This essay appeared in
response to a question regarding the U.N.'s having recognized the Armenian "Genocide." Afterwards, I wasn't sure
whether the U.N. declared such a recognition... since the only ones saying so
were the Armenian Assembly of America. Four paragraphs into the essay below,
the AAA claimed U.N. recognition on or before the year 2000, and yet U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq declared on
October 5th, 2000: "(The) United Nations has not
approved or endorsed a
report labeling the Armenian experience as Genocide."
I believe you are asking what is my
response to the United Nations' having recognized the Armenian "Genocide." In
other words, the U.N. represents the world, and if the world has recognized the Armenian
"Genocide," then what more need be said? That proves there must have been a
genocide, and there is no need for further discussion.
In order to answer, we cannot simply look
at the end result. This is the kind of case where we would need to examine the history of
events that led to the end result.
The Armenian Diaspora has spread all over
the world. We know the one million Armenians in the United States of America (where
probably more Armenians live in the world outside of Armenia itself, the latter of which
had 3.4 million people in 2000) and the half a million Armenians in France have
contributed to immense Armenian influence in those two particular countries. However, when
I look at lands I would have never suspected coming across as pro-Armenian... a local
Armenian group residing within that land always emerges from the background, as the
driving force behind the pro-Armenian activity.
Here is a description (www.aaainc.org/genocideintro.htm)
from the Armenian Assembly of America (with a $2.5 million budget) of the
"Armenian Genocide Reaffirmation":
A growing number of
countries and multinational organizations, including the European Parliament and the
United Nations, now recognize and reaffirm the Armenian Genocide as historical fact. In
1995 the Russian parliament adopted a resolution on the Armenian Genocide; in 1996 the
Canadian House of Commons and the Greek Parliament also adopted similar resolutions. The
Lebanese Chamber of Deputies followed in 1997 and in 1998 the Belgian Senate, French
National Assembly and the Council of Europe all passed resolutions that reaffirmed the
Armenian Genocide. Now members of U.S. House of Representatives are working diligently to
ensure Congressional Affirmation of the Armenian Genocide in the year 2000.
(This particular resolution, out of the
many that have been introduced over the years in the U.S. Congress, was brought by
Republican James Rogan, representing the 25,000 potential
Armenian-American voters from his Californian district, in a bid to help Rep. Rogan's
uphill fight for re-election. The resolution almost passed, until President Bill Clinton
wisely nipped it in the bud... keeping America's national interests in mind.)
And here is a list (to
1998) of all the many countires who have mindlessly adopted resolutions to support the
Armenian "Genocide," courtesy of a web site from Armenian friends in Greece:
On this list, I especially enjoyed the
neutral ones from 13 June 1997 — The Association of Genocide
Scholars ... and from 22 April 1998 — The National Assembly of
the Republic of Nagorno Karabagh. Russia, in particular, should
be ashamed for hopping on this bandwagon. Ultimately, the Armenians must accept their own
responsibility for their own actions that led to the relocation policy in 1915... however,
the Russians (and the British, to a lesser extent) had a huge part to play in using the
Armenians as pawns. Russia played a key role in emboldening the Armenians to
systematically massacre 500,000-600,000 Turks/Muslims, out of the over 2.5 million who
died from all wartime causes.
Let's examine the anatomy of these resolutions.
Case study: America.
The Armenian lobby
in the United States has been resoundingly successful. The main reason: they play
the ethnic race/Christian vs. Muslim cards expertly well. No "Muslim"
lobby of any power exists to effectively refute and oppose them,
and the Armenians know how to exploit this inequity.
Just one example of
their success: they actually managed to get the U.S. Congress to cut foreign
aid to Azerbaijan after the Armenians' sneak, unprovoked attack on
Azerbaijan in 1992. The Armenian soldiers, true to their ways, swooped down on the
citizenry, and murdered many in the most inhumane of ways (The Armenian-friendly Boston
Globe reported in November 21, 1993: What we see now is a systematic
destruction of every village in their way, said one senior US official. It’s one
of the most disgusting things we’ve seen).... taking at least 20% of
Azerbaijan's territory, and driving a million human beings from their homes. Yet,
cowardly/self-serving and ignorant U.S. Congressmen decided to penalize
And it's not only
because Armenia claims to be Christian like the United States, while Azerbaijan is
Muslim. Muslim Azerbaijan has no real lobby in America, but the well-financed
Armenian-American lobby has plenty of greenbacks to fill the pockets of unprincipled
Here's what Samuel
Weems said, in 2002:
The Armenians have perhaps 40-50 full time professionals in
Washington DC doing nothing but working each and every day to undercut Turkey and
Azerbaijan and promote themselves for more foreign aid taxpayer funding. Turkish
Americans have - 0- staff and office working for them in Washington DC. The Turks
really should do more to protect themselves. All they have to do is tell truth! Here
is an eye-opening calculation for you: Armenians, in the last 10 years, have
probably spent about 14 million dollars to support all the political candidates that
they did. When those candidates got elected, Armenia got 1.4 billion dollars in the
same 10 years as US Foreign Aid. That is, for every one dollar Armenian Americans
"invested", they got $100 back in US Aid to Armenia! 100 to 1 return! This
is a better return than Las Vegas casinos! (smiles) Wake up Turkish Americans!. Get
may not like Sam Weems, but the only relevant matter is whether these facts and
figures are correct.
Here is an Armenian
Assembly of America page that lends evidence to how frightened Americans should be,
demonstrating the lack of objectivity and limited intellectual capacity of their
elected political leaders (of course, there are those, like Frank Baloney Jr...
others call him Frank Pallone, Jr. ... who might well have been
bought by the Armenians):
Notice how almost
all are human rubber-stamps, saying exactly what they've been told, parroting what
Armenian-Americans have been moaning about for a century and longer, such as how the
Terrible Turk massacred 1.5 million of their Christian forefathers. If they haven't
been bought, these people are either Christian sympathizers, or simply naive...
they've been hearing a big lie all their lives, and they firmly believe it, by
(I would have loved
to hear how Rep. Adam Schiff of California handled his
testimony of rattling off an endless list of Armenian victims' names, for dramatic
effect. I wonder if he managed, without getting tongue-tied. Rep. Schiff, by the
way, was James Rogan's Democratic opponent in the election Rogan hoped to salvage by
introducing the genocide resolution. The one thing both men had in common was
kissing Armenian buttocks.)
I don't have the
time to check the exact figures now, but in the case of the world's second most
Armenian-loving country, France (I can't be sure, but perhaps the order of
Armenian-loving countries would work out thus: 1. America 2. France 3. Armenia),
their Armenian genocide resolution passed when only about one-tenth -- a
"skeleton crew" -- of the Assembly people were present. The next time the
fuller body of representatives came in for a full day's work, they didn't dare to
veto what went on before. There are so many powerful Armenians in France, after all.
It's the country where Boghos Nubar began the powerful Armenian organization (the
AGBU), that today has an annual budget of 27 million dollars. This is only one of
many powerful Armenian organizations throughout the world, albeit likely among the
Throughout the world, Armenians have been
successful in getting similar resolutions adopted. Many are countries where Turkey is
practically a non-entity. It doesn't help that Turkey has no real friends in the world.
Even those friends like the United States are only friendly when Turkey acts like a vassal
state... as proven earlier in 2003. Every wonderful thing Turkey has done over the years
supporting America's interests is quickly forgotten, the moment Turkey steps out of line.
(And this particular example was probably the first time Turkey stepped out of line, in
It was the United States that put an
embargo on Turkey after the Cyprus intervention. It didn't matter that the Greeks broke
every rule in the book in years past, violating all the agreements... it didn't matter
that Turkish Cypriots were getting massacred in years past, and had the plan to unite with
Greece succeeded, every Turkish Cypriot would have been massacred (as Nicos Sampson, the
leader, admitted years later in a Feb. 26, 1981 interview with
the Greek newspaper, Eleftherotipia), and it didn't matter what
Turkey did was legal, as even an Athens court admitted in 1979. No nation has recognized
the validity of Northern Cyprus. (I remember reading Bangladesh did, for at least a
while..? And North Korea..!)
So if Armenians have established
themselves all over the world and are active on this issue, of course they will succeed in
getting their resolutions passed... all over the world. Especially if they are wealthy.
The usually apathetic and ignorant Turks who are in these countries are mainly in their
own little worlds, and the playing field is wide open for the Armenians.
Let's put aside the fact that
"Resolutions" are worthless and have no legal meaning. These
"Resolutions" merely express the thoughts of the officials who vote for them.
The sneaky Armenian plan all these years has been to get these resolutions passed, just so
they can say, see. The world agrees with us. Next step: reparations and land.
(Of course, the Treaty
of Gumru that was signed on December 2, 1920 between the young Turkish government and the
Armenian Republic declared there shall be no reparations, and we all know Armenia would
never dream of breaking her word. This treaty also gave a provision to allow the relocated
Armenians to return to their lands within one year. By contrast, according to an addendum
to Dr. Dennis Papazian's amazing "What
Every Armenian Should Know," "Russia... forbade Armenian
refugees...from returning to their lands, which the Russian armies had overrun during the
war." Armenians may want to read stories of William Saroyan, such as Antranik
of Armenia — to get the perspective the real enemy of the Armenians were not the
Turks, but the Russians.)
So let's get to the United Nations'
recognition of the Armenian "Genocide." The U.N. is also a political body. if
Turkey has no friends in the world, and if the Armenians have sneakily succeeded in
getting many countries to adopt these resolutions, how do you think the representatives of
these countries are going to vote? Are they going to go against the resolutions their home
countries have already passed? Those countries that the Armenians haven't gotten around to
passing resolutions yet... the ones that have no affinity for Turkey... how do you think
they're going to vote? Why, everybody is saying there is an Armenian genocide, so there
must have been one. Is anybody really going to take the time to study this issue?
"If you tell a lie big enough and
often enough and no one challenges you - a great number of people will
believe the lie no matter how big it is."
If one looks to prove the Armenian
"Genocide," it won't do to point to people's opinions formed exclusively by
distorted Armenian history, or who have ulterior motives. People of honor and integrity...
genuine truth-seekers... have only one place to look: the facts of OBJECTIVE
Do most Western sources that lend
evidence... like Morgenthau, foreign consuls, Bryce, the missionaries, Lepsius, the N.Y.
Times... have conflicts of interest? Yes, they do. Do most Western sources that lend
counter-evidence have conflicts of interest? Westerners who have grown up being told the
Turks were cruel savages? No, they don't. Did the "Nuremberg" of WWI, the Malta
Tribunal, find the Turks innocent... after nearly two-and-one-half years of desperately
searching all documents within reach in Allied-occupied Istanbul (and in other countries),
employing a crack team of Armenian researchers? Yes, it did. (Remember, the British could
have conducted a mock trial in 1919 and gotten the matter over with as they originally
planned.... just like the 1919 Ottoman kangaroo courts. Keep that in mind when you come
across Armenian reasons to discredit the Malta Tribunal.)
I am a truth-seeker... and I hope you
are, too. I don't care what the Turkish government says, I don't care what any Turk
says... I make up my own mind for myself. The moment I run into GENUINE proof, I would be
the first to say... yes, there was an Ottoman government sponsored plan to exterminate the
Armenian people. Why not? The government in charge, after all, was overturned by the
present Turkish government in charge. I owe no allegiance to the Ottoman government. In
fact, ultimately, I owe no allegiance to anybody or any entity, but the principles of
truth and honor. I love my country, but if America does something clearly wrong, you would
not find me defending what America has done. Definitely no less would apply to the nation