I agree with seneca.

Son of Eire, another point is that Nazis for example use freedom of speech to organise the next holocaust. Holocaust denial is part of that strategy.

To use your analogy, the real intent in calling someone ugly is not just to offend them (although they may be) but to use this divisive scapegoating as a way to achieve or continue in power.

In any event some words are of themselves hurtful, reflecting say a history of slavery and suppression of rights and liberties and are used to put people into a category of being inferior and second class.

The Armenians are sure that these events were genocide and claim that Turkey does not want to face with her history and so she does not scrap article 301 which restricts freedom of speech. However, Turkish articles obviously do not have any power of sanction on Armenians. So, what is the reason of Armenians’ insistent refusal of Turkey’s suggestions to discuss these events together with historians from both sides? For example:

*In 2004, the Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform (VAT) was founded to exchange documents about the 1915 events by Austrian, Turkish and Armenian historians. After receiving 100 Turkish documents, the Armenians refused to send their documents which they promised, to the Turkish historians and afterwards the Armenian foreign minister announced that they did not want to discuss the 1915 events with historians.

*Armenia refused the Turkish prime minister's and the Turkish Assembly's invitation announced on 13th April 2005 which suggested to establish a Joint Commission composed of historians from both sides and discuss the events which took place during the 1st World War.

*Turkey sent full page ads to five popular newspapers of the United States (US) calling on Armenia to ‘bring light the events of 1915 together with Turkey and to establish a joint commission composed of historians from both sides in addition to historians from other nations’, in April 2007.

*And the Turkish prime minister repeated the same invitation on February 2008 , in Munich at the 44th Security Conference where the Armenian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Oskanian also attended?

In neither of these invitations was there any precondition, unlike it is claimed by the Armenians.

*Why did the Armenian historian Sarafyan, who accepted the recent invitation of the chief of Turkish History Foundation, Halaçoğlu, for cooperation to investigate Harput events, abandon the project, after talking the Armenian diaspora? .....

(continued in the next box)

cont..
*Why are the Armenian archives still closed? The archives of Taşnak (Dashnak) Party is present in Zoryan Armenian Institute in Boston. Both Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation offered the Armenians to open these archives; but the directors of the Zoryan Institute replied that they did not have enough money to open the archives. Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation promised financial support.Why did the Armenians refuse this suggestion too? (Nüzhet Kandemir, http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/418517.asp). Note that Zoryan Institute has quite enough money to provide financial support for Taner Akçam who advocates the Armenian claims in Minnesota University.

If a genocide had really occured, why did Brian Ardouny of the Armenian Assembly of America announce ‘We don’t need to prove the genocide historically, because it has already been accepted politically’? Why did the chief of the Armenian Archives in Armenia tell that they were not interested in the achives, but all they are interested is the world’s public opinion.

In your life, have you ever seen a criminal who persistently calls the victim to bring his evidences? And, have you ever seen a victim who passionately accuses somebody of committing crime and giving him great harm but strictly avoids of bringing his proofs before the referees or going to court, and tells that he need not prove that this person’s guilt, because the community has already accepted this person as guilty?

In this situation would you not ask the question of which era you are living in? 5000 BC or 7000 BC?

And what else should Turkey do, to FACE WITH HER HISTORY? Who is afraid of facing with her history? Turkey or Armenia and those who support them?

Thank you akasya.

It seems that I need to know a lot more about what is claimed to be the "Genocide of the Armenians"..

Can you recommend a book?

Part 1:
Whoever tells about topics which obviously abolish the Armenians' imaginary past, are labelled as ‘deniars’, as ‘agents of Turkish government’, or ‘people hired by the Turkish government’ or ‘disingenous scholars/authorities’. And, here are the names of Armenians who comply with the these terms:

The Armenian Soviet historian A.A.Lalayan who stated that the Dashnaks displayed extreme courage to massacre Turkish women, children and ill and old people (Contrarevolyutsionnıy ‘Daşnaktsutyun’ İ İmperialisti-çeskaya Voyna 1914-1918 gg.’, Revolyutsionnıy Vostok, No.2-3, p.92, 1936) was an Armenian deniar and he was also hired by the Turkish government years ago.

Armenian Boghos Nubar, who told that ‘150 000 Armenian volunteers in Russian Army were the only forces against Turks’ (Times of London , 1919 Jan 30 Link: http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2007/10/2013-150-000-armenian-volunteers-in.html) was also a deniar and agent of Turkish government.

Armenian T. Haçikoglyan who told that the Dashnaks eradicated thousands of Turks with their bloody hands (T. Haçikoglyan, 10 Let Armyanskoy Sttrelkovoy Divizii,p4-6. İzdatelstvo Polit. Uprav. KKA, Tiflis, 1930) was also a deniar and agent of Turkish government.

Hovannes Katchaznouni, the first prime-minister of the Armenian state founded in 1918 and the prime authority of the Dashnagzoutiun Party who wrote a book ‘Dashnagzoutiun Has Nothing to do Anymore’ and K.S.Papazian, the writer of ‘Patriotism Perverted’ published in 1934, in Boston were the main Armenian deniars. Because:

In both of these books, the writers displayed the terrorist identity of Dashnaks, and their lack of vision. Katchaznouni stressed on that they should have used a peaceful language towards the Turks but they (Armenian Dashnaks) rejected the Turks who suggested to negotiate with them and they went on fighting in cooperation with the Russians

Part 2
Papazian wrote that Khatisian and the then prime minister S.Vratzian didnot publish the text of Treaty of Gümrü which put an end to war between Turkey and the Armenian Republic on December 2, 1920, which coincided with the entrance of Bolsheviks into Armenia.Gümrü Treaty shows that in neither region of the Ottoman state, did the Armenians make up the majority of the population.

And both writers told that the Armenian prime minister Simon Vratzian applied to the Turkish government on March 18, 1921 and asked military help of the Turks against the Bolsheviks!

Of course, even these few examples give great harm to the present Armenian thesis and lead people to question the Armenian’s innocence, their predominance in Ottoman population, and most importantly their genocide thesis.

Of course, the fact that Ottoman government offered the Dashnaks negotiations long before deportation is the major point that is not wanted by the Armenians to be known since they make great effort to show that the Ottoman government committed a genocide aiming ethnic cleansing.

And they fear the question of why and how the Armenian prime minister Simon Vratzian applied to the Turkish government on March 18, 1921 and asked military help of the Turks against the Bolsheviks, in spite of that the Turks committed a (so-called) genocide and murdered 1.5 million Armenians!

So, it is not surprising that both of these books are banned in Armenia. It is also a fact that all the copies of the book of Hovannes Katchaznouni, in all languages were collected from the libraries in Europe by Dashnags. The book is included in the catalogues but no copies can be found in the racks.

Because, Hovannes Katchaznouni, the first prime-minister of the Armenian state and K.S.Papazian were the greatest deniars and the most disingenous scholars/authorities of the Armenians' present thesis