Re: Reply to Sultan
Reader comment on item: Europe under Siege
in response to reader comment: Turkey

Submitted by Reuben Hrone (Australia), Oct 22, 2005 at 04:53

Dr Pipes,
I must admit if I was in any way equivocally oriented in relation to the Armenian genocide then Sultan has polarised both my views on the matter at hand and Islam in general. His use of the phrase "stabbing in the back" - a classic reference and not accidental but expository of a repugnant philosophical underpinning. The Nazis used the same phrase in persecuting the Jews suggesting that Germany had not lost WW1 since its soldiers were still in France - they were "stabbed in the back" by politicians at home - and these politicians were then made out by Nazi propaganda to be Jews. An Armenian reading Sultan's crude reply would be justifiable indignant - hundreds of thousand of civilians were ripped from their homes and murdered in the desert, even the bedouins years later when interviewed about the crime they witnessed - themselves devout muslims see it as "a crime against god." They do but Sultan doesn't evidently. It is at best a minority report amongst the Turks that this genocide happened - they were however recorded and condemned by Pres Wilsons failed "League of Nations" post WW1 - general honesty from the Turks regarding these atrocities has yet to be forthcoming. Dont hold your breath.

This was not a war - it was a massacre - pure and simple. These people were not armed. They were taken from their homes and slaughtered in cold blood - it is a well documented and well established fact - everywhere other than in Turkey and the Middle East. Attaturk though generally regarded as the father of Turkish democracy had and frequently exercised dictatorial powers - he did so to lessen the power of the ultra religious segments of Turkish society and he /may/ well also have to expand its surrounds in this utterly ruthless fashion. I say he /may/ have because as far as I am aware he was not directly implicated though certainly very high ranking military officials were complicit in this exercise. Perhaps though this merely is reticence on my part to pin accusations upon a man that I and no doubt Sultan appears to have a significant degree of admiration for. He was nonetheless commander and chief during the period when these abominable acts occurred and so therefore bears some of the responsability.

What distinguishes this atrocity from many others and a similar rule can be applied to any other atrocity committed in the name of Islam whether it be Mohammed executing a tribe of Jews and enslaving their women and children or the entire civilisations that have been wiped away in Afghanistan and Pakistan in significantly larger genocides is that almost no pressure has been applied for Muslims to admit that these actions were atrocities. In fact these actions are widely celebrated observe Sultan's description aye indeed almost celebration of the slaughter as a glorious military victory. Humility, being self effacing, respecting the dignity of others rights and beliefs on equal terms rather than terms that favor your own well being and reduce the humanity of others who live with and amongst you - these are values distinctively and exclusively western it would seem and muslims often make reference to these things along with the "beauty of tolerence" as Shazia once enunciated in order to justify their tenuous position amongst us in our own countries. But these things are a two way street and it disappoints me that Sultan seems like so many Muslims to believe despite overwhelming evidence that Islam's hands are clean of blood. I contend that they are saturated. And this will remain so as long as the most eloquent and educated Muslims like Sultan for example retain an all consuming arrogance in relation to its history. As one only learn from history if one has the integrity to acknowledge it.

Cordially,
Reuben Horne.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.