Tweet
THE DENIAL OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE IS THE BASIS OF TURKEY'S EXISTENCE
PanARMENIAN.Net
13.11.2007 GMT+04:00
Kemal Ataturk was personally familiar with many key plans of the
movement of the Young Turks, but didn't take part in the upheaval
of 1908, so that later, when the organizers of the Armenian Genocide
were taken into court, Ataturk wasn't among them.
The founder of modern Turkey Mustafa Kemal Ataturk is still
"an inviolable person" in Turkey. In every city there is the
statue to Ataturk, his pictures may be found in all government
institutions. After his party lost its power in 1950, people still
continued worshiping Kemal Ataturk. A law was passed, concerning any
kind of offence towards Ataturk's picture or any kind of criticism
of his activities or slandering the facts of his biography.
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Besides, it is forbidden to carry the surname
Ataturk. The publication of his letters to his wife is forbidden
as well, since it would give the father of the Nation an image of a
"simple" human being. Any doubts about the "purity of the intentions
of the father of the Nation" were subject to criminal liability. Kemal
Ataturk was personally familiar with many key plans of the movement
of the Young Turks, but didn't take part in the upheaval of 1908,
so that later, when the organizers of the Armenian Genocide were
taken into court, Ataturk wasn't among them.
Moreover, perhaps he was the only one among the Turkish political
figures who qualified the deportation of the Armenian people as a
"slaughter".
Ataturk simply couldn't use the term "genocide", because he was
introduced in the international law only in 1948 as a result of
adoption of the UN Convention of Genocide Punishment and Warning
However, let's suppose that Ataturk qualified the events of 1915-1923
as "slaughter", the official Turkish historiography prefers to call it
"tehjir".
The name of the act "Tehjir Kanunu" is sounds as an act about
resettlement. While describing the events, most often terms
like "tenkil, or "nakletme" are used, which may be translated as
"transportation" or "removal" and terms like "deportation", never
"exile" were never used to qualify those events. But in spite of
this, out of ignorance or out of the desire to make things look more
dramatic, the Armenians and some western authors choose terms like
"exile". Both from historical and philological point of view this
is nothing but an intentional error," says the article covering the
events of 1915 in the site of the Turkish Ministry of Culture.
Yet, referring back to Ataturk who in July 1926 in his interview to
the Swiss journalist Emil Hildebrand mentioned the "slaughter", of
course putting the blame on the Young Turks. It shouldn't be forgotten
that in 1926 there were still orphanages where thousands of Armenian
children were sheltered, the organizers of the Armenian Genocide
were already starting to feel the revenge of the Armenian avengers
and Ataturk simply couldn't say anything else. Because of it again in
1926 a group of nationalists with Zia Khurshud at the head intended to
kill Kemal during his visit to Izmir, however the plot was discovered
and the group was arrested, five of them shot. By the way, after being
elected the President of Turkey, Ataturk gave his close fellow-fighters
land and made expensive presents, which as the evidence shows were
of "Armenian origins". However Ataturk was the one to put a taboo on
mentioning the events of the 1915 and gave the Turkish historians the
right of having their own interpretation of these horrifying years. It
was in the constitution written by Ataturk that the notorious Article
301 about "insulting the Turkishness" first appeared. Historian Taner
Aksham, who had to leave Turkey because of this very Article, writes:
"Extermination of a whole nation is the base of Turkey's existence". In
the light of these details it becomes clear why we have put a taboo on
this issue, which in fact played a very important role in formation
of our national consciousness and state. The fact that the events of
1915 were mass killings wasn't subject to any discussion. The main
topic of discussion of those times was how to punish the "Turks"
for the slaughter of the Armenian people. The trial was one of the
punishments. Dividing Anatolia was another means of punishment. In
other words, the Western powers closely hid their imperial aims behind
the reality of mass killings of the Armenian people.
Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and his fellow-fighters took this reality; those
who are guilty were to be punished, but they opposed to the allotment
of Anatolia". Mustafa Kemal Ataturk said: "A nation's case may not be
protected with irresponsibility. A Nation's case, before becoming a
matter of politics, should become a well-considered ideal. Propaganda
must always lean on positive knowledge. It is necessary to calculate
each movement and to determine the succession of the action."
From: Baghdasarian
PanARMENIAN.Net
13.11.2007 GMT+04:00
Kemal Ataturk was personally familiar with many key plans of the
movement of the Young Turks, but didn't take part in the upheaval
of 1908, so that later, when the organizers of the Armenian Genocide
were taken into court, Ataturk wasn't among them.
The founder of modern Turkey Mustafa Kemal Ataturk is still
"an inviolable person" in Turkey. In every city there is the
statue to Ataturk, his pictures may be found in all government
institutions. After his party lost its power in 1950, people still
continued worshiping Kemal Ataturk. A law was passed, concerning any
kind of offence towards Ataturk's picture or any kind of criticism
of his activities or slandering the facts of his biography.
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Besides, it is forbidden to carry the surname
Ataturk. The publication of his letters to his wife is forbidden
as well, since it would give the father of the Nation an image of a
"simple" human being. Any doubts about the "purity of the intentions
of the father of the Nation" were subject to criminal liability. Kemal
Ataturk was personally familiar with many key plans of the movement
of the Young Turks, but didn't take part in the upheaval of 1908,
so that later, when the organizers of the Armenian Genocide were
taken into court, Ataturk wasn't among them.
Moreover, perhaps he was the only one among the Turkish political
figures who qualified the deportation of the Armenian people as a
"slaughter".
Ataturk simply couldn't use the term "genocide", because he was
introduced in the international law only in 1948 as a result of
adoption of the UN Convention of Genocide Punishment and Warning
However, let's suppose that Ataturk qualified the events of 1915-1923
as "slaughter", the official Turkish historiography prefers to call it
"tehjir".
The name of the act "Tehjir Kanunu" is sounds as an act about
resettlement. While describing the events, most often terms
like "tenkil, or "nakletme" are used, which may be translated as
"transportation" or "removal" and terms like "deportation", never
"exile" were never used to qualify those events. But in spite of
this, out of ignorance or out of the desire to make things look more
dramatic, the Armenians and some western authors choose terms like
"exile". Both from historical and philological point of view this
is nothing but an intentional error," says the article covering the
events of 1915 in the site of the Turkish Ministry of Culture.
Yet, referring back to Ataturk who in July 1926 in his interview to
the Swiss journalist Emil Hildebrand mentioned the "slaughter", of
course putting the blame on the Young Turks. It shouldn't be forgotten
that in 1926 there were still orphanages where thousands of Armenian
children were sheltered, the organizers of the Armenian Genocide
were already starting to feel the revenge of the Armenian avengers
and Ataturk simply couldn't say anything else. Because of it again in
1926 a group of nationalists with Zia Khurshud at the head intended to
kill Kemal during his visit to Izmir, however the plot was discovered
and the group was arrested, five of them shot. By the way, after being
elected the President of Turkey, Ataturk gave his close fellow-fighters
land and made expensive presents, which as the evidence shows were
of "Armenian origins". However Ataturk was the one to put a taboo on
mentioning the events of the 1915 and gave the Turkish historians the
right of having their own interpretation of these horrifying years. It
was in the constitution written by Ataturk that the notorious Article
301 about "insulting the Turkishness" first appeared. Historian Taner
Aksham, who had to leave Turkey because of this very Article, writes:
"Extermination of a whole nation is the base of Turkey's existence". In
the light of these details it becomes clear why we have put a taboo on
this issue, which in fact played a very important role in formation
of our national consciousness and state. The fact that the events of
1915 were mass killings wasn't subject to any discussion. The main
topic of discussion of those times was how to punish the "Turks"
for the slaughter of the Armenian people. The trial was one of the
punishments. Dividing Anatolia was another means of punishment. In
other words, the Western powers closely hid their imperial aims behind
the reality of mass killings of the Armenian people.
Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and his fellow-fighters took this reality; those
who are guilty were to be punished, but they opposed to the allotment
of Anatolia". Mustafa Kemal Ataturk said: "A nation's case may not be
protected with irresponsibility. A Nation's case, before becoming a
matter of politics, should become a well-considered ideal. Propaganda
must always lean on positive knowledge. It is necessary to calculate
each movement and to determine the succession of the action."
From: Baghdasarian