He had served in the Turkish Historical Society as Director for 15 years.

Yusuf Halacoglu has become an expert on the Armenian Genocide thesis and explains he is ready to debate anyone publicly at any moment regarding the issue.

Read More . . .

With Fake Credit Cards, We Draw Money Out Of The Bank Get Gasoline, Make $50,000-60,000 A Year

Crooks and Kiar Armenians A report from a Yerevan Armenian who just spent some time in Los Angeles:

“Of all Hayastan Armenians who have moved to Los Angeles, I’d say eighty percent are rabiz, ten percent are all right, and ten percent are educated, intelligent people.

The Armenians that leave Armenia for Los Angeles aren’t usually of the highest class, and when they get to Los Angeles, they go downhill. Fifteen thousand, maybe as many as 18,000 Hayatantsis are in prison there.

What disgusted me was how they brag about beating the system there. One said, ‘With fake credit cards, which we use to draw money out of the bank and get gasoline, we make $50,000-60,000 a year. I haven’t worked since I got here.

Armenians own all the houses on this street. Almost none of them work.’”

Andranik Michaelian, October 2 2008

Read More . . .

Was Eastern Anatolia The Original Homeland Of The Armenians ?

Even Armenian historians disagree on this question. Let us examine some of their contradictory theories while looking into Anatolian history.

1. The Biblical Noah Theory. According to this idea, the Armenians descended from Hayk, great-great grandson of the Biblical patriarch Noah. Since Noah's Arc is supposed to have come to rest on Mount Ararat, the advocates of this idea conclude that eastern Anatolia must have been the original Armenian homeland, adding that Hayk lived some four hundred years and expanded his dominion as far as Babylon. This claim is based entirely on fables, not on any scientific evidence, and is not worthy of further consideration. The historian Auguste Carriere summarily dismisses it stating that "it depends entirely on information provided by some Armenian historians, most of which was made up."(1)

2. The Urartu Theory. Some Armenians claim that they were the people of Urartu, which existed in eastern Anatolia starting about 3000 B.C. until it was defeated and destroyed by the Medes, with its territory being contested for some time by Lydia and the Medes until it finally fell under the influence of the latter. This claim has no basis in fact. No form of the name Armenian is found in any inscription in Anatolia dating from that period, nor was there any Similarity at all between the Armenian language and that of Urartu, the former being a member of the Satem group oflndo European languages, while the latter was similar to the Ural-Altaic languages. Nor were there any similarities between their cultures. The most recent archaeological finds in the area of Erzurum support these conclusions very clearly. There is, therefore, absolutely no evidence at all to support the claim that the people of Urartu were Armenian.

3. The Thracian-Phrygian Theory. The theory most favored by Armenian historians claims that they descended from a Thracian-Phrygian group, that originated in the Balkan Peninsula and by the pressure oflllyrians migrated to eastern Anatolia in the sixth century B.C. This theory is based on the fact that the name Armenian was mentioned for the first time in the Behistan inscription of the Mede (Persian) Emperor Darius from the year 521 B.C., "l defeated the Armenians." If accepted, of course, this view effectively contradicts and disproves the Noah and Urartu theories.

4. The Southern Caucasus Theory. This idea claims that the Armenians are related racially and culturally to the peoples of the Southern Caucasus and that, therefore, they originated there. it is, however, supported only by the fact that Darius defeated the Armenians in the Caucasus. The Armenians are in no way related to any of the Caucasian races.

5. The Turanian Theory. Some Armenians have adduced similarities of certain elements of the Armenian language and culture with those of some Turkish and Azeri tribes of the Caucasus to document a relationship, but this remains to be proved.

Whichever, if any, of these theories is correct, it is very certain that the Armenians did not originate in Anatolia, nor did they live there for three to four thousand years, as claimed. They have put forward these ideas merely to support their claims that the Turks drove them out of a homeland in which they have lived for thousands of years, but they can not stand up to the facts.

Read More . . .

Have Turks Always Attacked And Misruled Armenians Throughout History ?

I Love History Armenian propagandists have claimed that the Turks mistreated non-Muslims, and in particular Armenians, throughout history in order to provide support for their claims of "genocide" against the Ottoman Empire, since it would otherwise be difficult for them to explain how the Turks, who had lived side by side with the Armenians in peace for some 600 years, suddenly rose up to massacre them all. The Armenians moreover, have tried to interpret Turkish rule in terms of a constant struggle between Christianity and Islam, thus to assure belief in whatever they say about the Turks on the part of the modem Christian world.

The evidence of history overwhelmingly denies these claims. We already have seen that the contemporary Armenian historians themselves related how the Armenians of Byzantium welcomed the Seljuk conquest with celebrations and thanksgivings to God for having rescued them from Byzantine oppression. The Seljuks gave protection to an Armenian church which the Byzantines had been trying to destroy. They abolished the oppressive taxes which the Byzantines had imposed on the Armenian churches, monasteries and priests, and in fact exempted such religious institutions from all taxes. The Armenian community was left free to conduct its internal affairs in its own way, including religious activities and deducation, and there never was any time at which Armenians or other non-Muslims were compelled to convert to Islam. The Armenian spiritual leaders in fact went to Seljuk Sultan Melikshah to thank him for this protection. The Armenian historian Mathias of Edessa relates that,

"Melikshah's heart is full of affection and goodwill for Christians; he has treated the sons of Jesus Christ very well, and he has given the Armenian people affluence, peace, and happiness.''(3)

After the death of the Seljuk Sultan Kilich Arslan, the same historian wrote,

"Kilich Arslan's death has driven Christians into mourning since he was a charitable person of high character. "

How well the Seljuk Turks treated the Armenians is shown by the fact that some Armenian noble families like the Tashirk family accepted Islam of their own free will and joined the Turks in fighting Byzantium.

Turkish tradition and Muslim law dictated that non-Muslims should be well treated in Turkish and Muslim empires. The conquering Turks therefore made agreements with their non-Muslim subjects by which the latter accepted the status ofzhimmi, agreeing to keep order and pay taxes in return for protection of their rights and traditions. People from different religions were treated with an unprecedented tolerance which was reflected into the philosophies based on goodwill and human values cherished by great philosophers in this era such as Yunus Emre and Mevlana Celaleddin Rumi who are well-known in the Islamic world with their benevolent mottoes such as "having the same view for all 72 different nations" and "you will be welcome whoever you are, and whatever you believe in". This was in stark contrast to the terrible treatment which Christian rulers and conquerors often have meted out to Christians of other sects, let alone non-Christians such as Muslims and Jews, as for example the Byzantine persecution of the Armenian Gregorians, Venetian persecution of the Greek Orthodox inhabitants of the Morea and the Aegean islands, and Hungarian persecution of the Bogomils.

The establishment and expansion of the Ottoman Empire, and in particular the destruction of Byzantium following Fatih Mehmed's conquest of Istanbul in 1453 opened a new era of religious, political, social, economic and cultural prosperity for the Armenians as well as the other non-Muslim and Muslim peoples of the new state. The very first Ottoman ruler, Osman Bey (1300-1326), permitted the Armenians to establish their first religious center in western Anatolia, at Kutahya, to protect them from Byzantine oppression. This center subsequently was moved, along with the Ottoman capital, first to Bursa in 1326 and then to Istanbul in 1461, with Fatih Mehmet issuing a ferman definitively establishing the Armenian Patriarchate there under Patriarch Hovakim and his successors(4). As a result, thousands of Armenians emigrated to Istanbul from Iran, the Caucasus, eastern and central Anatolia, the Balkans and the Crimea, not because of force or persecution, but because the great Ottoman conqueror had made his empire into a true center of Armenian life. The Armenian community and church thus expanded and prospered as parts of the expansion and prosperity of the Ottoman Empire.

The Gregorian Armenians of the Ottoman Empire, like the other major religious groups, were organized into millet communities under their own religious leaders. Thus the ferman issued by Fatih Mehmet establishing the Armenian Patriarchate of Istanbul specified that the Patriarch was not only the religious leader of the Armenians, but also their secular leader. The Armenians had the same rights as Muslims, but they also had certain special privileges, most important among which was exemption from military service. Armenians and other non- Muslims generally paid the same taxes as Muslims, with the exception of the Poll Tax (Harach or Jizye), which was imposed on them in place of the state taxes based particularly on Muslim religious law, the Alms Tax (Zakat) and the Tithe (Osur), from which non-Muslims were exempted. The Armenian millet religious leaders themselves assessed and collected the Poll Taxes from their followers and turned the collections over to the Treasury officials of the state.

The Armenians were allowed to establish religious foundations (vakif) to provide financial support for their religious, cultural, educational and charity activities, and when needed the Ottoman state treasury gave additional financial assistance to the Armenian institutions which carried out these activities as well as to the Armenian Patriarchate itself. These Armenian foundations remain in operation to the present day in the Turkish Republic, providing substantial financial support to the operations of the Armenian church.

By Ottoman law all Christian subjects who were not Greek Orthodox were included in the Armenian Gregorian millet. Thus the Paulicians and Yakubites in Anatolia as well as the Bogomils and Gypsies in the Balkans were counted as Armenians, leading to substantial disputes in later times as to the total number of Armenians actually living in the Empire.

The Armenian community expanded and prospered as a result of the freedom granted by the sultans. At the same time Armenians shared, and contributed to, the Turkish-Ottoman culture and ways of life and government to such an extent that they earned the particular trust and confidence of the sultans over the centuries, gaining the attribute "the loyal millet". Ottoman Armenians became extremely wealthy bankers, merchants, and industrialists, while many at the same time rose to high positions in governmental service. In the 19th century, for example, twenty-nine Armenians achieved the highest governmental rank of Pasha. There were twenty-two Armenian ministers, including the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Finance, Trade and Post, with other Armenians making major contributions to the departments concerned with agriculture, economic development, and the census. There also were thirty-three Armenian representatives appointed and elected to the Parliaments formed after 1826, seven ambassadors, eleven consul-generals and consuls, eleven university professors, and forty-one other officials of high rank.(5)

Over the centuries Armenians also made major contributions to Ottoman Turkish art, culture and music, producing many artists of first rank who are objects of praise and sources of pride for Turks as well as Armenians in Turkey. The first Armenian printing press was established in the Ottoman Empire in the 16th century.

Thus the Armenians and Turks, and all the various races of the Empire lived in peace and mutual trust over the centuries, with no serious complaints being made against the Ottoman system or administration which made such a situation possible. It is true that, from time to time, internal difficulties did arise within some of the individual millets. Within the Armenian millet disputes arose over the election of the patriarch between the "native" Armenians, who had come to Istanbul from Anatolia and the Crimea, and those called "eastern" or "foreign" Armenians, who came from Iran and the Caucasus. These groups often complained against each other to the Ottomans, trying to gain governmental support for their own candidates and interests, and at the same time complaining about the Ottomans whenever the decisions went against them, despite the long-standing Ottoman insistence on maintaining strict neutrality between the groups. The gradual triumph of the "easterners" led to the appointment of nonreligious individuals as Patriarchs, to corruption and misrule within the Armenian millet, and to bloody clashes among conflicting political groups, against which the Ottomans were forced to intervene to prevent the Armenians from annihilating each other.

These internal disputes, as well as the general decline of religious standards within the Gregorian millet led many Armenians to accept the teachings of foreign Catholic and Protestant missionaries sent into the Empire during the 19th century, causing the creation of separate millets for them later in the century. The Armenian Gregorian leaders asked the Ottoman government to intervene and prevent such conversions, but the Ottomans refrained from doing so on the grounds that it was an internal problem which had to be dealt with by the millet and not the state. Bloody clashes followed, with the Gregorian patriarchs Chuhajian and Tahtajian going so far to excommunicate and banish all Armenian protestants(6). Later on, serious clashes also emerged among the Armenian Catholics as to the nature of their relationship with the Pope, with the latter excommunicating all those who did not accept his supremacy, forcing the Ottomans finally to intervene and reconcile the two Catholic groups in 1888.

The freedom granted and the great tolerance shown by the Ottomans to non-Muslims was so well known throughout Europe that the empire of the sultans became a major place of refuge for those fleeing from religious and political persecution. Starting with the thousands of Jews who fled from persecution in Spain following its re-conquest in 1492, Jews fled to the Ottoman Empire from the regular pogroms to which they were subjected in Central and East Europe and Russia. Catholics and Protestants likewise fled to the Ottoman Empire, often entering the service of the sultans and making major contributions to Ottoman military and governmental life. Many of the political refugees from the reaction that followed the 1848 revolutions in Europe also fled for protection to the Ottoman Empire.

The claims that the Ottomans misruled non-Muslims in general and the Armenians in particular thus are disproved by history, as attested by major western historians, from the Armenians Asoghik and Mathias to Voltaire, Lamartine, Claude Farrere, Pierre Loti, Nogueres Hone Caetani, Philip Marshall Brown, Michelet, Sir Charles Wilson, Politis, Arnold, Bronsart, Roux, Grousset Edgar Granville Gamier, Toynbee, Bernard Lewis, Shaw, Price, Lewis Thomas, Bombaci and others, some of whom could certainly not be labelled as pro-turkish. To cite but a few of them:


"The great Turk is governing in peace twenty nations from different religions. Turks have taught to Christians how to be moderate in peace and gentle in victory"

Philip Marshall Brown:

"Despite the great victory they won, Turks have generously granted to the people in the conquered regions the right to administer themselves according to their own rules and traditions."

Politis who was the Foreign Minister in the Greek Government led by Prime Minister Venizelos:

"The rights and interests of the Greeks in Turkey could not be better protected by any other power but the Turks."

J. W. Arnold:

" It is an undeniable historic fact that the Turkish armies have never interfered in the religious and cultural affairs in the areas they conquered."

German General Bronsart:

"Unless they are forced, Turks are the world's most tolerant people towards those of other religions."

Even when Napoleon Bonaparte sought to stir a revolt among the Armenian Catholics of Palestine and Syria to support his invasion in 1798-1799, his Ambassador in Istanbul General Sebastian! replied that "The Armenians are so content with their lives here that this is impossible."

Read More . . .

Why Demoyan Kisses Me Now by Saying Ataturk Is A Hero ?

Why My Brother In Law Demoyan Kisses Me Now? This "Untold Story" has most likely remained untold for a reason... work out the dates, look at where Ataturk was at relevant times and his rank/position, and you can likely come up with the answer.

Or, just read the first few pages of Ataturk's Nutuk (Great Speech), even within the first few paragraphs, it tells you precisely what his position was with respect to Christian minorities in the Ottoman Empire who were agitating for the breakup of the Empire, ethnically cleansing Ottoman Muslims & Jews from their midst and setting up their own ethnically pure states in Anatolia. If you read further you will also learn Ataturk's views of Armenian activity in the southeastern Anatolian provinces AFTER WWI, and he does not talk about rescuing Armenians, but of rescuing Ottoman Turks from French armed marauding Armenians committing massacres and other atrocities.

Please let us all know when this Armenian genocide museum curator finally makes available to the public all these "unseen" documents AND explains why he has been hiding them from the public for so long. . .

Just want to share a bit more about Hayk Demoyan. This is the same Hayk Demoyan who has announced the following in a Guardian article just a few days before the article above:

Taken directly from the Guardian article above (and why am I not surprised that it is the liberal leftist Guardian doing its Turk bashing as always)
Historical documents proved Atatürk committed "war crimes" against Armenians and other groups in his drive to create an ethnically homogeneous Turkish state, Demoyan insisted. "Fear of rewriting history is the main fear of modern Turkey," said Demoyan, director of The Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute in Yerevan, Armenia's capital.

"It is a fear of facing historical reality and causing a total collapse of the ideological axis that modern republican Turkey was formed around. Turks get panicked when you compare Atatürk's legacy to Lenin.

Atatürk was sentenced to death in absentia by a military judge to punish war crimes during the first world war. There are documents from non-Armenian sources listing him as a war criminal ."

Enough said.

So now this same Demoyan, a couple of days later, is coming up with an announcement that will suddenly make a Schindler out of this "war criminal"? He must have realized how unacceptable his prior defamation of Ataturk must have been to all Turks. But the new stuff sounds very Hollywoody wishy washy, warm and fuzzy to me...

So now the new game is making a saviour out of Ataturk - someone who helped the Armenian victims during their horrific ordeal of genocide. We're on it and we see the new chess move. Not too bright, but I gotta say it's original and unprecedented..

KEMAL ATATURK , father of modern Turkey, rescued hundreds of Armenian women and children from mass slaughter by Ottoman forces during and after the first world war. This untold story, which is sure to surprise many of today’s Turks, is one of many collected by the Armenian genocide museum in Yerevan that “will soon be brought to light on our website,” promises Hayk Demoyan, its director.

His project is one more example of shifting relations between Turkey and Armenia. On September 6th President Abdullah Gul became the first Turkish leader to visit Armenia when he attended a football match. Mr Gul’s decision to accept an invitation from Armenia’s president, Serzh Sarkisian, has raised expectations that Turkey may establish diplomatic ties and open the border it closed during the 1990s fighting between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh. The two foreign ministers were planning to meet in New York this week. Armenia promises to recognise Turkey’s borders and to allow a commission of historians to investigate the fate of the Ottoman Armenians.

Reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia could tilt the balance of power in the Caucasus. Russia is Armenia’s closest regional ally. It has two bases and around 2,000 troops there. The war in Georgia has forced Armenia to rethink its position. Some 70% of its supplies flow through Georgia, and these were disrupted by Russian bombing. Peace with Turkey would give Armenia a new outside link. Some think Russia would be happy too. “It would allow Russia to marginalise and lean harder on Georgia,” argues Alexander Iskandaryan, director of the Caucasus Media Institute.

Mending fences with Armenia would bolster Turkey’s regional clout. And it might also help to kill a resolution proposed by the American Congress to call the slaughter of the Armenians in 1915 genocide. That makes the Armenian diaspora, which is campaigning for genocide recognition, unhappy. Some speak of a “Turkish trap” aimed at rewriting history to absolve Turkey of wrongdoing. Indeed, hawks in Turkey are pressing Armenia to drop all talk of genocide.

Even more ambitiously, the hawks want better ties with Armenia to be tied anew to progress over Nagorno-Karabakh. But at least Mr Gul seems determined to press ahead. “If we allow the dynamics that were set in motion by the Yerevan match to slip away, we may have to wait another 15-20 years for a similar chance to arise,” he has said.

-Demoyan INSISTED that Ataturk wanted to create a homogeneous Turkish state? Homogeneous in what respect?

Does Demoyan even know who the people living in Anatolia are? Clearly Demoyan knows nothing about the people who fought the war of independence after WWI to form the Republic of Turkey.

The only homogeneity Ataturk sought was with respect to language and that is why Ottoman Armenians living in Istanbul who never supported the Dashnaks became a part of Ataturk's nationalist forces.

Sounds like Demoyan is confusing Turks for Dashnaks. It's the Dashnaks that wanted an ethnically pure state and that ethnically cleansed Turks out the lands that became Soviet Armenia. Just more typical flagrantly false information out of genocide propogandists. Add it to the lengthy and ever increasing list of forged documents and falsehoods.

Read More . . .

Nationalism, Solidarity And Stereotypes About Armenians Or Turks

it is about
The truth is something that has always been difficult to judge, and when there are emotions, beliefs, and assumptions mixed into the equation it becomes almost impossible to judge as is the case with determining whether the Armenian Genocide allegation has any merit. One obstacle we face all the time, is whether you meet someone who strongly believes in the Armenian Genocide or who strongly disagrees with it, they both tell you "you can't deny the facts, this is the truth." So how do you determine which side is right? How do you know whether there is a conspiracy to create a genocide to promote hatred and lawsuits, or a conspiracy to exterminate a people?

One thing we know is true for sure, both sides have strong arguments, and both sides have facts. It is the interpretation of those facts, that lead us to a conclusion of genocide or just another ethnic warfare during the heat of World War I.

If you meet Armenians, they will most likely, though not always, agree with the Armenian Genocide, because they were taught to believe that their people were targeted without provocation just like the Jews during World War II. If you meet Turks, they will most likely, though not always, disagree with the Armenian Genocide, because they believe that the Ottoman Empire was a tolerant empire that tried its best simply to keep order and the Armenians through nationalism began an organized rebellion to create a Free Armenia.

Turks argue that since the rebellion failed, ending in relocations of a majority of Armenians to another Ottoman territory, the Armenians have begun a hate campaign to blame the Turks for genocide because they could not accept defeat.

Armenians argue that the extermination failed, and many Armenians were able to escape in order to tell the world about how they were all almost killed.

Then there are independent historians/scholars, but it's difficult to figure out who you should trust, because both sides have them, and both sides blame the other for being paid agents of organizations or governments which take sides on the issue. The reality? There is no independent organization/person/government that can judge this dark and clouded history.

Armenians want you to assume their facts as truth and to accept their conclusion because genocide has occurred in the past and it should be spoken out against always. They even point to the denial of the genocide as evidence of the crime of genocide, which is a logical fallacy, as both the innocent and the guilty will deny their crime.

As an individual, one should look at facts, evidence, and motives to judge what happened, and to keep an open-mind. One should not conclude on either side, because there will always be new research, to show there was or was not an Armenian Genocide.

Emotions such as nationalism, solidarity with your side, and stereotypes about Armenians or Turks or their religion, should be put aside. After all, the Ottoman leaders who were alleged to have planned this crime, were murdered without trial and without proof and so the closure that Armenians speak of, has already occurred, and they should have moved on back in the 1930s.

To claim that the denial of the genocide is a crime, opens old wounds, or is something negative, is disrespect to the scientific method and historians who will always discover new facts about historical events whatever the conclusion may be.

The problem is the issue has become politicized, with campaigns on both sides to make others accept their conclusion, one should ignore these. Politicians should definitely be ignored on topics such as this. Historians and scholars should be encouraged to research the issue regardless of their conclusion. The facts should be discussed rather than the blame, hate, and punishment.

If you want to learn the truth about whether the Armenian Genocide was a reality or not, you must look through the evidence, the archives, the many books on both sides, and learn the facts and then interpret them appropriately using motive. Some will have you believe that a genocide can happen anywhere because genocide is irrational--genocide is never irrational, it is carefully planned, created with a specific purpose, and executed carefully.

Though current research is insufficient to prove that the Armenian Genocide is real, this conclusion can change at any moment, and until clear solid evidence is provided, the Ottoman government should be assumed innocent until guilty. Excuses about how evidence might has been covered up or hidden is not how one judges history.

Read More . . .

Davit The Armenian Informer 1908 & The Dashnaks

Davit The Armenian Informer 1908 & The Dashnaks Table of Contents
Davit Decided to Fight Back
Dashnaks were Raided
February 5th Raid
Davit the Informer Assassinated by the Dashnaks
Dashnaks Iron-Grip on Armenian Society . .

Davit (also known as Davo or David) was a member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaks) in Van, Turkey. Davit was mistreated by the ARF Dashnaks and their leaders and decided to help the Ottoman authorities by informing them of smuggling routes, weapons caches, bomb factories, the inner structure of the Dashnaks, and revealed their future plans for revolution and massacre of the Turks during the 1900s.

Davit was a member of the Dashnaks and was in love with a girl named Vatan and wished to marry her. Aram Pafla (Aram Manukyan) as well had feelings for her and used his powerful Dashnak position to forbid Davit from marrying her. [1]

Davit decided to go to Tiflis to ask the leaders of the Dashnak committee to obtain permission to marry Vatan from Aram's superiors. The leaders agreed with Aram's decision and forbade Davit to marry Vatan.
Davit Decided to Fight Back

Davit angry with the way Aram treated him, he went to the Ottoman governor of Van, Ali Riza Pasa. He told him everything he knew about the Dashnaks and became an informant for Ottoman national guard.
Dashnaks were Raided

Using Davit's information, the governor made multiple operations in February 1908 along with Davit raiding weapons and arm caches in Van city of the Dashnaks.

February 5th Raid
On February 5th, 200 rounds of ammunition were discovered in Surb Kirkor Monastery, eight miles from now. The very same day 200,000 more rounds and 500 rifles were captured in the Garden District. [2]

More searches the next day revealed 300 packages of dynamite. By this time, Dashnak revolutionaries began to resist the raids by Ottoman soldiers by firing upon Ottoman soldiers in the Garden District. The Ottoman government reported 17 Ottoman casualties.

The government estimated that over 2 thousand weapons, five thousand bombs, hundreds of thousands of cartridges, and many other military materials. [3]

The government was surprised to find so many weapons that could arm a brigade of troops and severely damage the Ottoman army. They were even more surprised that many of the weapons found were of higher quality than the Ottoman weapons. The smuggling for years by the Dashnaks through Russia and Iran had been incredibly successful, but because of Davit's belief that the Dashnaks were not doing any good for the Armenian people, the Ottomans were able to severely damage the Dashnak Cause.

Davit the Informer Assassinated by the Dashnaks
After hiding out for many months, Davit decided to go to the market one day, he was assassinated in the Hacbogan Market by a Dashnak assassin called Dacat Terlimazian. The Assassin fired into the crowd killing Davit and a number of bystanders. Eight bystanders were killed.

The story of Davit, is corroborated by the Ottoman archives, and by K. S. Papazian's book "Patriotism Reverted" in which the version of the story is that Aram raped Vatan and Davit sought revenge.

Dashnaks Iron-Grip on Armenian Society
There are thousands of stories similar to what Davit experienced, some may never be heard of. Armenian Church leaders, notables, intellectuals, and professionals were murdered in cold blood because they believed that the Dashnaks were not helping the Armenian people but hurting them. Their revolution was unnecessary and based on the spread of irrational Armenian Nationalism that caused many youths of Armenia to unite for a cause that was not ever defined except by violence and bloodshed.

Hundreds of thousands of Turks died, as well as Kurds, Circassians, and other Muslims in the region during the Armenian Revolution (1895-1918), including the governor Ali Riza Pasa who was involved in the story of Davit. The Dashnaks committed atrocities in order to provoke counter-massacres, which did happen, where Armenians would be killed, and Dashnaks would have to ability to spread propaganda in European and Western Medias in order to convince foreign powers to intervene and grant them independence like they had to Bulgaria and many other nations that use to be a part of the Ottoman Empire.

Once an Armenian sniper was captured attacking the French Embassy in Turkey, when interrogated he revealed that he was going to blame the Turks for attacking the French embassy in order to compel France to invade the Ottoman Empire. He said the plan was introduced to him by the Dashnaks.

The Armenian Rebellion at Van by Justin McCarthy (2007), p. 111
The Armenian Rebellion at Van by Justin McCarthy (2007), p. 112
The Armenian Rebellion at Van by Justin McCarthy (2007), p. 112

Read More . . .

Raffi Hovannisian’s Unpublished Interview With Turkish News Magazine “Yeni Aktuel”

it is about September 5, 2008
Yerevan—On August 21, Armenia’s first foreign minister and Heritage Party founder Raffi K. Hovannisian received a request for an interview from the “Yeni Aktuel” magazine of Turkey. A few days later he delivered, and the magazine thankfully received, his responses to its questions. For reasons yet unknown, the interview has not to date been published.

For the record, the unmodified original transcript of questions and answers follows:

“Q- President Sarkisyan has invited Turkish President Abdullah Gul to visit Armenia on September 6 to watch the World Cup qualifying match between Armenia and Turkey. How do you think about that? According your opinion, what must do Turkish President? What do you prefer as an Armenian citizen?

A- We know well that the opportunities for and challenges of Armenia’s and Turkey’s ultimate reconciliation cannot be solved in a 90-minute football match. Only an honest and brave dialogue—its format flexible, its allegiance to truth unshakeable—can bring our nations the peace and friendship we desire.

Q- Can this be a good opportunity for Turkish and Armenian relationship if we considere that Turkey and Armenia have no diplomatic links since 1990’s and the border between Turkey and Armenia is closed.

A- There is never a bad time to begin good relations. The absence of diplomatic ties and open frontiers has been Ankara’s unilateral policy of choice.

Q- Actually, what are the expectations of Armenian people from Turkey? What must do Turkey to re-create relations between two countries?

A- The Armenian people expect good faith and integrity: good faith in process and integrity of substance. In respect of the latter, it is crucial to most citizens of Armenia that Turkey face the exclusionist legacy of the Great Armenian Dispossession—beginning with recognizing the genocidal past, teaching it, and atoning for it through, inter alia, a joint celebration of the Armenian civilization from Mount Ararat and Ani to all the other capitals, towns, villages, fortresses, schools, academies, churches, and monasteries of the ancestral homeland; the conduct of a full inventorization, restoration, and operationalization of the Armenian cultural heritage within its jurisdiction; the realization of a guaranteed right of secure voluntary return for the progeny and descendants of the dispossessed; and an end to its long-standing blockade of Armenia, which constitutes an act of enmity and a material breach of the very Soviet-Turkish treaties on which Ankara relies to assert its eastern frontier. Only through a landmark demonstration of fortitude, good will, and sincerity can the sovereign Republics of Turkey and Armenia come to their first-ever bilateral agreement in all of history.

Q- On your opinion, what is the Turkish image for an Armenian? What do Armenians feel about Turkey and Turks?

A- I appreciate the distinction you make, because in reality governments and peoples are different—and, unfortunately in the Armenian case, conflicting—concepts. I cannot speak for Armenia’s government. But it seems to me that the majority of Armenians bear no inherent hostility toward the people of Turkey and, quite the contrary, are ready and happy to begin a conciliation process, so long as it is founded on respect—for each other and for the truth. My grandmother, a Genocide survivor from Ordu, was saved as a little girl by a Turkish family of good conscience whom she blessed until her dying day.

Q- On your opinion, how these two countries can solve commun problems?

A- How do two neighbors solve problems? They talk. They talk politely and respectfully. They talk honestly. Most importantly, they talk bravely. If either side lacks any of these commitments—if the aim, in other words, is to achieve not peace but a momentary detente—then all of these discussions are ephemeral and fruitless.

Q- What is your opinion about Turkish prime minister Erdogan’s proposal about a “Caucasian Cooperation Platform.”

A- Cooperation is key to conflict resolution, but we must define the goals for which we cooperate. If the objective is to forge a lasting peace between Armenia and Turkey based on a fundamental acceptance of history and a courageously-negotiated program to overcome all outstanding matters of division, then I applaud the letter and spirit of that cooperation. But if the mission is to engineer a geopolitical lockdown or to contractualize a revision of Turkey’s past, there is neither purpose nor morality to it. The relevant scenarios are there for the choosing; it remains for us to break out of the box and shift the strategic paradigm in resolution to a future where both nations become partners in a common neighborhood of liberty, human rights, democratic values, and shared security.”

Read More . . .

Armenia Must Stop Aggression and Defamation Prior To Any Reconciliation

The frequency of whispers recently about some covert reconciliation efforts allegedly taking place between Turkey and Armenia seem to defy realities on the ground. Those who are involved in these “secret” talks must know one thing very clear:

As long as those…

- baseless Armenian claims of genocide are maliciously continued to be presented to the world as incontrovertible facts by the “A.F.A.T.H. camp”; [1]

- bogus allegations of genocide deceptively compared to court-tested-and-proven fact of Jewish Holocaust; [2]

- countless armed Armenian revolts, acts of treason and terrorism from 1882 to 1915 and beyond, causing heretofore untold Turkish suffering and losses, are ignored;

- territorial demands by the Armenian nationalists before WWI and Armenia today are dismissed;

- Tereset order of 1915 is deliberately misrepresented as one sided genocide; [3]

- current Armenian aggression and military occupation in Karabagh and Western Azerbaijan (since 1992) are not terminated;

- about a million exiled Azeris who are having to spend their 16th scorching summer in their tents with little food or medicine in those “forgotten refugee camps” are not allowed to return to their homes, which they were forced by Armenian thugs to leave at gunpoint ;
I don’t see how any…

- person can mention the word reconciliation, let alone achieve it;

- political party or government, whether in Turkey or Azerbaijan, can still enjoy wide public support at home, even if they achieve some kind of bizarre, unjust peace with an antagonistic, belligerent, hateful, corrupt, and terrorist Armenia.
I have lived in Southern California long enough to see how incredibly hateful most Diaspora Armenians truly are.

I have witnessed how Armenian terrorism, intimidation, and sheer political pressure—not a verdict by a competent tribunal or some new information unearthed by non-partisan historians—changed attitudes at major newspapers, from the good old days of referring to “alleged” genocide to nowadays’ timid and self-serving conclusion of genocide.

I noted how the same was repeated in international scene, by nagging Armenian pressure—not by historical facts—causing political resolutions to be passed here and there, based on a racist and dishonest version of history spread by the AFATH community.

Those who might be inclined to think that Turkey or Azerbaijan might succumb to such Armenian-triggered foreign pressure, need to refresh their knowledge of history, and perhaps, geography. While at it, they might also do well to take a look at the emerging global energy traffic and the transportation revolution gradually taking shape by the completion of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway (wisely skirting the belligerent Armenia) and Marmaray,(underwater tube passage near Istanbul), thus connecting London to Shanghai, Europe to China, Atlantic to Pacific, via rail over the neo-Silk Route. Future is extremely bright in that part of the world, not even darkened by the evil deeds of the blood-thirsty Armenia.

Frustrated by the persistently biased coverage of the Turkish-Armenian civil war during WWI and the ensuing censorship of Turkish views in American media, I have coined a new term back in 2003—my humble gift to the English language and a thoughtful and long overdue reaction to Rafael Lemkin’s genocide: “ethocide”.

A brief definition of ethocide is “extermination of ethics by systematic and malicious mass-deception in return for political, economical, social, religious, and other favors and benefits.”

I provided the tool for our children who will be able to refute the baseless Armenian allegations in future by simply saying the civil war that had been raging up to 1915 and the Tereset it resulted in was not genocide, but what the Armenians and their sympathizers did in misrepresenting it eversince is clearly ethocide.

Or simply: “Ethocide, Not Genocide.”


[1] A.F.A.T.H. : Armenian-falsifiers and Turk-haters

[2] Comparing a bogus genocide to a bonafide Holocaust is a deceiving, deliberately conducted by the prominent members of the AFATH community, to establish “credibility by association”. The rationale behind this heinous move is the expectation that unsuspecting masses will believe the “alleged Armenian genocide” subconsciously once they hear those lies uttered in the same breath with the undisputed fact of Jewish Holocaust, a verdict by a competent tribunal (Nuremberg) after lengthy, fair, and thorough due process.

[3] Tereset : Temporary Resettlement (coined by this author) order of 1915 which refers to “Council of Ministers Decrees, Prime Ministry's Archives, Istanbul, Vol. 198, Decree 1331/163, 30 May 1915”

Ergün Kırlıkovalı

Read More . . .

"Genocide Of Truth" On Bookshelves

On April 14, a new book was introduced to the media and the public which responds to the allegations of the supporters of the Armenian genocide. The 700 page book, 'Genocide of Truth', is the result of over 4 years of extensive research and study by Sukru Aya who believes that the allegations are an injustice and insult to Turkey and Turks everywhere.

The book is a compilation of information from a multitude of foreign sources, grouped under 30 headings, in order to shed light to certain arguments and thesis. It begins with an Introduction and Chapter 1, 'Historical Background', and ends with Chapter 30, 'Status Quo and Conclusive Remarks. There is a long list of Bibliography and a Selected Index and over 400 notes at the end of each chapter which shed further light on the subjects presented. It is a valuable source for anyone interested in solving this number one foreign policy issue of Turkey.

The first four chapters give the background on the Turkish – Armenian relations and the groundwork established by the Armenians to create a state on eastern part of Turkey where they were never the majority through revolts and uprisings which resulted in the massacre of Muslims and Turks.

The subject covered in Chapter 5, Marvelous Missionaries, is very important, since the American High Schools founded by Protestant missionaries are where I was educated before heading to the United States to attend university. There has been many commentaries and articles over the years on the role of the missionaries in the creation of the Armenian issue, which is very sensitive and their involvements is not known by the public widely. As a frequent contributor to the study of this issue, I received the following comment from one of my former American teachers:

'We agree that all of us – including Christian missionaries to the Ottoman Empire and Turkey - need to acknowledge that wrongs were done to all sides during the early 20th century. We need to ask forgiveness of each other. Then we need to find ways to be friends. None of these is an easy step; the hurts are real, even if some of the cause may be dubious. For us, the greatest reason for friendship and healing is that the alternative is grossly destructive. '

The first missionary societies in the USA were founded in 1810 which led to the arrival of missionaries in Izmir in 1819 and the opening of a mission in Bursa in 1834. The book tells the story of their expansion in the Ottoman lands and opening of missionary schools in Harput in 1876 as ' Armenian College ' , later renamed as ' Euphrates College .' The Tarsus American High School was established in 1888 and Talas American High School in 1889.

Chapter 16, 'Propaganda Fabrications,' is also very important as it presents information on the role of several early publications which are being used over and over again by authors, academicians and students to deceive the unsuspecting readers around the world.

The chapter begins with an analysis of the book supposedly written by the US Ambassador to Turkey Henry Morgenthau (1913 – 1915) and based on his diaries, published in the US in 1918. The author tells the story behind this book by referring to a study of Prof. Heath Lowry who has shown that the book did not reflect the true events of the time. Ambassador Morgenthau's book, also available in Turkish translation, was ghost written for him by Burton Hendrick with input from his Armenian secretary and Armenian translator, with the purpose of bringing the US into war against the Ottoman Empire.

The sections below are directly from ''The Murder of a Nation'', a chapter from the book ''Ambassador Morgenthau's Story'', published as a separate book by the Armenian Benevolent Association, full of slanders against the Ottoman Turks and many fabricated and distorted facts:

1. p. 51. ''Perhaps the one event in history that most resembles the Armenian deportations was the expulsion of the Jews from Spain by Ferdinand and Isabella. According to Prescott 160,000 were uprooted from their homes and scattered broadcast over Africa and Europe.

The Ambassador conveniently omits the fact that it was the Ottoman Turks who saved the Spanish Jews and sent ships to bring them to the Ottoman lands and settled them in Istanbul, Selanik, Bursa and other cities.

The Ambassador continues on the same page:

Yet all these previous persecutions seem almost trivial when we compare them with the Armenian sufferings, in which at least 600,000 people were destroyed and perhaps as many as 1.000.000.

As mentioned in many references, the Ambassador Morgentahu never ventured from the environs of Istanbul and did not witness anything, as many others and and Samantha Power claim in her book.

Sukru Aya writes in his book that Morgentau's claims were refuted by George A. Schreiner, a distinguished foreign correspondent who served in Turkey at the time and who knew the Ambassador and wrote to him about his concerns on how the truth was twisted to favour the Armenians.

Genocide of Truth is an excellent book with a collection of detailed information from a wide variety of sources which includes many books, articles, newspaper opinions and commentaries from many foreign publications written by westerners over the past 100 years (Over 2,000, according to the author). It is almost like an encyclopedia, presented under 30 chapters, with an Introduction by Prof. Talat S. Halman and a Foreword & Bibliography by the author. Each chapter can be read as a stand alone treasury of information on various subjects related to this important issue which has been presented to the world as a one sided and prejudiced tragedy with many fabrications, as shown by many authorities.

Chapter 6, Divinity for Bigotry and Anarchy, provides statements by many famous figures, including Napolean Bonaparte, Warren G. Harding, Sigmund Freud, Tomas Paine, Mohandas Gandi, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, one of the most respected President of the United States (1809 – 1865), claimed to have the Melunchan ancestary. This is what Abraham Lincoln has stated on divinity:

'My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of scriptures have become clearer and stronger with the advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them. Page 89.'

Among the many quotations, The New York Times report on Oct. 28, 1915, The Light That Might Go Out in Turkey, includes the following staement from Admiral Bristol, the US Ambassador to the Ottoman State:

'Troubled that killings by Armenians and Greeks did not get into the American press, the admiral wondered in his diary, 'Why aren't the atrocities committed by the Christian nation more heinous than those committed by Moslem races', if Christianity is better than Islam.'

Chapter 7, Distorting Realism Brings Antagonism, offers the readers a variety of excerpts and incidents relating to the Superpowers as defenders of Christianity and Humane values. At the request of Protestant missionaries, England and the U.S. intervene in the internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire. In fact, Artin Dadyan Pasha, Ottoman Under-Secretary of State Foreign Affairs actually works for the Armenian case and not for the Sultan as referenced in Erich Feigel's book 'A Myth of Terror.' What is also worse is that the Major Powers were directly and indirectly encouraging enmity between the Armenian sects, referenced in another book, 'The Great War and the Great Tragedy of Anatolia' by Salahi Sonyel.

The author in a Flier Sheet issued after the publication of the book states that this chapter as well as Chapters 14 though 17 show that the claims outlined in the 2007 House Resolution 106 are fabrications.

Chapter 8, 'Di-fused AUTONOMY! (Goal or Pretext?) begins with a statement that the Ottomans were friendly with Dashnaks, something overlooked by most historians and writers, especially the Armenian authors. In fact, the book states that the Dashnak Congress in 1914 was hosted in Erzurum where the Ottomans offered the Dashnaks and Hunchaks autonomy, although the book makes reference to independence as well (which may need to be corrected.).

The chapter also makes reference to the aims of British on carving up the Ottoman Empire and the US Presidnet Woodrow Wilson's desire for its complete disappearance, something shared by the US Ambassador Henry Morgnethau.

Chapter 9, Atrocities, Van, etc., makes references to the Armenian atrocities and revolutionary acts that go back to 1880s. For a very comprehensive study of the Van rebellions, the author refers the reader to Prof. Justin McCarty's book, 'The Armenian Revolt in Van,' while citing from close to 100 other references.

Chapter 10, Battlefields (Sarikamish – Gallipoli – Suez ) emphasizes the fact that the Ottoman armies were fighting on many different fronts, something also overlooked and seldom mentioned by some historians and writers. In his book, Inside Constantinople, Epstein, a member of the US Embassy in Istanbul at the time, states that the attcak at Gallipoli was the main reason for the re-location of Armenians.

Some of the conclusions that the reader can easily reach on the Armenian Issue after reading this book include:

1.Armenians and Turks lived together for almost a thousand years until the western powers began to interfere in the internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire and used Armenians for their own purposes.

2.Towards the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, Armenians began revolts and uprisings against the Ottoman government and started massacring Turks with the aim of creating a state of their own on lands where they were not the majority.

3.Armenians betrayed their own government and the moslems by joining the invading Russian forces and with their aid, captured Van, establishing the Armenian R epublic of Van, killing over 30,000 moslem inhabitants. After the relocation and their return, some Armenians joined French forces in fights against the Ottomans in the Cilician region.

4.During the uprisings, Russia, England, France and Italy provided arms and support to the Armenian guerillas and terrorists and the missionaries from these countries and the United States

This is a book that should be read by everyone who would like to see this issue resolved and Armenians and Turks everywhere can talk to each other.

Read More . . .

Do Armenian Witness Testimonies contradict the position of the Turkish Government?

No, the Armenian Genocide thesis is an idea promoted by Armenian Genocide scholars who are mostly of Armenian descent.

Armenian eye-witness accounts provide gruesome details of Kurdish and other Muslim raiders who attacked Armenian convoys or villages. The motives and intention of these raiders cannot be determined by the Armenian eye-witness accounts. Therefore, eye-witness accounts are not reliable to conclude whether there was a plan of genocide against Armenians. It can shed light into who was doing the killing but cannot determine if it was part of a bigger event.

Some eye-witness accounts cannot accurately pin-point the perpetrators of such crimes. Most eye-witness accounts of Armenians report Kurdish marauders or other ethnic locals who were looking to take advantage of Armenians or seek revenge against the Dashnaks.

The Turkish government does not deny the deaths suffered by Armenians and it does not reject witness testimony of Armenians. However, it defends that the deaths were part of local ethnic tensions not genocide.

Read More . . .

Who Is Taner Akcam?

Taner Akçam

1. Taner Akcam Arrested
2. Taner Akcam's Educational Background
3. Criticism of Taner Akcam
4. Conclusion

Taner Akçam is a historian from Ardahan, Turkey born in 1953. Taner Akcam studied economics and graduated from the Middle Eastern Technical University in 1975. In 1975, he was arrested and sent to Ankara Central Prison. He has written many controversial books in support of the Armenian Genocide thesis and has even claimed that the Armenian Genocide debate is already over, which was widely criticized by Western historians and scholars.

Taner Akcam Arrested

During his years in the university, Taner Akcam was arrested for contributing to the Devrimci Genclik (Revolutionary Youth) journal. [1] [2] Revolutionary Youth was the journal of Devrimci Yol (Revolutionary Path), a communist organization with ties to the PKK terrorist organization. Taner Akcam was sentenced in 1976 to 9 years in prison and he served one year before escaping Ankara Central Prison in March of 1977. [3] Taner Akcam was granted asylum in Germany in 1978.

Taner Akcam said in an interview, that he was arrested in 1976 for writing about the "existence of Kurds in Turkey" because he claims that the Turks did not acknowledge the existence of Kurds in Turkey. [4]

In another interview, Taner Akcam explains that the police accused him of writing about his opposition "to the invasion of Cyprus". In the same interview, Taner Akcam also states that in Turkey, at the time, one had to have permission to distribute literature from the police station, which he says he had, but that he was arrested anyway. Taner Akcam says that he was also punished for writing about class struggle and "worker's strike in Istanbul and the right of workers to establish a trade union." [5]

The New York Times reported that Taner Akcam was arrested for "spreading communist propaganda" on a leftist journal according to what Taner Akcam said to Belinda Cooper, an American journalist. [6]

After the statute of limitation passed on his arrest, he was able to visit Turkey several times.

Taner Akcam's Educational Background

Taner Akcam graduated from the Middle Eastern Technical University in 1975 by studying economics. In 1996, Taner Akcam received his doctorate in Sociology with a dissertation titled "Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide: On the Background of the Military Tribunals in Istanbul between 1919 and 1922".

Taner Akcam later came to the United States as a Visiting Associate Professor of History at the University of Minnesota. Later he was hired by Clark University and currently works there.

Criticism of Taner Akcam

In one interview Taner Akcam mentions that the first free elections in Turkey were held "in 1974" even though a variety of parties existed in Turkey since the 1930s. In addition, the Democratic Party had gained power with Adnan Menderes in 1950 which had opposing views to the Republican People's Party which makes one question the credibility of Taner Akcam on Turkish history.

The Boston Globe article argues that Taner Akcam is not even a historian. [7]

Taner Akcam claims that discussing the Armenian Genocide is "a taboo" and "outlawed" in Turkey, even though charges on Hrant Dink were dropped and even though he is able to write to newspaper articles discussing the events to Taraf, Radikal, and other major newspapers. In addition, Taner Akcam is able to sell his Armenian Genocide recognition books in bookstores in Turkey and can travel freely in Turkey, even conducting research in the Ottoman archives. [8]

Taner Akcam had acknowledged that the Aram Andonian "Naim Bey" documents (collection of telegrams by the Ottoman Minister of Interior in 1915) were forgeries, by stating in his book "There are important grounds for considering these documents fake." [9] Later he reversed his position in his newer book "A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility" and has claimed that they may be valid.

The alleged telegrams and documents were written on pieces of paper, with incorrect Ottoman ciphers, contradicting dates, inconsistent information, and forged signatures. Most importantly scholars have proven that these telegrams had no originals and even the existence of Naim Bey (who allegedly gave the telegrams to Aram Andonian) had been proven wrong.

Taner Akcam has engaged in smear campaigns against Turkish historians and in one article, "Anatomy of a Crime: the Turkish Historical Society’s Manipulation of Archival Documents", has accused hundreds of Turkish historians of various crimes. [10]

In one radio interview with Michael Enright, Taner Akcam claims that the Armenians were driven into the desert, even though the provinces of Aleppo and Deir el Zor which was the area where Armenians were relocated to are actually called the "Fertile Crescent" and they are definitely not deserts. [11]

In a PBS Debate on the Armenian Genocide, Taner Akcam argued "Muslims killing by the Armenians it is a legend." This drew great criticism by many historians and scholars who have proven that Armenians were indeed in full rebellion during 1915 (until the Relocation Law in June) and that there were also rebellions before 1915 in many cities in Turkey.

In another article Taner Akcam claims in response to Prime Minister Erdogan's statements on the Armenian deportations: "The argument says there were Armenian uprisings. It is simply a lie."

In an article, Taner Akcam claims that "Turkey cannot become a member of the European Union if talking about history is a crime." The problem is, Turkey does have abundant numbers of people talking about history (including a Turkish Historical Society established by the founders of Turkey) including the Armenian Genocide (some openly support it even). The fact that Taner Akcam has been able to publish his books and sell them openly in Turkish bookstores makes one wonder why Taner Akcam makes such statements.


Much of Taner Akcam's history is widely debated and his statements are widely disputed. However, one thing is certain, Taner Akcam did go to jail and he did escape, and every single thing he has written or talked about seems Anti-Turkish or related to the treatment of Armenians or Kurds by the Turks and the alleged Armenian Genocide. One would wonder what kind of serious grudges Taner Akcam holds toward Turkey.

1. Taner Akcam'a Ozgurluk -
2. Taner Akcam Bio -
3. Taner Akcam Bio -
4. Minnesota Law and Politics - Only our name is boring -
5. Minnesota Law and Politics - Only our name is boring -
6. New York Times Taner Akcam -
7. Boston Globe, Taner Akcam -
8. Minnesota Law and Politics - Only our name is boring -
9. Turkish National Identity and the Armenian Question - note 8, p.119
10. the Turkish Historical Society’s Manipulation of Archival Documents -
11. Taner Akcam Radio Interview -

Read More . . .

Armenians People Colaborated With Hitler

in ww2 armenian dashnak party collaborated with hitler and killed jewish people it is a historical fact.

by Karniyarikyan
Yes. and how eloquently and thoroughly you present all these facts. Thank you for enlightening us.

To validate a spurious genocide allegations,the Armenians curry favor with the Jewish people,and manipulate the Holocaust tragedy to gain some undeserved recognition from this uniquely Jewish experience.Historical evidences point to a devious Armenian collusion with Hitler to exterminate the Jews during WW II.Today,no matter how much the Armenians try to conceal this heinous episode from the public knowledge the Armenian conspiracy with Hitler is in the history books-indelibly.Soon it will be in the public conscience too.In early 1930s,when Hitler ascended to power,he began cultivating the Armenians to use their long-standing and strong anti-semitic feelings in his plans and policy.The Armenians,through their publications,radio broadcasts and meetings supported and cheered the Nazis on their attacks on Jews.ALFRED ROSENBERG,who was to become later Hitler's Minister of the Occupied Territories,declared that the Armenians were Indo-European or Aryans,which honored them and put them in the same league with the Nazis.

In Hitler's foreign policy the Armenians fitted very nicely too.Hitler's future invasion plans of Russia provided a golden opportunity for the Armenians to liberate what they considered to be ''HISTORIC ARMENIA'' from the Soviet as well as the Turkish rule.The short-lived Armenian Republic established in 1918 in the southern Caucasus by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (The Dashnaks) was conquered by the Russian Bolsheviks in 1920 and ceased to exist.This time,the Dashnaks saw a good opportunity in the collaboration with the Nazis to regain those territories.To that end,on December 30,1941 they formed a battalion of 8,000-strong known as the ''812TH ARMENIAN BATTALION OF WEHRMACHT'' under the command of Dro(Drastamat Kanayan),a seasoned guerrilla leader who had fought against the Turks in the Eastern Turkey before and during the Turkish War of Independence following World War I.Later,he became the supreme commandant of the Armenian army in the short lived Armenian Republic,and in 1920-1921 he organized a wide-spread genocide against the Azeri and the Turkish populations in the region.

This is documented in the book World Alive by the U.S. Naval officer ROBERT STEED DUNN who was an eye-witness to those Armenian atrocities.Lieutenant Dunn was the Intelligence officer of Rear ADMIRAL MARK L.BRISTOL,the American High-Commissioner in the region and also a de facto American Ambassador in Turkey.Between 1919-1921 Lieutenant Dunn travelled extensively with Dro and his army in the region,and both made several contacts with the Russian Bolsheviks,the Turkish and the Armenian National forces.With this historical perspective,this new task assigned to Dro by the Nazi leadership after a quarter of century later seemed to be a break to fulfill his dream of conquest.This alliance alarmed Turkey and the Turkish Jews.The British Ambassador in Ankara reported to London that ''THE ARMENIANS [in Turkey] are extremely fruitful ground for German activities,and these non-Muslim elements with their pre-Kemalist (i.e. Ottoman period) mentality are always viewed with mistrust by the Turkish authorities''(Public Record Office,Foreign Office document:F.O 371/30031/R5337)

This infamous 812th Battalion later developed into a so-called ''Armenian Legion'' of 20 000-strong with the efforts of Alfred Muradian a GERMAN-ARMENIAN,and by Armik Jamalian,the son of the Arshak Jamalian,the Foreign Minister of the short-lived Armenian Republic.The troops of this Legion were trained and led by the SS and its Security Division S.D. and they joined the Nazi Einsatz Gruppen in the invasion of the Crimea and the North Caucasus.These Armenian Battalions rendered valuable services to the Nazis as police units for internal security duties in the occupied territories.It was their duties to round up the Jews and the other ''undesirable'' elements and organize the death marches to the concentration camps.Pursuing those familiar utopic dreams,and shrewdly manipulated by the Nazis,the Armenians foolishly tied their lot to Hitler and praised him lavishly in the Armenian-language daily Hairenik on September 17,1936.''...and came (to power)Adolph Hitler after herculean struggles.He spoke to the racial heart strings of the German,opened the fountain of his national genius...''Then,in August 19,1936 the same daily Hairenik published the following:''Sometimes it is difficult to eradicate these poisonous elements (the Jews) when they have struck deep root like a chronic disease,and when it becomes necessary for a people (the Nazis) to eradicate them in an uncommon method these attempts are regarded as revolutionary.During a surgical operation the flow of blood is a natural


The Ottoman experience proves that anti-Semitism is an old Armenian habit. The main reason for anti-semitism among the Ottoman Armenians was mainly religious biases. For the Christian Armenians the Jews were in great sin. It was a common belief among the Armenians that the Jews slaughter young Christian Armenians and use their blood at the Passover feast. In Amasya province for instance local Armenian priests and notables claimed that an Armenian woman had seen Jews slaughter a young Armenian boy and use his blood for religious purposes. Stanford J. Shaw describes the following events:

‘Several days of rioting and pillaging and attacks on Jews followed, with Armenian mobs devastating the Jewish quarter of the city, beating men, women and children alike. The Armenian notables convinced the local Ottoman governor to imprison several Jewish leaders, including Rabbi Yakub Avayu, who was accused of having supervised the blood letting. They were said, after undergoing severe torture, to have confessed to their crimes and were hanged. Later, however, the Armenian boy who supposedly had been murdered was found and a new Ottoman governor punished the accusers, though nothing could be done about the Jews who had suffered in the process.’[3]

As Abraham Ben-Yakob put it, the Armenian and Greek attacks against the Armenians continued in the following years:

‘There were literally thousands of incidents in subsequent years, invariably resulting from accusations spread among Greeks and Armenians by word mouth, or published in their newspapers, often by Christian financiers and merchants who were anxious to get the Jews out of the way, resulting in isolated and mob attacks on Jews, and burning of their shops and homes.’[4]

Apart from the religious prejudices, the Jewish community in the Empire dramatically rose in numbers and their influence over the administration and economy increased, and this development made the Christian subjects (Armenians, Greeks etc.) worried. Unfortunately this competition between the Jews and Christians resulted in a long series of attacks against the Jews by the Armenians and Greeks, who simply did not want to lose their influential position in terms of politics and economy. In these assaults many Jews were assassinated. When the Europeans increased their economic and political influence over the Ottoman Empire they publicly supported the Ottoman Christians and the Armenians and Greeks gained a clear privilege in trade, which was unfavourable to the Jews. The local Armenians and Greeks had the American and the European diplomats and businessmen with them, while the Jews had to rely on their own sources and their good relations with the Ottoman bureaucracy. In addition, as the Armenians and Greeks got richer and more influential, harassments and the constant attacks against the Jews increased as witnessed in Izmir during the 19th century. The competition between the Armenians and the Jews was severe in Palace and the financial system in particular. When the Armenian bankers sustained monopoly over the Ottoman financial system they did everything to get the Jews out of the Palace, and even libelled Jews by accusing the Jews of not being loyal to the Sultan. As a result of these slanders, many Jews lost their life.[5]

Another dramatic development for the Jews was the impact of the European military victories and conquests of Ottoman territories by the European armies, because when the Christian European armies occupied the Ottoman possessions they were supporting their Christian ‘brothers’, Armenians, Greeks and Bulgarians, and punishing the Jews and Muslims alike.[6] Consequently the Jews became the most loyal ones to the government in the 19th century and this also worsened the relations between the nationalist Armenians and the Jews. The radical Armenians perceived the Jews as the agent of the state against their ‘revolutionary’ movement. Even some Armenians would claim that some of the responsible officers for the 1915 events, which the Armenians see these events as ‘genocide’, were Jews, freemasons or supported by the Jews or freemasons. Although this kind of claims cannot be considered as serious or scholarly, they are useful to understand the degree of the Armenian anti-semitism.

The fourth negative development for the Ottoman Jews was the nationalist-separatist movements in the Arab territories, the Balkans and in Anatolia. The only protector of the Jews in these regions was the Ottoman state and its governor because the Arabs and the Christians hated the Jews due to the tradition and religion. That is why the Jews became more and more loyal to their state, and this more annoyed the nationalist groups, particularly the Greeks and the Armenians. In many Greek uprisings for instance the Jews supported the Ottoman State against the rioters as witnessed in the Ottoman – Greek War in 1897 for Crete island. The Ottoman security forces had to intervene to protect the Jews from the Armenians, Greeks and the Arabs especially in the 19th century. In Syria in particular the Christian Arabs and Armenians hated the Jews as a result of the religious biases.[7]

In summary, the Armenians continually attacked the Jews for the religious reasons and for personal and ethnic interests. In the words of Shaw, ‘the attacks were brutal and without mercy. Women, children, and aged Jewish men were frequently attacked, beaten and often killed’.[8] These attacks inevitably caused a severe tension and nourished mutual hate between the Armenians and the Jews. As a result the Jews sometimes co-operated with other ethnic groups against the Armenians as Shaw puts it:


The historical Armenian mistrust towards the Jews continued in the 1930s and 1940s and some radical Armenians did not hesitate to support the Nazi administration. Ayhan Ozer claims that Hitler aimed to get the Armenian support in his anti-Semitic campaign. In other words both, Nazi party and the radical anti-Semitic Armenians saw each other in the same side. Apart from the ‘common feelings’ about the Jews, in foreign policy, ‘Hitler’s future invasion plans of Russia provided a golden opportunity for the Armenians to liberate what they considered to be “Historic Armenia” from the Soviet as well as the Turkish rule’.[11] The Armenian-German alliance alarmed not only Turkey but also the Turkish Jews. The British Ambassador in Ankara reported to his government that ‘the Armenians (in Turkey) are extremely fruitful ground for German activities, and these non-Muslim elements with their mentality (rooted in the Ottoman years) are always viewed with mistrust by the Turkish authorities’.[12] Ozer claims that as a result of the Armenian-Nazi alliance, the 812th Battalion later developed into a so-called ‘Armenian Legion with the efforts of Alfred Muradian, a German–Armenian, and by Armik Jamalian, the son of Arshak Jamalian, the Foreign Minister of the short-lived Armenian Republic. Some of this 20,000-strong Armenian legion were trained by the SS and its Security Division S. D. and later they joined the Nazi Einsatzgruppen in the invasion of the Crimea and the North Caucasia.[13] The skilled legion served the Nazi army as police unit for internal intelligence and controlling the ‘undesired elements’ like the Jews.

Moreover as Christopher Walker, a pro-Armenian researcher, admits that the relations between the Nazis and the Dashnaks living in the Nazi occupied areas were very close and active. The Armenians of Bucharest in May 1935 for example attacked the local Jews.[14] Walker summarise the close ties between the Nazis and Dashnag Armenians:

‘There remains the incontestable fact that relations between the Nazis and the Dashnags living in the occupied areas were close and active. On 30 December 1941 an Armenian battalion was created by a decision of the Wehrmacht, known as the Armenian 812th Battalion. It was commanded by Dro, and was made of a small number of committed recruits, and a larger number of Armenians from the prisoners of war taken by the Nazis in their sweep eastwards. Early on the total number was 8,000; this number later grew to 20,000. The 812th Battalion was operational in the Crimea and the North Caucasus.’[15]

Apart from the assaults against the Jews, the Armenians also published a German language magazine, with fascist and anti-Semitic tendencies. In these publications the radical Armenians supported the Nazi doctrines and justified the anti-Semitic Nazi policies.[16]

Though pro-Armenian researcher Christopher J. Walker admits that the Armenians collaborated with the Nazis, some of the Armenian authors may refuse these claims. However the Armenian periodicals of that period provide abundant proof for the Nazi-Armenian collaboration. For example the Armenian-language daily Hairenik on 17 September 1936 tried to legitimate the Nazi administration:

‘…and came (to power) Adolph Hitler after Herculean struggles. He spoke to the racial heart strings of the German, opened the fountain of his national genius…’[17]

Similarly Hairenik named the Jews as ‘poisonous elements’ in its 19 and 20 August 1936 issue:

‘Sometimes it is difficult to eradicate these poisonous elements (the Jews) when they have struck deep root like a chronic disease, and when it becomes necessary for a people (the Nazis) to eradicate them in an uncommon method these attempts are regarded as revolutionary. During a surgical operation the flow of blood is a natural thing…’[18]

‘…Jews being the most fanatical nationalists and race-worshippers, are compelled to create an atmosphere of internationalism and world-citizenship in order to preserve their race. As the British use battleships to occupy lands, the Jews use internationalism or communism as a weapon…’[19]

These quotations need no further comment as they speak for themselves. In this context, the next section will focus on the current Armenian scepticism towards the Jews.


As will be seen the anti-Semitic and sceptic attitude towards the Jewish minority inside and Israel and Jewish diasporas outside continued in the independent Armenian Republic period. Surprisingly the most significant factors which nourished the ‘Armenian paranoia’ and the Armenian hostility towards the minorities were as mentioned were not the minority activities inside, but mainly the international developments. Three developments in particular were very important at this stage; Baku oil project, Turkey - Israel strategic cooperation and the improving relations between Turkey and Georgia. Armenia has perceived all these developments as an extension of anti-Armenian conspiracy, which for the Armenians orchestrated by the Turks and Israeli lobbies.[48]

In this context it can be argued that there are seven different main reasons for the Armenian mistrust towards the Jews:

a. Historical Reasons,
b. Religious Reasons,
c. The Armenian Western Scepticism and the Armenian Isolationist Perception,
d. Armenia Feels Isolated: From Fears to Paranoia?
e. Israel-Turkey Friendship’s Impact on Armenia
f. Azerbaijani Oils, Israel and the American Jewish Lobby,
g. Israel’s Attitude to the Armenian Allegations.

The Historical Reasons
As discussed in the previous sections anti-Semitism is an old Armenian habit or ‘disease’ and experienced in the Ottoman period. Unfortunately the Soviet period did not help in curing this ‘disease’, contrary the Soviet’s scepticism nourished anti-semitism among the Armenians. In this period and later the Armenians have seen the foreigners including the Jews as the main source of their problems (scapegoat).

Apart from the historical mutual mistrust between the Armenians and the Jews, the traditional Turkish-Jewish friendship also affected the Armenian-Jewish relations. As a well known fact that when Jews suffered persecution in Spain in 15th century, the Ottoman Turks offered them sanctuary and ten thousands of them migrated to the Ottoman Empire. For the centuries the Ottoman Turks provided legal and political protection to the Jews and this friendly relations continued in the 20th century. However, ‘my enemy’s friend is my enemy’ understanding has made the Armenians more sceptical about the Jews.

Religious Reasons
As the religious reasons of Armenian-Jewish scepticism were discussed above these reasons are not detailed here.[49]

Armenia’s Western Scepticism

One of the most important characteristics of the newly independent Armenian state is the feeling of an isolated Armenia. The Armenian decision makers similar to the laymen have accused the Western states of being indifferent toward the Armenians’ problems. For them the West had used the Armenians for their own interest yet in the end they deserted the Armenians in ‘cold’ before the Turks, Iranians and the Russians. Second, the Armenians have seen the Jewish people and Israel as the agents or representatives of the West. As a direct result of this perception the Armenian people’s Western scepticism shapes their policies towards the Jewish and Israel. In many cases when the Armenians accuse the Jewish people and the State of Israel they mostly mean the West in general not only the Jews and Israel. For many Armenians the CIA, MOSSAD, Israel, Jews and the United States are identical.[50]

Armenia Feels Isolated: From Fears to Paranoia?

The dissolution of the Soviet ‘Empire’ made the Armenian independence possible, and Armenia became an independent state for second time in history. However Armenia was born as a weak and in a problematic geography, which made preserving independence highly difficult. Armenia was the smallest of the successor states of the former Soviet Union. It was located in the Caucasus mountains as a completely landlocked country. All these factors increased the Armenian insecurity feelings and led scepticism towards the minorities including the Jews.

Furthermore, after gaining independence in 1991 the country continued to be a zone of Russian influence. Moscow had economic, political and military leverages over the ‘independent’ Armenia,[51] and Armenia had to improve good relations with the neighbouring states, namely Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Iran, in order to overcome its internal economic and political problems and to escape from the Russian hegemony. Moreover, it needed economic aid from the Western powers, notably the United States and the European Union. As a matter of fact that the environment was suitable for the Armenian policy makers to follow a more constructive foreign policy; Russia was in a domestic economic and political turmoil; the West was enthusiastic to integrate the former Soviet Union territories into the European political system and Turkey was ready for co-operation with Armenia despite of the historical disputes. Turkey even was one of the first countries to recognise the independence of Armenia. The moderate government under Ter-Petrosian, which put aside the historical Armenian claims in order to improve relations with Turkey, was another positive factor in the Armenian side. However, the Karabakh problem restricted Armenia’s freedom of action in foreign policy; When Armenia clearly supported the Karabakh Armenians against Azerbaijan, and occupied about 20 percent of the Azerbaijani territories, Turkey could not improve its relations with Armenia,[52] and diplomatic ties were never established between the two countries since Turkey indexed it to the settlement of the Karabakh conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia.[53] Instead of improving relations with Armenia, Turkey moved into Georgia, Azerbaijan and the other former Soviet Union republics, and declared that it cannot improve its relations with Armenia until the Armenian occupation forces withdrew from the Azerbaijan territories. For instance, Mehmet Ali Irtemçelik, former Turkish State Minister, summarised the situation as ‘Turkey’s ties with Armenia can improve in parallel with the development of relations between Baku and Yerevan’.[54] In practice Turkey restricted its economic and political relations with Armenia, and focused on relations with its kin-state, Azerbaijan. Yet, Turkey’s good relations were always perceived as hostile in both Yerevan and Moscow, and two states got closer each other during the 1990s. Yet the Armenians could not trust the Russians fully, and the co-operation in this period was limited.[55] In another word, Armenia saw almost all its neighbours as ‘enemy, Turks, Russians, Georgians and Iranians.

The Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territories was not approved by the Western states as well and none of the countries recognised Nagorno-Karabakh as an Armenian territory except Armenia. The leading Western states called the Armenians to withdraw their forces from the region. As far as the Western interests are concerned, another consideration regarding the Armenians was that the Russians and the Iranians were planning to use Armenia’s problems with the other states to implement their regional policies against the Western block and this obviously disturbed the US, Israel and some of the European States and they warned Armenia not to turn its face to Moscow or Tehran.[56]

Apart from the security considerations, Armenia had to rebuild its devastated economy and strengthen its fledgling democracy. Under these circumstances Armenia could not get a serious aid from the West, and widespread dissatisfaction with the moderate Ter-Petrosian government increased, and although he won the 1996 elections, thanks to the growing opposition and street demonstrations, he had to resign in two years (3 February 1998). The resignation of Ter-Petrosian granted power to the radical nationalists, and Robert Kocharian, a hard-core nationalist and a war veteran from Karabakh, became the President of Armenia after the second round of the 1998 elections.[57] Kocharian’s foreign policy was so different than Ter-Petrosian; Kocharian implied the change in Armenia’s Turkish policy before the elections:

‘If I am elected, there will be some new developments in our relations with Turkey, there will be some new emphases; we shall soon clarify our new line regarding our relations’.[58]

His first action in office was lifting the ban on the activities of the fanatically anti-Turkish Dashnak Party, which was considered as terrorist organisation by the Turkish state. The Dashnak Party had been banned by the previous Armenian President Ter-Petrossian in 1994 on the grounds that it was engaged in terrorist activities. Ankara’s response was calming. Ankara advised Kocharian to solve the Karabakh problem and withdraw its soldiers from the Azerbaijani territories, give up the ‘genocide’ claims and respect the international borders of his neighbours. Yet Kocharian choose the worst alternatives for Turkey; he refused all peace plans for Nagorno Karabakh claiming the problem was already solved since Karabakh was an Armenian territory and approached to the Russians, the traditional rival of the West and Turkey in the region, to counter-balance the Turks. Armenia under Kocharian’s rule furthermore focused on the ‘Armenian genocide’ claims, and tried to apply pressure on Turkey and pushing Turkey to accept to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia by simply threatening it with the international pressure.[59] But the worst of all was to open the Armenian territories to the Russian military forces. By doing this, Armenia was challenging not only to Turkey but also to the Western interests while Georgia and Azerbaijan have viewed as a way to counter-balance Moscow and as an aid in building their relations with the US in order to escape permanently from the Russian sphere of influence and became a really independent state.[60] In this framework Georgia and Azerbaijan implied that they wanted a NATO or a NATO member’s military base in their country, while there has been Russian soldiers in Armenia.

These policies increased the gap between Armenian policies and the Western Block’s policies in the Caspian region including Turkey, Israel and the US. Apart from the problems in the external relations, the economic depression caused a social turmoil in the country and the politicians accused the foreigners for all these problems. Under these circumstances the mistrust and fears among the Armenians dramatically increased towards the foreign powers and the fears became a paranoia, which as will be seen below, ultimately stroke the minorities, namely Jewish, Azerbaijanis etc.

Israel-Turkey Friendship’s Impact on Armenia

Apart from the mistrust towards the West and isolated Armenian foreign policy, one of the most important factors caused anti-Semitic attitudes and sceptic Israel policy in Armenia has been Israel’s friendly relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan, both of which are Armenia’s traditional enemies. As Inbar puts it the relations between Israel and Turkey greatly expanded and reached an unprecedented degree of closeness.[61] Turkey upgraded its diplomatic relations with Israel to ambassador level at the end of 1991 and then the two states have exchanged many high – level state visits and bilateral trade has grown significantly. As a cooperation of two pro-American democracies of the Middle East Turkey-Israel partnership has become an important factor in the region. Not only the Arab states[62], but also Greece, Southern Cyprus, Iran[63] and Armenia panicked and perceived the ‘alliance’ as a threat for their security.[64] For the radical Armenians the ‘alliance’ targeted Armenia. Haik Marcar for instance said: ‘Israel is now is in bed with Turkey, the mortal enemy of Armenia’.[65] As a matter of fact that Israel was trying to counter-balance Syria and other Arab states in the Palestine problem while Turkey was making efforts to find a strategic partner against the Syria, which supported the PKK terrorism by providing a safe haven to its leader and bases, and logistical support for its armed operations against Turkey. Naturally there were more reasons for such a sensitive partnership yet none of the partners perceived the ‘entente’ against Armenia or Greece. Despite this, the strategic Turkish-Israeli alignment ‘reinforced’ Erivan, Tehran and Athena partnership. Later Syria and the Greek Cyprus joined the Armenia-Iran-Greece co-operation.[66] It is understandable that the Israeli-Turkish co-operation was a great disappointment for the radical Armenians and it can be said that Turkish-Israeli co-operation has played a crucial role in Armenia’s search for co-operation with the above mentioned states half of which are in the United States’ Terrorist States List. In addition, Armenians argued that Turkey-Israel relations have shaped Israel’s position regarding the Armenia issue and because of this Israel has never given support to the Armenian cause. Tsoluk Mornjian, Armeni’s Consul-General in Jerusalem clearly expressed the official Armenian view:

‘I understand Israel’s position for the time being. Turkey is very strategic ally for Israel, especially because of Syria (which borders, and is hostile to, both countries)’.[67]

In brief, while Turkey has extremely good relations with Israel and the United States, Armenia has developed military and political co-operations with Israel’s enemies and rivals like Syria and Iran, and all these choice has affected Armenia’s attitude towards Israel and the Jews in general, including the Jewish minority in Armenia. However at the next stage, Armenia’s good relations with Iran and Syria as a reaction to Israel-Turkey close ties worsened Armenia-Israel relations and Israel openly declared that ‘one of the reasons for the frozen relations is Iran-Armenia political and military co-operation’

Azerbaijani Oil, Israel and Jewish Lobby: Israel-Turkey and Azerbaijan Block?
Both sides have always sympathised with each other and had good relations since the independence of Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan in particular has given enormous importance to develop close ties with Israel.[69] All Azerbaijani Prime Ministers have not allowed any anti-Semitic movement in their country and opposed Iranian type fundamentalism. Israel has also seen Azerbaijan as a potential partner with Turkey. One of the most import factors determined Israel’s Caucasus policy has been the Caspian oil in the last decade. Israel who does not have good relations with the Arab states and Iran has seen the Azerbaijani oil and the natural gas in the other Turkish republics namely Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan as an opportunity to lessen its dependency in the energy sector. Moreover, Israel has perceived the rise of the Muslim and Turkish republics as important actors in international arena as an opportunity to balance the other Muslim states and legitimate itself in world politics by getting support of Turkish Muslims against Iranians and Arabs. Furthermore the American Jewish businessmen viewed the area with the commercial considerations. For the American Jewish businessmen Azerbaijan would be ‘another Kuwait’ and it was a golden opportunity for the American petroleum companies. To get the biggest portion from this market, good relations with Azerbaijan, Armenia’s archenemy, was essential. Apart from these factors Armenia as a small and isolated state with no natural resource or industry can provide any cooperation opportunity to Israel and the American Jews. Because of these factors, the American Jewish lobby has made enormous efforts in the name of Azerbaijan. The efforts by some Jewish groups in the United States (US) to repeal Section 907 of US foreign assistance legislation that prohibits most the US aid to Azerbaijan are significant. In 1992, the well-financed Armenian lobby in the Congress had succeeded in inserting Section 907 into the Freedom Support Act. That provision prohibited direct U.S. Government assistance to the government of Azerbaijan and in effect had labelled Azerbaijan the aggressor although the Armenian forces still occupy more than 20 per cent of the Azerbaijani territories. The 11 Jewish organisations in the United States in Autumn 2001 declared that they were against the Section 907.[70] The Jewish lobby groups clearly argued that Azerbaijan is an important partner for Israel, the US and the West and must be supported by the US.[71] Thanks to the Jewish organisations’ and Turkey’s efforts the US Congressmen were convinced, and the Section 907 was repealed. However this was perceived as a Turkish-Jewish conspiracy against Armenia and led nationalist Armenians to blame the local Jews, whom they see as representatives of Israel.[72]

Apart from the Jewish lobby and oil policies, Israel has seen Azerbaijan as an important actor in the Caucasus against Iran and the Russian policies. In the early years (Elcibey Period) Azerbaijan had troubles with Iran and searched good relations with Israel. According to Elcibey Israel could help Azerbaijan in Karabakh problem by convincing the Americans to stop the Armenians. Though some researchers, like Jane Hunter, claimed Israel sent arms to Azerbaijan to use against Armenians,[73] it can be said that Israel avoided from directly involving Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict. For the Armenians, Turkey has encouraged Israel to support Azerbaijan[74] yet it can be argued that such an argument would be simplification of the case and this strategy seems Israel’s own choice.

It also should be noted that Israel further makes efforts to develop its relations with another regional state, Georgia. Israel and Georgia signed many co-operation agreement and Israel now is one of the most leading foreign investors in Georgia[75] while Turkey is Georgia’s the biggest trade partner.[76] It is also a well known fact that Israel pays extra attention not to contradict with the American interests in the region.[77] Considered the United States’ political support for Georgia, Israel’s ‘friendly’ Georgian policy can be understood more easily. As a result of their importance for Israel have embassies in Tbilisi and Baku while the Israeli ambassador to Tbilisi is at charge for the affairs concerning Armenia.[78]

However Turkey’s and Israel’s good relations with Georgia and Azerbaijan cause conspiracy theories in Yerevan, and the radical Armenians argue that the Jews play the main role in this ‘anti-Armenian great strategy’.[79] As a matter of fact that Israel’s interest regarding to Azerbaijan and Georgia should not be interpreted as an anti-Armenian policy because Azerbaijan and Georgia’s commercial and political potentials cannot be compared with the Armenia’s potential.

Israel’s Approach to the Armenian Allegations

One of the formidable obstacles in Jewish-Armenian and Israel-Armenia relations is Israel’s attitude towards the Armenian anti-Turkish claims. As expected for the Armenians, Israel is the most important state in convincing the world to the ‘Armenian genocide claims’ and as Asbarez pointed out, for the Armenians, the importance of the recognition of the Armenian political claims by the Jews, and more importantly by Israel, cannot be overstated.[80] Therefore, the Armenian international campaign especially has focused on Israel and the Jews.[81] However Israel has consistently refrained from acknowledging the Armenian claims. Israel even in the recent years officially declared that the 1915 Relocation and the following inter-communal clashes couldn’t be called ‘genocide’ or ‘holocaust’. Government representatives have never participated in the memorial assemblies held by the Armenians every year on 24 April to commemorate the ‘genocide’.[82]

In last two decades four significant events show Israel’s opposed position against the Armenian arguments. First of all in 1978 the screening of a pro-Armenian film about the Armenian quarter in Jerusalem was cancelled and the film has never been shown since that time because the Israeli authorities thought that the film was a political and a propaganda material. As a matter of fact that Israeli Broadcasting Authority (IBA) had requested a documentary on the historical Armenian quarter in the city. However, though the film was supposed to be about the Armenian quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem, Michael Arlen, director of the film, had focused on the 1915 Armenian Relocation and had accused the Turkish people. In another word, Arlen was repeating the well known Armenian political claims instead of concentrating on the Armenian quarter of Jerusalem. Naturally the IBA refused to broadcast the film. In convincing the IBA the Turkish Jews and the Jews had emigrated from Turkey to Israel played a significant role. Jews in Turkey argued that the documentary was a ‘one-sided political propaganda film’.

In 1982, when some Armenian researchers aimed to participate in an international conference on the subject of the Holocaust and Genocide in Tel Aviv (Israel), the Israeli Government saw this attempt as a part of the politically motivated propaganda campaign. For the Israeli Foreign Ministry, the Armenians were trying to manipulate the public opinion by using the conference in Israel. As a result the Foreign Ministry rejected the Armenian applications and tried to limit the subjects regarding the Armenian claims. However the Armenian applicants started an international campaign against Israel and blamed the Israeli Government of damaging academic freedom.[83]

The third significant development occurred at the end of September 1989 when some American senators mainly led by the Armenian and Greek lobby proposed a bill in the American Senate Judiciary Committee to commemorate the so-called ‘Armenian genocide’ indicating a memorial day in the American calendar. As a matter of fact that the United States House of Representatives had previously rejected two similar attempts in 1985 and in 1987.[84] In the previous cases the US Presidents, the Government and the Congress had clearly showed that the US does not agree with the radical Armenians and never recognised such political claims. Turkey as expected condemned the attempt, yet the campaign against the bill was mainly organised by the Turkish Jews. The Chief Rabbi of Turkey sent a personal letter to every member of the US Senate and said ‘We recognise the tragedy which befell both the Turks and Armenians ... but we cannot accept the definition of “genocide”. The baseless charge harms us just as it harms our Turkish countrymen.’[85] The Chief Rabbi, moreover, pointed out that the Turks were tolerant towards the minorities in the Ottoman and Republican periods. However, the Turkish Jews and the official Turkish representatives were not able to affect the balance in the Congress as the Armenian and Greek lobbies were strong enough to manipulate the other senators for such a bill. Israel’s and the Jewish lobby in this context played a vital role by working behind scenes.[86] The American Jews officially did not accept their efforts in preventing the Armenian bill, because they did not want to alienate their relations with the American Armenians. Though Israeli diplomats denied such an initiative, Ha’aretz, the respected Hebrew daily, on 17 October 1989 declared that the Jews and Israeli diplomats worked to prevent the commemoration. Similarly The Jerusalem Post later wrote ‘the Israeli Embassy in Washington actively lobbied to block a US congressional measure to commemorate the Armenian events. In that instance, the Foreign Ministry chided embassy officials for their excessive involvement…’[87] Not only the Israeli and Turkish lobbies but also the American administration was against the bill and another Armenian attempt also failed, and this once more underscored that the Turkish and Jewish have a similar view on the issue.

Another case showing the Israeli attitude about the Armenian allegations was witnessed in 1990. IBA cancelled screening another pro-Armenian documentary called ‘Journey to Armenia’ in 1990. As IBA confirmed 100.000 Turkey immigrant Jews sent protest letter to the institution. In all these letters the Turkey Jews argued that the Ottoman Empire protected the Jewish minority for the ages and the Turkish people have been outstanding in its humane and tolerant treatment of its Jewish minority for 500 years following the Expulsion of the Jews from Spain and saved masses of Jews from massacre. In this framework the letters further argued a massacre against the Armenians or any other ethnic group cannot be expected. A member of the IBA Board of Directors clearly said that the documentary is a propaganda film:

‘The film contains propaganda and injury to part of the public, because a Holocaust happened only to part of the public, because a Holocaust happened only to the Jewish people’

Yet another historical fact: a fact that for years has been deliberately forgotten, concealed, and wiped from memory — the fact of Armenian-Nazi collaboration. A magazine called Mitteilungsblatt der Deutsch-Armenischen Gesselschaft is the clearest and most definite proof of this collaboration.

The magazine was first published in Berlin in 1938 during Nazi rule of Germany and continued publication until the end of 1944. Even the name of the magazine, which implies a declaration of Armenian-Nazi cooperation, is attention-getting. This magazine, every issue of which proves the collaboration, is historically important as documentary evidence. It is a heap of writing that should be an admonition to world opinion and to all mankind.

To give specific examples of actions; In May 1935 the Armenians of Bucharest attacked the Jews of that city, while the Greeks of Salonika attacked the Jews in the August of the same year. During World War II, Armenian volunteers, under the wings of Hitler's Germany, were used in rounding up Jews and other ''undesirables'' destined for the Nazi concentration camps. The Armenians also published a German-language magazine, with fascist and anti-Semitic tendencies, supporting Nazi doctrines directed to the extermination of 'inferior' races [1]. This is confirmed by Armenophile Christopher J. Walker, who admits that the Armenians collaborated with the Nazis. According to him, members of the Dashnak Party, then living in the occupied areas, including a number of prominent persons, entertained pro-Axis sympathies.

A report in an American magazine went so far as to claim that the Nazis had picked on the Dashnaktsutiun to do fifth-column work, promising the party an autonomous state for its cooperation. Walker goes on to claim that relations between the Nazis and the Dashnaks living in the occupied areas were close and active.

On 30 December 1941 an Armenian battalion was formed by a decision of the Army Command (Wehrmacht), known as the 'Armenian 812th Battalion'. It was commanded by Dro, and was made up of a small number of committed recruits, and a larger number of Armenians. Early on, the total number of recruits was 8,000; this number later grew to 20,000. The 812th Battalion was operational in Crimea and the North Caucasus. (These are the dates and numbers given by Walker).

A year later, on 15 December 1942, an Armenian National Council was granted official recognition by Alfred Rosenberg, the German Minister of the occupied areas. The Council's president was Professor Ardashes Abeghian, its vice-president Abraham Giulkhandanian, and it numbered among its members Nzhdeh and Vahan Papazian. From that date until the end of 1944 it published a weekly journal, Armenien, edited by Viken Shant (the son of Levon), who also broadcast on Radio Berlin.

The whole idea was to prove to the Germans that the Armenians were 'Aryans'. With the aid of Dr. Paul Rohrbach, they seemed to have achieved this as the Nazis did not persecute the Armenians in the occupied lands [2]. "Members of the Dashnak party living in the occupied areas, including a number of names famous from the period of the republic, adopted a pro-Nazi stance." [2]

"Wholly opportunistic the Armenians have been variously pro-Nazi, pro-Russia, pro-Soviet Armenia, pro-Arab, pro-Jewish, as well as anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist, anti-Communist, and anti-Soviet - whichever was expedient." [3] Sources: [1] Turkkaya Ataov: Armenian Extermination of the Jews and Muslims, 1984, p. 91. [2] C.J. Walker: _Armenia_ London, 1980, pp. 356-8. [3] John Roy Carlson (Arthur Derounian), _Cairo to Damascus_ Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1951, p. 438.

The preceding was published in a guestbook of an Armenian web site, 1999-05-27 04:27:00; the author is unknown.

The Armenian-Nazi Collaboration in WW II

To validate a spurious genocide allegations, the Armenians curry favor with the Jewish people, and manipulate the Holocaust tragedy to gain some undeserved recognition from this uniquely Jewish experience. Historical evidences point to a devious Armenian collusion with Hitler to exterminate the Jews during WW II. Today, no matter how much the Armenians try to conceal this heinous episode from the public knowledge the Armenian conspiracy with Hitler is in the history books-- indelibly. Soon it will be in the public conscience too.

In early 1930s, when Hitler ascended to power, he began cultivating the Armenians to use their long-standing and strong anti-semitic feelings in his plans and policy. The Armenians, through their publications, radio broadcasts and meetings supported and cheered the Nazis on their attacks on Jews. Alfred Rosenberg, who was to become later Hitler's Minister of the Occupied Territories, declared that the Armenians were Indo-European, or Aryans, which honored them and put them in the same league with the Nazis. In Hitler's foreign policy the Armenians fitted very nicely too. Hitler's future invasion plans of Russia provided a golden opportunity for the Armenians to liberate what they considered to be "Historic Armenia" from the Soviet as well as the Turkish rule.

Mr. Dro, in his pre-Nazi days
The short-lived Armenian Republic established in 1918 in the southern Caucasus by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (The Dashnaks) was conquered by the Russian Bolsheviks in 1920, and ceased to exist. This time, the Dashnaks saw a good opportunity in the collaboration with the Nazis to regain those territories. To that end, on December 30, 1941 they formed a battalion of 8,000-strong known as the "812th Armenian Battalion of Wehrmacht" under the command of Dro (Drastamat Kanayan), a seasoned guerilla leader who had fought against the Turks in the Eastern Turkey before and during the Turkish War of Independence following World War I. Later, he became the supreme commandant of the Armenian army in the short lived Armenian Republic, and in 1920-1921 he organized a wide-spread genocide against the Azeri and the Turkish populations in the region. This is documented in the book World Alive by the U.S. Naval officer Robert Steed Dunn who was an eye-witness to those Armenian atrocities.

Lieutenant Dunn was the Intelligence officer of Rear Admiral Mark L. Bristol, the American High-Commissioner in the region and also a de facto American Ambassador in Turkey. Between 1919-1921 lieutenant Dunn travelled extensively with Dro and his army in the region, and both made several contacts with the Russian Bolsheviks, the Turkish and the Armenian National forces. With this historical perspective, this new task assigned to Dro by the Nazi leadership after a quarter of century later seemed to be a break to fulfill his dream of conquest.

This alliance alarmed Turkey and the Turkish Jews. The British Ambassador in Ankara reported to London that "The Armenians [in Turkey] are extremely fruitful ground for German activities, and these non-Muslim elements with their pre-Kemalist [i.e. Ottoman period] mentality are always viewed with mistrust by the Turkish authorities."
(Public Record Office, Foreign Office document: F.O 371/ 30031/ R5337)

The Armenians loved this man
This infamous 812th Battalion later developed into a so-called "Armenian Legion" of 20,000-strong with the efforts of Alfred Muradian, a German-Armenian, and by Armik Jamalian, the son of the Arshak Jamalian, the Foreign Minister of the short-lived Armenian Republic. The troops of this Legion were trained and led by the SS and its Security Division S.D., and they joined the Nazi Einsatz Gruppen in the invasion of the Crimea and the North Caucasus. These Armenian Battalions rendered valuable services to the Nazis as police units for internal security duties in the occupied territories. It was their duties to round up the Jews and the other "undesirable" elements, and organize the death marches to the concentration camps.

Pursuing those familiar utopic dreams, and shrewdly manipulated by the Nazis, the Armenians foolishly tied their lot to Hitler, and praised him lavishly in the Armenian-language daily Hairenik on September 17, 1936:
"... and came [to power] Adolph Hitler after herculean struggles. He spoke to the racial heart strings of the German, opened the fountain of his national genius..."

Then, in August 19, 1936 the same daily Hairenik published the following:
"Sometimes it is difficult to eradicate these poisonous elements (the Jews) when they have struck deep root like a chronic disease, and when it becomes necessary for a people (the Nazis) to eradicate them in an uncommon method these attempts are regarded as revolutionary. During a surgical operation the flow of blood is a natural thing. Under such conditions dictatorship seems to have the role of a savior."

The daily Hairenik dated August 20 exposed the following bigotry:
"Jews being the most fanatical nationalists and race-worshippers, are compelled to create an atmosphere of internationalism and world-citizenship in order to preserve their race. As the British use battleships to occupy lands, the Jews use internationalism or communism as a weapon..."

The September 25, 1936, Hairenik Weekly, an English language organ of the Armenians (edited in Boston) denounced Zionist aims, and adopted a strong anti-Jewish and pro-Arab view, and printed the following:
".. the type of Jews who are imported to Palestine is not anything to be proud about. Their loose morals, and their vices... and on top of all, their communist activities were the cause of most of the Arab criticism."

The August 9, 1935 issue of the Hairenik Weekly published a vitriol about "the Jewish controlled film industry", then ascribed the massacres of the Jews by the Greeks and Armenians in Salonica to the Jewish love of gain.

The May 10, 1935 issue of the Hairenik Weekly quoted the vice-Mayor of Bucharest, Romania as saying: "The Armenians have helped us Romanians not to become slaves of the Jewish elements." Romania was one of the foremost anti-Semitic country where the hatred for the Jews reached hyperbolic dimensions.

Starting in the summer of 1942, a twenty-five year old Armenian by the name Suren Begzadian Paikhar organized and led the Armenian National Socialist (Nazi) movement called Hossank (Lightening), which gained a considerable following among Armenian youth in German-occupied Europe and to some degree in Turkey too. On December 15, 1942, these Armenian-Nazis and their supporters in Germany coalesced into the Armenian National Council under the direction of professor Ardeshir Abegian, and the vice-president Abraham Chulkandanian, and several old Dashnak guerillas, like Vahan Papazian and Karakin Nezhdeh, who were the veterans of the Turkish wars in the Eastern Anatolia after the World War I. Blessed by Alfred Rosenberg, this organization spew forth anti-Semitic and racist vituperations through the broadcasts of the Radio Berlin, and their weekly journal Armenian, published until the end of 1944, and edited by Viken Shant, son of the another well-known Dashnak leader Levon Shant. Suren Begzadian Paikhar and some Hossank followers worked as commentators/ announcers in the French and Armenian radio services of the Nazi Ministry of Propaganda under Goebbels. In those programs Paikhar was usually introduced as the Fuhrer of the Armenian people. (Patrik von zur Muhlen, Zwischen Hakenkreuz und Sowjetstern - Dusseldorf, Droste, 1971, pp. 105-106)

The Armenian general Karekin Nezhdeh also founded the racist Armenian Tseghagron movement, through which the Armenian youths flocked to the SS and the other elite Nazi military forces. (Karekin Nazhdeh by James Mandalian - The Armenian Review I, 1958)

Other Armenians living in France and Germany joined the 58th Panzer Corps, and the Ostlegion of the Wehrmacht's 19th Army, based in Lyon, France. The Dashnaks and the Hossank Armenian-Nazis worked closely with Admiral Canaris, who was the chief of the the German Military Intelligence (Abwehr), and his principal agent Hans Pickenbrock, the chief of the Branch No: 1, who was in charge of spying to obtain military information, as well as with Dr. Paul Leverkuhn, a key agent in Istanbul and the Director of the Istanbul Substation (KO-Nebenstelle) of the "War Organization Middle East" (Kriegsorganisation Naher Osten) from July 1941 until August 1944. This organization administered a major Nazi intelligence network, not only in Turkey but throughout the Middle East. The Armenian nationalists actively worked in those Nazi organizations to hunt down the Jews, and cooperated with Reichspropagandaleiter in spreading the Nazi propaganda in Turkey and in the Middle East. In these efforts they enlisted the support of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who was a close ally of Hitler.

During the early years of World War II, Germany was sweeping through the Western Europe, and all the prognosis for the outcome of the war were in favor of Germany. As the Armenian ethics always dictate fawning on the victor, they calculated — or, miscalculated — that it was about time to commit themselves entirely to Hitler's victory. They summarily formed a "provisional" Armenian government as a dress rehearsal for their soon-to-be-realized aspirations. However, in 1943 the fate of the war began shifting from Hitler to the Allies. The Armenians, the perennial political chameleons, summarily renounced their allegiance to Germany, and did an about-face, this time groveling before the Allies.

From Armenophile Christopher J. Walker

If one can't trust Mr. Walker, whom can you?

"...Nevertheless there remains the incontestable fact that relations between the Nazis and Daschnaks living in occupied areas were close and active. On 30 december 1941 an Armenian batallion was created by a decision of the Wehrmacht, known as the Armenian 812th Battalion. It was commanded by Dro, and was made up of a small number of committed recruits, and a larger number of Armenians from the prisoners of war taken by the Nazis in their sweep eastwards. Early on the total number was 8000; this number later grew to 20,000. The 812 th Batallion was operational in the Crimea and the North Caucasus. A year later, on 15 December 1942, an Armenian National Council was granted official recognition by Alfred Rosenberg, the German minister of the occupied areas. The Council president was Professor Ardasher Abeghian, its vice-president Abraham Guilkhandanian and it numbered among its members Nzhdeh and Vahan Papazian. From that date until thje end of 1944 it published a weekly journal, Armenian, edited by Viken Shantn (the son of Levon) who also broadcast on Radio Berlin... What was the motive for the collaboration in the occupied areas ? It is possible to see it as a purely vengeful desire to retake Armenia from the Bolsheviks..... There is in the untutored mind a tendency to class Armenians and Jews together (offensive to both peoples); and the malevolent paranoia of the Nazis might have manifested itself against Armenians as well as Jews. Hence it was important to prove to the Nazis that the Armenians were Aryans. With the aid of Dr. Paul Rohrbach they seem to have achieved this. The Nazis did not persecute Armenians, just for being Armenians, in the occupied lands..."

The preceding is from Christopher J. Walker's "Armenia —The Survival of a Nation," page 357, para 2.

Holdwater: That's funny. There was no mention of the Armenian-Nazi connection in the PBS program adapted from this book. Oh, there must have been some innocent oversight... it's not like the program desired to be intentionally misleading, or anything.

Prof. Richard Hovannisian:
"(Dro) was not a Nazi"

In "Armenian hero's wish is honored" (Boston Herald; Boston, Mass.; May 4, 2000; Jules Crittenden), Prof. Hovannisian actually denied Dro was a Nazi.

"He remains an idealized figure," Hovannisian was also quoted as saying about the mass murderer. "His main concern was the support and rescue of the Armenian people."

The article reports Robert Najarian of the General Dro Memorial Committee (in Armenian-friendly Massachusetts) as saying if Dro were not successful in defeating the Turks ("in a decisive battle at Bash Abaran in 1918, stopping what Armenians say was a systematic effort to destroy the Armenian people," as the article reports elsewhere) there would be "a good chance many of us would not be alive today."

Uhhhh... but I thought the "genocide" covered the years 1915-1916. If Dro engaged in his blood-spilling during 1918 ("In the brief First Republic of Armenia from 1918 to 1920, he served as minister of war"), what exactly was Dro rescuing the Armenian people from?

These were, after all, the years when the Ottoman Empire was gutted, and the Armenians who were in charge of Ottoman lands were busily massacring Turkish villagers. These were the years when Armenia felt free to wage war against neighbors Georgia and Azerbaijan.

"After the Turks and Soviet Russians invaded again in 1920 and divided Armenia between them, Dro fled to Romania, where he lived until the end of World War II." The article sure makes poor little Armenia out to be a victim, doesn't it? The fact of the matter is the well armed Armenian military was preparing its own attack against Turkey, but was caught with her pants down when Ataturk's forces first attacked the Armenians, instead of the invading Greeks to the west. According to the first prime minister of Armenia and American officers who accompanied Dro, the cowardly Armenians simply would not fight. And the Armenians then willingly hooked up with the Soviets.

Where was the Armenian "hero" Dro during this decisive period, the general who proved so effective in mass-murdering unarmed Turkish women and children? The hero bravely "fled to Romania, where he lived until the end of World War II... After the war, Dro lived in Beirut and then Watertown, remaining active as an Armenian nationalist until his death in 1956."

Leave it to Richard Hovannisian to give an accurate portrayal of the facts, as usual.

The Boston Herald gushingly devoted ten one-sided articles to this notorious killer of innocents and Nazi war criminal in only one month (May) of 2000, all written by Jules Crittenden.

Armenian Nazi Tidbits, from an Unknown Writer

Altogether 30,000 Nazi Armenians served in various units in the German Wehrmacht, according to Ara J. Berkian. 14,000 in predominantly Armenian army units, 6,000 in German army units, 8,000 in various working units and 2,000 in the Waffen-SS.[1]

A number of these Nazi Armenians were volunteers from France and Greece who had chosen to commit themselves to the extermination of the European Jewry. Derounian says that

_Nazi Armenians from France bore the mark 'Legion Armenienne.'_[2]

That Nazi Armenians like Dro 'the Butcher', Armenian architect of the genocide of 2.5 million Muslim people, and Nezhdeh sided with the Germans probably had an impact on the decision of Armenians who overwhelmingly opted for armed service.

[1] Enno Meyer, A. J. Berkian, _Zwischen Rhein und Arax, 900 Jahre Deutsch-Armenische beziehungen_ (Heinz Holzberg Verlag-Oldenburg 1988), pp. 118/119.
[2] John Roy Carlson (Arthur Derounian), ibid., p. 19.

In fall 1942, the Armenian infantry battalions 808 and 809 were formed, to be followed by battalions 810, 812 and 813 in spring 1943. In the second half of 1943 infantry battalions 814, 815 and 816 were created. These battalions together with other indigenous Caucasian units were attached to the infantry division 162. Also attached to ID 162 were the field battalions II/9, I/125 and I/198 which were formed between May 1942 and May 1943. Altogether twelve Armenian battalions served the Nazi army, if battalion II/73, which was not employed at any time, is to be included.[1] Most battalions were commanded by Nazi Armenian officers. Armenians wore German uniforms with an armband in the Dashnag colours red-blue-orange and the inscription _Armenien._

[1] Joachim Hoffmann, _Dies Ostlegionen 1941-1943, Turkotataren, Kaukasier und Wolgafinned im deutschen Heer_ (Verlag Rombach Freiburg 1976), p. 172.

The Armenian SS unit was formed following a directive of Himmler in the beginning of December 1944.[1] The Armenian Liaison Staff actively recruited volunteers[2] and by February 1945 a cavalry formation of twenty thousand Armenians was integrated into the larger Caucasian Waffen-SS unit. The Armenian SS formation was employed last in Klagenfurt.[3] In addition to this exclusively Armenian unit, Nazi Armenians also served in the thirty eight other SS divisions, one of them even in the elite _Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler._[4]

[1] Meyer, Berkian, ibid., pp. 136-137.
[2] United States National Archives, T-175, Roll 167, pp 2700157/2700158, SS-Headquarters, Amtsgruppe D - Oststelle,
see _Documents 3 and 4._
[3] Georg Tessin, _Verbaende und Truppen der deutschen Wehrmacht und Waffen-SS im zweiten Weltkrieg 1939-1945,_ (Frankfurt am Main 1965-1980), Volume 14, Armenian Legion/Waffen SS.
[4] Meyer, Berkian, ibid., p. 119.

Derounian says that

"Greece was honeycombed with Armenians serving as Nazi spies." [1]

Many Nazi Armenians were arrested by the British and sentenced by the Greek government as collaborators in espionage.[2] In Rumania many Nazi Armenians were found in Antonescu's Iron Guard during arrest of members after the war. Bulgaria was the operational base of Tzeghagrons-founder Garagin Nezhdeh, who commanded a network of espionage from there.

[1] John Roy Carlson (Arthur Derounian), ibid., p. 20.
[2] Meyer, Berkian, ibid., p. 150.

In Russia General Dro (the Butcher), the architect of the Muslim
Holocaust in ex-Soviet/Russian Armenia and Eastern Anatolia, was
working closely with the German Secret Service. He entered the war zone with his own men and acquired important intelligence about the Soviets. His experience with the Muslim Holocaust in ex-Soviet/Russian Armenia and Eastern Anatolia made him an invaluable source for the Germans.[1]

[1] Meyer, Berkian, ibid., p. 113; Patrick von zur Muehlen, ibid., p. 84.

Numerous articles in major newspapers (London Times) and periodicals (Newsweek) during the war, had suggested the existence of a significant collaboration between Armenians and the Nazis. Arthur Derounian deserves credit for being the first person to deal with this issue extensively. Derounian's motives were twofold: his deeply held democratic convictions gave him a sense of duty and he felt obliged to shed light on this yet another dark chapter of Armenian history. Concurrently, Derounian embarked on what one would call "crisis control" or face-saving. In order to forestall any potential attacks on the larger Armenian community in the United States, he marginalized collaboration as deplorable but insignificant.[1]

[1] John Roy Carlson (real name Arthur Derounian), _The Plotters_ E. P. Dutton & Company, Inc., New York 1946, p. 182.

Also, it is not surprising that the Armenians collaborated with the Nazis.

"Wholly opportunistic the Armenians have been variously pro-Nazi, pro-Russia, pro-Soviet Armenia, pro-Arab, pro-Jewish, as well as anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist, anti-Communist, and anti-Soviet - whichever was expedient." [1]

[1] John Roy Carlson (Arthur Derounian), Cairo to Damascus Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1951, p. 438.

Tell us something relevant and new.

To Francalajian
I believe every thing that he said is relevant but it is not new, at least for me. Israel does not support the Armenian allegations at all. Some of the most famous pro-Turkish Ottoman historians are Jewish. Ex. Bernard Lewis and Stanford Shaw.

we arent so creative like u.u always find new lies. u have created a so called genocide. go and find a lie relevant and new.

the collaboration shows how bloodthirsty armenians are.

by Francalajian
Yes, and we eat babies for breakfast and hunt Turks for leisure.

"the collaboration shows how bloodthirsty armenians are."

You missed the point of your own argument. The cooperation was for "the greater good" in hopes of receiving a piece of land from the Nazi regime. On top of everything, there are so many stories of the Armenian regiment sparring lives of captives. Give me a break with this pathetic argument "King Fox".

To: Francalajian
collaborate with hitler
kill jews
carry out khojaly genocide
invade azerbaijan
for a piece of land and c urself as angel.
u should proud of urself.

Also, the Turkish Embassy in Germany saved Jewish Germans from prosecution by giving them Turkish passports.

"Yes, and we eat babies for breakfast and hunt Turks for leisure."
hahahaha, yes. very true.
ok, just kidding.

All jokes aside, citing as a legitimate academic source is like someone citing the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' as an academic source. Rachel knows what I'm talking about.

Also, I love how the copy/paste function allows illiterate jackasses like this King Fox character to feel as though he has some sense of dignity/credibility. The guy has trouble putting together a single sentence or a mere phrase in English. I find individuals like this very counter-productive to this groups (as well as society's) goals.
I may have severe disagreement with individuals in this group... like with Rachel, Lynn, or Bugra... but at least we can ACTUALLY express our disagreements like human beings and in full sentences when we are arguing.
Please don't give me that bullshit about being a non-native English speaker. I'm not a native English speaker, and I can put together sentence at a level above that of a 3rd grader. For god's sake, Bugra isn't even from America and even he can express his thoughts in words quite well.

Ok, that was my rant on idiots in the group that are still at elementary English levels.

To: Karniyarikian
his strengths academically may not be the English language.

Having said that, you prompted him to provide information and he did. The man in essence answered your call to him to provide facts.

So again, I'm sure "King Fox" has strengths in other fields you maybe weak on. Ultimately making you "illiterate" when he has home field advantage.

I respect Fox's commitment on the AG issue.

By the way Karniyarikian if you're going to put one illiterate person down, you mind as well not segregate them because of their ethnicity. There have been countless Armenians who struggle just as much as Fox on this forum.

Armenians that come on here and say "I am Armenian, second generationian survivorian of the genocidian.." Just an example, but I guess you get the idea..

To: Karniyarikian
thx kar-miki-an
the topic was my english and ur comments were very relevant.
khojaly genocide carried out by armenians in one night.
when it taken account i dont want to think what those bloodthirsty armenians did during ww2.

instead of talking about a so-called genocide, the Armenians should worry about their shameful past cooperation with the Nazis in the genocide of Jews in Europe between the years of 1935 and 1945

by Francalacian
What exactly do you know about Khojaly?

I informed myself from a first hand account of a soldier.
Before I share it with you, I am just curious the extent of the knowledge that "King Fox" (PLEASE CHANGE YOUR NAME!!!) has on this issue.

And about your English, A for effort but if you want to, write it in Turkish underneath so that one of our friends here can provide people like me and Shant with your views and arguments without having to decipher butchered English.

PS: Don't tell me that your only source of information was the video. This will prevent me from splitting my ribs.

To: Francalacian
actually i heard khojaly genocide last year.when i was in taksim a group of people were protesting armenia over khojaly genocide and i made some research about it i read a lot and last mounth there was a program on trt
(Turkish Radio and Television Company).also i have some azeri friends at university one of them lost his relatives during armenian occupation.

i think my english isnt topic.i have never claimed i have perfect english. i started learning english last year and still i am trying to teacher allways says write sth even if it isnot correct.but shant uses it to dilute topic .his comments about my english shows that what can be done when people s past mistakes were s very effective way to hide past cooperation and to make me silent by using my bad english.

on the other hand in my view turks dont have to learn prfect english because turkish is one of the most prevalent languages in the world spoken by 300.000.000 ppl even armenians use it as second language. unfortunately i cant say the same thing for u. u should learn english very well.

also my real name is önder abatay.pls write sth about topic not my english and name.

Antisemitism in Armenia
Although the contemporary relations between Israel and Armenia are normally good, some anti-Jewish sentiments are still present.

In April 1998, Igor Muradyan, a famous Armenian political analyst and economist, published an anti-semitic article in one of Armenia's leading newspapers Voice of Armenia. Muradyan claimed that the history of Armenian-Jewish relations has been filled with "Aryans vs. Semites" conflict manifestations. He accused Jews of inciting ethnic conflicts, including the dispute over Nagorno-Karabagh and demostrated concern for Armenia's safety in light of Israel's good relations with Turkey.[6]

In 2002, a book entitled National System (written by Romen Yepiskoposyan in Armenian and Russian) was printed and presented at the Union of Writers of Armenia. In that book, Jews (along with Turks) are indentified as number-one enemies of Armenians and are described as "the nation-destroyer with a mission of destruction and decomposition." A section in the book entitled The Greatest Falsification of the 20th Century denies the Holocaust, claiming that it is a myth created by Zionists to discredit "Aryans": "The greatest falsification in human history is the myth of Holocaust. <...> no one was killed in gas chambers. There were no gas chambers."[7] A speaker at the event also suggested the book should be distributed in schools in order to "develop a national idea and understanding of history." The event was marked with public accusations that Jews were responsible for the Armenian massacres of 1915.

Similar accusations were voiced by Armen Avetissian, the leader of the nationalist Armenian Aryan Order (AAO), on 11 February 2002, when he also called for the Israeli ambassador Rivka Kohen to be declared persona non grata in Armenia for Israel's refusal to give the Armenian massacres of 1915 equal status with the Holocaust. In addition, he asserted that the number of victims of the Holocaust has been overstated.[8]

In 2004, Armen Avetissian expressed extremist remarks against Jews in several issues of the AAO run The Armeno-Aryan newspaper, as well as during a number of meetings and press conferences. As a result, his party was excluded from the Armenian Nationalist Front.[9]

Shortly after, during a prime time talk show, the leader of the People's Party of Armenia and the owner of ALM television channel, Tigran Karapetian, accused Jews of assisting Ottoman authorities in the 1915 Armenian Genocide. His interviewee, Armen Avetissian stated that "the Armenian Aryans intend to fight against the Jewish-Masonic aggression and will do what it takes to repress evil in its own nest." Speaking about Armenia's Jewish community Avetissian said that it consists of "700 of those who identify themsevles as Jews and 50,000 of those whom the Aryans will soon reveal while cleansing the country of Jewish evil." The Jewish Council of Armenia addressed its concerns to the government and various human rights organizations demanding to stop promoting ethnic hatred and to ban ALM. However these demands were mostly disregarded.[9]

On 23 October 2004, head of the Department for Ethnic and Religious Minority Issues, Granoush Kharatian, publicly commented on so-called "Judaist" xenophobia in Armenia. She said: "Why are we not responding to the fact that on their Friday gatherings, Judaists continue to advocate hatred towards all non-Judaists as far as comparing the latter to cattle and propagating spitting on them?" [9] Kharatyan also accused local Jews of calling for "anti-Christian actions."[10]

The Jewish Council of Armenia sent an open letter to President Robert Kocharian expressing its deep concern with the recent rise of antisemitism. Armen Avetissian responded to this by publishing yet another antisemitic article in the Iravunq newspaper, where he stated: "Any country that has a Jewish minority is under big threat in terms of stability." Later while meeting with Chairman of the National Assembly of Armenia Artur Baghdasarian, head of the Jewish Council of Armenia Rimma Varzhapetian insisted that the government took steps to prevent further acts of antisemitism. Avetissian was eventually arested on 24 January 2005, however several prominent academic figures, such as Levon Ananyan (the head of the Writers union of Armenia) and composer Ruben Hakhverdian, supported Avetissian and called upon the authorities to release him. [11] In their demands to release an anti-semite, they were joined by opposition deputies and even ombudsman Larisa Alaverdian.[12]

In September 2006, while criticizing the American Global Gold corporation Armenian Minister of Nature Protection Vardan Aivazian said during a press-conference: "Do you know who you are defending? You are defending kikes! Go over there [company headquarters] and find out who is behind this company and if we should let them come here!"[13] [14] After Rimma Varzhapetian's protests, Aivazian claimed he didn't mean to offend Jews and such criticizm was intended strictly for the Global Gold company.

Recent vandalism by unknown individuals on Jewish Holocaust Memorial in central Yerevan was witnessed in one of the central parks of Armenian capital on 23 December 2007. A Nazi swastika symbol was scratched and black paint was splattered on the the simple stone. After notifying the local police, Rabbi Gershon Burshtein, a Chabad emissary who serves as Chief Rabbi of the country's tiny Jewish community said "I just visited the memorial the other day and everything was fine. This is terrible, as there are excellent relations between Jews and Armenians." The monument has been defaced and toppled several times in the past few years. It is located in the city's Aragast Park, a few blocks north of the centrally-located Republic Square, which is home to a number of government buildings

by Francalacian
Ok good . I like your answer. Believe me my English is perfect, so are my 3 other languages. I'm a cunning linguist ;)

So about the "Khojaly Genocide". First it cannot be a genocide, for it was not an attempt to systematically exterminate the Azeri population. It was a war as you know it.

Second, the Armenian troops had Khojaly surrounded. Khojaly obviously had a civilian population, accompanied by a small armed force. The Armenian troops offered the evacuation of the civilian population. The local militia advised against it, because they were using the civilians as a shield. Believe me, the Armenians could have easily gone in and killed everyone had the civilians not been there. So basically they wanted the civilians out so they can kill/take prisoner the armed forces. To this regard, they opened up a passage so that a column of civilians could get out and they could invade the village. There was Azeri military accompanying the column and they opened fire, both on their own people to scare them and on the Armenians.

And the Armenian troops stood there and got massacred because the Azeri forces were using a civilian shield.... NOT
They retaliated. I mean yes you shouldn't hurt civilians but if the enemy is going to use that in order to kill you, screw that....

It wasn't a genocide. It can be called a massacre and the responsibles are the Azeri armed forces for bringing such a sad fate upon their own people. The Armenians are also somewhat responsible... But their options were pretty limited.

-Stay and do nothing=death
-Run=Heavy casualties probably as you are turning your back to the enemy
-Try and shoot at the people with guns and in the process stray bullets from both sides wounding civilians=victory but breach of war conventions

Can you come up with another solution?

And now, a few years ago, some people came up with a dubious video and started yelling Khojaly Genocide.... Give me a break Onder and let this go...

To: Francalacian
i think your ideas about khojaly genocide are illogical and in favour of only accuse azeris.did azreis want armenians to invade their country and to kill azeri people.

do you think regarding only one side s ideas is objective way to decide wether it s genocide.your post is totally armenian side s view about khojaly genocide.

lte s look topic objectively
the executive director of Human Rights Watch has stated that: “we place direct responsibility for the civilian deaths with Karabakh Armenian forces. Indeed, neither our report nor that of Memorial includes any evidence to support the argument that Azerbaijani forces obstructed the flight of, or fired on Azeri civilians”.

actually your coment refutes your own ideas about armenian genocide you wrote that So about the "Khojaly Genocide". First it cannot be a genocide, for it was not an attempt to systematically exterminate the Azeri population. It was a war as you know it.

i can say the same thing about armenian genocide.first it cannot be a genocide, for it was not an attempt to systematically exterminate the armenian was a war as you know it.also ottoman soldiers never killed babies and was a relocation as you know it.

shortly i know u arent objective but at least u can try to be and when you write pls read both sides views.

*still you havent given a logical reason for armenian nazi collaboration.

To: Karniyarikian
citing as a legitimate academic source is like someone citing the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' as an academic source.

Hi there, Karniyarikian,

Is there any specifics you could point out at the TallArmenianTale site so that the site content could be viewed along with your version aired here at least.

I can neither defend the site or nor can understand your particulars until I find out, if you care to explain please

To: Karniyarikian is a site specifically geared towards glorifying Turkey while degrading Armenians. It claims to be geared towards falsifying the genocide claims, but a great chunk of its content has nothing to do with issues about the genocide and its surrounding debates. It attempts to portray Armenians in a negative way by any means possible. It is basically an anti-Armenian hate site. It is a collection of any and all information that can make Armenians look evil. Instead of dealing with the issue at hand, it simply attacks the character of Armenians. And it also glorifies Turks.

A simple example of this can be found on the 'Jewish' (which is already a pretty offensive title) section of the site. First of all, why the hell would you label a section of the site as 'Jewish.' Wouldn't 'Armenian-Jewish Relations' or 'Turkish-Jewish Relations' or 'Jews and the Armenian Genocide Claims' all be more appropriate title?
The first subsection in the 'Jewish' section is entitled 'Jews of Turkey.' It simply speaks of how there is a strong connection between Turks and Jews and how Jews have lived in Turkish lands for a long time. It also throws in random unsubstantiated claims of Armenians killing Azeri Jews. I apologize, but I fail to see how establishing/document a relationship between Turks and Jews does ANYTHING whatsoever to falsify the Genocide claims. In fact, I feel that people of a Jewish background might even find it offensive that the creator of this site somehow believes that by present a connection between his people and the Jewish people, Turkish claims somehow should become more credible. This seems to somewhat play into the nasty stereotype of Jewish world domination conspiracies. The author is pretty much implying "Jews are powerful, so if we establish a clearer connection between us and them, we'll look good."

Just visit the site and you will find a plethora of example of slander against Armenians or just non-Genocide related stories about Armenians whose sole purpose is to make Armenians look less credible. Some of the stories on the site are just simply stupid and have nothing to do with the Genocide and don't even make the Armenians look bad. For example, why the hell does an supposed "academic source" on Genocide issues need an entire page about "How the "Thanksgiving Bird" Acquired its Name" ( You really want to be the one citing from a source that has an article about how a bird was named 'Turkey.' The same subsection features a story about how Turks are 'kind to animals.' Is this a joke or what?

To: Karniyarikian
Thanks for that,
By just looking at your comments, you do have some valid points,
however, some of the stuff I've read at the site, as far as I remember -It is kind of too much for me to read A-Z of the whole site as one can imagine- there are some (Anti-Armenian) truth, which an Armenian may not be able accept gracefully in front of others, it is like "them against us" thing.

i.e. if an Englishman calls you wog in England, you get angry. On the other hand if an Armenian calls you wog in England you just laugh and take it easy.)

I need to go an read that site's few articles along with your comments in hand in order to respond to you better & to be fair to both of you ( site & you)

I also agree that there are some unrelated Turkish-Armenian issues at the site too.

Then again one can not be expected to be satisfied 100% in any given message but could still pick and choose if needed.

To me, it is like buying a newspaper or a magazine and finding some content very intriguing and to my liking very much, and some others are so against my common understanding -whether it is the truth or not- god knows.

Maybe it is not so related here but there is an editorial strategy to employ the totally opposite view journalists, writers. I am of course not relating it to that site here, and personally I like reading conflicting views as part of my studies (second year journalism student, I am) these days.

and if you happen to be into journalism, please feel free to share your resources in investigative journalism as well.

by Francalacian
"To me, it is like buying a newspaper or a magazine and finding some content very intriguing and to my liking very much, and some others are so against my common understanding -whether it is the truth or not- god knows."

Unfortunately some people do not have that common sense, or that ability of sorting out and believe everything they want to hear. Ex. Religious groups who twist religious edicts such as the Corran or the Bible to their evil means.

And unfortunately, most of the stuff on TAT is pre-evilized so their is a huge bias on almost every single article

To: Francalacian
So about the "Khojaly Genocide". First it cannot be a genocide, for it was not an attempt to systematically exterminate the Azeri population. It was a war as you know it.

Yes, you are right the people who got exterminated were not Armenian's so it cannot be a genocide, we got that. But, if the same happens to Armenian's it is Genocide that doesnt even need to be proven :))

Read More . . .