|
The Armenian Genocide by the Ottomans…the Big Lie
By Dr. Hany Sibai
hanisibu@hotmail.com
Almaqreze Centre For Historical Studies
Praise be to Allah and Peace and Blessing be upon our beloved
Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.
This is an article in reply to the alleged claim of the Armenian
genocide by the Ottomans:
First: Introduction
Second: Crucial points to understand the conflict
Third: Few Examples of the Loyalty of the Armenians to Russia
and their Mutiny against the Othman State
Fifth: Conclusion
First: Introduction
This false claim and despicable propaganda (i.e. the Armenian
genocide by the Ottomans) had been adopted by the Russians who
used the Armenians to achieve their political interests and
ambitions. It was the Russians who had created the Armenian
state and had given them, illegally, most of the lands owned by
the Muslims after they were expelled from them. These vast lands
were seized by the Russians during centuries of constant wars
against the Othman Empire.
Russia was using an organized terror campaign against the
citizens of the Othman state; they destroyed complete towns and
villages fully inhabited with Muslims, and those Muslims who
would remain alive were forced to leave. The Russians used to
seize all the properties of those oppressed Muslims, who were
exposed to the worst kind of mass extermination in the history
of mankind. At the same time, and under the pretext of defending
Christianity, the Russian armies used to bring in the Armenians
who were supporting them in their wars against the Ottomans and
give them Muslims lands. The Russian government used to provide
the Armenian rebels with money and weapons, after any incident
between a Muslim among the Othman nationals and an Armenian
supporting Russia. The Muslim was not allowed to retaliate to
the hostility of the Armenian gangs, who used to attack the
villages and rape women; and if a Muslim tried to defend his
land and honour, the Armenian gangs would destroy and burn down
the whole village.
Russia had used the Armenian rebels to extend their areas of
influence and seize countries that were under the Othman Empire,
and this policy had helped them create the Soviet Union since
the Bolshevist revolution in 1917. This has been confirmed by
Laurent Chabri and Annie Chabri in their valuable book: Politics
and Minorities in the Near East,’ and although they were not
unbiased in their book (“Politics and Minorities in the Near
East” Translated by Dr. Dhuqan Qarqut, page 311), they said in
their book: “The Armenians, who remained in Armenia and who were
under the authority of the Turks on one side and under the
authority of the Persians on the other, had seen great hope by
the end of the eighteenth century in the Russian power, the
Christian power that would appear in the scene of the Near East,
and with it came the desire to extend well behind the Caucasus
towards the south and the south east. Before that, in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Armenians had tried
vainly to get a support from the western Catholics, expecting a
military intervention from the western countries in order to
rescue them from the Turkish firepower. Russia did not break
those new hopes, as it used the army of Armenian volunteers to
invade Persia and occupy the lands that form what is held to be
the Russian Armenia.”
Perhaps, one asks when the issue of Armenia came to light
internationally, and why the Armenians insist about their
allegation that they have been subjected to a genocide by the
Ottomans?
To answer these questions, we will shed light upon the following
issues:
Second: Crucial points to understand the conflict:
The first point:
The Armenian issue was raised at the international level for the
first time following the Saint Stefano Deal: after the end of
the Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878, the two parties conducted the
deal of Saint Stefano and Berlin in 1878, where articles 16 and
61 gave way to deal with the Armenian issue internationally in a
manner that is still gouging and exacting pressure on the Turks
up to our present time.
The second point:
It is necessary to study the historical period during which the
Armenians claim to have been subjected to genocide, and it is
the period that more or less between 1821 and 1922. There should
also be a study of a great geographical region that was under
the authority of the Ottomans, from the Caucasus to Anatolia and
the Balkans, including Bulgaria and Greece, where most of the
inhabitants of these vast regions were Muslims.
There are indeed some serious studies about this subject,
although few, such as the one conducted by Justin McCarthy in
his book “Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman
Muslims, 1821-1922 (Princeton, N.J. : Darwin Press, ©1995); a
book that was sponsored by the US National Endowment for
Cultural Studies to investigate the First World War and its
effects, and by the Institution for Turkish Studies to look into
the deaths and migration of the Turks, jointly with some
American and British universities…
This research is considered as the best effort regarding this
issue, despite our reservation about some remarks that do not
diminish its value and its genuine effort, and it was translated
into Arabic and published by “Qadams” in Damascus. Naturally,
the study of this region geographically and historically, with
the nature of the conflict in that period, necessitates a great
deal of research and documented studies, which would allow
reasonable and just people to discover the gravity of this
allegation, repeatedly quoted by the West about the so-called
“Armenian genocide”, in time when the western writers ignore the
fate of millions of Muslims who were expulsed from their lands
and killed at the hands of the Russians, the Armenians, the
Bulgarians, the Greeks and the Serbians during the
aforementioned period up to 1922!
As in the words of McCarthy: “There were Muslim societies in an
area with the size of western Europe that were reduced or
exterminated. In the Balkans, the great Turkish population was
reduced to their previous number. In the Caucasus, there was
expulsion of the Charkas, the Laz, the Abkhaz and the Turks
along with other Muslim minorities. Anatolia has changed, as its
east and west were almost completely destroyed. This was one of
the greatest tragedies in history. (McCarthy: p327)
The third point:
There was the role of the “Union and Progress Group” in the
downfall of the Othman Caliphate in 1908, coercing the Sultan
Hamid the Second to retire, and introducing an article in the
new constitution, allowing all the Ottoman citizens to be armed
and providing a legal cover for the ethnic minorities to procure
weapons. The Armenians exploited the new legislation to acquire
and store weapons with which they killed Muslims. The Armenian
aggression against the Muslims began in the town of Adana before
the middle of 1909, under the leadership of the vicar of the
city of Asvin, named Mustic.
The fourth point:
There was also the role played by western ambassadors and
consuls and American protestant missionaries in misleading the
public opinion and spreading reports, exaggerating the number of
killed Armenians, while disregarding the number of Muslims
killed in the war. In many occasions, telling lies was
deliberate as is the case of American consul who was accused of
siding fanatically with the Armenians. The French consul was not
less fanatic than the American or the Russian consuls!
Unfortunately, the Sultan Abdul Hamid used to believe that the
British government wanted to preserve the unity of the Othman
provinces, but he came around after it was too late!
Robert Mantran said in the second part of his book: “The History
of the Othman State” – a book that contains many inaccurate
statements: “From 1878 to 1879, Abdul Hamid began to have
suspicions that England wanted to abandon its traditional policy
about preserving the unity of the Othman lands. These suspicions
were fed by the pressures executed by the British government on
the Sultan Abdul Hamid in order to carry out the promised
reforms in the Armenian region, and were increased intensely by
the appointment of Gladstone, leader of the Liberals, as the
head of British government in May 1880. He was a known enemy of
the Turks since the slaughters in Bulgaria. Those suspicions
were confirmed, in a way, by the control of London upon Egypt in
1882. Since that time, the British diplomacy had witnessed –
according to the Istanbul’s view – a complete turn over.”
(Robert Mantran: The History of the Othman State).
The fifth point:
It is the misleading western propaganda, diffused by the media
to distort the facts and depict the Muslims as savages and
barbarians; while on the other hand, it pictures the Armenians
as genius, righteous and tolerant people!
The sixth point:
These problems and worries, stirred by enemy forces against the
Othman State, appeared in its reigning lands of the Caucasus,
the Crimean peninsula, the Balkans and Anatolia, and had an
impact on the fate of the Muslims in those vast territories,
because of many fundamental factors:
a- The weakness of the Othman State until it was described as
“The sick man”
b- Inciting the Christian Nationalism among the minorities, who
were under the Othman Empire. The Great Powers at that time,
which were ambitious enough to divide the properties of the
Othman Empire, strived to incite the non-Muslim minorities to
rise up and revive nationalism, as is the case with Armenia,
Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia. Robert Mantran had confirmed this
issue, saying: “In reality, the Armenian National Movement,
after 1878, is associated, to a considerable extent, with the
analysis which the Armenian intellectuals had conducted about
the Bulgarian independence. Bulgaria had achieved this
independence with the help of Europe, but, in fact, it had been
achieved by the use of force and ruthless methods used by the
Bulgarian Revolutionary Committees.
Therefore, the Bulgarian example dominated the Armenian
combatants’ thought, especially those who would resort to create
the first organizations. Actually, the first revolutionary
parties started to appear in the middle of 1880: the Armenian
Party was established (in Fan) in 1885 by a number of educators,
then the two large parties, unlike the first party, were formed
by Armenians from Caucasus who had very little link with the
Armenian Turks. The first of these two large parties was
Hintshaq, which was established in Geneva in 1887, and Tashnaq
(The Armenian Revolutionary Union) established in 1890 in
Tiflis.” (Robert Mantran: Second 2, p. 217)
c- The Russian colonial expansion which continued to absorb the
properties of the Othman Empire piece by piece.
Therefore, from the aforesaid, we can understand the Armenian
problem, which the West uses against the modern Turkish state,
though the new Turkish government adopts the secular system and
fights any aspect of Islam in the country, in order to satisfy
the West and join the promised paradise of the European Union.
However, the European Union will never allow Turkey to be a
member in its club, because the Western leaders know very well
that Kamal Ataturk had done a very good job by turning Turkey
into a secular state. Nevertheless, they know that, although the
Turkish people are far from the real Islam, they still have the
spirit of it in their blood and a yearning for the return of the
glorious Islam, which have started to spread in recent years,
even though the army tried hard to stop this living spirit.
Accordingly, the European leaders worry about the entry of
Turkey into the European Union because they believe with faith
that this Union is a Christian club and there is no place for a
Muslim state in it.
Although Turkey and the United States are close allies at the
moment, the leaders of the White House are not certain about
their interests in the remote future; therefore they will,
eventually, adopt a resolution which condemns Turkey of the
Armenian genocide, and hence use extortion against Turkey and
use this resolution as an excuse to sanction Turkey
economically, and intervene militarily, if Turkey abandons its
extreme secular system and adopts an Islamic system. If that
happens, Europe and the US will form an alliance and wage a
fierce war against Turkey. It will be like a Third, Fourth or
Fifth World War against Turkey in order to occupy Constantinople
and annex it to the West.
Third: The Loyalty of the Armenians to Russia and their Mutiny
against the Othman State:
The religious loyalty had a major impact in the conflict between
Russia and the Othman state, because the concept of citizenship
had not appeared then. This principle had been confirmed by
McCarthy in his aforementioned book: “It is obvious that the
Armenian people, under the Othman and the Russian control, used
to view each other as brothers, regardless of their
nationalities, and the same thing goes for Muslims. It is not
clear whether the concept of citizenship, in comparison with the
religious affiliation, was firmly established, to a greater
extent, in either the Caucasus or eastern Anatolia before 1920.
In the East, a Caucasian Muslim felt that he was closer to his
Anatolian Muslim brother than to a Caucasus Armenian; likewise,
the Eastern Anatolian Armenian related himself to the Caucasus
Armenian and not to the Anatolian Muslims. Their affiliations
with their religious groups were confirmed by the Caucasian and
Eastern Anatolia wars time after time.” (Justine McCarthy:
Expulsion and Genocide, p. 49)
The religious loyalty is not something strange in the world
history, but what is strange is to exclude this principle in
assessing the nature of the conflict throughout history. As an
example of the importance of this religious loyalty, the Russian
Tsarists used to persecute the Armenian Church, and then they
changed their treatment during the reign of Peter the Great, so
that they could use them as support in their expansionist wars
against the Othman state. The Armenian people understood that on
the basis that they belong, along with the Russians, to the same
Christian religion and that their enemy was one (the Othman
Islamic State).
In fact, the Armenian people used the same principle with the
French and established a legion which became under the French
army command in Qulayqiliyyah. This Armenian legion caused
mischief on earth on the basis that the French were their
brothers in religion and that they had a common enemy (i.e. the
Othman Islamic State). The American Protestant Missionaries had
also a major role in inflaming this conflict and the religious
brotherhood was the sole factor which associated them with the
Armenians, and worst, it covered the reality of the carnage
committed by the Armenians against Muslims. This is not
prejudice from my part in understanding the nature of the
conflict, because all the historical facts confirm it and the
modern history supports this opinion.
If you really want to understand this fact clearly, look at the
regions of conflict in the world: Palestine, Iraq, Kashmir,
Afghanistan, Burma, Thailand, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Montenegro, Somalia, Darfur and the pressure and oppression of
Muslims in the West. Is all this just sheer coincidence,
unintentional and with no religious loyalty in this conflict and
in waging these unjust wars?
Few Examples of the Armenians Loyalty to the Russians and their
Mutiny against the Othman Empire:
In his study, McCarthy had mentioned many historical proofs of
the Armenian’s Loyalty to the Russians, which we will summarize
as follow:
1- During the reign of Peter the Great, the Armenians started to
rely more on the Russians, hoping that they would get the
support they needed. Since the first waves of attacks by the
Russians on the Caucasus, the Armenians had formed a military
power to help the Russians attack the region and they pledged
their allegiance to the Tsars.
2- During the eighth and ninth century the Armenians (Church
leaders, secular leaders, different groups, etc.) supported the
Russian attack of Muslim lands in the Caucasus, hoping to
overthrow the Muslim leaders in these states.
3- The Armenians were employed as spies for the Russians against
their Muslim leaders, be it the Ottomans or Armenians who were
subjects of the Persian state.
4- When the city of Derbend was under the siege by the Russian
army in 1796, its Armenian inhabitants sent to the Russians
valuable information about the city’s water supplies, and this
allowed the Russian army to defeat the army of Derbend.
5- In the 1890’s, Armenian archbishop (Argotnisky - Dolgorokov)
publicly announced that he would hope that the Russians would
liberate Armenia from the Muslim rule.
6- During the wars of 1827-1829 and the Qaram war, the Armenian
citizens of both the Othman and Persians Empires, together with
the Armenians who lived inside the Russian Empire, fought
alongside the Russian army against the Persian army and the
Othman Empire.
7- The Armenians, living inside Ottoman Anatolia, gave their
allegiance to the Russian cause by working as spies for the
Russian government.
8- The Armenians used to cross the borders of Anatolia and gave
reports of the Ottoman armies to the Russian in all the wars of
eastern Anatolia.
9- The Armenians in Anatolia helped the invading Russian armies
in 1827 and when the Russian armies left thousands of Armenians
followed it outside Anatolia.
10- During the Qaram war, the Armenians gave secret information
from the city of Kars which was under the Russian siege.
11- The Armenian guides paved the way for the Russian invaders
from the Othman Anatolia in 1877.
12- In 1877, the Armenians of Elsekirt valley welcomed the
invading Russian armies, and when the Russian armies left all
Armenians left with them.
13- The Armenians of Anatolia and Caucasus were allies of the
Russian armies in the First World War. In Anatolia the Armenian
rebels’ reliance on the Russians became clear by the middle of
the 19th century, by revolting in Zeyton when there were needs
for financial resources to reinforce their defence in Zeyton
against the Ottomans. In 1854 while the Othman armies were
fighting against the Russian in the Qaram war the Armenian
rebels tried to get financial support from the Russians.
14- In 1872, the Armenians of Van, who were citizens of the
Othman Empire, wrote to the Russian Emperor’s representative in
Caucasus asking help from him against their government. They
wanted to become citizens of Russia so they started to buy and
store weapons.
15- There were constant contacts and communications between the
Othman Armenians and the Russian Empire within the Armenian
revolutionary groups, especially Tashnaq, and the other half of
Armenia under the Russian control was a centre for storing
weapons and revolutionary organization against the Othman
Empire.
16- The Archbishop of Derik, on the side of the Persian border
with the Othman, transformed a monastery into a store for
weapons and a centre of infiltration for the Armenian rebels to
the Othman Empire.
17- The Armenians and the Georgians, especially those who had
relatives in Iran or had businesses, continued to be significant
sources of information for the Russians; hence they had major
impact in the Russian political and strategic decisions. The
Tsar, Alexander Tsitsianov ordered his advisers to contact
Patriarch Daniel and his followers.
18- Patriarch Daniel, who was a candidate, supported by the
Russians, for the position of the Armenian church Patriarchy
(after the death of Argotnisky - Dolgorokov) used to spy and
give valuable information to the Russians.
19- In 1808 Alexander Tsitsianov rewarded Patriarch Daniel with
a first degree monastic for his services in spying and providing
information for the Russians. While the Russians were fighting
to expand their territories in Kur and Aras, the Armenians
continued to send letters to the Russian officials encouraging
them to capture areas under Muslims control and save the
Armenian people from the Muslim persecution.
20- The relation between the Armenian rebels and the Armenian
Church had facilitated their activities to a larger extent,
because the church was an organization which managed to cross
the border easily, and in Istanbul, itself, the church leaders
and priests had the freedom to move as they pleased and the
Othman Armenians could not touch them, although they were caught
many times carrying letters, reports and money to the rebels.
Besides, some churches and monasteries were used as clandestine
stores for weapons, which were smuggled to the Armenian rebels,
as these churches and monasteries were not subject to security
inspection.
Therefore, we have examined some examples of the Armenians’
loyalty and allegiance to the Russians during times of war and
peace, which quash their fabricated lie (The Armenian genocide
by the Ottomans).
For more confirmation about the authenticity of our report, we
present this statement:
Fourth: A Statement buried in the US archives:
This statement is in the form of a report made by two men who
did not have any sympathy for the Ottoman Muslims. They were
rather fanatically inclined to the Armenians and went to the
region with a deliberate thought that the Armenians were a
victimised nation, against whom the Muslims had committed group
killings and slaughters, according to information taken from the
misleading western media and from the American Protestant
Missionaries, who did not deserve all trust as witnesses of the
Muslims’ sufferings, because they were excellent in deceptively
recording acts against the Armenians in details. They were not
honest also in recording acts against the Muslims, as reported
by some historians! Therefore, who are these two witnesses who
returned to America with a different mood than the one with
which they set out to eastern Anatolia?
They are Captain Emory Niles and Arthus Sutherland, who were
commanded by the American State administration to check the
situation in eastern Anatolia. When they arrived to Anatolia,
they travelled all around the region and listened to the
testimony of the two parties. They were surprised at the bulk of
distortions, fabricated by the Armenians, and were shocked at
the terrifying ordeal and atrocities suffered by the Muslims at
the hands of the Armenians! The American government was not
pleased with the report so they disregarded it. It was for this
reason that the report of the two American envoys was not
included in the file of the American Investigating Committee,
and all thanks to Allah, Glorified is He, that their report was
not lost, but rather concealed and buried in places linked to
the First World War in eastern Anatolia!
Justin McCarthy, of the University of Louisville, printed the
report in 1994, and published it in his book “Muslims and the
Minorities”! He published it once more in another book
“Expulsion and Genocide”, and all thanks and praise to Allah !
As for the report of Niles and Sutherland, they wrote:
“ In the entire region from Bitlis through Van to Bayezit, we
were informed that the damage and destruction had been done by
the Armenians, who, after the Russians retired, remained in
occupation of the country and who, when the Turkish army
advanced, destroyed everything belonging to the Muslims.
Moreover, the Armenians are accused of having committed murder,
rape, arson and horrible atrocities of every description upon
the Muslim population. At first, we were most incredulous of
these stories, but we finally came to believe them, since the
testimony was absolutely unanimous and was corroborated by
material evidence. For instance, the only quarters left at all
intact in the cities of Bitlis and Van are Armenian quarters …
while the Muslim quarters were completely destroyed.”
They also said in their report: “The ethnic situation in this
region (Bayezit and Ardrom) is extremely critical because of its
closeness to an Armenian front, fled by the refugees who report
about the atrocities and organized killings committed by the
Armenian government and its army and people against the Muslim
residents. Although few hundred Armenians live actually in the
province of Van, it is impossible for them to live in the
mountainous regions of the province of Ardrom, where everyone
feel utmost hatred towards them. There, the Armenians destroyed
the villages and committed all types of criminal acts against
the Muslims, before they retreated. The criminal acts of the
Armenians have left a living and influencing factor of hatred on
the other side, an aversion that fumes with rage at least in the
region of Van. The existence of organized killings in Armenia
was confirmed by refugees from all Armenian territories and also
by some British officers in Ardrom.” (Mc Carthy: p251.)
Niles and Sutherland presented, in their report, some statistics
covering the number of Muslim villages and houses which survived
the miseries of war around the cities of Van and Bitlis alone;
its confirmed that the Armenians had destroyed most Muslim
houses and demolished all building with Islamic features, as
detailed in the following table:
Destruction in Van and Bitlis
After the War 1919 Before the War The City of Van
3 3400 Muslim houses
1170 3100 Armenian houses
After the War 1919 Before the War The City of Bitlis
Naught 6500 Muslim houses
1000 1500 Armenian houses
As for villages in the provinces of Van, Sanjiq and Bayezit
before the war and the Armenian occupation, it was reported, in
the statistics of Noles and Sutherland, that the number of
Muslim houses before the war in the villages of the province of
Van was 1373 and it decreased after the war in 1919 to 350
houses! Whereas the houses of the Armenians were 112 before the
war and they increased after the war to 200! In the villages of
the province of Bayezit, the number of the Muslim houses before
the war was 448 and they reduced to 243 after the war, while the
houses of the Armenians were 33 and they remained 33 after the
war!
Niles and Sutherland conscientiously summarized the history of
Muslims in eastern Anatolia in the end of their report:
“Although it is not part of our investigation at all, one of the
significant facts which affected us in every place of Bitlis and
Trabzon, that we have passed through, was that the Armenians had
committed exactly all the atrocities and group killings which
the Turks had committed against the Armenians in other places.
At first, we largely had doubt regarding all the narrations we
have received, but the overall agreement of all the witnessed
and the passion with which they discussed the evil acts
perpetuated against them, and their apparent hatred towards the
Armenians, besides all the materialistic proofs in the land
itself, all this made us believe the authenticity of the facts
in general.
First, the Armenians killed Muslims in a large scale and with
various barbarity in their methods. Second, the Armenians were
responsible for the destruction of most towns and villages. The
Russians and the Armenians occupied the country for a long
period (1915-1916), and it appeared that during that period,
anarchy was limited, even though the Russians undoubtedly had
caused much damage. In 1917, the Russian army was disbanded and
left the authority in the hands of the Armenians alone. During
that period, the Armenian militias patrolled the country,
killing Muslim civilians. When the Turkish army moved towards
Arzugan, Ardrom and Van, the Armenian army broke up and its
soldiers or militias began destroying Muslim properties and
killings mercilessly the Muslim inhabitants. The result was a
completely destroyed country and a strong hatred towards the
Armenians; a fact which makes it impossible for these two people
to co-exist in the present time. The Muslims declared that if
they were to be forced to live under the Armenian authority,
they would rather fight, and it seems to us that they are likely
to execute their threat. This opinion is shared by the Turkish,
British and American officers that we have met.” (Mc Carthy:
p253-254).
This is just a testimony about the organized killing perpetuated
by the Armenians against the Muslims during the First World War,
from 1914 to 1918 in the provinces of Van and Betlis, in east
Anatolia, let alone the decrease of the number of Muslim
inhabitants in the all eastern Ottoman provinces, such as
Ardrom, Betlis, Diyar Bikr, the Al-‘Aziz colony, Siwas, Halab
and Trabzon. We will discover that in the period from 1912 to
1922, more than 62% of the Muslims in the province of Van were
missing, 42% in the province of Betlis, 31% in the province of
Ardrom and more than 60% in the Qoqaz!
As for the provinces in western Anatolia, such as Aydin,
Kadawindakar, Bigha and Idmid, the coalition forces expulsed the
Turkish refugees who settled there and handed their properties
to the Greeks! They left the Muslims without any refuge in the
greatest public group theft in history. It was a premeditated
group killing against the Muslims in the Qoqaz, Anatolia and the
Balkans, with the blessing of the world imperialistic powers in
that miserable period, and the dramatic end of the Othman
Caliphate, which lasted six centuries.
Fifth: Conclusion
Therefore, it has become clear to us the weakness of this
allegation “The Armenian genocide by the Ottomans), which is
repeatedly declared by the Armenians and those who urged them
and supported them.
Millions of Muslims were killed at the hands of the Armenians,
the Russians, the Greeks, the Bulgarians, the Serbians and other
enemies of the Othman Islamic state, in which lived under its
reign various ethnic minorities in peace and security! Yet, no
one asked for the punishment of the criminal perpetrators, who
committed those group killings.
The Muslims who were and still are the victims of these gruesome
killings are exposed as savage killers!
The real problem lies with the regimes related to the Islamic
world for not demanding – even with diffidence – the punishment
of the offenders behind the ongoing crimes against the Muslims
in the Caucasus and Chechnya, the population exterminated in the
Balkans, the mass graveyards in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the
killing of more than one million child in Iraq alone, the
destruction and complete disappearance of towns and villages in
Afghanistan during the barbaric British, Russian and American
aggressions. These oppressive regimes did not take one sound
decision in its life to demand justice for their people, and ask
for compensations from the French, the British, the Spanish, the
Italians, the Dutch, the Russians and the Americans for their
victims in Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Indonesia,
Malaysia, Kashmir, Tailand, Somalia and Sudan!!!
The Armenians have scraped the scab off wounds which are not
dressed yet. They revived grieves which have not calmed yet.
They stirred sorrows which would not rest until justice is done
in the future. The western world owes a clear apology to the
Muslims and compensation deemed for the crimes committed in the
crusade wars, past and present! Yes, we demand apology and
compensation for the mass killings of the Muslims during many
centuries.
As for those who seek their mercy in every fabricated case
highlighted by them, and keep on defending disgracefully on the
doorsteps of the Security Council and European Union, well it is
self-destruction itself! It is better for this nation (Islamic)
to be swallowed by the earth than to live in disgrace and
dishonor!
The defect lies with us as a nation who accepts humility and
cheers its executioner and does not punish its killer!
Almaqreze Centre For Historical Studies
|
