Any historical case has several explanations or points of view, since at least two sides are involved in them. The events of the First World War could have dozens of versions if one asks their witnesses as this war has drawn into the battles many countries and continents. Scientists summarize the results of the first global war by collecting and analyzing the facts, and they call it a turning point, which launched events that changed the world. However, most of these cases are explained by different parties in different ways, even if they led to the same global consequence. An example of such events is the genocide and deportation of Armenians from the Ottoman Empire, since it ended in the numerous deaths; however, it was a victory for some people and a disaster for others. Quite often, people use differences in nationality, religion, or appearance to hate others. This feeling is illogical, imposed by manipulation and lies, and eventually, it leads to deaths and losses. Such hatred based on ethnic differences is called genocide and is one of the known facts about the First and Second World War. However, even in such events, there are two sides, such as the victims of genocide and their persecutors. The history of genocide and deportation of Armenians by the Turks also has several explanations of its course and causes. This feature can be noted in two primary sources written by a witness to the events of 1915 and a government representative. Both documents have many differences regarding the display of events and their justification, although they also have several shared points. The first feature expressed is the words of Talaat Pasha, head of the Ottoman Empire, that all the data and rumors about the genocide are extremely exaggerated (Overfield, 2013). At the same time, a letter from Mary Graffam, who was an eyewitness to the early deportation of 1915, describes completely different circumstances. Graffam mentions the mass arrests of men and some women, the robbery, beating, and killing of Armenians, as well as the hopelessness of the situation in which they found themselves (Overfield, 2013). Graffam writes, “I counted forty-nine deaths, but there must have been many more. One naked body of a woman was covered with bruises” (Overfield, 2013, p. 85). Today, the historical evidence demonstrates that Talaat was wrong; however, from the context of his notes, the reader cannot say whether he actually believed that the data was exaggerated or only lied to protect himself. The second feature is the causes of the genocide described by different authors. Talaat notes that the blame for this event falls on Armenians themselves, since they were robbers who killed the innocent Muslim population, so arrests and deportations were preventive measures (Overfield, 2013). At the same time, Graffam describes many examples showing that it was the Turks and Kurds who robbed Armenians during their movements, beat them, and murdered (Overfield, 2013). Current data demonstrate that the main reason for the genocide and deportations was not the Armenian threat to the safety of Turks and Kurds. Nevertheless, it is most likely that some local incidents did occur, and the Ottoman government used them for propaganda. The shared part for these two sources is the admitting of some officials’ crimes. Talaat notes that some government officials may have abused their position, resulting in arrests and deaths. Howev