|★阿修羅♪ > ホロコースト4 > 417.html ★阿修羅♪|
Defending Foxman, or
Cool it, Armenians
By Israel Shamir
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Abe Foxman, the head of the Jewish-Masonic thought police misnamed ADL, easily one of the most repulsive men in American public life, is not as good as a clock, but he can be right once in a while; and this time is now.
The US Congress, this modern areopagus of saints and sages, the highest moral authority of our planet, is about to condemn the Turks for massacring Armenians almost a century ago. 1915 was a long time ago, and the American legislators probably do not know where Armenia is and where it was then. This issue is a veritable can of worms, where nothing is as it appears.
The reasons are anything but moral. Its American promoters wish to punish Turkey for staying out of the Iraq War and to scare this great country back into obedience. The Neocon plan for the New Middle East calls for the creation of a Greater Kurdistan including some parts of Eastern Anatolia, and the condemnation of Turkey may lead to a new attempt to tear the requisite lands away from Ankara.
The Armenians, always keen to copycat the Jews, want to have a holocaust registered to their name, replete with compensations, museums and a permit to massacre their neighbors Azeris. Why should the events of 1915 legitimize their atrocities against the Azeris, who actually allowed the Armenian refugees to settle in their land? Here again, the Armenians borrowed a leaf from the Jewish book: if the Jews can kill innocent Palestinians on whose land they found refuge after being expelled by Germans, the Armenians may do the same to the equally innocent Azeris.
This decision is likely to antagonize Turkey, and thus it is not to be undertaken lightly; on the other hand, it is good to keep ‘em on tiptoes, so they won’t be too cocksure. In addition, Armenians have a small but efficient lobby, a little brother to the mighty Jewish one, and their desire has some weight.
Now, in questions of importance an Italian consults with his priest, a Swiss – with his banker, a German with his policeman, while an American goes to the Jews who happily unite a financial and religious institution with a secret police function. This time, Abe Foxman gave a correct reply: “A congressional action will not help reconcile the issue. The resolution takes a position; it comes to a judgment. The Turks and Armenians may need to revisit their past. The Jewish community shouldn't be the arbiter of that history, nor should the U.S. Congress.” Afterwards, the ADL and three other powerful Jewish organizations―the American Jewish Committee, the Masonic B'nai Brith International, and the Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs ― asked Congress to stay away from the trouble.
The reasons of Foxman were as hard-nosed as those of the Armenian apologists. Turkey is traditionally friendly to the Jews, and a decision of the American congress is usually considered to be taken, or at least approved by the Jews. A hostile resolution is going to cause some ill feeling of Turks to the Jews and to the Jewish state; while the Armenians are traditional enemies of the Jews anyway.
Foxman was attacked and almost lynched by many members of his community who had dreamed for years for a politically correct opportunity. [See http://www.jewcy.com/feature/2007-07-09/fire_foxman ] It’s hard to regret his possible political demise; but this time he was right. The U.S. Congress and the Jewish community shouldn't be the arbiter of history.
If the Americans feel they must condemn mass killings, they should begin with themselves. Let them begin with mass killing of Iraqis and Afghanis, instead of paying for its surge. Afterwards, they may condemn the massacres done by their fathers and grandfathers – be it Dresden or Hiroshima, Vietnam or Cambodia, Philippines or Mexico, Atlanta or Wounded Knee – and compensate the sufferers, and all other nations they bombed and robbed. In such a way they will obtain some moral right to express their view, if not to sit in judgment.
The Jews should get off their high horse, while they continue to suffocate and starve Gaza. Let them pay for the horrors of Al Nakba, the Palestinian holocaust, for 60 years, before voicing any view on genocides, whether in Turkey or in Sudan. But it is not likely they will. They do not know where to stop. This extremism will eventually cause their defeat. They had to take a good Communist idea to its Trotskyite extreme, and now, taking Holocaustism to its extreme, they launched a “kNOw (cute!?) Genocide, a new multi-ethnic, non-partisan coalition formed to combat the ongoing denial of known cases of genocide, such as the Darfur, Cambodian, Jewish, Rwandan, and the Armenian genocides.”
I wonder why they stop at that. What about the Sack of Troy and ensuing genocide? Do not deny it, the Trojans are extinct but for computers! And let us consider the oldest genocide, that of the Neanderthals. They were exterminated by Homo sapiens. Our ancestors killed them all. We should not forget nor forgive this crime.
Speaking of Armenians, the US Congress may recognise and condemn the massacre of Cypriot Greeks by Armenians in the 13th century when they practically depopulated the island, or the massacre of Azeris in 1918 in Baku (over 30,000 slain) and in 1992 over Karabagh by Armenians. On the other hand, provided that the Armenians are the descendents of the Amalek tribe, Congress should recognise their genocide by King Saul and demand of the Jews that they pay for it…
I do have strong doubt about many new inventions, and genocide, a concept invented in 1945, is one of them. There is nothing new in killing since it was practiced by Cain on Abel; why would they need a brand new concept? The inventor, a Polish Jew named Raphael Lemkin, served as a US adviser; he felt that killing a Jew is much worse a crime than killing a goy. Indeed, he studied the Talmud, and the Talmud makes this important contradistinction. In order to convince the American goyim, he invented the concept of genocide. So, genocide is just a new word for the Talmud-defined special offence of killing, or threatening a Jew. Genocide is not the same as “killing civilians”, otherwise the victims of Leningrad siege and Dresden bombing would qualify.
The ‘genocide’ concept was invented by Jews, and Jewish inventions work well only for Jews. For instance, Jewish siege of Gaza fits the definition of genocide, but try and say that; you will be called Nazi and excluded from a polite society. On the other hand, when Ahmadinejad calls for undoing the Jewish racist state, this is “genocide;” when a Hezbollah missile killed ten Israeli soldiers last August, this was a case of “genocide,” for “they were killed only because they were Jews”. The killing of a goy does not qualify: when the Germans starved Leningrad, Americans nuked Hiroshima, or Jews bombed Gaza and Beirut, this was not genocide because the perpetrators were indifferent to the ethnic-religious orientation of their victims, claims the PC legalist. The Yankees could not exclude that Hiroshima is populated by Scots; the Germans could think Leningrad is mainly Zulu; while the Jews thought only murderous terrorists lived in Beirut and Gaza. This explanation is so forced that it calls for Ockham's Razor. My explanation “genocide is killing of Jews” is easier.
Later, mass killing of Jews was promoted to the “Holocaust,” while the genocide concept was downgraded and used for branding the general enemy: Communists, Muslims, disobedient rulers. The killing of a few dozen Albanian brigands in Kosovo was “genocide,” and Serbia was bombed for this crime, while its President died in a Hague jail. A civil war in Rwanda became ‘genocide’, though the Tutsi population actually increased. It is now ascribed to Muslims. Cambodia was “genocide”, while Vietnam (where Americans killed five million) was not. In short, “genocide” is a politically motivated label of little importance.
Listen, war is hell, and killing civilians is a crime, or should be crime; whatever their ethnic background is. This simple rule is better than genocide innovations. The problem is, it eliminates the high moral ground of the Allies over the Axis, for both sides killed a lot of civilians. But it should not bother us. Let us get rid of the genocide invention – anyway it does not help us, and it helps our enemy.
Joachim Martillo discovered that the Save Darfur Genocide PR campaign was arranged and orchestrated by the American Jewish network “David Project” and its affiliates in order to demonise Muslims and Arabs and to recruit non-Jews [See his revelations on http://eaazi.blogspot.com/ and http://karinfriedemann.blogspot.com/ ] Have no doubt: the Armenian Lobby signed on every dotted line; without that they won’t get far.
So, what happened with the Armenians? Armenians suffered during the WWI because they fought against the Ottoman Empire – and lost. They sided with its enemy. They were promised almost the whole of Anatolia by the Allies, and Turks could experience the grim fate of Azeris but for the sword of Mustafa Kemal. Armenians made a good try to ethnically cleanse the Turks and the Kurds, but failed. They were interned or deported by the Imperial government. Likewise, the Japanese were interned by Franklin D. Roosevelt, the Germans were deported by Britain, the Palestinians were deported by Israel, the Turks were deported by Greece - and many perished.
Since then, the world has changed. The Ottoman Empire is gone; and Turkey is just one of many successor-states, among them Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Greece etc. This is unfair and outright racist plan to single out Turkey, especially if the Armenian deportees were killed by their neighbours, the Kurds. Now there is an (almost) independent Kurdistan with a lot of oil. If some Armenians are spoiling for compensation, they may try the Kurds. If however some Armenians want to return to the Lake Van, they may be allowed to come back while fully recognising Turkish sovereignty.
The dissolution of empires is a painful event, with succession wars a permanent feature. Still, India does not claim that England owes it compensation for the Hindu – Muslim massacres and wars of 1948. A community is likely to suffer from the wrong choice in case of war. Armenians surely suffered, but the Turks are not to be blamed. We should reject the racist concept of inherited guilt: whoever was in the wrong in 1915 is certainly dead.
Nowadays, the Armenians live in modern Turkey in peace; they are not looking for condemnations. The recently assassinated Armenian journalist was adamantly against such a foreign condemnation – he thought this is an internal Turkish affair. He was right: every nation may do its soul-searching and guilt-attributing. But the holier-than-thou attitude promoted by the Western well-wishers should be limited to a minimum.
Even in the case of our beloved Palestine we do not call for the US Congress to condemn the Nakba: we call on them to give equal rights to the Palestinians living in Palestine, and to allow the return of refugees. Let the past to take care of itself; while we may take care of our present.
The Armenians are advised to take care of their present as well. Because of their obsession with the past, their republic is in dire straits. Whoever can emigrate does so. There are more Armenians in Moscow than in Yerevan. Playing into neocon hands won’t improve their situation. Instead of aggravating the situation and dreaming of redrawing maps, they should cool it and make peace with their Turk, Azeri and Kurd neighbours.
An American historian on the Armenian Turkish problem:
Speech given by Dr. Justin McCarthy at the Turkish Grand National Assembly
March 24, 2005
Jews demand Foxman’s head:
Jewcy.com July 9, 2007
Denying the Armenian Genocide should be the last atrocity perpetrated by the ADL chief.
By Joey Kurtzman
Joachim Martillo on Armenian Genocide:
http://eaazi.blogspot.com/ and http://karinfriedemann.blogspot.com/
▲このページのＴＯＰへ HOME > ホロコースト4掲示板フォローアップ: