|
|
The so-called Armenian Genocide is mainly a “faith-based”
presentation, instead of being grounded in reality. This is why power-advocates such as
Peter Balakian and Taner Akcam are on record for insisting there are no two sides to this
story. (Forgetting the age-old maxim that there are always two sides to a story.) The
moment their obsession/money tree lays open to scientific analysis with real historic
facts, they are aware their wild claims don’t have much of a leg to stand on. They will
do anything to discourage true debate, by engaging in smear campaigns and labeling their
nay-sayers as “denialists.”
It’s one thing to discourage true debate while hiding behind intellectual fraud, knowing
the real events of this historic tragedy and deliberately, unethically twisting them. This
is what the “evangelists” do; they know their prey are true believers, and are open to
all suggestions fortifying their reason for existence. The main body of Armenians and
genocide advocates have passions that run so deep, they are unwilling or unable to listen
to reason.
This is why the so-called Armenian genocide comes dangerously close to becoming a
religious obsession with many Armenians and those who mindlessly support them. (Terrence
Des Pres gives a grand idea on the parallel between genocides and the religious feelings
they evoke, in this excerpt from a New York
Times article.)
With the neo-conservative swing that has overtaken the United States in recent years, I
see many parallels between their tactics, and the Armenians. Chancing upon conservative
forums, their style is little different than the voices heard in Armenian forums; rants
based on bigotry and name-calling run rampant. Both groups are quick to make their points
by smearing and labeling. Discrediting the opponent takes precedence over intellectual
discussion. It’s easy to take advantage of the emotional mentality of both constituents.
(And I’m not saying the liberal camp is always reasonable and unemotional; for example,
the ranks of the genocide scholars and human rights groups are composed of equally shrill,
dogmatic pharisees, and these people are mostly left-leaning. [Since the days of William
Gladstone, the left has had a tradition to speak ill of Turks... mainly because the “compassion”
liberals are famous for is reserved for the groups liberals hypocritically find
exclusively worthy.] This is the problem with generalizing; keeping in mind extremists
exist in both camps, generally speaking, reason and intelligent debate usually gets
shorter shrift in the “radical” conservative crowd.)
|
|
A TIME Magazine article (Jan. 31, 2005) got me
thinking about these parallels between most genocide-obsessed Armenians and “radical”
conservatives. One parallel off the bat is that both these groups have the cash to
finance their beliefs, and impose them on the masses. Since their opponents (Turks
on one hand, and what we might call “liberals” on the other) generally like to
let things be and not make waves, and simply don’t possess the fanaticism to put
up much of a struggle.
The article is entitled “Stealth Attack on Evolution.” (“Who is behind the
movement to give equal time to Darwin’s critics, and what do they really want?”)
One difference between the Creationism movement and the widespread acceptance of the
Armenian “Genocide” as historical fact is that at least the USA is protected by
its Constitution, serving for the separation of church and state. So the underdog of
the Creationist movement are still the Creationists, as opposed to the underdog of
the Armenian “Genocide” movement, which has had over a century to spread its
near-unilaterally presented poison.
The article tells us church and state separation is becoming an issue among many
Americans. “So at a time when religious faith is increasingly worn on public
sleeves — most prominently that of the President — a dispute that dates back to
the celebrated 1925 Scopes ‘Monkey Trial’ is being replayed around the country
in legislatures, courts, school-board meetings and parent-teacher conferences.
School administrators in rural Dover, Pa., visited biology classes .... to read a
declaration proclaiming, among other things, that ‘Darwin’s theory [of
evolution].... is a theory, not a fact.”
This boggles the mind, when you think about it. If you’ve read “Inherit the Wind”
(a Broadway play which also had an excellent film version with Spencer Tracy; he
played the defense attorney for the schoolteacher on trial for teaching evolution,
in a small religious community), who could forget the moment when the attorney
called up his opponent, the religious prosecutor, on the stand. The defense attorney
used the Bible as his source. When reason met faith, there was no way the prosecutor’s
“mythological case” could sustain itself. Yet, here we are in the 21st century,
and we still have to deal with this issue! (What a powerful parallel with the myth
of the Armenian “Genocide,” which may be substituted for the Bible or any “holy
book”; on the opposing end, we have undeniable evidence negating this purported
genocide, such as the Malta Tribunal... and yet the myth still persists. Such is the
power of blind. religious or quasi-religious passion.)
|
| |
Interestingly, the article tells us,
“The intellectual underpinnings of the latest assault on Darwin’s theory come not from
Bible-wielding Fundamentalists but from well-funded think tanks promoting a theory they
call intelligent design, or I.D. for short.” Sound familiar? Money talks, and can buy
seeming legitimacy. When the Armenians were in trouble in the 1970s and 1980s, after the
Turks finally began to speak up (triggered by Armenian terrorists using Turks as target
practice), they cleverly began supporting the “genocide institutes” that began to
proliferate around that time. Hiding behind the cloak of the Jewish Holocaust, the
Armenian cause became more righteous. After all, arguing about the Armenian “Genocide”
became tantamount to arguing with the Holocaust!
The TIME article continues: “All the think tanks want to do, they insist, is make the
teaching of evolution more honest by bringing up its drawbacks. Who could argue with that?
But the mainstream scientific community contends that this seemingly innocuous agenda is
actually a stealthy way of promoting religion.” The Armenians may have invented the word
“stealth.” Their tactics before the “genocide” years included massacring Turks,
with the real reason to invite European powers to come in and punish the Ottomans, when
the Turks were incited to respond in kind. Similarly, the Armenians support grand human
rights ideologies (for example, claiming they’re only bringing this up so that future
genocides won’t be repeated), when all they care about is preserving their own precious
myth.
One main power behind this Creationist movement is the “nonpartisan but generally
conservative think tank,” Seattle’s Discovery Institute. Funding has come from “an
ultraconservative savings-and-loans heir,” and Discovery “is best known as a major
center of research and advocacy for I.D.” What a striking parallel to the genocide
institutes, like Stephen Feinstein’s CHGS, funded in large part by at least one wealthy
Armenian.
|
|
“Some 350 scientists have signed a declaration
challenging evolution.” With a bit of searching, one can come up with candidates
who are sympathetic to certain causes. Armenians have thrived on gathering the names
of legitimate sounding “genocide scholars” and even celebrity authors like
Norman Mailer and Arthur Miller, to sign their many genocide declarations.
The article confronts the Creationists’ argument that Darwin is “just a theory”:
“They are playing on the public’s lack of understanding of what a scientific
theory is,” says (Kansas City biology teacher Ken) Bingham. “It’s more than a
guess. It’s a set of hypotheses that has been tested over time.”
Just like the Armenians’ strategy of playing on the public’s ingrained
prejudices and lack of understanding, regarding the other side of their genocide
coin. The “other side,” as you may have discovered with minimal strolling
throughout this site, presents inarguable historic events backed up by sources who
would have had no reason to defend the Turks... turning the mythical Armenian “Genocide”
on its ear.
|
| |
The article tells us, “Evolutionary theory does have
gaps, but so do relativity, quantum theory and the theory of plate tetonics. (I.D.
director John) West says those are different because scientists in these fields,
unlike evolutionists, aren’t afraid of intellectual debate. Evolutionists counter
that they have welcomed challenges.”
 |
|
Man and
Dinosaur |
There’s a switch. It’s the Creationist
claiming the evolutionists aren’t broad-minded and are afraid of debate. It may
not be that the latter are afraid... they just know the futility of arguing with
absurdity. (Dinosaurs co-existing with Man when carbon dating clearly reveals the
impossibility.) Unfortunately, the anti-Armenian genocide perspective is forced to
argue against the genocide advocates.... no matter how ludicrous their arguments
are. (And because they’re so possessed, arguing reasonably often proves futile;
they’re going to keep on presenting their unfounded claims as real facts, like the
familiar number of 1.5 million Armenians being murdered.
Just as evolutionary theory has gaps, so does the arguments that I’ve been
presenting on this site. Do I know for certain the Ottoman government was not behind
a systematic plan to exterminate the Armenians? As I’ve written repeatedly, I was
not there, and neither were you. All we can do is look upon the most reasonable
facts and figures and come up with our conclusions. If there were genuine proof such
an extermination plan occurred, I would change my mind in an instant; all that
matters is the truth.
Unfortunately, with the two movements compared on this page, truth is not the
overlying concern. Both the Creationists and the pro-Armenians feel little remorse
in twisting the most malleable evidence to support their agendas... closing their
eyes to the arguments they can say nothing about, and discrediting all other
counter-arguments in whatever way they can. Such is the power that fanaticism
brings.
|
| |
Outside Reading:
A Creationism Chart (slow loading)
|
|
