A SOLEMN ANNIVERSARY
By Jessica Scarpati / Daily News Correspondent
Daily News Tribune, MA
April 24, 2006
BOSTON- Shoushan Kalaydjian is left speechless by people who say
Turkish attacks against World War I-era Armenians do not constitute
genocide.
“My father’s side lost all six members of his family, including
his parents,” said Kalaydjian, 70, of Waltham. “There is no single
Armenian family you can talk to that hasn’t lost someone.”
After rumor spread that Germans would poison the soup in the Turkish
orphanage where her father lived, Kalaydjian said he fled to Iraq.
“He was 7 years old,” she said after a State House remembrance service
on Friday. “He slept on a carpet in a mosque in the middle of Baghdad
and one of the imams took care of him.”
Kalaydjian and her husband Ara, 68, attend the Beacon Hill ceremony
each year.
“What happened to the Armenian people and our ancestors shouldn’t
happen again,” said Kalaydjian, an Israeli native. “We don’t pray
for ourselves only. We pray for all.”
Over 300 Bay State Armenians, politicians and survivors gathered in
the House chamber to honor the 1.5 million lost 91 years ago and to
condemn attempts to deny the genocide took place.
“The denial of genocide . has allowed genocide actions to be
perpetrated decade after decade,” said Rep. Peter Koutoujian,
D-Waltham. “Keeping the memory alive is a method for protecting our
and others’ futures.”
Koutoujian said he would file a bill today (Monday) to forbid the
state from investing in countries where genocide occurs, such as Sudan.
“Even if this itself does not stop genocide, it is a way of making
our voice heard,” he said.
The state Board of Education, defended by attorney general and
gubernatorial candidate Tom Reilly, is locked in a federal lawsuit
against Turkish interest groups and a Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High
School student and teacher.
The coalition has accused Massachusetts schools of censoring statewide
history curriculum by only using “genocide” to define the Armenian
experience in the Ottoman Empire.
Lincoln-Sudbury High School senior Ted Griswold and history teacher
Bill Schechter joined plaintiffs this October in alleging that the
removal of dissenting views over the massacres from curricula violated
free speech.
The Legislature passed a law in 1998 requiring high schools to teach
genocide and human rights topics, specifically naming the Armenian
genocide.
“The case should be dismissed because the state has a right to
teach its students what it wants to, especially when that is the
truth,” Arnold Rosenfeld, a lawyer on the case, told a rally after
the ceremony.
U.S. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said Nazi leader Adolf Hitler used
public ignorance of the Armenians’ strife to justify killing six
million Jews during World War II.
“There are those who will deny the Armenian genocide just as there
are those who will deny the Nazi Holocaust,” Markey said.
Gesturing to a group of three elderly women from Belmont and Andover
who huddled silently next to the podium during the two-hour service,
state Rep. Rachel Kaprielian, D-Watertown, struggled to keep her
voice steady.
The genocide survivors-Naomi Armen, Eva Loosigian and Alice
Shnorhokian-had fled to the Syrian desert as children under Turkish
persecution.
“Mrs. Loosigian apologized to me for not being able to focus because
she had lye poured into her eye by a Turkish soldier,” Kaprielian said,
her voice cracking.
The women, along with Areka DerKazarian of Watertown, who was not
present, were recognized by Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey.
“You stand as living proof of a dark chapter world history and you
cannot be denied,” Healey said, proclaiming April 24 as Armenian
Martyrs Day in Massachusetts.
Following the ceremony, coalition group “kNOw Genocide” announced
its mission to fight denial Armenian and other genocides.
“Whenever we read or hear that people deny our genocide, it is as
if we are being killed again, slowly,” said Jean Nganji, a Rwandan
refugee who lost his entire family to genocide in 1994.
State police moved three protestors who shouted, “Don’t forget the
Palestinians!” over televised speeches.
With his face obscured by sunglasses, a Red Sox baseball hat and a
bandana around his nose and mouth, one protestor waved a sign that
read, “Defend Sudan from Zionist UN.”
Interrupted by the heckling, Brookline rabbi Moshe Waldoks said the
world should “create a culture of life.”
“And precisely, there are people here who support the culture of
death,” said Waldoks, an author and board member of Jewish Community
Relations Council, as police moved protestors from the State House
steps.
“We’re not here to teach that we’re victims. We’re here to teach that
there should be no more victims,” Waldoks said.

TURKEY FINALLY HEARS ITS PAST
By Henry Morgenthau III
Boston Globe, MA
April 24, 2006
“AMBASSADOR Morgenthau’s Story,” my grandfather’s account of the
killings of Armenians in Turkey in 1915, was published just before
World War I ended in November 1918. A personal chronicle of his service
as the US ambassador to Ottoman Turkey for 26 months, the book was
published last month for the first time in Turkish, a milestone in
informing the Turkish people of what happened in their country more
than 90 years ago.
The term genocide had not yet been invented when my grandfather wrote
his book. Thus, Morgenthau refers to “the destruction of the Armenian
race” as “the murder of a nation.” It was Henry Morgenthau’s lonely
voice that alerted the world to the premeditated atrocities of the
Young Turk leaders and the complicity of their German allies.
Why Morgenthau chose to speak out on behalf of the Armenians is a more
complex question than how he did so. Almost from the time he arrived
in New York as a 10-year-old German Jewish immigrant, he envisioned
public service as his ultimate calling. When the opportunity arose,
he attached himself to Woodrow Wilson’s rising star and was appointed
US ambassador to Turkey.
At the end of 1914, Morgenthau noted a pattern: Palestinian Jews were
conscripted into the Turkish army, then promptly disarmed and placed
in labor battalions. This was a tactic the Turks used against Greeks
and other minorities, and, most ominously, against the Armenians.
Fearing reprisals against Jews in Turkish territories, Morgenthau
warned international Zionist leaders to contain their indignation.
Then he took it upon himself to call on the US Navy for help. In
January 1915, the USS Tennessee was ordered to Alexandria, Egypt,
ostensibly to protect US citizens. In fact, it made possible the
evacuation of impoverished Jewish refugees, including David Ben-Gurion
and Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, who became respectively Israel’s first prime
minister and second president.
Morgenthau was never able to carry out a rescue of the Armenians with
the effectiveness he achieved in saving Jews, though certainly not
for want of trying. There were fundamental differences between the
Armenian and Jewish situations. The Armenians were a minority located
within the borders of Ottoman Turkey and Czarist Russia. The Jews, on
the other hand, were widely dispersed throughout Eastern and Western
Europe and the United States, and to a much lesser extent in the Near
East, including the Holy Land. In Western Europe and the United States,
Jews had risen to positions of power and had learned how to network
internationally. The diaspora Armenians had not yet achieved such
status and so could not mobilize support for their persecuted kinsmen.
When Morgenthau appealed to Enver Pasha, the Turkish minister
of war, to permit US missionaries to feed starving Armenians, the
response was coldly cynical. “We don’t want the Americans to feed the
Armenians. . . . That is one of the worst things that could happen
to them. . . . It is their belief that they have friends in other
countries which leads them to oppose the government and so bring down
upon them all their miseries.” The Turkish minister of the interior,
Talaat Pasha, was equally callous: “The hatred between the Turks and
the Armenians is now so intense that we have got to finish them. If
we don’t, they will plan their revenge.”
The memoirs of my grandfather factually chronicle an important
period of history. Yet, 91 years later, the Turkish state insists
the genocide of the Armenians did not happen. Why does Turkey protect
the murderers of the past? That is a question that needs to be asked
over and over again until the truth is acknowledged. As Turkey seeks
membership in the European Union, it is being challenged to open up
its society and adopt free speech.
But its penal code has resulted in several Turkish writers being
brought before their own courts for speaking out about the Armenian
genocide. Surely a modern country like Turkey needs to treat its
citizens with more respect. Free speech cannot be denied, especially in
a country seeking to join the EU. Whatever may have motivated Turkish
officials to deny the genocide for more than 90 years, there now
appears to be some light at the end of the tunnel. The US government,
which had knuckled under in support of the Turkish policy of denial,
is now urging all parties to accept the realities of history.
At this critical moment, the publication of the Turkish edition of
“Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story” is an important step for the citizens
of Turkey. It is their right to know their own history, good and
bad, without interference from the state. A crime denied is a crime
repeated. Great nations in history have acknowledged the misdeeds of
their earlier governments. It is time for Turkey to join the ranks
of those great nations.
Henry Morgenthau III, who lives in Cambridge, is the author of a
family history, “Mostly Morgenthaus.”
itorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/04/24/turkey_fi nally_hears_its_past/

OUR YOUTH PUBLIC UNION HOLDS CONFERENCE ON “ARMENIAN GENOCIDE”
Today, Azerbaijan
April 24, 2006
Our Youth Public Union organized conference-“The so-called Armenian
genocide-historic truths and facts” in the Ataturk Center.
As APA reports, the conference brought together representatives of
youth organizations and parliament members. Head of the Union Shamsi
Akhundov addressing the meeting said that youths need to be informed
about alleged facts such as “Armenian genocide” in order to arouse
patriotism spirit in them.
“All Turk world should protest against Armenians claims on the
so-called “genocide of Armenians,” Akhundov stressed.
Historians talked about the troubles Armenians caused for Turk. Film
on genocide of Azerbaijanis committed by Armenians was displayed in
the end of the conference.
URL:

FAREWELL AMID CRY FOR JUSTICE
Calcutta Telegraph, India
April 24, 2006
A crowd looks on as the hearse with Prashant’s body heads for the
crematorium. A Telegraph picture Siliguri, April 23: The body of
Prashant Anchali, a medical student, arrived here today, three days
after his mysterious death in Armenia.
Two senior students – including one from Siliguri – of Yerevan State
University accompanied the body on its last journey. The body had
been embalmed and dressed in a spotless black suit.
Prashant died on April 20 after a fall from the sixth floor of a
building at the university. Indian embassy officials in Armenia had
said the third-year student had committed suicide.
Prashant’s family is, however, not ready to accept this. They suspect
he was murdered.
A crowd had gathered at the Anchali home soon after the coffin arrived
at 12.15 pm. An hour or so later, it was taken for cremation.
“When everything was over, the truth finally sank in and I realised
with a heavy heart that my younger brother was no more,” said a
grieving Pankaj, Prashant’s elder brother, in the evening. Family
members said a post-mortem had been conducted in Armenia. But the
report is yet to come.
The Anchalis have already written to the President, the Prime Minister
and the Lok Sabha Speaker to help them find out what exactly had
happened in Armenia.
Pankaj said the family has decided to request the university through
the embassy to investigate into the matter. “We have also planned to
go to the human rights commission for justice,” he said.
Puja Goyel, one of the two students and a resident of Siliguri, who
had accompanied the body, told The Telegraph that though she was in
class when the incident occurred, she firmly believed that Prashant
had not committed suicide. “He wasn’t that kind of person. I spoke
to him the previous evening and he was quite normal. Most probably,
it was an accident. However, the Armenian police have started an
investigation and the truth would hopefully come to light soon.”
According to Puja, except for the dean of the university, Anna
Sargsayn, all others including the non-Indian students, were very
cooperative. “The students lodged a complaint against the dean and
she has been suspended,” the fourth-year student said.
Abhishek of Patna, the other student who had accompanied the body
from Armenia, said: “Prashant was a nice and kind-hearted fellow and
also a brilliant chap. He was quite popular among the students and
also liked by the teachers. The vice-president of Armenia was present
during his farewell from the university,” he added.
Abhishek too was not ready to accept that Prashant had committed
suicide.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

TWO BOOKS EXAMINE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ISSUE (LEWY & BLOXHAM)
Alex van Oss
EurasiaNet, NY
April 24, 2006
A EurasiaNet Book Review
The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide,
by Guenter Lewy (2005 The University of Utah Press) ISBN:
978-0-87480-849-0
The Great Game of Genocide: Imperialism, Nationalism, and the
Destruction of the Ottoman Armenians, by Donald Bloxham (2005 Oxford
University Press) ISBN: 0-19-927-356-1
April 24 is a day of commemoration for Armenians, a day of controversy
for Turks. Both nations continue to argue over the tragic chain of
events that began in 1915, leaving up to 1.5 million Armenians in
Ottoman Turkey dead.
Armenians today assert that the systematic slaughter of Armenians in
1915 constituted the first genocide of the 20th century. Meanwhile,
Turkish leaders deny the genocide claim, saying the mass deaths were
mainly caused by civil strife that accompanied World War I and its
aftermath. Historians continue to struggle between doubt and certainty
over what transpired and why, and the debate has become so polarized
that researchers risk being pilloried for not cleaving to one or
another position, or for not using words just so.
Two recently published books attempt tackle the complex subject:
The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: a Disputed Genocide strives
to demonstrate how elusive history can be when scrutinized closely;
The Great Game of Genocide explores the causes and legacies of the
1915 massacres in an international context.
Guenter Lewy, professor emeritus of political science at the
University of Massachusetts-Amherst, has a reputation for debunking
stereotypes. He has written respected (and hotly criticized) works
about the Vietnam War; and also the relationship between the Nazis and
Gypsies, and the Catholic Church. The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman
Turkey: A Disputed Genocide, too, has been both praised and condemned
for its attempt to take a dispassionate look at the issue.
Readers with strong prior convictions about the subject will surely
find much to disagree with in the pages of The Armenian Massacres;
but those who are intrigued by history, and by the labor of trying to
capture the texture of times past stand to be well-rewarded. This book,
though clearly written, requires careful evaluation and reference
to footnotes. Lewy dissects and teases out convoluted strands of
historical evidence and counter-evidence, and analyzes the sources,
methodologies, rhetoric, and conclusions of “pro-Armenian” and
“pro-Turkish” researchers.
Lewy asserts that scholars on both sides of the debate have used
data selectively. It should be noted that similar accusations have
been leveled at him: in 2005 Lewy published articles summarizing his
Armenian massacre findings in the Middle East Quarterly and in the
journal Commentary-findings for which he was taken to task by the
eminent Armenian genocide scholar Vahakn Dadrian [,
Oct. 18, 2005]. Dadrian accused Lewy, who does not speak Turkish or
Armenian, or read Ottoman Turkish, of being out of his depth; Lewy
riposted; and the scholarly “chewing” goes on.
Ottoman Turkey was being subjected to extreme pressure in 1915, from
foreign invaders, namely British, French Anzac and Russian forces,
and from rebellious ethnic groups inside the collapsing empire. It
was a time of government crackdowns, reprisals, and paranoia about the
“enemy within.” Lewy demonstrates the difficulty of nailing down hard
data about this period. Indeed, The Armenian Massacres may be viewed
as a work of deconstruction, and one that possibly sets the marker of
historical proof too high. The book delves into subjects not often
covered, such as the appalling conditions in the Ottoman army and
the depravations from typhus among Turkish soldiers and displaced
persons of every nationality. The reader will learn about the often
ambiguous complicity in the Armenian massacres of non-Turkish groups,
including Kurds and Circassians; and also about the complicated matter
of determining the population and demographics of pre-1915 Anatolia
(which is important to know so that one can estimate the number of war,
or massacre, victims).
Lewy’s digressions help color in that turbulent period: [p.57]
“If the Turkish authorities were unable or unwilling to provide
adequate clothing, decent hygienic conditions, and appropriate
medical attention for their Muslim soldiers, why should one expect
them to be concerned about the fate of the Armenian deportees, whom
they regarded as a fifth column?” And: [p.61] “…A government as
callous about the suffering of its own population as was the Young
Turk regime could hardly be expected to be very concerned about the
terrible human misery that would rise from deporting its Armenian
population, rightly or wrongly suspected of treason.”
The Armenian Massacres covers 19th century Anatolian history,
including the various Armenian revolutionary movements, sundry
Ottoman reprisals and repressions, and the rise to power of the Young
Turks. This is followed by a detailed comparison of what Lewy terms
“two rival historiographies.” Perhaps most valuable is a section on
“historical reconstruction: what we know and what we do not know.”
Ottoman Turkey in 1915, Lewy concludes, was a ravaged state, with
an incompetent government that panicked and made horrific decisions,
the aftermath of which lingers to this day.
In The Great Game of Genocide, Donald Bloxham (a lecturer in 20th
century history at the University of Edinburgh) shows how the “clean
sweep” of 1915 was, in a sense, the culmination of a series of tragic
events. Bloxham points to the fact that Ottoman Turks massacred masses
of Armenians not once but several times: throughout the empire in
1894-96, and in Cilicia in 1909. By this time, 19th century Armenian
communities had gained exposure to western education and philosophical
trends-such as nationalism-and had grown increasingly restive under
Ottoman rule. Nor was 1915 the end to violence: Turks and Armenians
(and by this time Azerbaijanis, too) continued to commit atrocities
against each other for the next few years, with no group enjoying a
monopoly on suffering.
The Great Game of Genocide examines the international context of the
Armenian tragedy, and the response (or non-response) by other countries
to what was looming as an ethnic disaster of unprecedented scale:
[P.5] “…Great power involvement in Ottoman internal affairs was a key
element in exacerbating the Ottoman-Armenian dynamic towards genocide
while Turkish sensitivity about external intervention on behalf of the
Armenians-whether directed towards reforms before 1914 or independence
after 1918-was a vital contributory factor to the emergence of denial.”
Both Bloxham and Lewy dwell at length on genocide denial, and the
appropriateness of genocide as a term. “Genocide,” says Bloxham,
is a 1940s word being applied as a “retrospective projection”
upon historical events of decades before: [p.95] “…the killing
did constitute a genocide-every aspect of the United Nations’
definition of the crime is applicable-but recognizing that fact
should be a by-product of the historian’s work, not its ultimate aim
or underpinning.” The sticking point is the perpetrator’s intent:
without intent there cannot be genocide. But intent need not be a
clear-cut, one time manifestation: it can develop, grow, and feed
upon itself and events. Hence, says Bloxham: “[p.96]…Pinpointing
the precise time within that period of radicalization at which a
state framework that is demonstrably permissive of murder and atrocity
becomes explicitly genocidal is extremely difficult and unlikely ever
to be achieved definitively.”
Meanwhile, Lewy finds little tangible evidence of premeditated mass
homicide (i.e. genocide), of Armenians. Perhaps this evidence will
be found, he allows, but it is not there yet. Apparently, crucial
archival documents have gone missing, or have been destroyed, or have
not been made available by Turkish authorities (even now, possibly
due to archival disorganization). In addition, documentation might
have been deemed spurious to begin with, or was used selectively for
political purposes (e.g. to deflect blame for Armenian massacres,
or, on the other hand, to build a case for creating an Armenian
state in eastern Anatolia, or for keeping land and property out
of Armenian hands after the collapse of the Ottoman empire). Lewy
concludes that there is plenty of testimony and documentation that
atrocities and massacres occurred, but, he cautions, premeditation
has yet be ascertained.
Lewy analyzes what he calls the “politicization of history” regarding
Ottomans and Armenians, and believes both sides are stuck in a semantic
bind. He says that the legalistic definition of “genocide” has been
conflated with the common use of the word as a term of opprobrium,
and proposes that separating these two meanings just might provide
the basis for more productive discussions between Turks and Armenians
today. This is a point worth pondering, while not forgetting that the
1948 UN definition of genocide was based on writings by jurist Raphael
Lemkin-who had precisely the Armenian, and other, massacres in mind.
Lewy and Bloxham’s histories inspire compassion for all Anatolians
of a century ago. Whether or not one agrees with the authors, their
work will surely should inspire readers to pursue further and deeper
investigations.
Editor’s Note: Alex van Oss is the Chair of Caucasus Advanced Area
Studies at the Foreign Service Institute in Washington, DC.

ARMENIANS REMEMBER VICTIMS OF 1915 MASSACRE
By Rym Ghazal
Daily Star staff
The Daily Star, Lebanon
April 25, 2006
Turkey still denies targeting minority community
BEIRUT: Thousands of Armenians from all over Lebanon gathered at Bourj
Hammoud Stadium on Monday to commemorate the 91st anniversary of the
Armenian genocide, demanding that Turkey “recognize and apologize for”
the massacre committed by the Ottoman Turks in 1915.
“It was the first massacre of the 20th century to which the whole world
turned a blind eye,” former Minister Alain Tabourian told the crowd.
The gathering was attended by 35,000 Armenians who came wearing the
Armenian flag but singing the national Lebanese anthem as they marched
into the stadium in the Armenian suburb of Beirut.
“Turkey tried to wipe us out of existence, but we survived and were
reborn with new citizenships,” said Tabourian, who also thanked
Lebanon for having welcomed Armenian refugees who fled Turkey. “We
never forgot our roots.”
He also thanked representatives from the government and President
Emile Lahoud, along with Lebanese Forces MP Strida Geagea, who attended
the commemoration ceremony.
Beginning on April 24, 1915, Armenians say about 1.5 million Armenians
“were massacred” by the Ottoman Turks as part of a government-led
“genocide,” a term Turkey has fiercely and consistently rejected for
decades. Ankara also says the dead numbered 300,000-500,000.
Survivors fled to Syria and Lebanon, with the latter now home to the
largest Armenian community in the Arab world, made up of about 75,000
descendants of those who fled the 1915-1917 violence.
“In order for the Armenians to open a new page with Turkey, it has
to acknowledge and admit its crime against us, and apologize for
committing the highest kind of atrocities possible against human
beings,” Tabourian said.
“Their admission of this crime would benefit them and help them
accomplish their dream of entering the European Union, and would give
us our peace and compensation which are rightfully ours,” he added,
referring to EU demands that Turkey face its past and expand freedom
of speech before it can qualify to enter the union.
Apart from the speeches, which were mainly delivered in Armenian, white
balloons were released in honor of those killed in the bloodletting
and in hope that peace can finally be realized between Turkey and
the Armenians.
“It is rather unlikely they Turkey will admit it, but we have to
prove that as Armenians, we still exist, and just as Palestinians are
fighting for their land, so are we,” said one participant at the event,
Anto Narguizian, 17.
“Turkey’s alliance with the United States is very strategic, both
economically and geographically, so the United States will not agree
that such a mass genocide occurred, even if most European states
have agreed to this,” he added. “But if America does not agree,
Turkey will not return the land it has taken from the Armenians,
and will not repay all the damages it has caused.”
Narguizian’s mother, Maral, who did not attend the commemoration,
told The Daily Star: “Everyone has their way of expressing their
beliefs and what they stand for; I would rather express myself through
monetary aid to local charities and churches.”
But she added that these “protests need to be done, to ask for our
rights, which have long been ignored.”

RECOGNISE THE ARMENIAN AND ASSYRIAN GENOCIDE
By Peter Marshall
Assyrian International News Agency
April 24, 2006
On Saturday 22 April, around a thousand Armenians living in the UK
marched from Marble Arch to the Cenotaph in Westminster where a wreath
was laid to draw attention to their demands for the recognition of
the Turkish genocide of 1915-23 in which around 1.5 million Armenians
were killed.
Genocide has been around throughout history, but it was only in
the twentieth century that the term was invented. It was needed to
describe both the fate of the Jews under the Nazis and the earlier
Turkish crimes against the Armenians.
Ethnic groups such as the Armenians just didn’t fit in with the concept
of a new Muslim Turkey held by the Young Turks in the early years of
the twentieth century. The only solution was to kill them.
The Turks started on the job on 24 April 1915 by arresting 1000
intellectuals and other leaders and executing them.
Next they conscripted 300,000 male Armenians for army service, but
but instead of sending them to the trenches, they were alleged to be
traitors, disarmed and killed.
Finally, the remaining Armenians – women, children and the elderly –
were dealt with my mass killings and enforced marches into the desert
where they starved. Rape and other atrocities were common.
The Armenians had been living inside what became modern Turkey for
some 3000 years. At the start of 1915 there were over 1.5 million of
them. Most were killed during that year, and by 1923 there were only
around 50,000 left.
The Turkish government still refuses to accept this genocide
occurred. In 1916, a UK parliamentary report by Lord Bryce and Arnold
Toynbee, ‘Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 1915-16’
detailed these systematic politically motivated killings, and many
other reports, including some from the UN have given simiilar accounts.
Over recent years, many governments and other organisations around the
world have passed resolutions affirming that the Armenian genocide
occurred. Like the Nazi holocaust, it is a fact of 20th century
history, and like that, totally reprehensible.
Various Early Day motions in the British parliament have called upon
our government to take some action. The most recent, sponsored by
Stephen Pound MP, “calls upon the UK and Turkish governments publicly
and officially to recognise the Assyrian and Armenian genocide of
1915” and for the “UK Government to call on the European Union to
make official Turkish recognition … one of the pre-conditions for
Turkey’s membership of the EU.” So far this has only attracted 38
signatures – only one from a Conservative.
The march was one of a number of events this year organised by the
Campaign for the Recognition of the Armenian Genocide, CRAG, together
with other Armenian community groups. Among those leading the march
was Bishop Nathan Hovhannisian, Primate of the Armenian Church of
Great Britain.
htm

TODAY IS A DAY TO REMEMBER, THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE
ABC 7, CA
April 24, 2006
An estimated 1.5 million Armenians died between 1915 and 1923 in the
waning days of Turkey’s Ottoman Empire
Flags will fly at half staff in West Hollywood today to honor Armenian
victims of genocide.
An estimated 1.5 million Armenians died between 1915 and 1923 in the
waning days of Turkey’s Ottoman Empire.
Today is the 91st anniversary of what many Armenians consider the
start of the genocide, when Turkish authorities arrested two hundred
Armenian community leaders.
The Turkish government says allegations of genocide have never
been proven.
Turkish Ambassador Nabi Sensoy, in response to the Public Broadcasting
Service documentary “Armenian Genocide,” said last week that
“Armenian allegations of genocide have never been historically or
legally substantiated.”
The West Hollywood City Council has passed a resolution “condemning
the human rights violations of the Turkish government,” according to
City Councilman Jeffrey Prang’s office. The resolution was introduced
by Prang and Councilwoman Abbe Land.

SEN. ALLARD TO HANG OUT WITH ROCK STARS
By M.E. Sprengelmeyer, Rocky Mountain News
Rocky Mountain News, CO
April 24, 2006
Concern over Armenian genocide is bringing together soft-spoken Sen.
Wayne Allard and one of the loudest heavy metal bands in the business
this week.
The Armenian-American group System of A Down, known for an eclectic
repertoire and rapid, screaming lyrics, is scheduled to visit Allard’s
office Wednesday afternoon.
The visit is to thank Allard for co-sponsoring symbolic legislation
casting a spotlight on the deaths of an estimated 1.5 million ethnic
Armenians under Ottoman Empire rule in the early 20th Century.
The band, known for political lyrics, has made remembering the Armenian
genocide a cause celebre, and its web site urges fans worldwide to
pressure their representatives to remember crimes against humanity.
On the surface, Allard and the band would seem to have little in
common.
While Allard is quiet and conservative, the band is, uhm, not.
Its song list includes the song “F— the System.” One song,
“B.Y.O.B.,” includes the lyrics “Why don’t presidents fight the war?
Why do they always send the poor?”
And then there are profanity-laced songs like “Cigaro,” which includes
bragging references to various male physical attributes and repeated
lines like, “My s— stinks much better than yours…”
(That’s one of the more family-friendly lines.)
So is the band’s music on Allard’s iPod?
“Sen. Allard does not yet own an iPod,” chief of staff Sean Conway
reports.
“Sen. Allard is aware the band is heavy metal and has strong ‘political
lyrics’ in their songs, but he admires the band members for their
standing up for what they believe in, and for their strong support
of the Armenian Genocide Resolution,” Conway said.

AZERI SPEAKER MEETS AUSTRIAN OFFICIALS IN BAKU
AUSTRIA TODAY
April 24, 2006 Monday 7:47 PM (Central European Time)
Speaker of Azeri Parliament Oktay Asadov met with a delegation
headed by the State Secretary of Austrian Foreign Ministry Hans
Winklerin, Trend reports with reference to press service of the Azeri
Parliament. Speaker said at the meeting Azerbaijan’s priority-driven
politics is the integration in Europe.
“Azerbaijan intends to extend relationships within Europe’s new
neighbourhood programme. In this respect, the republic officials are
leading conversations on development of an action plan. We should
note also that in some political issues, in particular Armenian-Azeri
conflict, the European Commission is not taking Azerbaijan’s concerns
in consideration,” he said. Speaker also said that staring 1992
European commission has provided our country over USD 400 million and
highly appraised cooperation under such programs as TACIS, TRASECA,
INOGATE and Food programme. The speaker informed the guests about
the development of interparliamentary relationships, preliminary work
performed in conjunction with re-elections of May 13.