www.talkcyprus.org

[brother]

Well France has now officially demonstrated its double standards and that Freedom of speech does not exist there.

French MPs pass 'genocide' bill

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6043730.stm

[Kifeas]

brother wrote: Well France has now officially demonstrated its double standards and that Freedom of speech does not exist there.

French MPs pass 'genocide' bill

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6043730.stm

Unlike the genocide attempted and /or committed by the Greek Cypriots against the Turkish Cypriots between 1963-1974, no such Armenian genocide has ever taken place! Such an Armenian genocide occurred only in the imagination of the anti-Turkish west, like it is only the imagination of those claiming that a genocide and annihilation against the Turkish Cypriots, has never taken place nor was ever attempted in Cyprus.

[brother]

For those interested this is near to what happened those times and proves imo that the Armenian Genocide is fabricated for political reasons and why France feel the need to be involved.

Quote: What happened to the Ottoman Armenians? (I)

Opinion by Professor Nursen Maz?c?

Professor Nursen MAZICI
ISTANBUL - TDN Guest Writer

  One of the basic aims of the social sciences is to try to solve the contradictory issues and problems between people, groups, communities and societies, and their political and social systems. The problems must be fixed objectively and according to cause and effect. The other necessity during scientific research is to avoid making propaganda and invoking the wrath of one group against another. In addition, researchers should not attempt to persuade others relating to their political beliefs. While studying the political history of the world, which has consisted of many wars that have caused the loss of uncountable human lives, the documents one must depend on are primary resources rather than secondary ones. Another important step in scientific research is to use the terms, notions and concepts related to the topic in the correct form.

  In this context, since 1965 there has been an unfounded allegation that genocide was carried out against 1,500,000 Armenians by the Ottoman government in 1915 during World War I. First of all, it should be remembered what kind of position the Ottoman Armenians had before and during the war.

  In addition, although nearly 25 million people, including Turks, Kurds, Arabs, Britons, French, Germans and Russians, died during World War I, what distinguished the Armenians' deaths, which have been discussed for nearly 41 years, is the subject of this paper.

  

Ottoman Armenians organizations before the war:

  After living together in peace with Turks for more than 850 years, the Ottoman Armenians were encouraged to rebel against the Ottoman state by imperialist England, France and Russia, which aimed to divide and share the Ottoman Empire in the late 19th century.

  Professor Langer, a diplomatic historian from Harvard University, explained how the Ottoman Armenians organized at Istanbul, Trabzon, Van, Harput, Izmir and Aleppo against the Ottoman Empire to work toward its collapse and create an independent Armenian state. Thus the Hunchak Armenian bands and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) secretly arranged revolutionary bands that could fight the government and ìterrorize government officials, traitors and usurers and all kinds of exploitersî during the 1890s. [1] One of the revolutionary Armenians told Dr. Hamlin, [2] who was the founder of Robert College in Istanbul, that the Hunchak Armenian bands would:

  … watch their opportunity to kill Turks and Kurds, set fire to their villages and then make their escape into the mountains. The enraged Muslims will then rise, and fall upon the defenseless Armenians and slaughter them with such barbarity that Russia will enter in the name of humanity and Christian civilization and take possession. [3]

  Dr. Hamlin was shocked. He told the revolutionary that the scheme was atrocious and infernal beyond anything ever known, and he got this reply:

   It appears so to you, no doubt; but we Armenians have determined to be free. Europe listened to Bulgarian horrors and made Bulgaria free. She will listen to our cry when it goes up in the shrieks and blood of millions of women and children … We are desperate. We will do it. [4]

  Therefore, the Hunchak Armenians decided that social organization in the Ottoman Empire could be shifted by violence against Turks. They explained how to terrify the Ottoman government. To achieve it, their methods included ìpropaganda, agitation, terror organization and peasant and worker activitiesî led by guerrilla bands. [5] For example, the Hunchak Armenians arranged a demonstration of Bab-i Ali (the Sublime Porte), which caused much bloodshed on Sep. 18-30, 1895 in Istanbul. [6] Similarly, on Aug. 26, 1896, members of the ARF bombed the Imperial Ottoman Bank in Istanbul in an event similar to the Sept. 11, 2001 Al Qaeda ????? attack against the United States. The event at the Imperial Ottoman Bank caused an uprising by Muslims in which more than 900 Armenians and 700 Muslims died in Istanbul. Hayik Tiryakian, who was one of the people who bombed the bank, spoke about the attack:

  …6 people were sufficient to begin the operation. We set out, with sack[s] full of bombs on our shoulders and guns in our hands. … The bombs were giving incredible results; they did not kill [the staff of the bank and the people around the bank] instantly, but tore their flesh apart, and made them writhe with pain and agony. We went with Garo to the president's office and wrote down our conditions. We demanded that the Powers [referring to England, France and Russia] fulfill our requests, that those who took part in this confrontation be freed; if not, we would blow up the bank along with ourselves … 3 had died, 6 of our friends were wounded. Our enemies' casualties [implying Turks] were also heavy. [7]

  

Footnotes:

  [1] William L. Langer, ìThe Diplomacy of Imperialism 1890-1902î Volume 1, New York & London Alfred. A. Knopf 1935, p.155

  [2] Dr. Cyrus Hamlin was one of American missionaries in the late term of the Ottoman Empire. So he had good friendship with Armenians as well as Turks.

  [3] Langer, op.cit., p.157

  [4] ibid, p.158

  [5] Louise Nalbandian, The Armenian Revolutionary Movement, University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967 pp.110-111

  [6] ibid, p.122

  [7] Kamuran Gürün, ìThe Armenian File The Myth of Innocence Exposed,î K.Rustem& Bro.and Weidenfeld & Nicolson Ltd. London. Nicosia. Istanbul 1985, p.158 quoted from Vartanian's book ìHistory of Dasnaksutyunî pp.160-163



Article here

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=55648

[brother]

This is part 2 of the above article

Quote: What happened to the Ottoman Armenians? (II)

Opinion by Nursen MAZICI

Nursen MAZICI
ISTANBUL - TDN Guest Writer

  

The position of Armenians during the war:

  By 1914, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) had recruited many militants and in the spring of 1915, besieged the city of Van, massacring tens of thousands of Muslims and spearheading a Russian invasion of Eastern Ottoman Anatolia. For example, a report I obtained from the National Archives (N) proved that the ARF admitted to killing 60,000 Muslims in Sarikamis, Kars, in 1914 and massacring many Muslims who lived in Eastern Anatolia by collaborating with the Russian and French armies, which occupied eastern and southeastern Anatolia from 1914 to 1918.[1]

  According to this report, the ARF explained what they had done, which was admitted by the Ottoman Armenians who had migrated to the United States as follows: In August 1914, a Turkish mission visited the ARF, which had congregated for its annual meeting at Erzurum in eastern Anatolia. Afterward, the Turkish mission suggested to the ARF that ìif the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire and of Russia [make] common cause with Turkey, Turkey [will agree] to create, with a guarantee from Germany, an autonomous Armenian state by giving Erzurum, Van and Bitlis in Turkey.î However, the ARF rejected this arrangement. (p.3-4)

  Meanwhile, before the entry of the Ottoman Empire into the war in October 1914, Russia, through Russian Commander Count Varantzoff Dachkoff, ìproposed to Armenian political organizations that if Turkey should enter the war and if Armenians [make] common cause with Russia, thereby contributing to a Russian victory over Turkey, Russia [will] incorporate in the peace treaty stipulations for the complete autonomy of the six vilayets (provinces) of Turkey,î and the Armenians accepted the proposal. Therefore, ìWith the Armenians' excellent fighting qualities, especially when in the presence of a hereditary enemy [Turks are implied], these troops really made the difference between success and failure to the Russians in the Caucasus." (p.7)

  Another comment in the report is that more than 200,000 Armenians fought with the allies [England, Russia and France, which wanted to divide and share the Ottoman Empire] or independently, and 100,000 lost their lives. ìOf the 900 college and university students, especially of those whose families were in Turkey, (p.21) that enlisted in the Foreign Legion and fought on the Western front all, but 55 were killed in action and of the survivors every one received one or more decorations for gallantry in action. Following the defection of Russia, the Armenians took over the Caucasus front -- 600 miles long ñ and prevented the Turks from reaching the Baku oil fields for nine long months.î (p.1)

  The Armenians had achieved the plan of the ARF, which was related to Dr. Hamlin, step by step, during the war on the Caucasus front. The report says: "In 1914 … the 10th Turkish Army, on its way from Olti to Sarikamis, was held up for 36 hours at the Barbuz Pass by the first Armenian battalion, under Armenian Col. Keri. This delay enabled the Russians to concentrate their forces at Sarikamis, where Enver Pasha [the minister of war in the Ottoman government] failed utterly in his offensive.î It adds: ìThe Turks lost 30,000, largely due to freezing conditions. Ali Ihsan Pasha and his staff were captured and shipped to Siberia. … When Enver returned to Istanbul, he publicly announced that his failure was due to the intervention of the Armenians. … Enver told the truth. … In April, 1915 … Armenian leader Andranik fought off Gen. Khalil Bey for three days. When Russian reinforcements arrived, 3,600 Turks lay dead and wounded in front of Armenian trenches." (pp. 9-10)

  As a matter of fact, this information, that 100,000 Armenians had fought against the Turks in World War I, was confirmed at the U.S. Senate as well. [2]

  Finally, the ARF declared ìa people's warî [3] against the Turkish government and began to implement its plan by massacring hundreds of thousands of people. According to information provided by the Turkish State Archive, more than 523,000 Turk Ottoman subjects were killed by the ARF from 1910 to 1922. [4] As is well known, American and European Armenians have been claiming since 1973 that on April 24, 1915 there was an Armenian genocide by the Ottoman government. As explained in the report, the situation is so confused that it is almost impossible to understand who massacred whom in April 1915.

  There has been an allegation that after the entry of the Ottoman Empire into World War I, a so-called Armenian genocide paralleled the genocide of Jews by the Nazi regime during World War II. As Professor Bernard Lewis mentioned, this allegation is unfounded because what happened to the Ottoman Armenians was the result of a massive Armenian armed rebellion against the Turks, which began even before the war broke out, and continued on a larger scale.

  "To make this a parallel with the holocaust in Germany you would have to assume the Jews of Germany had been engaged in an armed rebellion against the German state, collaborating with the allies against Germany. That in the deportation order the cities of Hamburg and Berlin were exempted, persons in the employment of the state were exempted and deportation only applied to the Jews of Germany proper, so that when they got to Poland they were welcomed and sheltered by Polish Jews." [5]

  The Russian occupation continued from 1914 to 1916 in the eastern region. Consequently, it means that it was impossible to massacre Armenians who lived in eastern Turkey in 1915 because neither the Ottoman government nor the army had control over the region. Afterward, it is probable that the German and Ottoman governments, which were allied with each other during World War I, decided to deport the AFR members and their families temporarily to Syria, which was a province of the Ottoman Empire and far from all active fronts at that time.

  Finally, the Ottoman government had to deport them at the insistence of the ARF on May 27, 1915. However, during the deportation some Armenians were killed in revenge by Kurdish tribes and by local officials whose members and relatives had been massacred by the AFR between the 1880s and 1915. The situation in the region is well described by Gen. Harbord: "In the territory untouched by war from which Armenians were deported, the ruined villages are undoubtedly due to Turkish deviltry, but where Armenians advanced and retired with the Russians their retaliatory cruelties unquestionably rivaled the Turks in their inhumanity." [6]

  

Footnotes:

  [1] National Archives (N) RG 59 Records of the Department of State Relating to Political Relations Between the United States and Turkey, 1910-1929 Roll No: 6, M : NO:365 Document No:711.672/473, and Date: June 7,1926, Herbert Adams Gibbons ìArmenia in the World War,î 1926, New York.

  [2] Congressional Record Proceedings and Debates -- Senate, Volume LXVII, Part-1, March 17, 1925, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1926, p.292

  [3] Nalbandian, op. cit. p.156

  [4] The New York Times, April 18, 2005

  [5] Gunay Evinch, ìThe Armenian Cause Today,î The Turkish American, Vol.2 No.8, Summer 2005, p. 24

  [6] Maj. Gen. James. G. Harbord, U.S. Army, Conditions in the Near East, Report of the American Military Mission to Armenia, Presented by Mr. Lodge, April 13, 1920 -- Ordered to be printed, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1920, p. 9


Article here

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=55652

[Khan]

I'm a looking forward to the moment when thousands of Turkish proterstors march on the French streets saying "We do not recognise the so-called Armenian genocide". Then they will see how stupid and unenforcable the law is.

Drop article 301 they tell Turkey, allow freedom of expression, allow full discussion about the Armenians. Except in France, there is no longer full discussion on Armenians, the French government has decided what that discussion must be. Who are these people to teach Turkey on fredom of expression?

This is not just about the Armenians, this France's way of telling Turkey it is not welcome. It is Europe showing its old bigotted and racist face again, something we were meant to have buried 60 years ago.

[brother]

Kifeas wrote: brother wrote: Well France has now officially demonstrated its double standards and that Freedom of speech does not exist there.

French MPs pass 'genocide' bill

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6043730.stm

Unlike the genocide attempted and /or committed by the Greek Cypriots against the Turkish Cypriots between 1963-1974, no such Armenian genocide has ever taken place! Such an Armenian genocide occurred only in the imagination of the anti-Turkish west, like it is only the imagination of those claiming that a genocide and annihilation against the Turkish Cypriots, has never taken place nor was ever attempted in Cyprus.

This Kifeas is about the freedom of speech for people to say yes it happened or no it did not unlike the French parliment that has now tried to gag/hush up people who do not recognise it using prison and hefty fines as a stick.

Going to cyprus we have the freedom to deny or accept what happened to the Turkish Cypriot but im sure you follow the Tpap line that not one Turkish Cypriot was hurt in 1974 :wink:

[cypezokyli]

i dont really consider it important if they recognised the armenian genocide.
but if they indeed legalised anyone that doubts that, it is not only rediculous, but also hindering dialogue

[Kifeas]

It is no secret that the French bill to criminalize the denial of the Armenian genocide is an act of retaliation against the Turkey for not withdrawing the article 301 from its penal code that considers it a crime to insult “Turkishness!” Under article 301, someone may be prosecuted in Turkey for insulting "Turkishness," if he claims that the Armenian genocide did happen. Turkey was called repeatedly by the EU to withdraw the article, or at least to give it a more substantial definition. Turkey refuses to do so. Only yesterday, the French PM called Erdogan and asked him to do so, so that this bill doesn’t go through the French parliament. Erdogan refused. It is utter hypocrisy for Turkey now to complain against France, when her own laws are even worst in terms of freedom of expression. What does it mean to insult “Turkishness?” What nonsense! And ...look who is talking!

[brother]

Kifeas wrote: It is no secret that the French bill to criminalize the denial of the Armenian genocide is an act of retaliation against the Turkey for not withdrawing the article 301 from its penal code that considers it a crime to insult “Turkishness!” Under article 301, someone may be prosecuted in Turkey for insulting "Turkishness," if he claims that the Armenian genocide did happen. Turkey was called repeatedly by the EU to withdraw the article, or at least to give it a more substantial definition. Turkey refuses to do so. Only yesterday, the French PM called Erdogan and asked him to do so, so that this bill doesn’t go through the French parliament. Erdogan refused. It is utter hypocrisy for Turkey now to complain against France, when her own laws are even worst in terms of freedom of expression. What does it mean to insult “Turkishness?” What nonsense! And ...look who is talking!

So in your mind kifeas two wrongs make a right......Turkey is not pretending to be the cradle of democracy and freedom of speech like France is and if what you are suggesting (which i think is utter rubbish) is true then France is in no way behaving in a European manner and is only gain from this is to alienate the Turkish people.

[Kifeas]

brother wrote: Kifeas wrote: It is no secret that the French bill to criminalize the denial of the Armenian genocide is an act of retaliation against the Turkey for not withdrawing the article 301 from its penal code that considers it a crime to insult “Turkishness!” Under article 301, someone may be prosecuted in Turkey for insulting "Turkishness," if he claims that the Armenian genocide did happen. Turkey was called repeatedly by the EU to withdraw the article, or at least to give it a more substantial definition. Turkey refuses to do so. Only yesterday, the French PM called Erdogan and asked him to do so, so that this bill doesn’t go through the French parliament. Erdogan refused. It is utter hypocrisy for Turkey now to complain against France, when her own laws are even worst in terms of freedom of expression. What does it mean to insult “Turkishness?” What nonsense! And ...look who is talking!

So in your mind kifeas two wrongs make a right......Turkey is not pretending to be the cradle of democracy and freedom of speech like France is and if what you are suggesting (which i think is utter rubbish) is true then France is in no way behaving in a European manner and is only gain from this is to alienate the Turkish people.

Do you mean to say that I talk rubbish? What is the rubbish I said?

[brother]

Kifeas wrote: brother wrote: Kifeas wrote: It is no secret that the French bill to criminalize the denial of the Armenian genocide is an act of retaliation against the Turkey for not withdrawing the article 301 from its penal code that considers it a crime to insult “Turkishness!” Under article 301, someone may be prosecuted in Turkey for insulting "Turkishness," if he claims that the Armenian genocide did happen. Turkey was called repeatedly by the EU to withdraw the article, or at least to give it a more substantial definition. Turkey refuses to do so. Only yesterday, the French PM called Erdogan and asked him to do so, so that this bill doesn’t go through the French parliament. Erdogan refused. It is utter hypocrisy for Turkey now to complain against France, when her own laws are even worst in terms of freedom of expression. What does it mean to insult “Turkishness?” What nonsense! And ...look who is talking!

So in your mind kifeas two wrongs make a right......Turkey is not pretending to be the cradle of democracy and freedom of speech like France is and if what you are suggesting (which i think is utter rubbish) is true then France is in no way behaving in a European manner and is only gain from this is to alienate the Turkish people.

Do you mean to say that I talk rubbish? What is the rubbish I said?

Quote: French bill to criminalize the denial of the Armenian genocide is an act of retaliation against the Turkey for not withdrawing the article 301 from its penal code

This part above i feel is rubbish, imo the French are doing this for domestic political reasons(Armenian disporia votes with elections coming), does not want Turkey in the EU and to top it up a pinch of Turkophobia.

If it really was for the reason given by you then i must say that France is in no way a country that represents freedom of speech at all and her politicians are a bunch of spiteful and revenge motivated idiots.

[Khan]

Kifeas wrote: It is no secret that the French bill to criminalize the denial of the Armenian genocide is an act of retaliation against the Turkey for not withdrawing the article 301 from its penal code that considers it a crime to insult “Turkishness!” Under article 301, someone may be prosecuted in Turkey for insulting "Turkishness," if he claims that the Armenian genocide did happen. Turkey was called repeatedly by the EU to withdraw the article, or at least to give it a more substantial definition. Turkey refuses to do so. Only yesterday, the French PM called Erdogan and asked him to do so, so that this bill doesn’t go through the French parliament. Erdogan refused. It is utter hypocrisy for Turkey now to complain against France, when her own laws are even worst in terms of freedom of expression. What does it mean to insult “Turkishness?” What nonsense! And ...look who is talking!

There is a difference Kifeas. Turkey is told that to join the EU it has to drop 301. Now why should it be made a pre-condition for Turkey when France has adopted a bill which can be considered practically the same. The hypocrisy lies with Europe, not Turkey.

[100%cypriot]

Turkey , French relations are starting to get more strained.


Quote: Turkey says the law will seriously damage bilateral relations, and deal a heavy blow to the freedom of expression in France.


http://www.brt.gov.nc.tr/ENews/2006/102006/121006/FRANSA%20TURKIYE.htm

[cannedmoose]

For all those who dispute the Armenian genocide and decry the loss of free speech in France... please tell me why to debate whether a genocide even took place against Armenians in the Ottoman Empire is a crime in Turkey punishable by lengthy imprisonment (and effectively 'civil death'). I think it's scandelous to accuse the French of silencing free speech when Turkey continues to prevent investigations that would prove one way or another.

Sorry if that offends some of my friends on here, but that's the way I see it as a dispassionate observer.

[cypezokyli]

cannedmoose wrote: For all those who dispute the Armenian genocide and decry the loss of free speech in France... please tell me why to debate whether a genocide even took place against Armenians in the Ottoman Empire is a crime in Turkey punishable by lengthy imprisonment (and effectively 'civil death'). I think it's scandelous to accuse the French of silencing free speech when Turkey continues to prevent investigations that would prove one way or another.

Sorry if that offends some of my friends on here, but that's the way I see it as a dispassionate observer.

once again the topic here is not "comparing all other countries with turkey". as a matter of principle , what the french did is wrong. one cannot penalise the other opinion.
since when is the argument : "well turkey is doing it" a valid excuse?


imo, since i supported the popes speech, idonomeas theatre play , the drawings of the prophet, straws comments, i am against 301 , and our goverments indirect sencorschip on some people , i simply cannot support the french action.

that doesnt mean ofcource that france has suddenly turned undemocratic (anyone who would claim that would be rediculous) , or that this action should provide an excuse for further stupidities.