Tall Armenian Tale


The Other Side of the Falsified Genocide


  "Is Russia the Offender?" (DUH!)  
First Page


Major Players
Links & Misc.



Mahmut Ozan
Edward Tashji
Sam Weems

The following appeared in
The Nebraska State Journal, June 15, 1899:




Just when the peace conference Is deliberating at The Hague on the invitation of Czar Nicholas, it must be somewhat embarrassing to the Russians to have the story put In general circulation that the czar was at the bottom of. the Armenian massacre that has so stirred up the indignation of the Christian powers against the bloody Turk.

The row was started by Armenian conspirators who were making an open effort to raise an insurrection in Armenia. Much has been said by European and American missionaries in Armenia about the colossal folly of these young conspirators who so uselessly excited the animosity and fanaticism of the Turks and brought destruction upon the innocent all through Asia Minor.

Now It Is charged that Russian agents hired these young men to head a bogus insurrection and at the same time, slyly aggravated the alarm of the Turks and egged them on to revenge and murder. The object of this wicked mischief-making, it is charged, was to get the Armenians killed off in the eastern part of Asia Minor so that when the czar has perfected his plans to annex this region he will not be bothered with a turbulent population.

These be very serious charges against the czar and he ought to set himself right if he can. It must be confessed that it is on all fours with Russian policy in other regions of the east to stir up insurrections and make thereby some sort of justification for Russian Interference to "protect Christians," and keep the peace of the world. Calculating ferocity has distinguished the policy of the Romanoff ever since it siezed [sic] imperial power In the east. Apparently, its civilization is stlll of the thinnest of veneering.

 Quick Analysis

Let's see now;

1) Russia has been after control of the Dardanelles and access to warm waters for the longest time. [Check.]

2) Armenians were, pound for pound, arguably the most prosperous in Ottoman society; possessing an internal autonomy as granted in the millet system, they were completely free to practice their religion, language, culture. Not to say they were living in a utopia and had no problems — there is no utopia anywhere in the world — but they were generally content. (That is why they were called "The Loyal Millet.")

3) Armenians who started up the most powerful revolutionary societies, the Hunchaks and especially the Dashnaks, were foreigners, originating primarily from the Caucasus.

By golly, it's all beginning to make sense.

(Pretty interesting speculation there, that the Russians' underlying motive was to knock off the Armenians. How could that be possible? Didn't the Armenians regard the Russians as the Armenians' greatest friend?)

However, the West did not care about this "theory," despite its appearance in extremely rare articles, as the one you have read. The European powers were basically in on it together, using the Armenians as the tools to get a slice of the rich Ottoman pie.








"West" Accounts


Armenian Views


Turks in Movies
Turks in TV


This Site

...Is to expose the mythological “Armenian genocide,” from the years 1915-16. A wartime tragedy involving the losses of so many has been turned into a politicized story of “exclusive victimhood,” and because of the prevailing prejudice against Turks, along with Turkish indifference, those in the world, particularly in the West, have been quick to accept these terribly defamatory claims involving the worst crime against humanity. Few stop to investigate below the surface that those regarded as the innocent victims, the Armenians, while seeking to establish an independent state, have been the ones to commit systematic ethnic cleansing against those who did not fit into their racial/religious ideal: Muslims, Jews, and even fellow Armenians who had converted to Islam. Criminals as Dro, Antranik, Keri, Armen Garo and Soghoman Tehlirian (the assassin of Talat Pasha, one of the three Young Turk leaders, along with Enver and Jemal) contributed toward the deaths (via massacres, atrocities, and forced deportation) of countless innocents, numbering over half a million. What determines genocide is not the number of casualties or the cruelty of the persecutions, but the intent to destroy a group, the members of which  are guilty of nothing beyond being members of that group. The Armenians suffered their fate of resettlement not for their ethnicity, having co-existed and prospered in the Ottoman Empire for centuries, but because they rebelled against their dying Ottoman nation during WWI (World War I); a rebellion that even their leaders of the period, such as Boghos Nubar and Hovhannes Katchaznouni, have admitted. Yet the hypocritical world rarely bothers to look beneath the surface, not only because of anti-Turkish prejudice, but because of Armenian wealth and intimidation tactics. As a result, these libelous lies, sometimes belonging in the category of “genocide studies,” have become part of the school curricula of many regions. Armenian scholars such as Vahakn Dadrian, Peter Balakian, Richard Hovannisian, Dennis Papazian and Levon Marashlian have been known to dishonestly present only one side of their story, as long as their genocide becomes affirmed. They have enlisted the help of "genocide scholars," such as Roger Smith, Robert Melson, Samantha Power, and Israel Charny… and particularly  those of Turkish extraction, such as Taner Akcam and Fatma Muge Gocek, who justify their alliance with those who actively work to harm the interests of their native country, with the claim that such efforts will help make Turkey more" democratic." On the other side of this coin are genuine scholars who consider all the relevant data, as true scholars have a duty to do, such as Justin McCarthy, Bernard Lewis, Heath Lowry, Erich Feigl and Guenter Lewy. The unscrupulous genocide industry, not having the facts on its side, makes a practice of attacking the messenger instead of the message, vilifying these professors as “deniers” and "agents of the Turkish government." The truth means so little to the pro-genocide believers, some even resort to the forgeries of the Naim-Andonian telegrams or sources  based on false evidence, as Franz Werfel’s The Forty Days of Musa Dagh. Naturally, there is no end to the hearsay "evidence" of the prejudiced pro-Christian people from the period, including missionaries and Near East Relief representatives, Arnold Toynbee, Lord Bryce, Lloyd George, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, and so many others. When the rare Westerner opted to look at the issues objectively, such as Admirals Mark Bristol and Colby Chester, they were quick to be branded as “Turcophiles” by the propagandists. The sad thing is, even those who don’t consider themselves as bigots are quick to accept the deceptive claims of Armenian propaganda, because deep down people feel the Turks are natural killers and during times when Turks were victims, they do not rate as equal and deserving human beings. This is the main reason why the myth of this genocide has become the common wisdom.