Tall Armenian Tale


The Other Side of the Falsified Genocide


  Imagine the following scenario....  
First Page


Major Players
Links & Misc.


Mahmut Ozan
Edward Tashji
Sam Weems

Let's say the United States of America is on her last legs. The whole world has gotten jealous of this only superpower of the world and has decided to gang up on her, before she really gets too big for her britches. War is being fought on every front. Manpower and resources are at a minimum, the country's infrastructure is crumbling, and famine, disease and poverty face most people every day.

Mexico figures it's about time to pay back the gringos for stealing some southwestern states way back when. Mexico figures an effective strategy would be to hit the embattled U.S. army from the back. Mexico appeals to the sizable Armenian community in California... promising the Armenian-Americans half of California, when California is "liberated"... making it "New Armenia."

The opportunistic Armenian-Americans rejoice. They know the other "New Armenia" which is known as "Armenia" (New, because Armenia barely existed as a non-vassal, independent country before the 20th Century, save for periods of Russian weakness) is turning out to be a disaster as a nation... so many people have been emigrating out of Old New Armenia. Wouldn't it be great to start anew with New New Armenia?

Quickly, the Armenian-Americans arm themselves. Loyal Armenian-Americans don't want anything to have to do with the treacherous plan... after all, they have lived and prospered in the U.S.A., the land they love... but they fully know the historic price for non-compliance with Armenian revolutionaries, so most of the loyal ones also go along (albeit unwillingly).

The revolting Armenians harass the U.S. Army's supply lines, and engage in hit and run tactics... sometimes engaging in full blown battles, the rare times they can stomach facing American soldiers. Meanwhile, Armenian leaders figure it would be wise to clear out Southern California of their fellow Americans, so that New Armenia can be as ethnically pure as possible. With many of the men away at war, villages are easy pickings, as American women, children and older men are mercilessly murdered.


Given the dogmatic nature of many Americans... the kind who violently took out their furies on Iranian-Americans during the hostage crisis, say... you can bet the local Americans would get plenty steamed over what their fellow Americans of Armenian origin treacherously decided to embark upon during America's dark hour. You can bet notions of civility would be rare to find among Americans whose beloved family members have been systematically slaughtered by the Armenians.

Let's say the American government realizes something must be done to stem the horrible hemorrhaging caused by the Armenian Benedict Arnolds. The government is aware that the cycle of hatred has grown out of control, as reprisals for each massacre turns out to be yet another massacre. 



The government decides to relocate the Armenians far away from the area of calamity. Since so many Armenians are sympathetic to the cause of "New Armenia," it would be impossible for the government to separate the loyal Armenians from the disloyal... especially during desperate wartime, where resources and manpower are scarce.  So the American government rounds up all the Californian Armenians and forces them to march part of the way to South Dakota. (Unfortunately, the European and Chinese militias have blown up most of  the rails and roadways, and the few operating trains and vehicles need to be prioritized for the war effort.)

With manpower so scarce, few soldiers are assigned to protect the Armenians during the march. Some of them can't find it in their hearts to forgive the Armenians' betrayal, and take it out on the innocent Armenians. However, most of the American soldiers are noble, and do the best they can to give the food and medicine allocated to them, and to protect the Armenians from blood-feuding fellow citizens. It's too bad those gangs from Los Angeles' South side have been coordinating attacks on the marching Armenians, out of revenge for what the Armenians had done to their families. 

Luckily, most of the Armenians make it to South Dakota. There have been deaths along the way... famine, disease and massacres at the hands of fellow citizens have taken some toll.

America survives the ordeal, and some seventy years later, Armenians claim 1.5 million of their numbers have been systematically murdered (curiously surpassing the figure of their entire population in California, based on various neutral censuses/sources), in a repulsive act of "genocide"...  making up all kinds of reasons in a desperate attempt to find motives, such as the Americans were xenophobic, or that the Americans needed to blame their crumbling empire on a scapegoat, or that the Americans were after their money... while the Armenians took it like lambs awaiting slaughter, just like the Jews of World War II. 


Let us all pity the poor Armenian victims!

You don't have to be an American to Imagine the described scenario.... just imagine any ethnic minority in your land turning treacherous during your country's desperate hour of need. Let's say you're from France. (Boy, the French almost unwaveringly support the Armenians.) Let's say it's Germany among France's attacking nations that incites a sizable French ethnic minority to stab France in the back (France has a huge Armenian community, so let us again use them as an example). What if the Germans say, Armenians! We fought side-by-side in WWII as fellow Aryans... come join us! Since Armenians create their own history, and their historians have little regard for the facts, let's say a few historians "discover" France was a real Armenian ancient homeland 7,000 years ago (long before the Armenians were documented as a people, of course), before the Armenians started migrating to the Anatolian region... taking their cue from actual Armenian professors/authors who have claimed Switzerland as their ancient homeland [see "QUOTES" section for source] or that the British are descended from or related to the Armenians [see "Reference" under "Articles"]); French Armenians rise by hitting the on-its-last-legs French Army in the back, and begin to slaughter fellow French, to make room for their New Armenia... with the words of William Saroyan to inspire them. ("When two Armenians meet anywhere in the world, see if they will not create a New Armenia.") 

Brrr! How do you think the French government would react? The French people?

 The described scenario is almost exactly what took place in the Ottoman Empire

And the Ottoman Turks were clearly at fault for not being able to fully protect the innocent Armenians of the march. Given the desperate circumstances (bankruptcy, famine, disease, limited resources/manpower, war on five fronts), would your country have been able to do better? 

Do not forget, the Armenians from other parts of the Ottoman Empire were untouched. Some Turkish soldiers lost their lives defending the relocating Armenians, and some who were caught committing crimes against the Armenians were actually EXECUTED by the Ottoman government (After, and DURING the war. [See "Questions," under "Sections" for sources].) What kind of a "genocide" is that?

Do not forget as well that the causes claiming Armenian lives were the same that claimed Turkish ones, in considerably greater numbers. [See "Census," under "Sections" for sources]


Holdwater does not take the credit for this scenario; he merely
embellished the scenario from an article written in 1923, "Angora and the Turks," which you can find in the ARTICLES section ("West" Accounts).

There is an "end all" argument against the Armenian Genocide...

...That is, one that should have ended the argument many years ago. It's really stupefying how few people pay attention to this absolutely convincing argument.


It appears obvious that the Turkish authorities, anxious for the safety of their lines of communication, had no other alternative than to order the removal of their rebellious subjects to some place distant from the seat of hostilities, and their internment there.

The enforcement of this absolutely necessary precaution led to further risings on the part of the Armenians. The remaining Moslems were almost defenceless, because the regular garrisons were at the front as well as the greater part of the police and able-bodied men. Already infuriated at the reports of the atrocities committed at Van by the insurgents, in fear for their lives and those of their relatives, they were at last driven by the cumulative effect of these events into panic and retaliation and, as invariably happens in such cases, the innocent suffered with the guilty.

C.F. Dixon-Johnson, British author of the 1916 book, "The Armenians." ("West" Accounts, under "Articles.")

"I could see that [the Armenians'] well-known disloyalty to the Ottoman Government and the fact that the territory which they inhabited was within the zone of military operations constituted grounds more or less justifiable for compelling them to depart their homes."

Robert Lansing, United States Secretary of State, November 1916

"West" Accounts


Armenian Views
Geno. Scholars


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.