From: dbd@urartu.sdpa.org (David Davidian)
Subject: So what makes Shaw not creditable?
Summary: Shaw is an historical revisionist 
Organization: S.D.P.A. Center for Regional Studies
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 04:57:26 GMT

In article <11106@crackers.clearpoint.com> martillo@stars.clearpoint.com 
(Joachim Martillo) wrote in response to article <1992Jul23.172041.7676@murdoch.
acc.Virginia.EDU> gd8f@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Gregory  Dandulakis):

[JM] So what makes Shaw not creditable?  

He is a revisionist.

[JM] Because he is Jewish or because his wife is a Turk. 

Neither.

[JM] If he is reporting the facts in their factual
[JM] context and making a reasonable and rational presentation and
[JM] analysis, his work is worth review.  After reading Jaber's comments
[JM] which denigrate Anwar Mohammed because he is Shiite and Anisa's
[JM] comments which attempted to discredit my opinion's because my father
[JM] supposedly is a Saudi (what do you think of that my Saudi friends?), I
[JM] can only be totally disgusted at this attempt to validate opinion on
[JM] the basis of the holder's ethnicity. Such a debating technique is
[JM] truly offensive and reminds me of the Nazi dismissal of Einstein's
[JM] work as Jewish physics.

You may have missed an expose' of Shaw's revisionism. I will re-post it for you
and the benefit of others. This was posted on July 12 of this year. Please
note that the following does not exhaust the revisionist evidence against Shaw,
however it is sufficient for the title...revisionist. 

   +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ 
   |       Mid-Summer 1992 Typical Review of Turkish Genocide Apology    |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------------+

Featuring:

* Professor Stanford Shaw getting paid by Turkey for his revisionism,

* Shaw's revisionism demonstrated,

* Justin McCarthy, another Turkish-paid revisionist, refutes Shaw.

* etc.

In Turkish Genocide Apology <9207101737@anadolu.michigan.com> via its scribal
dolt apostle han@anadolu.michigan.com (hasan.b.mutlu) [(*], responded to 
<82685@netnews.upenn.edu> kkniaz@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Krzysztof W. Kniaz) who
wrote:

[KK] H. Mutlu! You are irresponsible lying lunatic. 

[(*] Is that how the mind of a revisionist works? I always wondered what 
[(*] made revisionists tick and why they did certain acts that no normal 
[(*] person in their right mind would do. Did you grow up in a troubled 
[(*] family?

[KK] Your forged stories are permeated with hatred. 

...and the following is used as end-post-revision filler. We shall examine the
revisionist author and his text!

[(*] Source: Stanford J. Shaw, on Armenian collaboration with invading Russian
[(*] armies in 1914, "History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey (Volume
[(*] II: Reform, Revolution & Republic: The Rise of Modern Turkey, 1808-1975)."
[(*] (London, Cambridge University Press 1977). pp. 315-316.

[(*] "In April 1915 Dashnaks from Russian Armenia organized a revolt in the
[(*] city of Van, whose 33,789 Armenians comprised 42.3 percent of the 
[(*] population, closest to an Armenian majority of any city in the Empire...
[(*] Leaving Erivan on April 28, 1915, Armenian volunteers reached Van on May 
[(*] 14 and organized and carried out a general slaughter of the local Muslim 
[(*] population during the next two days while the small Ottoman garrison had 
[(*] to retreat to the  southern side of the lake."

We shall:

1) Demonstrate how Shaw receives monetary compensation from the Turkish
   government for his efforts in genocide revision,

2) Demonstrate two non-Armenian, non-Turks accounts of the events where 
   revised by Shaw,

3) Demonstrate Justin McCarthy (another Turkish-paid revisionism) and Taalat 
   Pasha, the architect of the Turkish genocide of the Armenians, refuting
   Shaw.

Let's FIRST examine the author and his affiliation with the Turkish 
government, the same government that engages in denying their genocide of 
the Armenian people:

ITS, stands for the Turkish Studies Institute, in Washington D.C., honorary
chairman, the Turkish Ambassador to the U.S.. The Institute's purpose is to 
counter Armenian activity at the "academic level" and as a pro-Turkey lobbying
group.

ARIT, stands for the American Research Institute in Turkey.

The number in ( ) stands for the number of monetary grants by either ITS, or
ARIT to the "scholar", and the items between [  ] indicate the total number
of grants to the rest of the College or University the "scholars" are
affiliated with. [1]


SCHOLAR (sic)		AFFILIATION		DIRECT CONNECTION W/TURKEY
						(or area of scholarship)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shaw, Stanford		UCLA				ITS(1), ARIT(2),
							[ITS(4)]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECOND we shall examine two non-Armenian, non-Turk associated accounts of 
events in Van.

Account 1 -- Frijdof Nansen in 1928:

"This attempt of the Armenians to defend themselves against the Turkish attack
 in Van was promptly misrepresented in a communique' which was sent by Enver 
 Pasha and the Turkish Government to Berlin, and thence spread all over the 
 world, as an attack by bands of Armenian insurrectionists who, in the rear of
 the Turkish army had fallen prey upon the Muhammedan population. Out of 
 180,000 Moslems in the Vilayet of Van only 30,000 had succeeded in escaping! 
 In a later report issued by the Turkish embassy in Berlin on October 1, 1915,
 the story was further embellished: "No fewer than 180,000 Moslems had been 
 killed. It was not surprising that the Moslems had taken vengeance for this".
 Some 18 Turks, answering to the number of Armenians they had killed in Van, 
 had turned into 180,000! This astonishing impudent lie has a kind of 
 foundation. According to statistics there should be 180,000 Moslems, 
 including 30,000 Turks and 150,000 Kurds, in the Vilayet of Van. The Turks 
 fled westwards when the Russian army advanced, while the 150,000 Kurds 
 remained where they were, and were molested neither by the Russians nor the 
 Armenians" [2]

Account II -- Nansen independently confirmed 13 years later: 

 "The Turkish ally also furnished German papers with stories of Armenian
  cruelty to offset the unfavorable publicity directed at the Central Powers 
  for their alliance with the "terrible Turk", the perpetrator of the 
  "Armenian massacres." The Armenians were accused of helping the Russians 
  burn the Moslem quarters in the province of Van, rape the women and girls,  
  kill all the men. According to a later estimate the Russians had burned 
  alive 500 people in one village of Van, and only 30,000 of the 180,000 
  Moslems in the province had escaped. Germans who read that the Armenians 
  were especially fond of burning Turks to death were not likely to have 
  much sympathy with the Christian minority of Turkey. An intensive anti-
  Armenian campaign was staged by the official Turkish news agency as late as 
  February and March, 1918. In this group of stories the most refined types of
  mutilation were included, such as Armenians waylaying Turks, tearing out 
  their lungs and hanging them on the wall" [3]

...and:

"Certain "revolts" of the Armenians had taken place but most of them came 
 after the deportation policy had started and were the result, not the cause, 
 of the cruelties committed by the Turks. Three minor uprisings took place
 before the deportations were initiated. Two of them were nothing more than 
 rows of gendarmes with deserters. The only one of any consequence was the 
 trouble in Van -- apparently a case of self-defense on the part of the 
 Armenians. In all these "revolts" the maximum losses which the Turks suffered
 amounted to not more than three hundred soldiers. The oath of the Mutessarif 
 of Musch at the burial of seven Moslem gendarmes who had been killed was 
 almost fulfilled: "For every hair of your head, I will have a thousand 
 Armenians slaughtered." [4]

THIRD, Turks can't even agree on a single revision of history. We first read
Shaw's revisionism, then according to the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey early in
WWI, Henry Morgenthau, Talaat Pasha, (the architect of the Turkish genocide 
of the Armenians) in conversation stated:

 "...in the entire district around Van only 30,000 Turks escaped, all the 
  rest were murdered by Armenians and Kurds" [5]

So blame the Kurds too! Turks can't even keep their lies consistent.

In addition, if one refers to the _Van ve Bitlis Askeri Istatistigi_ source as
used by another Turkish-sponsored historical revisionist, Justin McCarthy, the
number of Turkish families in Van in 1914 was 4,252. With a 6.69 people/family
ratio for Muslims we get 28,446 Turks.

Thus, according to Turkish sources and servants, all the Turks in Van would
have escaped the Turkish-Russian WWI front!!!

			- - - references - - -

[1] Middle East Studies	Association Bulletins, Directory of American Scholars,
    and the Ottoman Studies Directory.

[2] _Armenia and the Near East_, Dr. Fridtjof Nansen, 1928, pg. 302.

[3] _Atrocity Propaganda 1914-1919_, James Morgan Read, Yale University Press,
    1941, pages 118-119.
 
[4] Ibid. page 220-221

[5] _Ambassador Morgenthau's Story_, Henry Morgenthau, Doubleday Page & Co.,
    1919, page 346.


-- 
David Davidian dbd@urartu.sdpa.org "It has been ever thus in all things, son, 
SDPA Center for Regional Studies    Whatever we thrash we give to the wind, 
P.O. Box 382761                     We too have been blown by the world's wind
Cambridge, MA 02238                 The chaff is gone but the grain remains." 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.greek:6692 soc.culture.yugoslavia:7300 soc.culture.europe:6543