I think the Armenians, the Greeks and many other nationalities would say the same thing, because the Ottomans were the invaders. Greece, when landing troops in Anatolia, said that they were liberating their fellow countrymen from Turkish oppresion. When the invasion failed, the Turkish authorities set about massacring the Greek population in places like Smyrna and Ephesus
Freedom is of whom deserve it. Your words end up with Turks trying to liberate Middle Asia. History is full of stories of invasions and rebellions. Inquiring these historical terms in a wrong manner, you will mix up everything. Do you know that we spilled 250.000 bodies of blood to defend against heavy English navy in Canakkale which is a heroical milestone of warfare history? We wanted freedom and we got it. These lands were ours since about 1200-1300s. Turkish indepence efforts were given under threats of Ottoman government, and the whole "Great" invaders I already mentioned about. Armenians or Greeks or whomever minorities that the "Great" ones would like, would be independent in Anatolia, if they ever deserved to. History always had oppressors and the ones under their control. That's the nature. You should forget about this point of view, because it makes no sense..

What's more since it was the Turkish parliament established by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk that planned the liberation in both armed and unarmed ways (Ottoman government was a whole different thing for that time, do not confuse). So it was obvious that this struggle would be given against to all threats to Turkish existence. Please direct your questions in this framework, from now on.

So King Henry, would you welcome someone that supports invasion of your land. Whatever the population was, it was a Turkish land. And I do not see anything strange with Greeks being swept away after such an invasion. By the way, I would be asking why Greeks burnt down all the places when they were retreating ? It is an act of war, of course. So were ours.

If you take every aspect of battle as massacring, you'd better keep off the history. You can not win your hand through handshaking, making agreements all the time. Whoever was that much merciful, I wonder. And also I wonder if such one still exists.

And if the Turks were so kind and tolerant, why didn't they give Armenia its independance? Remember the Greeks and the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire had more of right to it as their homeland than the Turks, because they were there first.
Pff..We were kind and tolerant that after 600 years (six hundred you see) they still exist with their own language, own culture, own religion and own places where they used to be for their whole history - Lesser Armenia. Please try to understand what I try to mean in fact.

What kind of right did the British and French had that they came over here and provoked minorities and make invasions ? And do I have more right than anyone else in Middle Asia ? Do you really think that you want to discuss something or just propose blank challenges to oppose me? I fought in a battle, I won, I am free. That's the summary.

They're probably were atrocities comitted by the Armenians and the Greeks, but let me ask you this, who would be more capable of committing genocide, the Turks, who were the rulers, or the Armeinians, who were an ethnic minority.
Through the waning period of Ottoman Empire, the great powers of Europe seized such a control over Ottoman Empire (especially in economic terms) that in these lands minorities had absoultely better rights than Turks towards the empire's collapse. Rulers had been muppets of Europe. Ottoman government could never act in such a manner that would drive things worse with them like a genocide.

What's more, it doesn't mean that Armenians can not commit 500.000 murders in such a weak and chaotic condition. And 500.000 murders equals to "massacre".

About the links you provided :
The whole world knows only what Armenians wanted them to know. One to get clear results should come over here and research through Turkish government archives as much as he/she did with Armenians. So I am not surprised with that wikipedia's definitions.

The second link is a wise choice of domain name registration -LOL-
The whole website is full of anti-Turkish proposals. Do not tell me that you really believed in a website that never mentions about Native American Genocide by U.S., the Algerian Genocide by France or Aztek Genocide by Spaniards. You really did not believe that site selling "Turkish Denial Machine" t-shirts didn't you ? They promote a fascism that works in contradictive way - filling people with anger against Turks. What's more, I never and ever accept anything from a website that uses Mustafa Kemal Ataturk's photo next to Adolf Hitler's and making up a logo with it. Ataturk never had anything related to Armenian incidents happened over there, but they propose that. Briefly, the website has no intentions on "making up things right". They serve to provide anti-Turk community.

The last link you provide and the cause you propose sums up all your manner and intentions. You are not talking to a kid over here. Talking about "balancing" to keep me out of burst is the same thing that www.unitedhumanrights.org website you provided does.

I am here to explain something and will try to avoid provocations as much as I can, I promised to Gregoshi. If you have not much to say, you'd better open the doors of your brain and keep silent. Get rid of your prejudices before discussing such a sensitive topic. Human is human before he is an Armenian, Greek, Kurd or Turk or whatever.

P.S. I just learned that the congress in Turkey about Armenian Issue was cancelled by the Turkish minister, Cemil Cicek. Sorry that I opposed that news and claimed that the Armenians did it.