|
We always hear about the Russians stirring up the
Ottoman Armenians, which went as far back as the times of Peter the Great,
with promises of a homeland the Russians never intended to make good on. Well,
what about the British? Sure, we know how Lloyd George desired to wipe the
Ottoman Empire off the face of the map, as the United Kingdom planned the dismemberment of
the Sick Man of Europe, along with other imperialist powers, for the longest
time... and the "genocide" also helped in the justification of
reducing what is now Turkey to little more than their planned Indian
reservation. However, let's explore the possibility of how much the British
encouraged the Armenians to hit their own nation in the back, like the
Armenians gladly did with Russian encouragement.
|
|
|
DENIES
BLAME IN ARMENIA |
The New York Times
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lord Robert Cecil Says British Agents Did Not Stir Up Revolt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOVEMBER 17, 1915
LONDON, Nov. 16.--In the course of a discussion in the House of Commons tonight of the
Armenian massacres. Lord Robert Cecil, Under Secretary of State or Foreign Affairs,
refused the suggestion made, he said, in the United States that British agents had
intrigued and stirred up the Armenians to revolt, and that Great Britain, therefore, was
responsible for the massacres.
"There was no provocation whatever," said Lord Robert. "The massacres were
premeditated with the intention on the part of their instigators, the Committee of Union
and Progress, not to punish the insurrectionists, but to exterminate the Armenian
race."
Lord Robert declined an invitation to give to pledge of the Government to employ all the
resources of the army and navy in order to save the Armenians.
Well... Lord Robert Cecil WOULD
say that, wouldn't he. Where exactly is your proof of the reckless extermination charge
you made to take the heat off the real issue, Lord Robert? After the war was over, Lord
Cecil's own nation... acting as judge, jury and executioner... could not come up with a single
shred of reliable evidence at the Malta Tribunal, even
though Great Britain searched so very, very desperately for nearly two-and-one-half years,
employing a crack team of Armenian researchers, partly to justify the avalanche of lies
committed on the part of Britons like Lord Cecil.
Tsk tsk tsk. What an awful blur
on the good character of Lord Cecil to have been caught on record with such a deceptive
and false claim. Sure, he might have thought being at war gave him license to commit
slander and libel... but even war cannot transcend a man's integrity, which is how we
ascertain the true value of a human being. There were, after all, Britons during wartime
(such as C. F.
Dixon-Johnson) where the principle of truth
came first. (One reason for maintaining the truth against a "misjudged and badly
maligned enemy," Dixon-Johnson reasoned, was that neutral nations would be
"influenced in our favour if we show ourselves fair minded.") All those who have
made and are still
salivating to make the genocide charge, a crime of the
highest magnitude that compromises a people's reputation, without taking the time to fully
investigate all sides of the story... will posthumously forever live in shame; once the
truth is wholly accepted by the masses, as one day it ultimately shall.
(How come every Briton involved in
the "Genocide" issue seems to be a Lord? What good is being a Lord if there were
so many Lords?)
Did the Brits Have Nothing to Do with the Revolting
Armenians?
|
The British must have promised the Armenians
SOMETHING.
Otherwise, why would the Armenians have helped
the British at
Gallipoli, as they did?
The seeds of British usage of the Armenians
were planted many years before the First World War. Russian General Mayewski gave an excellent accounting.
|
"British promises to Armenians
were exactly like their promises to Arabs in Syria, Palestine and Mesopotamia;
they were made with the purpose of encouraging the war efforts of the
Armenians, to influence neutral states in favor of England and to excite the
separatist tendencies in ethnic minorities under the rule of these neutral
states so as to make their enemy, the Ottoman Empire, collapse from the
inside."
A. H Arslanian, British Wartime
Pledges, 1917-1918: The Armenian Case, Journal of Contemporary History, Vol.
13, 1978 (page 522)
|
Prof. Mim Kemal Oke, The Armenian Question, 1914-1923 |
Contrary to official statements,
England did not refrain from secretly helping some Armenians. As early as 1905, it
had approved the establishment of the Armenian General Benevolent Union in Egypt
under the leadership of Bogos Nubar Pasha. This
society held a meeting in the summer of 1914 and decided to send six Dashnak
revolutionaries who were among its members to Adana to make preparations for a
revolution. These revolutionaries held meetings with churchgoers in Adana and
promised that arms would be supplied for them from Greece which was under British
protection. Cyprus, which was also under British protection, was another important
place of asylum for Armenian revolutionaries. The British had opened an Armenian
school also in Cyprus, and the intention was to send its graduates to Anatolia to
Initiate a revolution. Furthermore, according to Ottoman records, the Zeytun
rebellion and then the disturbances which broke out in Maras, Urfa and Adana had
been created with British protection and support. The admirals in the nearby
British fleet were in regular communication with Armenians in Adana, Dortyol,
Yumurtalik and Iskenderun."' The British had promised the revolutionaries to
launch a landing as soon as the revolution would start."' As a matter of fact,
a detachment of 60 English soldiers came to the Adana province on 23 January 1915,
but it had to go back to the ships because it encountered armed resistance. Even
after the Fourth Army forced the Armenians in this region to emigrate in the
direction of Aleppo and Damascus, the British established contact with them and used
Lawrence of Arabia in an attempt to make them rebel again.
(For more: the link)
Back in the
mid-1890s...
|
British Captain C. B. Norman wrote:
"Our (British) Eastern Policy has failed, failed miserably. We have
alienated the Turks, we have falsified the hopes of the Armenians and we have
deluged the country with blood."
He adds British policy in the Ottoman
capital has been "wrong-radically wrong... Our Ambassador never seeks an
audience (with the Sultan) unless for the purpose of launching some complaint
or uttering some threat. Advice is rendered accompanied by menaces, and no
effort is made to promote a friendly intercourse. The Sultan is accused in our
Press of openly instigating massacres and of deliberately ordering the murder
of untried persons by arousing accusations incapable of proof and as cruel as
they are absurd." — "The Armenians Unmasked," 1895
|
|
|
|
|