Shekhar Kapur to make film on Armenian genocide?

[Developereo]

The Western media has never denied the death of Turks, this is the first I am hearing of this. It is our media that has denied the death of Armenians. No one ever claimed that Turks weren't killed. Right?

If there is a war and both sides kill large numbers of civilians indiscriminately, how can you accuse only one side of genocide?

Anatolia 1915:Turks Died, Too

In the end, almost 600,000 of the Anatolian Armenians had died. Almost 3 million Anatolian Moslis had died, more than one third of them in eastern Anatolia. Mortality in the Caucasus was similarly proportioned

 

[Ticker]

The Western media has never denied the death of Turks, this is the first I am hearing of this. It is our media that has denied the death of Armenians. No one ever claimed that Turks weren't killed. Right?

Agreed that the western media has not totally denied atrocities committed against the Muslims, but projecting one side of the story while giving lip service and suppressing the other side in my opinion amounts to hypocrisy and an intelligent partisan practice. Highlighting the so-called Armenian genocide for 30 minutes on a TV debate and at the end adding for the record that there were atrocities committed against Muslims as well. This in my opinion is deliberate suppression and attempted denial of the truth and is being racist beyond a doubt, while projecting neutrality.

I will respond to your links, in time.

 

[truthseer]

Armenian Genocide | United Human Rights Council
I am sorry but both of you are acting like this happened in a war, like all casualties. The truth, however, is different, for both genocides:

At this time, about forty thousand Armenian men were serving in the Turkish Army. In the fall and winter of 1914, all of their weapons were confiscated and they were put into slave labor battalions building roads or were used as human pack animals. Under the brutal work conditions they suffered a very high death rate. Those who survived would soon be shot outright. For the time had come to move against the Armenians.

The decision to annihilate the entire population came directly from the ruling triumvirate of ultra-nationalist Young Turks. The actual extermination orders were transmitted in coded telegrams to all provincial governors throughout Turkey. Armed roundups began on the evening of April 24, 1915, as 300 Armenian political leaders, educators, writers, clergy and dignitaries in Constantinople (present day Istanbul) were taken from their homes, briefly jailed and tortured, then hanged or shot.

Next, there were mass arrests of Armenian men throughout the country by Turkish soldiers, police agents and bands of Turkish volunteers. The men were tied together with ropes in small groups then taken to the outskirts of their town and shot dead or bayoneted by death squads. Local Turks and Kurds armed with knives and sticks often joined in on the killing.

An estimated 75 percent of the Armenians on these marches perished, especially children and the elderly. Those who survived the ordeal were herded into the desert without a drop of water. Being thrown off cliffs, burned alive, or drowned in rivers.

Even Hitler referred to it:

Referring to the Armenian Genocide, the young German politician Adolf Hitler duly noted the half-hearted reaction of the world’s great powers to the plight of the Armenians. After achieving total power in Germany, Hitler decided to conquer Poland in 1939 and told his generals: ‘Thus for the time being I have sent to the East only my ‘Death’s Head Units’ with the orders to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of Polish race or language. Only in such a way will we win the vital space that we need. Who still talks nowadays about the Armenians?’

It just shows the lack of interest of the human race.

 

[Developereo]

I am sorry but both of you are acting like this happened in a war, like all casualties. The truth, however, is different, for both genocides:

The link I have shows the history of the region, including Armenian aggression against Turkish Moslis.

The best example of the effects of Russian Armenian cooperation was seen in the province of Erivan (today the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic). Before the Russian invasion of Erivan, the majority of the population was Mosli. As the Russians defeated the Turks and Persians in 1827 29, 30 percent of the Moslis of Erivan either died or migrated. They were replaced with greater numbers of Armenians from Anatolia and Persia. Many more Armenians came to Erivan in the years to come, creating what today is Armenia.
[...]
The exchange of Armenian and Turkish populations continued for a century. With each war between the Russians and the Ottomans, more Moslis died, more fled, and more Armenians came. By 1922, more than 1 1/2 million Moslis had migrated from the conquered lands.

Even Hitler referred to it:

And that proves what, exactly? That he, too, had similarly heard one side of the story.

It just shows the lack of interest of the human race.

Turks are also human. Unlike the Western media, we want to acknowledge the suffering of both sides.

 

[truthseer]

The link I have shows the history of the region, including Armenian aggression against Turkish Moslis.

The best example of the effects of Russian Armenian cooperation was seen in the province of Erivan (today the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic). Before the Russian invasion of Erivan, the majority of the population was Mosli. As the Russians defeated the Turks and Persians in 1827 29, 30 percent of the Moslis of Erivan either died or migrated. They were replaced with greater numbers of Armenians from Anatolia and Persia. Many more Armenians came to Erivan in the years to come, creating what today is Armenia.
[...]
The exchange of Armenian and Turkish populations continued for a century. With each war between the Russians and the Ottomans, more Moslis died, more fled, and more Armenians came. By 1922, more than 1 1/2 million Moslis had migrated from the conquered lands.

I'll come back to this in a second.

 

[Ticker]

@ truthseer

As I have read your posts and links, what I think is that you need to read both sides of the story before arriving at a conclusion. What you are doing is depicting only one sided viewpoint or a biased projection thereof.

One advantage that I have is that I have visited Eastern Turkey and have stayed with those people a bit and have heard their stories. One place which gave me chills was an old fort where on a side of a wall, thousands of Turks were beheaded by the Russo-Armenian forces. Honestly Sir, it was still stained with blood marks of those Muslim Turks beheaded in tens of thousands, over a period of time.

I do not believe the Ottoman government ever intended a genocide of Armenians. This conclusion is based on both evidence and logic.

Of the masses of secret deportation orders seen to date, not one orders murder. Instead, they order Ottoman officials to protect deported Armenians. It has been argued that the Ottomans must have sent out another set of secret orders, contradicting the first set of secret orders, which were a subterfuge. This assumes that the Ottomans deliberately confused their own officials in wartime so that future historians would be fooled—a more than unlikely proposition.

Large Armenian populations, such as those of Istanbul and other major cities, remained throughout the war. These were areas where Ottoman power was greatest and genocide would have been easiest. To decide whether genocide was intended, it is instructive to compare this to the Nazi genocide of the Jews. The Jews of Berlin were killed, their synagogues defiled. The Armenians of Istanbul lived through the war, their churches open.

Another telling argument against genocide is that hundreds of thousands of Armenians survived deportation to the Arab World. If genocide were intended, it must be believed that the Ottomans could not manage to kill them, even though these Armenians were completely under Ottoman control for three years. This is not believable.

 

[truthseer]

Now, the Moslis here were killed fighting the Russians. So far, I'm sure we can see that the Armenians were not responsible for this. The Armenians settled in these lands. As the wars intensified, more Turkish Moslis fled the area. Once again, can we be clear here that Armenians were mostly merchants at the time and were not responsible for this? As this was a peaceful area, the Armenians flocked to the area. Thus, this place became known as Armenia.

So far I don't see the Armenians at fault. Later, during WW1, the genocide was started by the Turks first!

Though now I accept what Ticker says. His experience means he likely knows better!

 

[Ticker]

@ truthseer

It was in fact in the regions where Ottoman control was weakest that columns of Armenian deportees suffered most. The stories of the time give many examples of columns of hundreds of Armenians guarded by perhaps two government guards. When the columns were attacked by tribesmen or bandits Armenians were robbed and killed. It must be remembered that these tribes were those who had themselves suffered greatly at the hands of Armenians and Russians. Were the Ottomans guilty.

The Turkish government of the time was guilty of not properly protecting their citizens. However, given the situation of the time, with Turks and Kurds fighting for their lives against Russians and Armenians, this is understandable, although it is never excusable for a government not to protect its people. Conditions are best illustrated in the Van province, where Muslim mortality was greatest. The central government ordered the Van governor to send gendarmes, rural policemen, to guard columns of Armenian deportees. He responded that he had 40 gendarmes at his disposal—all the others were fighting at the Russian Front. The 40 gendarmes were protecting Muslim villages against Armenian attacks. He refused to let the Muslims be killed by Armenians so that Armenians could be protected from Muslims.

While Ottoman weakness should be censured, should we not also ask how well Armenians and Russians protected the Turks and Kurds who fell under their control? The answer is that in provinces such as Van, where inter-communal fighting was fiercest, Muslims who could not escape from Armenian bands were killed. Virtually the entire Muslim population of southeast and far eastern Anatolia either became refugees or died. Like the deportation of Armenians, this too was a deportation with great mortality.

So to put the blame entirely on one side because of the current environment and that too after almost a century, and the way Muslims are being hounded in American, Western and Indian media, in my opinion belies the intent and the racist and religious undertones which needs to be understood.

 

[Developereo]

Now, the Moslis here were killed fighting the Russians. So far, I'm sure we can see that the Armenians were not responsible for this.

Again, from the link,


The Russians [...] adopted native Christians as their proxies
[...]
The Armenians, [...] were to be used much as the Slavs had been used
[...]
the Armenians [...] were convinced of the superiority and ultimate triumph of their Christian faith, and the opportunity to side with a great Christian power was seductive.
[...]
Armenian armed units assisted the invading armies of Peter the Great and acted as spies against their Mosli rulers. Armenians were subsequently to become Russian soldiers and even generals who lead the Russian conquests.
[...]
Tens of thousands of Armenians formed thiselves into guerrilla bands.
[...]
Throughout eastern Anatolia, Armenian bands attacked villagers wherever they found them. In turn, Turks and especially Kurdish tribesmen attacked Armenian villages. It was the beginning of a bloody war.

 

[truthseer]

Like I said before:
Though now I accept what Ticker says. His experience means he likely knows better!

The genocide, whoever committed it, remains deplorable though. As I'm sure you agree.

Again, from the link,

The Armenians, [...] were to be used much as the Slavs had been used
[...]
the Armenians [...] were convinced of the superiority and ultimate triumph of their Christian faith, and the opportunity to side with a great Christian power was seductive.
[...]
Armenian armed units assisted the invading armies of Peter the Great and acted as spies against their Mosli rulers. Armenians were subsequently to become Russian soldiers and even generals who lead the Russian conquests.
[...]
Tens of thousands of Armenians formed thiselves into guerrilla bands.
[...]
Throughout eastern Anatolia, Armenian bands attacked villagers wherever they found them. In turn, Turks and especially Kurdish tribesmen attacked Armenian villages. It was the beginning of a bloody war.

I accept what you say and concede you probably know more!

 

[Developereo]

The genocide, whoever committed it, remains deplorable though. As I'm sure you agree.

Of course. The only thing I am saying is that Turkish civilian casualties were also huge at the hands of Armenians and Russians. The Turks have their version of comparative numbers as to who suffered more casualties, so the Western charge of 'Armenian genocide' while the Turkish losses are mere footnotes is not fair.

 

[Sashan]

If that was a compliment, that is the most number of left hands hitting me within a minute that I have experienced in my life so far.



Pretty harsh stuff, but asexuality?????

Joe sir - Ofcourse it is and at the sametime showing my dumba**sness.

 

[xyxmt]

Another usual Pakistani(see I can also generalise).

Considering some 90k of your surrendered(12k civilians) and PA +Jamat/Rajakars started killing people much before the actual war started; even if 15 percent of troop posted in east pakistan killed a single east pakistani a day, still they would manage to kill 3 million. And usually PA disposed whole villages at a go.

are you afraid of falling into Pakistani army's hands, be afraid be bery afraid

 

[RazPaK]

Well Joe, as long as your not trying to draw parallels between Armenian Genocide, and 71', then continue on.

I had a feeling you were going to take it there for some reason.