From: visser@convex.com (Lance Visser)
Subject: Re: Gagging at the mess of "visser the revisionist"s lies.
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 05:23:15 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <9211162017@zuma.UUCP> sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic) writes:

+>In article <9709@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> cacst9+@pitt.edu (Cecelia A Clancy) writes:

+>>Come on, Argic-efendi, don't call Vissar a liar.

+>Don't insult our collective low intelligence. This historical 
+>revisionist is a compulsive liar whether you like it or not.

	And you are a coward who posts from a site that does not exist
under a name that is not your own. You are too much of a coward to 
answer one simple question:

	What Territories do you consider to be rightful possessions
of turkey:

	Now by past postings, its fairly clear that you consider half
of Iraq and all of former russian Armenia as being Turkish.  Will
you state what other portions of the middle east, the balkans and
North Africa and Central Asia you consider as belonging to "turkey".

	I am still waiting.



+>Source: W. E. D. Allen and Paul Muratoff, "Caucasian Battlefields," 
+>Cambridge University Press, 1953, p. 481.

+>"As the Armenians found support among the Reds (who regarded the Tartars
+> as a counter-revolutionary elements) the fighting soon became a massacre
+> of the Tartar population." 

	Now the "Reds" considered the Tarters to be so "counter-revolutionary"
that they held the Baku conference in 1920 of "revolutionary peoples of
the east.   Enver, a former partner in the dictatorship that lead the
Ottoman empire to destruction in World war I was there as a guest of
the Comintern.  235 delegates to the conference were Turks.

	Please explain how the above information is consistant with
Tartars being "counter-revolutionary elements".


+>Source: General Bronsart wrote as follows in an article in the July 24, 
+>1921 issue of the newspaper "Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung:"


+>"As demonstrated by the innumerable declarations, provocative pamphlets,
+> weapons, ammunition, explosives, etc., found in areas inhabited by
+> the Armenians, the rebellion had been prepared over a long time,
+> organized, strengthened and financed by Russia. 



+> Since all the Moslems capable of bearing arms were in the Turkish Army,
+> it was easy to organize a terrible massacre by the Armenians against
+> defenseless people, because the Armenians were not only attacking the
+> sides and rear of the Eastern Army paralyzed at the front by the 
+> Russians, but were attacking the Moslem folk in the region as well."

	Note the source:  A German General

	Now consider the following.  The Germans were close collabortors
against the Russians with the Turks and Bronsart's experence comes from
being attached to the Turkish army.

	Now the Turkish army in the east collapsed when the Russians
pressed it hard.....because of terrible leadership mostly.  Now
after the war, various German generals started trying to "clear" 
themselves of "fault" in losing the war.  In the case of the
western front, the myth of the "stab in the back" was used.
	In the case of Turkey, the Armenians were used a a scapgoat
for Turkish military failure.  Note that argic argues that the number
of armenians in eastern anatolia was very small, but at the same
time he has them as this uncontrollable force of rebellion causing
the disasters that the turks suffered at the hands of the Russians.