• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

The Armenian Genocide

Status
Not open for further replies.
and a bill has was passed in 07 that calls it a genocide.
That bill never made it to the House floor.

Other than Reagan, The U.S. has acknowledged it as genocide in a prior House resolution in 1975 along with a document submitted to the World Court in 1951.

Personally, I always find denial more fascinating. And/or justification. It was just a famine! Also Muslims died! And plus everybody was killing each other around that time, it was like POGS man.

the measures adopted regarding the Armenians in Eastern Anatolia were merely a replacement in another region within the Empire for security reasons

Denial about Rwanda and the Khmer Rogue goes some pretty fascinating and strange places. Nanking and Armenia are kinda uneventful in comparison in that it seems more like it's just that they can't give up now after digging themselves in.
 
Turkey sticks its head in the sand going LALALALALALALA YOU TOO DID BAD THINGS IN THE PAST GUYS TURKEY IS A PARAGON OF VIRTUE AND A BASTION OF TRUTH LALALALALALALALALA.

And that's true, as an Australian I can safely say that Australia has done some horrible things in the past. The government admits it though, you'll be hard pressed to find anyone in the government that denies the Stolen Generation, The Lambing Flat Riots, White Australia Policy and so on. EDIT: And also the fact that Australians actually managed to wipe out an entire people, the Tasmanian Aboriginals.
 
Mr. Tankian schooled me on it as a kid. I try and spread the fact that it happened when the oppurtunity arises - most people don't know about it, apparently.
 
I'd wish our history books taught all genocides, including Armenian, Native American and the one that took place in Soviet Union during WW2.

Nationalism in textbooks in general is stupid. Your country, and my country, and every other country, has dirt in their histories. The countries that talk about their dirt are the ones that quickly get past it

I honestly feel like thing like extravagant nationalism and patriotism should be limited to stuff like the Olympics only
 
When I went to visit my relatives in Turkey, there's a pretty sizeable Armenian population where they live. It was kind of amazing seeing a nice big church with lots of schoolchildren passing through and learning in the middle of an Islamic country. I found myself thinking that it was sad that this was out of the ordinary and wished that there were a lot more of the ancestral minorities present that used to inhabit Anatolia. The events of WW1 were a horror for everyone in that area, the Greeks, the Turks, the Kurds...but I don't think anyone could have claimed to suffered as much as the Armenians. I'm ancestrally Turkish, I don't consider myself a Turk at all but I just found the whole thing tragic and quite sad.

Also, the Armenian alphabet just might be the coolest alphabet ever.
 
Events of World War One were a horror for everyone involved pretty much. Arguably the biggest set of tragedies of the 20th Century when you consider "why" they happened.
 
I'm a Turk that read the Wiki article on the Armenian genocide for the first time yesterday. While I accepted it before, my opinions are less stubborn than they were before. It was a systematic government lead drive to exterminate Armenians from Anatolia. While many Turks sufferred similar fates in the Balkans and Caucasus, the efforts there were not as driven by the machinations of Balkan and Russian governments, whereas the Ottomans knew exactly what they were doing.

Incidentally I was surprised to learn that the last Ottoman Emperor acknowledged the genocide, and for those that don't know the founder of Turkey Ataturk also acknowledged the genocide. It seems that the idea of active denial didn't happen until later in the century.

When I went to visit my relatives in Turkey, there's a pretty sizeable Armenian population where they live. It was kind of amazing seeing a nice big church with lots of schoolchildren passing through and learning in the middle of an Islamic country. I found myself thinking that it was sad that this was out of the ordinary and wished that there were a lot more of the ancestral minorities present that used to inhabit Anatolia. The events of WW1 were a horror for everyone in that area, the Greeks, the Turks, the Kurds...but I don't think anyone could have claimed to suffered as much as the Armenians. I'm ancestrally Turkish, I don't consider myself a Turk at all but I just found the whole thing tragic and quite sad.

Also, the Armenian alphabet just might be the coolest alphabet ever.

Same. Turkey would be a far better developed country if our Armenian and Greek minorities remained as significant as they did in the past.

I sometimes go as far as to idealise a Republic of Anatolia, which would have had less ethnic and nationalist baggage than the Republic of Turkey.

2Isi4ji.png


such a gut-wrenching picture.

That picture is fake.

As a Turkish person, it's a shame that this isn't recognized. But out current regime is assholes, and this has been a long-running issue of mis-education and misguided national pride. Older and less enlightened people are rather resistant to seeking the facts on this due to the education system pushing the bad narrative. There are politicians trying to fix this but as long as Erdogan is in power it won't happen.

Know that not all Turkish people are like what you'd believe, and many are like me in support of recognizing this awful stain on history.

I wish people recognised this fact more. It's not treason or totally taboo to recognise the Armenian genocide in Turkey, a significant number of Turks actually do.

As a fellow Armenian, I applaud your courage and honesty in this matter, especially if you happen to live in Turkey. One of the many things the Turkish government and Erdogan have been good at is to create a strong Nationalistic hive mind with its citizens, to inflict fear on outside the box thinkers and questioners of history and government. The amount of media control/censorship and imprisonment and murder of journalists in Turkey for the past decade is chilling, yet the Western world turns a blind eye, because Turkey is a strong military and economical ally of the US.

While Erdogan has a plurality of supporters and abuses his power, there will and always will remain a significant number of rational Turks. Sometimes when reading about the bad things Erdogan does it might seem like the country is too far gone, but Turkey is too diverse and too large for Erdogan to control as tightly as he wants.

Perhaps apocryphal but:

"Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?"

Edit: The fact that we still don't officially recognize it as genocide is embarrassing.

That quote is fake.
 
I'd also suggest people read up on the Congo free state and the Belgian genocide there. Slightly different in that it wasn't quite so much a 'war' on an ethnic group, but the numbers of the murdered are quite simply incredible, and it was all down to racism. It sits somewhere between the Native American wipeout and the Holocaust as western history's greatest horror.
 
I'd also suggest people read up on the Congo free state and the Belgian genocide there. Slightly different in that it wasn't quite so much a 'war' on an ethnic group, but the numbers of the murdered are quite simply incredible, and it was all down to racism. It sits somewhere between the Native American wipeout and the Holocaust as western history's greatest horror.

Agreed. There have been many genocides in history, this is one of the biggest. Somewhere between 5-10 million, putting it on the same scale as the Holocaust.

edit: maybe people should go through the list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll there are a couple of others in Anatolia around the same time apparently which was news to me.
 
edit: maybe people should go through the list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll there are a couple of others in Anatolia around the same time apparently which was news to me.
I was looking for some light reading.

To be serious for a moment, Equitorial Guinea is on that list. Everybody read about Nguema. What the hell, I'll just quote:
The president's paranoid actions included banning use of the word "intellectual" and destroying boats to stop his people fleeing from his rule[1] (fishing was banned).[6] The only road out of the country on the mainland was also mined.[7] He Africanized his name to Masie Nguema Biyogo Ñegue Ndong in 1976 after demanding that the rest of the Equatoguinean population replace their Hispanic names with African names. He also banned Western medicines, stating that they were un-African.[7]

MacĂ­as Nguema was the centre of an extreme cult of personality, perhaps fueled by his consumption of copious amounts of bhang[2] and iboga,[1] and assigned himself titles such as the "Unique Miracle" and "Grand Master of Education, Science, and Culture". The island of Fernando PĂł had its name Africanized after him to Masie Ngueme Biyogo Island; upon his overthrow in 1979, its name was again changed to Bioko. The capital, Santa Isabel, had its name changed to Malabo. In 1978, he changed the national motto to "There is no other God than Marcias Nguema".[8]

During MacĂ­as Nguema's regime, the country had neither a development plan nor an accounting system for government funds. After killing the governor of the Central Bank, he carried everything that remained in the national treasury to his house in a rural village.[2] During Christmas 1975 he ordered about 150 of his opponents killed. Soldiers dressed up in Santa Claus costumes murdered them by shooting at the football stadium in Malabo, while amplifiers were playing Mary Hopkin's "Those Were the Days".[9]

By the end of his rule, nearly all of the country's educated class was either executed or forced into exile—a brain drain from which the country has never recovered. He also killed two-thirds of the legislature and 10 of his original ministers.[10]
...
Today, MacĂ­as Nguema is regarded as one of the most kleptocratic, corrupt, and dictatorial leaders in post-colonial African history. Depending on the source, he was responsible for the deaths of anywhere from 50,000 to 80,000 of the 300,000 to 400,000 people living in the country at the time. According to Penn State professor Randall Fegley, one of the few non-African authorities on Equatorial Guinea, this was proportionally worse than the Nazis' rampage through Europe

It's kinda crazy that his successor, the world's current longest serving dictator who has stolen millions of dollars personally, is like a breath of fresh air in comparison:
In July 2003, state-operated radio declared Obiang "the country's god" and had "all power over men and things." It added that the president was "in permanent contact with the Almighty" and "can decide to kill without anyone calling him to account and without going to hell." He personally made similar comments in 1993. MacĂ­as had also proclaimed himself a god.[13]

Obiang has encouraged his cult of personality by ensuring that public speeches end in well-wishing for himself rather than for the republic. Many important buildings have a presidential lodge, many towns and cities have streets commemorating Obiang's coup against MacĂ­as, and many people wear clothes with his face printed on them.[14][15]

Like his predecessor and other African dictators such as Idi Amin and Mobutu Sese Seko, Obiang has assigned to himself several creative titles. Among them are "gentleman of the great island of Bioko, AnnobĂłn and RĂ­o Muni."[16] He also refers to himself as El Jefe (the boss).[17]

...

Although his rule was at first considered more humane than that of his uncle, it has, by most accounts, become increasingly more brutal. Most domestic and international observers consider his regime to be one of the most corrupt, ethnocentric, oppressive and undemocratic states in the world. Equatorial Guinea is essentially a single-party state, dominated by Obiang's Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea (PDGE). The constitution grants Obiang sweeping powers, including the power to rule by decree. Although opposition parties were legalized in 1992, 99 members of the 100-seat parliament are either members of the PDGE or are aligned with it. Consequently, there is little opposition to presidential decisions.[citation needed]

The opposition is barely tolerated; indeed, a 2006 article in Der Spiegel quoted Obiang as asking, "What right does the opposition have to criticize the actions of a government?"[2] The opposition is severely hampered by the lack of a free press as a vehicle for their views. There are no newspapers and all broadcast media are either owned outright by the government or controlled by its allies.
800px-Teodoro_Obiang_Nguema_Mbasogo_with_Obamas.jpg
 
it isnt that Turkey openly denies the deaths of the Armenians, its that Turkey refuses to take open responsibility for 'planned' genocide. to make a comparison, i dont believe the Ottomans had anything resembling the German answer to the Jewish question when they decided upon the forced deportation of Armenians from their homeland.

more importantly, however, i think Turkey simply does not want to deal with the issue of reparations should they admit responsibility. Germany was forced to pay 3 billion marks to Israel following their agreement - Israel has occasionally used this history to make further (unsuccessful) demands of Germany, as well as receiving military equipment from them.

as always, its money.
Watching Turkish politicians talk about it, I think almost any word other than "Genocide" for it would be acceptable to them. Most of them do indeed seem to acknowledge the atrocities themselves and regret them, but have no interest of carrying the sins of their ancestors. The g-word is one of the harshest marks on your record as a country, and it's one you'll never be able to undo. It's unfortunate that this is the way they look at it, because calling it by its name is probably the most respectful way to distance yourself with your nation's past. All these excuses aren't good for anything but prolong the pain.

Belgium can be a bit weird when it comes to their own closeted skeletons. History classes spend as much time distancing themselves from the royalty that was behind the Congolese genocide, as on the genocide itself. While that seems fair, that same courtesy we extend ourselves is not handed out to events of other countries, especially during the world wars. It feels immature and disrespectful to not be able to do both. The mention of genocide may make you feel responsible, and that is partially true. You're not directly responsible for the atrocities, so you shouldn't feel that you are. You are responsible for being respectful and supportive to the victims, and try to make sure it won't happen again.
 
Agreed. There have been many genocides in history, this is one of the biggest. Somewhere between 5-10 million, putting it on the same scale as the Holocaust.

edit: maybe people should go through the list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll there are a couple of others in Anatolia around the same time apparently which was news to me.

That page is rather disappointing since there is nothing about the Balkan Turkish genocide, although the Circassion genocide is mentioned.

Watching Turkish politicians talk about it, I think almost any word other than "Genocide" for it would be acceptable to them. Most of them do indeed seem to acknowledge the atrocities themselves and regret them, but have no interest of carrying the sins of their ancestors. The g-word is one of the harshest marks on your record as a country, and it's one you'll never be able to undo. It's unfortunate that this is the way they look at it, because calling it by its name is probably the most respectful way to distance yourself with your nation's past. All these excuses aren't good for anything but prolong the pain.

Belgium can be a bit weird when it comes to their own closeted skeletons. History classes spend as much time distancing themselves from the royalty that was behind the Congolese genocide, as on the genocide itself. While that seems fair, that same courtesy we extend ourselves is not handed out to events of other countries, especially during the world wars. It feels immature and disrespectful to not be able to do both. The mention of it may make you feel responsible, and that is partially true. You're not directly responsible for the atrocities, so you shouldn't feel that you are. You are responsible for being respectful and supportive to the victims, and try to make sure it won't happen again.

Recently I've been wondering more about that point. The Turkish word for genocide is "soykirim" which literally means "lineage breaking". The English word is less removed from such overt meaning if that makes sense? So perhaps that is part of the reason Turks are specific about the use of the word.

Your second paragraph explains why some even rational and reasonable Turks like myself can be annoyed. Westerners and the West don't scrutinise themselves with the same kind of veracity they do towards the Turks or other non-Western European people. So sometimes, perhaps wrongly, we feel that Turcophobic sentiments crop up when people talk about the genocide (and other hot button Turkish issues).
 
The mention of it may make you feel responsible, and that is partially true.
I think this is a major factor in a lot of denial of failures of nations/governments/companies. When you become attached to it at that level, it is like you were doing it, and yet you can't deny it happened. In reality, you didn't, even if you did support it remotely, you can still make it right or try to make up for it.

Something Steve Youngblood might want to think about.
 
And they even want to join the EU.
Fuck that.

Majority of Turks, of all political persuasions, don't give a shit about the EU, it's a total myth and these days I only see people like you mention it in patronising comments, but it's barely talked about in Turkey and among Turks.
 
Good and farewell.

No problem. It was a stupid idea from the start and has been a big waste of time. Turks are comfortable in their Asian identity (even the many white skinned, light haired/eyed European looking Turks don't see themselves as European) and Europeans are largely unanimous that Turks aren't European.

Most important thing is UEFA membership. "WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS" etc. :P.

I wonder if Armenia would be considered for EU membership if Russia didn't control them.
 
No problem. It was a stupid idea from the start and has been a big waste of time. Turks are comfortable in their Asian identity (even the many white skinned, light haired/eyed European looking Turks don't see themselves as European) and Europeans are largely unanimous that Turks aren't European.

So you say but I don't assume you speak for all the Turks in the world. ;)
 
That page is rather disappointing since there is nothing about the Balkan Turkish genocide, although the Circassion genocide is mentioned.

Oh come on, what the hell is "Balkan Turks"? I don't know where you're from but muslims in Balkans (Bosnia, Albania, FYRO Macedonia and Moldovia) hate to be called Turkish. They're not Turks. They're of slavic race. Turkish language has never been spoken there. Turks have never lived in Balkans, nor migrated there. It's just Ottoman Empire had some forced religion conversions in the past.

Plus, it's not a genocide nor ethnic cleansing. Death toll was no more than ~10,000 people in 1909 events. Of course, it was a sad event too, but we're talking about 1,5 million people here. This is outright genocide.
 
Oh come on, what the hell is "Balkan Turks"? I don't know where you're from but muslims in Balkans (Bosnia, Albania, FYRO Macedonia and Moldovia) hate to be called Turkish. They're not Turks. They're of slavic race. Turkish language has never been spoken there. Turks have never lived in Balkans, nor migrated there. It's just Ottoman Empire had some forced religion conversions in the past.

Plus, it's not a genocide nor ethnic cleansing. Death toll was no more than ~10,000 people in 1909 events. Of course, it was a sad event too, but we're talking about 1,5 million people here. This is outright genocide.

Offf I stated this in the other thread. There were Turkish speaking communities that lived in large numbers across the Balkans (and still live there today though in smaller numbers).

I'm not talking about Bosniaks, about Pomaks, about Albanians or Greek Muslims. I'm talking about Turkish speaking Muslims whose homeland was the Balkans, like Ataturk.

I agree that what the Armenians went through was a top-down systematically organised by the government, whereas what the Turks went through was not mandated by the Balkan governments but sporadically organised by below.

I'm an Anatolian Turk myself, but have cousins who are half Bulgarian Turkish descended and friends with ancestry from all over the Balkans.

The collapse of multi-ethnic empires/republics never ends well for minorities.

India/Pakistan being a prime example.
 
We were never taught this either where I live (Kuwait) but I did learn about this atrocity years ago and it's a shame that not many people talk about it.
 
And they even want to join the EU.
Fuck that.

Why would any country want to join the EU? Given the devastation wrought on the other Mediterranean countries I'm very glad that Turkey had the good sense to stay out. Anyway this isn't the right place to discuss this.
 
I loathe the "But you did bad things too!" counter. Yes, everyone's nation has taken part in horrible things. However the key is to own it and be honest about the history.

Nothing will make it "right" but St least some type of cultural healing process can begin.
 
I agree that what the Armenians went through was a top-down systematically organised by the government, whereas what the Turks went through was not mandated by the Balkan governments but sporadically organised by below.

There have been quite number of massacres and mass killings in Rumelian history but 1909 events which led to two huge Balkan wars were the worst ones, I hope you were talking about those. It was more of a guerrilla conflict between Slavic rebels and muslim pro-Empire people where many innocent civilians were killed from both sides. But in the end people who were responsible for all innocent deaths in Balkans were none other than Sultan Abdulhamid the Butcher and infamous Young Turks. Their irresponsibility led the downfall of the huge Empire in the end.
 
I loathe the "But you did bad things too!" counter. Yes, everyone's nation has taken part in horrible things. However the key is to own it and be honest about the history.

Nothing will make it "right" but St least some type of cultural healing process can begin.

There are 2 types of "but you guys did bad things too" counter. There's the irrational side, who literally turn it into whataboutism and a tennis match, who can be dismissed. But there's also the reasonable side who say "the bad things you guys did isn't well known compared with the bad things we did" which I believe is a valid point to make.

I agree that Turks should just take the initiative and apologise. The majority of Turks mean nothing malicious by it, it's just quite heavy baggage to deal with it and no one wants to own up to that.

There have been quite number of massacres and mass killings in Rumelian history but 1909 events which led to two huge Balkan wars were the worst ones, I hope you were talking about those. It was more of a guerrilla conflict between Slavic rebels and muslim pro-Empire people where many innocent civilians were killed from both sides. But in the end people who were responsible for all innocent deaths in Balkans were none other than Sultan Abdulhamid the Butcher and infamous Young Turks. Their irresponsibility led the downfall of the huge Empire in the end.

Definitely. The Ottoman top brass ruined the country by stubbornly refusing to grant rights to minorities. Even Albanians and Bosniaks despite being Muslim wanted out of the mess and eventually even Turks wanted out of the mess of course.

I read yesterday that initially during the late 19th century reform period Armenians wanted autonomy, but not independence. A Turkey with Armenians would have been a far more advanced country today.
 
I loathe the "But you did bad things too!" counter. Yes, everyone's nation has taken part in horrible things. However the key is to own it and be honest about the history.

Nothing will make it "right" but St least some type of cultural healing process can begin.

Whataboutism is literally the worst argument in any discussion.
 
Why would any country want to join the EU? Given the devastation wrought on the other Mediterranean countries I'm very glad that Turkey had the good sense to stay out. Anyway this isn't the right place to discuss this.

So why are you discussing it?
 
So the European Parliament is today going to vote whether to label the mass killings of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turks as "Genocide", and Turkey's President (Recep Tayyip Erdoğan) just made this comment to the media.....


“Irrespective of what decision the European Parliament may take, it would go in one ear and out the other," he told reporters in Ankara before departing for a visit to Kazakhstan.

“Because it is not possible for Turkey to accept [having committed] such a crime.

Everybody should know that,” the Turkish president continued.

“There is no shadow, no stain, of genocide on us,” Erdoğan declared.

http://www.todayszaman.com/latest-n...european-parliament-genocide-vote_378024.html

So it's "in one ear and out the other" (his words not mine) for Turkey's president. Very mature....

This man truly is a sociopath and gifted liar.
 
So the European Parliament is today going to vote whether to label the mass killings of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turks as "Genocide", and Turkey's President (Recep Tayyip Erdoğan) just made this comment to the media.....




http://www.todayszaman.com/latest-n...european-parliament-genocide-vote_378024.html

So it's "in one ear and out the other" (his words not mine) for Turkey's president. Very mature....

This man truly is a sociopath and gifted liar.

If he does anything else he'll be voted out. Guys a damn good politician.
 
I don't remember it being taught in high school. I think I stumbled upon it just while I was doing a casual browsing on genocides.
 
Adolf Hitler referred to the Armenian genocide to justify his plans to exterminate Jews an Gipsies in 1939.

I have issued the command, and I'll have anybody who utters but one word of criticism executed by a firing squad, that our war aim does not consist in reaching certain lines, but in the physical destruction of the enemy. Accordingly, I have placed my death-head formations in readiness, for the present only in the East, with orders to them to send to death mercilessly and without compassion, men, women, and children of Polish derivation and language. Only thus shall we gain the living space (Lebensraum) which we need. Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?

http://www.armenian-genocide.org/hitler.html
 
It sure is (it was created in 405 AD)...

alphabet1.jpg

How hard is it to learn? We have a pretty substantial population in Fresno and we have like 4 or 5 over the air Armenian channels that are great to watch. I also have a good friend and drummer that's Armenian who came over when he was twelve. I always have a good time when he shares stories about his culture.

There was a lot of migration to Fresno, Ca around the time of the genocide. Not surprisingly the Armenian population endured a lot of racism. We had a lot of bits of Armenian American history throughout my schooling. I guess because we had a lot of famous Armenians like William Saroyan with places dedicated to them.
http://armeniapedia.org/index.php?title=Fresno
 
So it's "in one ear and out the other" (his words not mine) for Turkey's president. Very mature....

This man truly is a sociopath and gifted liar.

well he and his party are not so closet islamists that want to reverse AtatĂĽrks changes in turkey. He is basically brain damaged.
 
That quote is fake.

Which is why I said it was "perhaps apocryphal". And there seems to be some debate on whether it is or isn't, as mentioned specifically in the article I linked.

The key area of contention regarding the Armenian quote is a reference to the Armenian Genocide, referencing the ethnic extermination to Armenians during World War I in the Ottoman Empire, where an estimated one to one-and-a-half million ethnic Armenians were killed by Turks. The quote is now inscribed on one of the walls of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C.. In 2009 International Association of Genocide Scholars used the quote in a letter to Barack Obama related to the Armenian Genocide recognition. The authenticity of the quote has become hotly contested between Turkish and Armenian political activists, because when the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal got hold of the first note of the speech, named "L-3", they rejected its use as evidence for political reasons, as to not connect the original source to the American newspaper.

Dr. Kevork B. Bardakjian, in a publication entitled Hitler and the Armenian Genocide, published by the Armenian-American Zoryan Institute for Contemporary Armenian Research and Documentation, argues that the L-3 document originates in the notes secretly taken by Wilhelm Canaris during the meeting of August 22, 1939:
To conclude, although its author is unknown, L-3 and its unsigned counterparts 798-PS and 1014-PS originate from the notes Wilhelm Canaris took personally as Hitler spoke on 22 August 1939. ... Although not an “official” record, L-3 is a genuine document and is as sound as the other evidence submitted at Nuremberg.

Richard Albrecht (see de:Richard Albrecht), a German social researcher and political scientist, published a three-volume study (2006–08) on 20th century genocides, of which volume 2 (Armenozid, "[]Armenocide") relates to the Armenian genocide, and volume 3 ("Wer redet heute noch von der Vernichtung der Armenier?" Adolf Hitlers Geheimrede am 22. August 1939) is dedicated solely to Hitler's Armenian quote. Albrecht contained the document of the original German version of the Armenian quote (the L-3 text) for the first time. The book is summarized as "When discussing, and applying, all relevant features scholarly accepted as leading principles of classifying documents as authentic, the author not only works out that the L-3-document as translated and brought in a few days later at August 25th, 1939, by the US-newspaper man Louis P. Lochner (1887–1975) from Associated Press, and first published in 1942, whenever compared with any other version of Hitler's speech – above all the Nuremberg-documents 798-PS, 1014 PS, and Raeder-27, as produced by a dubious witness after realising the L-3-version, too – this version must be regarded as the one which most likely sums up and expresses what Hitler said – for what Hitler really said in his notorious second speech was only written down simultaneously during his speech by one of his auditors: Wilhelm Canaris (1887–1945), at that time chief of the military secret service within the Third Reich".

According to Margaret L. Anderson, professor of history at the University of California, Berkeley, "we have no reason to doubt the remark is genuine, both attack and defense obscure an obvious reality" that the Armenian Genocide has achieved "iconic status... as the apex of horrors imaginable in 1939," and that Hitler used it to persuade the German military that committing genocide excited a great deal of "talk" but no serious consequences for a nation that perpetrates genocide.

According to Stanford University historian Norman Naimark, "There is no question that Hitler and the Nazi leadership were well aware of the Armenian genocide and its relatively innocuous effect on international affairs during the Great War and after."

Other sources have a different view of the subject. According to Heath Lowry, professor of history at Princeton University, a close examination of the quotation reveals that "there is no historical basis for attributing such a statement to Hitler". According to German historian Winfried Baumgart (see de:Winfried Baumgart), among the documents of Hitler's speech on 22 August 1938, 1014-PS is the one that contains the original notes taken that day by Wilhelm Canaris, the head of military intelligence. Therefore, in order to Baumgart, 1014-PS, which does not contain the Armenian quote, is superior to the other documents of Hitler's speech including L-3 which is the only source of the Armenian quote. According to Christopher Browning, American historian of the Holocaust, L-3 document, which contains the Armenian quote, is an "apocalyptic" version of Hitler's speech that day which was purposefully leaked to the British in order to gain their support to Poland. According to Alan Whiticker, an Australian non-fiction author, several historians examining Lochner's version of Hitler's speech (the L-3 document) concluded that it was a version designed to arouse a reaction against Hitler in various countries. According to Arnold Reisman, a Polish-American researcher of history, the Armenian Quote may be a contrived sentence and its use in the US Holocaust Memorial Museum may be erroneous.
 
It's important to teach about it. People need to know about it.
My wife survived the Srebrenica Genocide, I luckly got out right before, but still saw bunch. She just got a letter yesterday from the Red Cross that they have possibly found the remains of her dad. Almost 20 years later.

I have a similar experience to this, I had a partner who lost her dad to the massacre, she escaped with her mother and her mother's sisters and their stories of the event will haunt me until I die.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom