88Punx you wrote:-

And how did Ehrenberg come by his information?

Vasily Grossman:- Journalist Writer (for his diaries see “A writer at War” Edited and translated by Antony Beevor and Luba Vinogradova). In 1943 Majdanek, a prison camp for Russian PoWs and Polish non Jews which was later turned into an extermination camp and Treblinka an extermination camp run under the control of Operation Rheinhart were liberated by the Red Army. Konstantine Simonov investigated Majdanek and Vasily Grossman interviewed survivors from Treblinka, the survivors that broke out when Treblinka was being liquidated.

Since many Russian PoWs and non Jewish victims suffered at Majdanek, the soviet authorities felt able to use Majdanek for propaganda.

Vasily Grossman estimated the total number of victims at Treblinka to be 3 million he calculated this from the number of trains he had heard about and their size. Subsequently the figure was reworked and found to be between 750,000 and 880,000. His error was in the size of the trains as they were normally split, the station at Treblinka being to short to take the usual 60 cattle trucks. But at point the other Rheinhart extermination camps had not been liberated, Sobibor and Belzec. Auschwitz I, Birkenau and Monowitz were not to be liberated for another year. And does not include the actions of the EinsatzGruppen.

Johnderondon

Her Hitler:- Hitler himself remarked to his SS officers in Poland to continue their massacres of Jews because, after all “who today speaks of the Armenians?”

Hansard Canada

Mr. Maurice Vellacott (Saskatoon--Wanuskewin, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, it is a fact that close to some 700,000 Armenians were killed or died of starvation and disease while being relocated during the first world war in eastern Anatolia. It is also a fact that more than 2 million Turks and Muslims were massacred in eastern Anatolia at the turn of the 20th century and during the first world war by Armenian revolutionary bands acting in co-operation with the Russians who were the Ottoman Empire's enemy.

What happened in eastern Anatolia during the first world war were tragic events from which lessons should be learned, for all of us here today and for the future, so that similar incidents of such ultra-nationalism that result in the total uprooting and devastation of any community around the world is not allowed to occur again.

The world has heard a lot about the Armenian losses due to the tireless efforts of Armenian individuals who in some cases it is sad to say have resorted to terrorism. The Turks recognize the Armenian deaths and they also acknowledge the suffering that took place in eastern Anatolia so many years ago.

What the Turks so strenuously object to is the Armenian activists' one sided portrayal of the tragic events to the world community and labelling them as genocide using in some cases distortion or exaggeration of facts to further their political agenda of obtaining money and land from Turkey. While doing so Armenians ignore the death and massacre of more than twice as many Turks at the hands of the Armenian revolutionary bands and the Russians whom they were helping during the first world war.

The Armenian accusations or allegations were not countered in North America and Europe until the 1980s because there were no significant populations outside Turkey until then. Armenians were unopposed in terms of the viewpoint of history they depicted to the North American public. Therefore others around the world did not have that understanding of another point of view on things.

Now that world opinion is becoming aware of the Armenian massacres of the Turkish and Muslim population, Armenian activists accuse anybody who questions their version of the events as attempting to rewrite history.

No Armenian publication or conference ever mentions the massacres of the Turkish and Muslim population by the Armenian revolutionary bands and terrorist organizations such as Hunchak and Dashnaktsutiun. In the kinds of genocide that Armenians claim, the alleged perpetrators ended up having ironically more dead than the victims, some 2 million Turks and Muslims.

After the first world war the Ottoman capital was under allied occupation and all state archives were under the control of the British authorities in Istanbul. As a result of constant accusations by Armenian individuals the British finally decided to transport more than 140 Ottoman high officials and cabinet members to Malta for a trial; almost like an anticipation of the Nuremberg trials.

The prisoners were held in Malta for 30 months while the British, French and the Americans searched feverishly for evidence. If there were any credible witnesses or evidence regarding the alleged Armenian massacres they should have been found in that period of time.

However, as a matter of fact, no evidence could be found in Paris, Istanbul or Anatolia to support the charge that the Ottomans had planned a mass slaughter of the Armenians. This is not at all to deny that very tragically and even horrifically large numbers of people were killed. I guess some would maybe question, and I am not the one who has a perfect knowledge of this, that it should be called a genocide.

The British high commission was unable to forward any legal evidence to London. There was nothing in the British archives that corroborated the accusations of the Armenians. I guess at the end of the day these individuals had to be released. Even though there had been those with utmost zeal trying to bring it forward, no evidence was produced.

I stand here today saying that we should move on, that we would not necessarily benefit a whole lot by looking back when there is a differing point of view here. Horrific events were perpetrated on the Armenians but also upon the Turks by these Armenian bands. I stand before the House today not having a final, settled, and determined conclusion about the matter. However I want there to be a more serious look at some of the other atrocities that were perpetrated upon the 2 million Turkish people in those days.

I am appealing for some balance in looking at some of the evidence and information. I am not convinced there is a reason and benefit in declaring an Armenian genocide, such that we would benefit in a big way from that in the future.

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond by first thanking my colleagues who have spoken to the motion before the House, whatever their views might have been.
The fact that we have different viewpoints clearly indicates that the time has come for this parliament to take a strong stand on this issue. If we had to wait for unanimity, we would get to vote on very few issues. Parliament is where decisions are made.
It is most unfortunate that the unanimous consent which was requested twice was not given. In my mind, that is miscarriage of democracy. Since September 11, democracy has been miscarried a few times in this House, which has ordinary Canadians and political analysts in Canada and around the world a bit worried.
Today, we were given the opportunity to demonstrate our values and the significance we give to history, and to say how despicable we find those well-orchestrated plans to eradicate a whole nation.
Of course, a people can be eradicated in very subtle ways. I will not go into this today, but one thing is clear, the events that took place between 1915 and 1920 nearly eradicated the Armenian people.
However, the Armenian people, because it has suffered so much, was incapable of recovering. Indeed, one only has to look at the numbers of Armenian artists who make us proud in Quebec and Canada because they have become integrated into our culture.
Finally, I would like to invite hon. members to go to see the lastest movie by Atom Egoyan, an Armenian filmmaker, who has won many prizes for his work. It deals with the Armenian genocide. By watching this film, many of us will have a better understanding of what the destruction of a society means.

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublicat...&Parl=37&Ses=1

Hansard UK

Baroness Cox asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will extend the Commemoration of the Holocaust on 27th January to include other examples of genocide, as defined by United Nations criteria, and the Armenian massacre in 1915.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the Government decided that Holocaust Memorial Day should focus on learning the lessons of the Holocaust and other more recent atrocities that raise similar issues--and not necessarily genocide as defined by the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide. A particular focus on events around the period 1939 to 1945 and thereafter should not be seen as failing to acknowledge, sympathise with and respect the deep concerns about earlier events like the massacre of Armenians in 1915 and 1916.

Baroness Cox: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that partially encouraging reply. Does he agree that, without in any way detracting from the commemoration of the Jewish Holocaust, to deny recognition of other comparable crimes against humanity diminishes the significance? Does he also agree that one of the most important aspects of the commemoration is to discourage further genocide? Any genocide forgotten or denied may well encourage other genocides, as illustrated by Hitler's infamous question posed before he began the extermination of the Jews: "Who today speaks of the Armenians"?

Well Hitler got that wrong as well there are some do speak for the Armenians. Unfortunately some people think like, 88punx, that they did it to themselves.