Posted on 04/25/2006 8:07:22 PM PDT by x5452
Bush Says 'Tragedy' not 'Genocide' for 1915 Events
By Cihan News Agency, Washington
Published: Tuesday, April 25, 2006
zaman.com
US President George W. Bush has describe the incidents that took place in 1915 as “a tragedy”, in the message he prepared for the 91st anniversary of the so-called Armenian genocide allegations.
The White House announcement reads that the events were a tragedy for mankind and should never be forgotten. Bush, overlooking the demands of the Armenian Diaspora, did not term the incidents as “genocide.”
The event is a source of pain for all Armenians, the. President acknowledged, and Americans feel deeply for this page in history.
Bush invited all parties to take part in dialogue and determine common understanding, and he praised the parties in both Turkey and Armenia who examine the happenings of 1915 impartially, accurately and sensitively.
The Armenian Diaspora alleges a genocide occurred, Armenians were forced to leave their home in 1915; Turkey, on the contrary, refutes these allegations and advocates the deaths were caused by difficult road and weather conditions during the migration.
Bush's use of the word "tragedy" somehow prevents the Armenians from seeking some form of redress for what happened in 1916?
Is it no longer permissible for Bush (or anyone) to refer to the Holocaust as a "tragedy"?
And who is the "Cihan News Agency", anyway?
Just because Bush is not in lockstep with you and the Cihan News Agency in screaming "genocide", does not imply that he believes said genocide did not occur.
All genocide is tragedy, yes?
Are you going to go dig up the dead Turks who perpetrated this? Or are you insisting on accountability from people who had nothing to do with it?
Well, I hope that we are telling the Turks that if they cause trouble in northern Iraq, they might discover that a large number of AK-47s are working their way across their border into the hands of the Kurds they are pushing around. They don't have a large enough force to handle that situation.
Thanks for the further information!
It's not that I don't think the genocide of Armenians, as well as other Christians resident in Turkey, during the relevant period, was not a terrible tragedy. It's just that it's frustrating to me to have the bickering over terms when we know that (1) nothing can be done to bring these folks back, and (2) nothing is likely to be done to prevent similar atrocities against vulnerable populations in the future.
It's just a performance to make people who don't really give a hoot (e.g., the entire MSM, unless an individual journalist happens to be Armenian) feel righteous.
Bush promised a year ago to finally acknowledge this as tradgedy, that is why the Armenians are a little irked. He certainly still has the oppurtunity to do so.
I dunno if my loved ones died a cruel death like that, and someone basically promised to officially acknowledge it as genocide, I'd be a little upset at continued dancing around using the term too.
The Turk Muslims were and are animals, and should be called out on it.
We have absolutly no reason to be sensative toward Muslims and their acts of violence.
Sounds like he did so.
I'm still not getting how this helps. Dead is dead, whether it's "genocide," "tragedy," or just "mass murder."
We have absolutely no reason to be sensitive toward Muslims and their acts of violence.
I agree 100%.
Bigotry and hate is clearly spewed by both sides, as your comments demonstrate.
Hey I'll cut the Turks some slack when and if they leave the city which was long the center of Orthodox Christianity. FYI they aren't exactly helping out in Northern Iraq either.
Convention against Genocide
This convention bans acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. It declares genocide a crime under international law whether committed during war or peacetime, and binds all signators of the convention to to take measures to prevent and punish any acts of genocide committed within their jurisdiction. The act bans killing of members of any racial, ethnic, national or religious group because of their membership in that group, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, inflicting on members of the group conditions of life intended to destroy them, imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group, and taking group members' children away from them and giving them to members of another group.
It declares genocide itself, conspiracy or incitement to commit genocide, attempts to commit orcomplicity in the commission of genocide all to be illegal. Individuals are to be held responsible for these acts whether they were acting in their official capacities or as private individuals. Signators to the convention are bound to enact appropriate legislation to make the acts named in Article 3 illegal under their national law and provide appropriate penalties for violators.
People suspected of acts of genocide may be tried by a national tribunal in the territory where the acts were committed or by a properly constituted international tribunal whose jurisdiction is recognized by the state or states involved. For purposes of extradition, an allegation of genocide is not to be considered a political crime, and states are bound to extradite suspects in accordance with national laws and treaties. Any state party to the Convention may also call upon the United Nations to act to prevent or punish acts of genocide.
The remainder of the Convention specifies procedures for resolving disputes between nations about whether a specific act or acts constitute(s) genocide, and gives procedures for ratification of the convention.
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/undocs.html#CAG
Financial considerations are a separate issue between Armenia and Turkey.
As are losses of individuals. I believe the heirs of victims have been successful in the US in action against at least one insurance company who has refused to pay death claims.
Simple use of the term would not provide redress however it would enable the use of the UN legal term in court, I suspect there are in fact still culpable folks, and further as you mentioned there are even American companies refusing the pay death claims, imagine the situation then in Turkey where the government won't acknowledge anything more than bad weather along the road.
Still acknowledging something happened is scads better than has been done for the Serbian Orthodox Church.
It seems, then, that the point of defining this event as "genocide," and using the term at every opportunity, is to make an accusation against Turkey. Well, okay.
Life insurance claims would be a matter of contract law in the country of issue, and shouldn't be affected by questions of "genocide" vs. simple "death." Property insurance claims might be affected, if "genocide" were defined as the cause of loss, as opposed to "act of war," which is generally excluded.
And what was the total population of Languedoc at the beginning of the 13th century?
All of that would be well and good if the fact that Muslims are allowed to abuse Christians and throw the law to the winds in Turkey wasn't true. Without the UN or NATO putting preassure on Turkey it will see that such claims go unpaid, and those responsible are promoted and praised rather than held accountable.
For a fine read about the Turds, I mean the Turks, go to yati.org and read "The End Time Beast-The Harlot of Babylon". Find out about Islime-Saudi Arabia-Mecca-Turkey.
True, and it stinks. However, I think the chance of the UN or NATO's doing anything useful is zero. Unless some situation prompts the US to Zot Turkey like we did Iraq, the current rulers of Turkey will do as they like, without consequences from the "international community."
This has been very interesting, but I must go. Baby, and all that ...
Alternate title "Bush caves to Turks, insults the memory of over a million genocide victims."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.