Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Genocide Deniers And Their Cronies

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Genocide Deniers And Their Cronies

    GENOCIDE DENIERS AND THEIR CRONIES

    Neos Kosmos, The Hellenic Perspective, Australia
    Dec 5 2013

    Thee campaign for Australian recognition of the Armenian, Assyrian
    and Greek genocides has intensified and the issue has reached the
    Australian mainstream like never before.

    Dean Kalimniou

    ABC political analyst Michael Brissenden recently tweeted: "Is
    Parliament House the right place for genocide deniers. We wouldn't
    give a committee room to David Irving." He was of course referring to
    the lecture, booked by Labor MP Laurie Ferguson, to be given by one of
    the world's most strident genocide deniers. Professor Justin McCarthy,
    an American history academic, is well known for his denial of the
    Armenian, and by implication, Assyrian and Greek genocide in Anatolia.

    According to Michael Brissenden, he is considered by Armenians to be
    what David Irving is to the Jewish Holocaust.

    Interestingly enough, the same gentleman was scheduled to speak at
    the University of Melbourne and the Art Gallery of NSW. However,
    after certain interested members of the public drew the university
    and the gallery's attention to both the content of the lecture and
    Justin McCarthy's active campaigning against genocide recognition,
    it was announced that the lecture was not to take place.

    Of late, the campaign for Australian recognition of the Armenian,
    Assyrian and Greek genocides has intensified and the issue has reached
    the Australian mainstream like never before. Further, the Australian
    media are beginning to realise both the enormity of the crime and the
    fact that it involved not just the Armenians, but also other Christian
    peoples of Anatolia. Thus, in his recent report on Lateline, Michael
    Brissenden took pains to point out that: "Although it's known as the
    Armenian genocide, thousands of Assyrians and Pontian Greeks were
    also killed." Hundreds of thousands would have been a more accurate
    description, but the fact that this connection is being made at all
    is encouraging for all those activists who campaign for recognition of
    what is a crime that has largely gone unrecognised. Furthermore, as we
    have seen this year, more and more Australians have become indignant at
    the manner in which the Turkish government seeks to quash a groundswell
    of Australian public support for the recognition of the genocide, by
    seeking to hold the Gallipoli celebrations to ransom. As the Speaker
    of the Turkish Grand National Assembly Mr Cemil Cicek has stated:
    "One of only two things ... could disrupt good relations between
    Turkey and Australia." One is for Australia "to support any claims
    about genocide without hearing the Turkish side ... this could cause
    huge rifts between the nations and even jeopardise commemorations
    around Gallipoli." In handling this matter so clumsily, all they have
    managed to do is to show the Australian public that they have something
    to hide. As NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell comments: "It's deplorable
    anyone associated with the Turkish government would try and use next
    year's centenary of the Gallipoli landing for political purposes."

    Such attempts at bullying are not new. Australian scholars who study
    the genocide have been known to receive abusive emails and threats
    from genocide deniers and this is especially so if they belong to an
    ethnic community that was a victim of the genocide. Leading genocide
    recognition campaigner Dr Panayiotis Diamadis has, over the years,
    been the recipient of a barrage of quite disturbing and threatening
    emails which have only intensified as the campaign gains momentum
    and more and more Australians become sensitive to the issue. Even
    the Diatribe is not immune, with one incensed reader writing in to
    state in May of this year: "Panayiotis Diamadis and yourself are prime
    examples of the hypocritical human (although Diamadis's credentials
    are highly doubtful) who comes across as good and noble, because you
    are against genocide, and who is going to argue with that?

    But in reality, both of you are exploiting human suffering
    for political and professional gain. You are determining who the
    villains and victims are, and your determinants have little to do with
    legitimate history. In addition, by avoiding the crimes perpetrated
    by those you have designated as the victims, you are telling us that
    one people are more worthy than another.

    Some may call that 'human rights' 'search for justice' etc., but by
    choosing the better human group (one side is completely bad, the
    other completely good), what both of you are advocating might be
    better termed as 'racism'.

    We have taken note of your racist attitude."

    My response was to point out that in previous articles I have
    not shied away from discussing Greek brutalities committed upon
    innocent Turkish civilians during the 1821 War of Independence and
    challenged the writers to meet me in the middle by condemning the
    brutalities committed by their own people. I received no response
    and of course it seems far beyond the bullies to realise that if we
    are to prevent genocide, we must condemn it in all its forms. This
    has nothing to do with asserting the relative merits of one race over
    another. History has shown that we are all capable of the heinous as
    well as the sublime. The manner in which we acknowledge faults, and
    take steps not to repeat them, forms a measure of our humanity. The
    apology to the Stolen Generation of indigenous Australians is a prime
    example. The inverse is true when we try to cover up crimes.

    Given these gross attempts to sweep under the carpet a genocide for
    which there is ample contemporary eyewitness and documentary evidence,
    evidence that even Turkish scholars such as Taner Akcam openly
    acknowledge as condemnatory, the fact that a Labor MP would use the
    chief symbol of Australian democracy as a forum for a genocide denier
    to promote his views is mystifying and thoroughly hurtful. At first
    glance, it reeks of Orientalism. According to this view, Armenians,
    Assyrians and Greeks rank lower in the hierarchy of races, so that
    any event of concern to them is of lesser importance to the mainstream
    than it would have been if the same event had been visited upon other
    'high ranking races'. This may provide an extra dimension to Joe
    Hockey's 2011 comment: "The Armenian genocide is one of the least
    known, least understood and least respected human tragedies of the
    modern era." Accordingly, politicians and others can use such events
    to play politics or curry favour with interest groups, knowing that
    the public outcry will not be significant or politically damaging.

    Further, as the Executive Council of Australian Jewry points out in
    a recent letter, there is a fine line between freedom of speech and
    racial vilification. The council supports the contention that hundreds
    of thousands of Armenians were slaughtered with 'genocidal intent',
    and argues that parliament is being 'misused' by acting as a forum
    for the genocide deniers in question.

    Michael Brissenden's insightful Lateline report, as well as his
    inspired 'tweet', highlight the dangers of such a trivial approach
    to important historical events. This also marks a watershed in the
    campaign for genocide recognition as the Australian public begins
    to question the appropriateness of using important and respected
    Australian institutions for the purposes of subverting traumatic
    events. Laurie Ferguson, who declined to comment to Lateline, would
    do well to spend some time with the survivors of genocide and their
    descendants. He should hear accounts of Armenian orphans forced into
    Turkish orphanages in Syria and beaten when they spoke their mother
    tongue, during their process of Turkification. He should read the
    chilling accounts of Hasan Fehmi, who wrote: "Why did we impute the
    title of murderer to our race? Why did we enter into such decisive
    and difficult struggle? That was done just for securing the future
    of our country that we know as more precious and sacred than our
    lives." He should also have regard to Halil Pasha who wrote: "The
    Armenian nation, which I had tried to annihilate to the last member
    of it... if you ... try to betray Turks and the Turkish homeland,
    I will order my forces which surround all your country and I won't
    leave even a single breathing Armenian all over the earth. Get your
    mind." Then he should be asked what qualifications or special insights
    he possesses that permit him to encourage the denial of the massacre
    of millions and whether he believes that insulting the memories of
    over a million innocent victims of a massacre and their descendants
    is appropriate for a member of the Australian parliament. The party
    that he represents should also be asked the same question. In the
    meantime, the clock is ticking, and with every passing moment, more
    and more Australians are looking to their elected representatives to
    do the right thing - to honour the victims of imperialism, racism and
    brutality. After all, their ancestors fought for them and it is upon
    this foundation that our nation is based.

    * Dean Kalimniou is a Melbourne solicitor and freelance journalist.

    http://neoskosmos.com/news/en/genocide-and-their-cronies

Working...
X