!àáP="justify">The matter is not related with what the Armenian or Turkish families had undergone. Both sides involve those who have lost their relatives and suffered pains.

†)erned. There is not even one document proving this. Moreover, since the Turks had been defeated in the war, none of the murderers of a total of 170,000 people, who had been designated even by the contemporary Britain publication as the ones killed by the Armenians, had been tried. The draft is hiding certain facts by not mentioning any of these realities, and is also involving bare lies. Those who have signed the draft can easily find the official message sent by the British Ambassador to Washington on July 13, 1921 to Minister Lord Curzon, suggesting that “there are no sufficient concrete facts to blame Turks”.

Prof. Heath Lowry has sufficiently proved that Henry Morgenthau, who had been the US Ambassador to Istanbul during 1913-16, would not be a reliable source. In all his publications and activities, there are the influences, interventions, additions, omissions, and even direct writings of the embassy advisors and translators H.S. Andonian and A.K. Shmavonian as well as of Minister R. Lansing and B. Hendrick, the “ghost writer” who had never been to Turkey. Although the USA and the Ottomans did not fight, they were in two separate groups of states, and despite this, Talat Pasha allowed America of that period headed by President W. Wilson to come to Anatolia to help the Armenians, the subject of accusation, and provide assistance to them (just them) with the money collected upon the widespread “Armenian genocide” statements. Is there any other example to this in history?

The Draft also mentions the support of Wilson to the organization for Help to the Near East. However, it does not refer to the report of his representative M. Prentiss which suggests that Izmir was actually burnt by the Armenians (with the participation of the Greeks) in 1922. The original of this report is in Washington and can be provided to 165 signatories as soon as in ten minutes time from the Admiral Bristol documents. I also have a copy of it.

A sentence identified with Hitler has also been used for this purpose for sixty years. This sentence was put onto a board of six meters long which is hung on the wall of the Jewish Holocaust Museum in Washington. The Draft also refers to this. Nevertheless, below it, the following was necessarily added in smaller letters: “According to Louis Lochner from the AP Agency…” A nation is accused because of a word of a journalist. However, there are millions of eyewitnesses of what the Westerners including America had done and are still doing in the three continents.

Most specifically, the statement suggesting that Turks had prepared the stage for the genocide of the Jews by the Nazis makes this draft as embarrassing as never had been before. Anti-Semitism is an illness of the West and Christianity dating back to the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ. There are numerous examples to this in the previous and recent histories of all the Western states. It is so strong that even today the graves of the Jews in places where they do not live anymore are being destroyed. If 165 signatories apply to expert psychologists, they may describe it as an effort to get rid of the feeling of guilty by passing over an illness, from which in fact they suffer, to others. It would be more appropriate for the US Congress to choose a date, on which they had applied genocide to the inhabitants of the New World as a state, instead of “April 24”.

The British experts could not find even just one document to blame the Turks in their long-lasting researches.

In a significant source book published in Britain in 2003 (with the heading “Glossary for World War I”) (p. 34-35) it is written that “while the Turks were preparing for mobilization and marching to Sarikamis, Armenians had already killed 120,000 and then after 1917, they had killed 50,000 others”. It is also stated that “they had revolted in Van in April 1915 along with 2,500 armed men and established a temporary government there”. That was the reason why the relocation had started.

The draft does not involve even a line referring to these facts. It also does not mention the facts that the orders given from Istanbul were related only with the relocation and those who had carried out illegal activities were punished severely by the administration to include executions in 1915 and 1916. The post-war trials in Istanbul make up another case. These trials were realized in the occupied capital under the shadow of the British bayonets.

(…) The Draft prefers not mentioning in any way the Armenian terrorism of the long Ottoman era and the period after 1975. However, the Armenian terrorism is clearly examined with all its negative aspects in the doctorate thesis of Prof. Louise Nalbandian who is an American of Armenian origin, in the above-mentioned book of K.S. Papazian and in many other sources.

The Draft utters the name of certain Western states and advocates that there are many documents in their official archives proving the genocide. However, according to the post-war treaties, the defeated states were to open up their archives to the experts of the defeaters. In fact, they did so. The British, who took a total of 144 Ottoman leading figures starting with the former grand vizier to the Malta Crown Colony in 1919 and put them into jails, took their experts to every Ottoman corner and sustained their intensive research until mid 1921.

When they could not get even one useful document that they would use in a trial, they made an official application to the US administration and were responded that the USA also did not have any documents that would be useful in the trial process. The Turks were released after a long period of arrest. The Draft does not refer to this important development and to the official response of the USA in 1921.

The Draft suggests that the “Armenian genocide” was accepted also by the United Nations. This allegation is a complete lie. The document which I have and the document which came from the office of the UN Secretary General say: “The United Nations has never approved or supported a report which describes the Armenian experience as ‘genocide’”.

In addition, the thesis suggesting that the whole world accepts the “Armenian genocide” is far from reality. 54 independent states of Africa have never taken a decision in line with their demands on this issue. Neither have the Asian countries. Also, the official view of Britain, which they strongly trust, is as follows: “The stance of the Government of the United Kingdom is such that there are not sufficient evidences to require the classification of these incidents as genocide as described in the United Nations Genocide Treaty of 1948.” I have this document, which is printed on the official paper of the British Ministry of Foreign Affairs and bears the signature of the authorized officer.

The Democrats, who have obtained the majority in both of the lower houses of the Congress, are to undergo real exams. First of all, there is the “gap of classes” which is explicitly underlined by Senator Jim Webb from Virginia. The American society had never been divided that much in terms of the revenues of individuals. The selected Democrats must keep their promises, especially those related with this issue. For instance, the minimum wage must be increased, high taxes must be imposed on large oil monopolies, the great gap between the revenues of those who lead special partnerships and of the ordinary employees must be reduced, steps must be taken to make the health services widespread, and measures must be taken to provide large masses with educational opportunities.

Those who are newly elected as well as their parties have not yet made a significant progress in this regard. And most probably, they will not. However, this is what the American people are in fact waiting for. Going back to the time of ninety years ago and signing a document which targets Turks and which they have put into the hands of the Armenian pressure organization in order to create the impression that they protect their rights will neither acquit them nor reduce the contradiction in the American society. It is necessary to make a distinction between pretending to be “heroes” by taking shelter behind a primitive document like the Armenian draft law and venturing to fight with the dominant powers by approving new laws that reflect the justified demands of those voting for them. If the US Congress does not row against the stream, it will only prove that it is a primitive board.

In summary, the draft creates the impression that the report prepared by a handful of Armenians standing at the utmost distance was delivered to the MPs and that the event is a snatching attempt. Is the reason for this ignorance of these 165 signatories their inability to see the facts which reveal the other side of the coin or is the reason for their immorality the fact that they are aware of it but they hide it? Both probably lead to opportunism, injustice and perhaps to adventure. And if this adventure involves pressure, then one should be sure that the Turkish nation will be ready to show reaction.