Thoughts on the 1915 Armenian, Assyrian, Greek genocides

[bookingman]

I'm interested to know the opinions of holocaust revisionists on this. I am sure that you have all studied this genocide as well as it somewhat ties into the later events of WW2, and certainly the infamous Hitler quote(which is disputed by many) brings that connection too.

The problem with the holocaust claim is that we actually have so much physical examples to look into after it supposedly happened. It all relies on the gas chambers where supposedly millions were killed, the concentration camps are still around and that is where revisionists have completely shot it down after questioning them. Without the gas chambers they're simply lost.

With the genocide of the christians in the Ottoman lands it is a different issue. There is a lot of evidence for it aside from the incredible amount of eye witnesses from survivors, but the credibility relies in the eye witness accounts of international people who saw it happen and reported it, many letters and telegrams that confirm it and also the actual massive decrease in Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks in these lands post WW1. Armenians do not have the kind of power that the jews have but most of the world recognizes the genocide, it is Turkey that is denying it vehemently for fears of retribution.

[Hannover]

So what is your evidence for 1.5 million 'genocided' Armenians? Specifics please.
How do the Assyrians & Greeks figure into this?
Got mass graves to review?

Thanks, Hannover

[bookingman]

So what is your evidence for 1.5 million 'genocided' Armenians? Specifics please.
How do the Assyrians & Greeks figure into this?
Got mass graves to review?

Thanks, Hannover

You may want to re-read the OP especially this part:

I'm interested to know the opinions of holocaust revisionists on this.

You seem to have an opinion on this subject already, why not put it out there first.

[Hannover]

Please re-read your own statements. In the OP you said:

With the genocide of the christians in the Ottoman lands it is a different issue. There is a lot of evidence for it aside from the incredible amount of eye witnesses from survivors, but the credibility relies in the eye witness accounts of international people who saw it happen and reported it, many letters and telegrams that confirm it and also the actual massive decrease in Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks in these lands post WW1. Armenians do not have the kind of power that the jews have but most of the world recognizes the genocide, it is Turkey that is denying it vehemently for fears of retribution.

Please give us your claimed "lot of evidence".
What "letters", what "telegrams"?

Simple request really.

- Hannover

[bookingman]

Please re-read your own statements. In the OP you said:

With the genocide of the christians in the Ottoman lands it is a different issue. There is a lot of evidence for it aside from the incredible amount of eye witnesses from survivors, but the credibility relies in the eye witness accounts of international people who saw it happen and reported it, many letters and telegrams that confirm it and also the actual massive decrease in Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks in these lands post WW1. Armenians do not have the kind of power that the jews have but most of the world recognizes the genocide, it is Turkey that is denying it vehemently for fears of retribution.

Please give us your claimed "lot of evidence".
What "letters", what "telegrams"?

Simple request really.

- Hannover

Re-read the OP again because me giving my own thoughts on the subject doesn't change the goal of the thread which is: hearing opinions of others like I asked. You don't seem to have any or you're baiting for some angle, but regardless here's a link for starters:

http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/ ... imes/?_r=1
In the middle of the page it will lead you to a lot of sources. There's about 145 old articles from the New York Times in 1915 about the Armenian massacres by the Turks and Kurds. Not from Armenians but international political figures who were in the Ottoman lands at the time and saw what happened and reported their testimonies.

I once saw a documentation of population statistics of 1914 to 1922 showing about 1.6 million decrease which I'm trying to find, it's from The University of Minnesota.

http://blogian.hayastan.com/2007/04/25/ ... in-turkey/
Mass graves found back in 07. Unfortunately it's not an easy task to find unmarked mass graves in the middle of the Syrian desert.

The only deniers I've known are Turks or other muslims, and they don't deny the high number of casualties they just don't deny that it was delibirately done to get rid of the christians. The Kurds who participated have actually recognized their role in the genocide and issued apology years ago.

[Hannover]

Re-read the OP again because me giving my own thoughts on the subject doesn't change the goal of the thread which is: hearing opinions of others like I asked. You don't seem to have any or you're baiting for some angle, ...

"Baiting"? Is that what you call being challenged on your claims? Stop the silliness.
Per the guidelines, which you agreed to when registering, please comment on the articles in your NY Times link, tell us which are compelling and why?
Remember this forum has the same rules as the 'holocaust' forum. No BS.

I once saw a documentation of population statistics of 1914 to 1922 showing about 1.6 million decrease which I'm trying to find, it's from The University of Minnesota.

OK, then produce it.

And then there's photos of skulls supposedly belonging to 'genocided' Armenians for which no such confirmation is given. IOW, there is nothing remotely resembling proof that: 1. these are Armenians 2. that they match the alleged timeline. There is only this caption by the article's Armenian author :

Photographs by Ülkede Özgür Gündem (a Kurdish newspaper in Turkey that was closed down after reporting the discovery of the mass grave) of a possible Armenian mass grave before manipulated by the Turkish Historical Society

Wow, a Kurdish newspaper. Since when have the Kurds not been biased against the Turks?
No proof that the Turks closed down the newspaper because of these photos.
No proof that the newspaper published these photos in the first place,

The charges that the Turks fooled around with a single mass grave of an alleged 200 Armenians is pure conjecture yet somewhat irrelevant as no one questions the fact that there was a nasty civil war between the Armenians and the Turks, Turks state that fact openly, human remains of both could be expected in areas of fighting.
In fact these bones could just as easily be Turks, or anyone else for that matter.
Imagine taking this article to legal adjudication, it would be laughed out of court.

And the measly number of a supposed "200"is trivial.
The alleged 1,500,000 - 200 = well, hardly proof of a genocide of anyone.
Rather a long way to go yet, eh?
Is that all you have?

The author of the piece, Simon Maghakyan, an Armenian, makes his bias known right up front. Hardly a reliable assessment.

The Kurds who participated have actually recognized their role in the genocide and issued apology years ago.

Please post the alleged apology.

- Hannover

[Moderator]

bookingman:

You have been reasonably challenged to support your position, the guidelines are clear, no dodging.
All guidelines here: viewtopic.php?f=27&t=9628
Please read them.

Posting a link a without specific comments will not do, from those guidelines:

If you post a quote or link from or to a book, a news article, magazine story, another website, etc., you must also comment on the quote or the link content. Tell the forum what you find wrong, compelling, unique, or important about the quote or link content. Flippant, overly brief comments are not acceptable. We want commentary and discussion.

If you wish to re-post on this topic without committing to a position then please do so; but heretofore you stated your belief on the topic, you posted some photos of bones and claims that have been challenged. You have not addressed those challenges.

Also your last post, which has been removed, was littered with personal attacks while not addressing the challenges put to you.
That's not how real debate works. Continue that approach and you will be gone. Respond to challenges or leave the thread.

The basic guidelines / rules are the same for all CODOH forums.
Thanks, M1

[Hektor]

I'm interested to know the opinions of holocaust revisionists on this. I am sure that you have all studied this genocide as well as it somewhat ties into the later events of WW2, and certainly the infamous Hitler quote(which is disputed by many) brings that connection too.
....

Please give the quote + quote. It isn't the fraudulent Obersalzberg speech by any chance.

[ginger]

I have been reading a book about how the Young Turks treated the Armenians before and during WW I.

I'd like to comment on bookingman's? initial post since I find parallels between the stories about the Armenians and the Jewish Holocaust - like some of the Holocaust stories could have been borrowed from what people saw in Anatolia.

- - - but I must say it is a daunting task to comment after reading the kind of rigor demanded of the poster by Hannover and the moderator. . . but I will comment anyway.

what I want to say is from a book and its author took great pains to support his contentions and I can give you the information on the book if anybody's interested -

Prior to the WW I the Muslims, including Turks, were driven out of the Balkans, and the Turks wanted to resettle them in Anatolia. The government aim was to have a homogeneous population in Anatolia (like Hitler in Germany). At the time, with WW I looming, the Armenians hoped to have their own country carved out of Anatolia and also they were possibly allies of Russia, considered an enemy of the Ottoman's disintegrating empire, so they were considered a threat to the Ottomans (just as Hitler feared Jews and Bolsheviks). This is a reason for the ethnic cleansing of the Armenians by 2 strong men in control of the Ottoman Empire at the time - 1915 - 1916.

Their method was to take stock of, to count, the Armenians. Their policy was to break up their communities, and allow them to make up only 5% of any community population. The extra people were deported south to Syria and Iraq - and the dead were seen along the roadside - their property and land was confiscated (like the Nazis' policy toward the Jews). They were concentrated in camps along the route. Many died in the camps from exposure, disease, and starvation (like the Jews and others in camps at the end of WW II). People reported seeing mass graves.

How did the powerful communicate their wishes? They used couriers to hand deliver orders to provincial governors and then destroy the document. Many documents were destroyed by the government (as is alleged about the Nazis), but at least there is some evidence that orders were given.

Much of the book is a painstaking report on what documents remain. They show that the officials wanted people eliminated. Here the many records of the counting of the Armenians showed a great decrease in their numbers.

The numbers of dead are mind-boggling - 200,000 killed in 5 months - and other assertions.

Here the book runs into the same problem as the Holocaust stories do for me - where are all the dead? Armenians were not welcomed in Muslim lands, they were left to die - unlike the Jews who ended up in Palestine. So where are the bodies, the bones, the clothes? At least the gas chambers are not part of the Armenian story - but still, people in the area should have found an abundance of human remains.