Genocide (info)

[Prince Cobra]

I found some interesting things about the term 'genocide'. BTW it was discussed around the Armenian genocide which make me search for it. The results are taken from a material about International Criminal Court (ICC). A material gathered by Kreisau-Initiative Berlin helped me a lot here ( sometimes I am really lucky when I start searching for something; I'm just lucky man :) ). Special thanks for the gathered info to them. Here is the info:

For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed
with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as
such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about
its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Elements of crime:


Article 6 (a) Genocide by killing
Elements
1. The perpetrator killed one or more persons.
2. Such person or persons belonged to a particular national, ethnical, racial or religious group.
3. The perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that national, ethnical, racial or
religious group, as such.
4. The conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed
against that group or was conduct that could itself effect such destruction.
Article 6 (b) Genocide by causing serious bodily or mental harm
Elements
1. The perpetrator caused serious bodily or mental harm to one or more persons.
2. Such person or persons belonged to a particular national, ethnical, racial or religious group.
3. The perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that national, ethnical, racial or
religious group, as such.
4. The conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed
against that group or was conduct that could itself effect such destruction.
Article 6 (c) Genocide by deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring
about physical destruction
Elements
1. The perpetrator inflicted certain conditions of life upon one or more persons.
2. Such person or persons belonged to a particular national, ethnical, racial or religious group.
3. The perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that national, ethnical, racial or
religious group, as such.
4. The conditions of life were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of that group,
in whole or in part.
5. The conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed
against that group or was conduct that could itself effect such destruction.
Article 6 (d) Genocide by imposing measures intended to prevent births
Elements
1. The perpetrator imposed certain measures upon one or more persons.
2. Such person or persons belonged to a particular national, ethnical, racial or religious group.
3. The perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that national, ethnical, racial or
religious group, as such.
4. The measures imposed were intended to prevent births within that group.
5. The conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed
against that group or was conduct that could itself effect such destruction.
Article 6 (e) Genocide by forcibly transferring children
Elements
1. The perpetrator forcibly transferred one or more persons.
2. Such person or persons belonged to a particular national, ethnical, racial or religious group.
3. The perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that national, ethnical, racial or
religious group, as such.
4. The transfer was from that group to another group.
5. The person or persons were under the age of 18 years.
6. The perpetrator knew, or should have known, that the person or persons were under the age
of 18 years.
7. The conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed
against that group or was conduct that could itself effect such destruction.
Edited: Also thanks to a friend of mine.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Interesting article

[Conqueror]

I wonder how the "in part" is supposed to be interpreted.

[Aenlic]

I'd comment, except my country won't join the ICC, fearing perhaps that they might end up on the wrong side of the docket, for little things like the Guantanamo detentions.

[edyzmedieval]

For real now, the Armenian Genocide is as bad as it's said?

[kataphraktoi]

Excellent work Stephen Asen.

The Armenian Genocide fits all descriptions.

The Turkish government can deny it all they want, they're unrepentant and will condemn themselves to be imprisoned in the past by not learning any lessons.

[IrishArmenian]

I think the denial is why many Armenians hold a grudge, sometimes me.
Edyz: True story here. My great-grandmother watched here father be burnt, the man she was engaged to shot, never heard from the rest of her family again, watched the elderly be killed for lagging behind, see children starve, and she narrowly escaped being raped and killed by being buried and hidden under rags. That is the abbreviatted version, of course.

[Lemur]

As Adolf said:

"Wer redet heute noch von der Vernichtung der Armenier?" or, "Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?"

[Csargo]

Nice article Stephen

[edyzmedieval]

I think the denial is why many Armenians hold a grudge, sometimes me.
Edyz: True story here. My great-grandmother watched here father be burnt, the man she was engaged to shot, never heard from the rest of her family again, watched the elderly be killed for lagging behind, see children starve, and she narrowly escaped being raped and killed by being buried and hidden under rags. That is the abbreviatted version, of course.

I don't wanna read anymore...

[LeftEyeNine]

Hello, I knew you were expecting my coming

edyz, after reading what IrishArmenian said, maybe you find time to look through these eye witness accounts of Armenian's murdering Turks here :

http://www.ermenisorunu.gen.tr/engli...s/witness.html

Here is the list gathered through Ottoman archives about the numbers killed by Armenians. That's where I summed up that 500.000 appromixation of deaths :

http://www.ermenisorunu.gen.tr/engli...res/lists.html


Here is why it is April 24, 1915 :

http://www.ermenisorunu.gen.tr/engli...ers/april.html

As Adolf said:

"Wer redet heute noch von der Vernichtung der Armenier?" or, "Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?"

From the same resource :

A Turkish commentary says:

This so-called Hitler statement is accepted as a "historical fact" and has been quoted by numerous politicians who support the Armenian cause, in parliamentary debates in North America. It also appears routinely in Armenian propaganda publications.
"The Armenians want to play on the sentiments of the Jewish Holocaust and purport that Adolf Hitler made this quotation in a speech regarding his planned annihilation of the European Jews... The problem with this linkage is that there is no proof that Hitler ever made such a statement. It is claimed that he referred to the Armenians in the manner cited above, while delivering a secret talk to members of his General Staff, a week prior to his attack on Poland. However, there is no reference to the Armenians in the original texts of the two Hitler speeches delivered on August 22, 1939, published as the official texts in the reliable Nuremberg documents." (

Deriving from the excerpt, the quote of Hitler can be all means of an attempt to resemble the Armenian Issue to the Holocaust. Nice plan but a part of the whole lie, unfortunately.

Excellent work Stephen Asen.

The Armenian Genocide fits all descriptions.

The Turkish government can deny it all they want, they're unrepentant and will condemn themselves to be imprisoned in the past by not learning any lessons.

Armenian Issue fits none of the descriptions. Systematic ethnic cleansing is never done. What's more the fire was started by the murders of Armenians, not Turks.

If accepting a lie and kneeling down is learning a lesson, I just figured out why we are still here for hundreds of years, and am grateful to that.

As long as Armenian lie will be dictated around, I'll be thereabouts to refuse, no worries.

[kataphraktoi]

As long as Turkish chauvinism is being exposed, of course you will be there to defend it's integrity.

As for your eye-witnessess, they only tell us the pent up frustration (of centuries) of Armenians against Turkish rule in the course of which they resorted a frenzy they were subjected too. Or perhaps you want to portray Armenians as ungrateful subjects under the nice , sweet, saccharine and cosy benevolence of Ottoman rule.

[LeftEyeNine]

As long as Turkish chauvinism is being exposed, of course you will be there to defend it's integrity.

As long as anti-Turkish racism is disguised in many ways, of course I'll be there to defend what is rightful.

As for your eye-witnessess, they only tell us the pent up frustration (of centuries) of Armenians against Turkish rule in the course of which they resorted a frenzy they were subjected too.

How do you conclude that it was an aftermath?..

For an uncountable time again : Everyone believes what they want to believe. Truth stands.

...Or perhaps you want to portray Armenians as ungrateful subjects under the nice , sweet, saccharine and cosy benevolence of Ottoman rule.

Armenians were called "millet-i sükun" (sükun: peace, silent; millet: nation) if you want a sidenote about the point of view on Armenians before all murders done.

I'm speaking so loud because relying on the coumentaries, I have concluded that Armenian stuff is all about a lie, not an issue. And I won't take it hard to tell that I was wrong and feel sorry for what I had said, in case the so-called genocide finds proof after scientific and two-sided discussions. I'm sure that won't happen, but I just wanted to let you know that it's not a matter of pride in case it is proven.

[Lemur]

LEN, I am truly under-educated on this whole issue. I took a look at the Wikipedia entry on the subject, and they seem to be trying to give airtime to both historical viewpoints. Very interested to hear what you think of their take.

[Vladimir]

Good LORD! Five minutes on a LAN for the page to load?!?

On Topic: I'm starting to see similarities between the Armenian and the Darfur "genocides". In Armenia it seems like both sides were doing their best to kill one another. In Darfur the southern militias took refuge amongst the villages, engaging the northern Sudanese not in open combat, but in hit and hide tactics; thus forcing the northerners to hunt down the fighters in the villages.

I'm not sure how many people here understand logistics or know what a teeth-to-tail ratio is but how do you think these fighters are able to fight? More importantly how do you know who is supporting them and who isn't? The Romans had a philosophy when suppressing a revolt: Kiss our arse and wash our feet when we show our banner or die.

Why is genocide such a bad word anyway? This is what cultures do and how nations formed. Whether it be feuding clans fighting for control or ethnic groups or empires, people are always trying to force others to assimilate or: (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. That's how nations form.

On a lighter note it seems that the female gender has been waging genocide on us men since creation (trying to make us change, etc.). :gorgeous

[LeftEyeNine]

LEN, I am truly under-educated on this whole issue. I took a look at the Wikipedia entry on the subject, and they seem to be trying to give airtime to both historical viewpoints. Very interested to hear what you think of their take.

So did you now reach the point where I am yelling from the start? If you are under-educated about the issue, how can you easily blame a whole nation from a quote that's not yet proven to be real that is extracted from an online resource website where information is contributed, not reached scientifically ?

This is not a personal attack. Take it as a neutral question Why and how easily can you do this after confessing about your inadequateness on the topic, Lemur ? This is the biggest component of the problem behind Turkey and world against it.

[LeftEyeNine]

Why is genocide such a bad word anyway? This is what cultures do and how nations formed. Whether it be feuding clans fighting for control or ethnic groups or empires, people are always trying to force others to assimilate or: (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. That's how nations form.

Modern definition of humanity can not accept genocides happening, answer is obvious.

My case is all about a lie being trampled over a nation with false documents that so-called genocided side invented. We have counter-proof but we are told to keep silent, admit and obey...What a wonderful world, isn't it ?

[Lemur]

If you are under-educated about the issue, how can you easily blame a whole nation from a quote that's not yet proven to be real that is extracted from an online resource website where information is contributed, not reached scientifically?

I posted the quote because I thought it was interesting, and I had heard it long before. I added the link to Wikipedia because it cast doubt on the origin of the quote, which I thought was worth including.

Not to get terribly side-tracked, but I'm not clear on the distinction between "contributed" information and "scientific" information. In a sense, all science consists of "contributed" information. Does peer review really make the world go round? And does the collaborative nature of Wikipedia preclude validity? I've found Wikipedia to be a wonderful resource, especially now that they are getting serious about attribution.

But that's probably an issue for another thread.

LEN, I don't hold any strong views about the ... what am I supposed to call it? The Armenian-Turkish Altercation? Anyway, I'll be interested what you think of the article I linked.

[LeftEyeNine]

I posted the quote because I thought it was interesting, and I had heard it long before. I added the link to Wikipedia because it cast doubt on the origin of the quote, which I thought was worth including.

The vanishing of a 1.5 million population is even more interesting, friend. eVerything interesting does not prove out its validty, you see.

Not to get terribly side-tracked, but I'm not clear on the distinction between "contributed" information and "scientific" information. In a sense, all science consists of "contributed" information. Does peer review really make the world go round? And does the collaborative nature of Wikipedia preclude validity? I've found Wikipedia to be a wonderful resource, especially now that they are getting serious about attribution.

I should make myself clear there. Let'!s substitute "contributed" by "contributed by -maybe knowledgable- but ordinary people". It's not a science magazine after all, Wikipedia is open source although corrections and false statements are said to be corrected.

Wikipedia is an easy-to-go source of information indeed. But where even historians' statements are debated, I don't think Wikipedia can cover such sensitive arguments precisely. What's more, conradictively, in the same page they had included the counter-view on the quote as well. I may sound like falsifying my very own idea about Wikipedia just several sentences before, however what I want to remark is that such topics touch the nerves and need better and more serious examination, I think, Lemur.

LEN, I don't hold any strong views about the ... what am I supposed to call it? The Armenian-Turkish Altercation? Anyway, I'll be interested what you think of the article I linked.

I'm not a rank of censorship, lad. You can even call it with a more severe definition than genocide. The problem here is that noone is accustomed to see counter-proof against the issue. I'm not one of those crap Grey Wolves who have nothing more to say but racist remarks. I'm talking on proof and that's why I insist on the topic.

It's even more interesting that a Turk is always "welcome" with words such as "chauvinism", "racism", "nationalism" and so on. So, I should stop talking, accept the other's identification on me, admit every single crap put on the table and bow down. Whenever in the history has it been so dictative and easy?

[Lemur]

LEN, I'm not trying to argue with you. I haven't called you any names. I've never called you a bigot, a chauvanist, or anything of the sort. Ever. All I've asked was your opinion on an article, after saying that I was under-educated on the subject. If at all possible, you you turn down the volume? I don't have a dog in this fight, so my only interest is in historical accuracy. (Although, given the tenor of the discussion so far, I'm not sure that can be achieved ...)

[edit]

It's worth noting that my country committed a massive genocide, and we make no excuses or apologies for it. The northern American continent was not exactly empty when my ancestors showed up in their wooden boats with their boomsticks ...

[IrishArmenian]

It's even more interesting that a Turk is always "welcome" with words such as "chauvinism", "racism", "nationalism" and so on. So, I should stop talking, accept the other's identification on me, admit every single crap put on the table and bow down. Whenever in the history has it been so dictative and easy?

I do not know anyone who has actually expressed thoughts about it. I'll bet my great grandparents and grandparents probably said that, but old people are nationalists, racists, and incredibly biased. I just think in this modern world, it is odd and rare to find a person who says this. Sure, I am biased, but only in context: when someone says late Ottoman Empire sure, I think Genocide, but I do not carrry that view when someone brings up Earlier times, or generally Turkish people. It was not all of the Turks that committed these acts, rather it was quite few and many mercanaries and I see no reason to condemn a whole people for what very few did.

[LeftEyeNine]

LEN, I'm not trying to argue with you. I haven't called you any names. I've never called you a bigot, a chauvanist, or anything of the sort. Ever. All I've asked was your opinion on an article, after saying that I was under-educated on the subject. If at all possible, you you turn down the volume? I don't have a dog in this fight, so my only interest is in historical accuracy.

Dear Grand Lemur of the Lemurs, I was making underlined and sharper statements in my last post, Even though assuming that you were not a respectable member there is no reason to ruthlessly fight over a topic in this forum. As I just said I did not intend to make some kind of attack (I had stated that in my first reply to you), and if I unintentionally did, sorry for that

For the article you linked, I'm a terribly busy rookie guy trapped in a work life, and that article (Armenian Genocide entry, isn't it?) needs a thorough reading. However as I was pulling down the scroll bar unconcsciously, I caught that up between the lines:

..In March 2005, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan invited Turkish, Armenian and international historians to form a Commission to establish the events of 1915. The offer was rejected by Armenia and its foreign minister remarked that "The historians have already said their piece and it is now down to Turkey to determine its attitude..."[10]

Now let's roll back to a previous post of mine :

It's even more interesting that a Turk is always "welcome" with words such as "chauvinism", "racism", "nationalism" and so on. So, I should stop talking, accept the other's identification on me, admit every single crap put on the table and bow down. Whenever in the history has it been so dictative and easy?

This issue is not even open to discussion by two sides, so why are people expecting Turkey's acceptance about the issue ?

(Although, given the tenor of the discussion so far, I'm not sure that can be achieved ...)

Does it convince you so far?

It's worth noting that my country committed a massive genocide, and we make no excuses or apologies for it. The northern American continent was not exactly empty when my ancestors showed up in their wooden boats with their boomsticks ...

Hmm, since this topic is a general one about everything related to genocide, then why no excuses or apologies?

[LeftEyeNine]

I do not know anyone who has actually expressed thoughts about it.

Is it so hard to review a few posts back, friend? Or you can give it a shot in Ottomans and Christians thread too.

[IrishArmenian]

I'm sorry, I must not have been clear. I mean to say I have maybe met one person who completly hates the whole Turkish peopel because of the Genocide, and he was a mangled old man.

[Vladimir]

Is there still a feeling of animosity between Greeks and Turks for alleged atrocities? I can remember stories of older Greeks having a hatred for Turks because of similar alleged offenses as in Armenia.

[LeftEyeNine]

As far as I saw here (because I did not have one-on-one contact with Greeks before anywhere else), there still is.

Both sides are quite nationalistic and whatever the way words wrap it, truth behind always gives a glimpse.

[UglyandHasty]

Oh it wasnt an Armenian genocide, but the Armenian genocider !

A few nation have recognize "mistakes" of the past, some have still to grow up. Denying that there was an Armenian holocaust is just history revisionism.

[LeftEyeNine]

Oh it wasnt an Armenian genocide, but the Armenian genocider !

A few nation have recognize "mistakes" of the past, some have still to grow up. Denying that there was an Armenian holocaust is just history revisionism

.

Refusing to listen to a nation accused is historical ignorance. And I think my nation has proved out times and times to those dictating "growing up".

[orangat]

This is getting O/T but the current Turkish government doesn't seem to be too terribly tolerant of other non-Muslim faiths.
I think all Christian seminaries were closed by the government in the 60s or 70s so the number of priests are not replaced and are slowly dying off and even churches have been closed.

[LeftEyeNine]

This is getting O/T but the current Turkish government doesn't seem to be too terribly tolerant of other non-Muslim faiths.
I think all Christian seminaries were closed by the government in the 60s or 70s so the number of priests are not replaced and are slowly dying off and even churches have been closed.

This government is the worst thing happened to Turkey in recent years but I'd like some facts about closing of churches and the related please?