Revision as of 18:09, 29 June 2008 editParamandyr (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers50,096 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:31, 3 July 2008 edit undo69.72.219.234 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
:::::The saddest and most amusing part was this; "The U.S. wasn't at war with Turkey, but America was certainly allied with the Allies. MARCH 6, 1916".... It's a pity whomever runs that site is so historically ignorant. From the World War I wiki-source; "....Wilson called for war on Germany, which the U.S. Congress declared on 6 April 1917." ] (]) 18:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC) | :::::The saddest and most amusing part was this; "The U.S. wasn't at war with Turkey, but America was certainly allied with the Allies. MARCH 6, 1916".... It's a pity whomever runs that site is so historically ignorant. From the World War I wiki-source; "....Wilson called for war on Germany, which the U.S. Congress declared on 6 April 1917." ] (]) 18:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
Parishan is using the March 6 dispach by manipulating it. The dispatch was to the Morning Post, where it says the Russians punished the Turks (note, the third army as reported in the dispatch itself) for what they did to the Armenians. The original dispatch does not contain anything about Armenians having engaged at that date. (Parishan has some explainations to do). This is what the dispatch actually says: ''Terrible slaughter followed the capture of the Turkish positions at Bitlis. '''The Russian troops had witnessed at Van, Mush, and many other places, an appalling sight, the massacre: namely, by Turkish fanatics of tens of thousands of Armenian Christian men, women, and children. It was unlikely after such deeds that any quarter should be given. This colossal killing completed the destruction of the Turkish third army.''''' Relevent note to the end of the dispatch, as the note refers to the Turkish third army, which one of his commenders (Vehib) himself punished participants of the Armenian massacres by his own initiative and against above order by slaughtering them. | |||
Parishan is using the untrustworthy website tallarmeniantale, see is from there March 6, and see by which reference it was followed by McCarthy's reference to Niles and Sutherland. It is unlikelly that this order of the references was an accident because Niles and Sutherland report wasn't even specifically about Bitlis. Parishan is readding the thing by claiming that reference is being removed. Under this guise about any worthless, irrelevent and plainly manipulated stuff could be added to the untrusthworthy so-called encyclopedia. | |||
Problem being that Niles and Sutherland report is not considered as trusthworthy by any credible historian (and no McCarthy is not considered as credible). A review of the list of houses left provided by their reports before and after expose the report for what it was, rubbish. The report claims that in the city of Van from the 3,400 Muslim houses only 3 were left (they claim 1,170 Armenian houses were left). The claim that no Muslim houses were left in the Bitlis city, nothing of the 6,500 houses. (while they claim that out of the 1,500 Armenian houses 1,000 remained, while the highest proportion of mortality was recorded nowhere else than Bitlis). In the villages of Van, only 350 Muslim houses being left. And guess what, the Armenians even managed from the report to increase the number of their houses there, fantastic, etc. | |||
Wait, this is not the most interesting part of this, the report also claims that because of some imaginary Armenian army the Ottoman Empire is ruined, and because of this fictif army, only ¼ of the former population and 1/8 of the buildings are remaining (this almighty Armenian army could not even secure a tiny region in Eastern Anatolia). This was a copy of the claimed levelled by the Turkish delegation after the war. Niles and Sutherland were sent there to study the situation of the Armenians in the Eastern Ottoman to report the relief they will be needing. The Turkish autorities found their ways by switching the role of the victims and agressors to get every penny out of this by claiming Armenians were in a good situation. Niles and Sutherland were in the entire process escorted by the nationalists. No wonder the report recieved no consideration at the Senate. Useless to say how the current politic of the time with Bristol's shadow, confirming the awaited Chestler concession was more than welcomed. | |||
And the report by Zaman? I think it won't be wrong to say that we can't expect Parishan to have added this in good faith. The only reported mass burrials ever reported for Bitlis, were those for exemple of the massacre of 15,000 Armenian there in June from the accounts of the German missionaries as well as officials from Italy, Vatican as well as Greece. In fact, when the Russians had Bitlis under control they took pictures of mass graves from there. Several recorded butchers were from there including the Vali, Mustafa Abdul Halik who was interned by the British for this. The last reference doesn't even need to be answered. |
Revision as of 18:31, 3 July 2008
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bitlis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Kurdistan Stub‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Turkey Stub‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Turkey may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. | Upload |
It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. Wikipedians in Turkey may be able to help! |
Comments
Sources are not sited properly...Thelorien 18:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Why would there be any need for sources in an entry that is so small? I can't believe so many edits have been made to a page that contains almost nothing! Couldn't any of those editors add some actual content? Meowy 03:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- If you examine closely, most of the edits are reverts of anon users deleting material. VartanM 23:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
My actual content, you know real info about Bitlis as opposed to ethnic proaganda was totally undone by someone without any comment. Actually, there was no need for a comment!Murat (talk) 03:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I suppose I will have to persist and defend this little patch of wiki from determined vandalism. My factual updates, links, pictures and other valuable contributions are constantly undone without any discussion or explanation. Some people here think they own this town and this page. Before making changes and edits, first discuss, explain and get some consensus. That is how it is done.--Murat (talk) 20:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- Making large and controversial edits without prior discussion is exactly how you started this edit-war. Also, removing uncited and/or obviously POV information does not count as WP:Vandalism, regardless of whether or not you believe it is of value. Also, keep in mind the 3RR. The Myotis (talk) 17:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
There is no "Jevdet Bey Paşa", his real and proper name is "Governor Cevdet Paşa".--Murat (talk) 01:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
One does not pick and choose references to bolster one's POV. Out of hundreds of references, I have chosen ones that are easiest to verify. Not one, but all were removed without any reason. Stop harassing references, make an argument, express what facts are specifically disputed. No amount of vandalism here can change or re-frame historical facts. Given how you and your partisans have turned these pages into ethnic and nationalistic propaganda depositories, full of hate and distortions, maybe it is too much to expect a little respect for neutral facts. I will keep trying.--Murat (talk) 18:07, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
In spite of all good faith efforts to inject a little reality in these pages, wanton removal or any reference that does not meet a certain POV continues. This is the page to discuss it before things removed or erased. That is the wiki policy.--Murat (talk) 21:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
- Your lies are just going to get reversed. Don't you have anything better to do with your time? Meowy 21:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
What lies?--Murat (talk) 21:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
There was major massacre in Bitlis committed against Muslim population by the Armenian irregulars and the Russians when they "briefly" held the town during WWI. The US observers, in their report to the US Congress (a reference repeatedly removed from here) noted that in their tour of the region right after the war, they encountered ZERO Muslims in Bitlis. The reference and paragraph stays.--Murat (talk) 19:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Discuss before editing out major sections and deleting references and sources. What is dubious about a reference? Does that mean not to one's liking? More than half the article has grown into coverage of the WWI events. That belongs to a different article. Maybe that new article can be titled "self-defensive invasion of Bitlis and self-defensive massacre of the Turks there by Armenians"! Just a suggestion!--Murat (talk) 20:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
"The US observers, in their report to the US Congress noted that in their tour of the region right after the war, they encountered ZERO Muslims in Bitlis" - that has to be just about the most unbelievable statement I've read on Misplaced Pages this week! Give us the full quote - and the source you read it in. Regarding your wish to see material moved to a different article - that activity has a name, it's called a POV fork. WW1 was an important period in the history of Bitlis. If you think the size of that part of the entry is too big compared to the rest, then add more material to the rest, and make it genuine material. Meowy 14:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh, yes, this is whatg happens when you drink from your own bath water. There are a few things you will learn here. It is not possible of course to make the article original when any edit, unless it contains the term "Armenian massacre", is savagely removed by you and your mob. I am not one to give up though. Yes, I will expand on the reference more. They are not easy to find though, since over the years, most material not supporting Armenian mythology have been sytematically destroyed from the world archives. I know of specific cases in USA. I personally do not need references or books to learn these facts of course. My granfather's family tree was cut down by the Armenians in Bitlis. I do not mean forced evacuations or marches etc., I mean complete anhiliation. Van and Bitlis are where there were large scale massacres of local Muslims, mostly women, children, old and invalid by Armenians. See if you can find any references on these pages. No amount of burying your head in the sand will change this fact.--Murat (talk) 01:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- Sources are sources. We do not care what conspiracies you allege or what colorful anecdotes you can weave. Unless you can cite a mainstream source, (and actually cite it, not just tell us that somebody reported or published it at some time in the past) that proves your point, you have no justification to add it to the article. The Myotis (talk) 03:32, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- Murat, please stop damaging this entry by removing valid and referenced material - and stop claiming to "restore historical details" in your edit summary when actually the edit has removed historical details. Meowy 19:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
1-Do not remove references simply because you do not like them. What is considered a reference is clearly defined by wiki. 2- Some of the details of "battle for Bitlis" in WWI seem out of proportion for an article only 20 lines or so long. Make it a separate entry if you feel up to it and I will contribute. 3- If we are going to count the dead, then surely one needs to mention the large scale massacre of Turks by Armenians there. Van and Bitlis were the two cities where Armenians pretty much erased the local Muslim populations. Will be more then happy to detail it, but it seems to me out of proportion for a small article. 4- Architecture was a bit overdone but I collected the paragraphs and tidied up a bit. At least pretend to keep a semblance of neutrality and objectivity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hudavendigar (talk • contribs) 05:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- If you think one section is out of proportion, then add content to the rest of the article. And if that actually were the reason you removed that material then why do you want to reduce the article even more by saying the architecture section was "overdone". Attempting to get material you don't agree with moved to another entry is called creating a POV fork. Do not remove referenced material that is important to the history of Bitlis. Do not remove material that describes the most important aspect of Bitlis today - its unique built form. Faking content by faking references is a serious offense - do it again and I will report you. There is no such content in Muratoff and Allen that says the "Armenian population of Bitlis has moved out with the retreating Russians in 1916". Zaman's Turkish propaganda is not admissable, and is not even connected to Bitlis - I suppose you can read a map, the alleged site is not in Bitlis. The NY times citation is a fake, there is no such article (all NY times reports for that period are available online, and nothing for Bitlis exists for that date). And whoever that "16th century Kurdish historian Sherefxan Bedlisi" was, he certainly was not a prince of the Roman empire! Meowy 02:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Every reference provided by myself can be found and traced including NYT ones, which is on line and available and where I found it. Your personal attacks are tiresome and unwarranted and against the rules. I repeat, do not remove references simply because you do not like them. Get some concesus before editing in propaganda. I have no clue who Bedlisi is either. War and battle details belong to another article and way out of proportion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hudavendigar (talk • contribs) 12:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- If the NY times article exists online then please give the url. I searched for it and could not find it. A known extemist nationalist Turkish newspaper making a claim that is entirely uninvestigated by any archeologists is not a valid source and, as I said earlier, it is not even in Bitlis - this is about Bilis town, not Bitlis region (which didn't even exist in WW1). The proper place for an account of Bitlis during WW1 is in the article about Bitlis, anywhere else amounts to a POV fork. Meowy 16:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- BTW, reading that http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Niles_and_Sutherland.pdf the initial feelings are one of amusement and astonishment that someone could come up with such breathtaking lies. Regarding Bitlis, the claim that every Muslim house was destroyed is so moronic that that statement alone should damn the entire document. Bitlis is full of old Muslim buildings to this day, and has thousands of intact pre-WW1 Muslim houses (I guess that might be why you wanted the section on the architecture curtailed - it disagrees with the lies in that report). Meowy 17:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC
- The info given in the article may not be correct, but Zaman is not an extremist nationalist newspaper. It is a moderate religious one, supportive of the AKP and is not particularly nationalist. And there was a Bitlis region (or rather a vilayet) in Ottoman times - though it was much bigger than the present-day province of Bitlis. Just wanted to clear those two points up. Ordtoy (talk) 17:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- The former point is perhaps a matter of opinion (regarding the Armenian genocide every mainstream Turkish newspaper appears to be extreme nationalist, for self-preservation reasons if nothing else). But I stand corrected on the latter point. The location mentioned in that Zaman report is a village to the west of Mutki (former Tadvan), i.e. it's in the Sasun region. I was thinking it was in Diyarbekir vilayet during WW1, but looking again, I see it must have been transfered to the Bitlis vilayet at some point (sometime in the 1890s maybe?) Meowy 18:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Turkish newspapers are nationalist (well almost all of them), but calling Zaman "extreme nationalist" is disingenuous. In any case, there is no reason to believe that such discoveries are necessarily being studied objectively. Ordtoy (talk) 21:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- The Zaman source, with its commentary from "Törehan Serdar, head of the Association of Victims of World War I Massacres by Armenians", is undoubtedly an attempt at POV pushing. Kansas Bear (talk) 03:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe so, but please read what I said carefully. My only comment was that Zaman is not an "extreme nationalist" newspaper. That is all that I wrote (indeed, you could argue that immediately calling Zaman "extreme nationalist" is in itself "POV pushing", no? At the very least it makes the person who writes it look like they do not know what they are talking about). If you have doubts about Zaman's sources, fine. Criticize those. Ordtoy (talk) 05:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Well anyway, regardless of its validity or veracity, since the location mentioned - Kavakbaşı village of Mutki - is not in the town of Bitlis it is off-topic for an entry on Bitlis town! BTW, Kavakbaşı is located in a valley that is now flooded by a dam. The valley is named "Khoit" or "Khut" on old maps, the river that runs thorough it is called the "Khoit dere". "Atlas of Armenia" says thet there were 41 Armenian or partly Armenian villages in the Khut district before the genocide - so there is a good chance the mass grave (if such it is) contains the remains of some of those Armenians. Meowy 19:57, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe so, but please read what I said carefully. My only comment was that Zaman is not an "extreme nationalist" newspaper. That is all that I wrote (indeed, you could argue that immediately calling Zaman "extreme nationalist" is in itself "POV pushing", no? At the very least it makes the person who writes it look like they do not know what they are talking about). If you have doubts about Zaman's sources, fine. Criticize those. Ordtoy (talk) 05:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- The Zaman source, with its commentary from "Törehan Serdar, head of the Association of Victims of World War I Massacres by Armenians", is undoubtedly an attempt at POV pushing. Kansas Bear (talk) 03:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Turkish newspapers are nationalist (well almost all of them), but calling Zaman "extreme nationalist" is disingenuous. In any case, there is no reason to believe that such discoveries are necessarily being studied objectively. Ordtoy (talk) 21:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- The former point is perhaps a matter of opinion (regarding the Armenian genocide every mainstream Turkish newspaper appears to be extreme nationalist, for self-preservation reasons if nothing else). But I stand corrected on the latter point. The location mentioned in that Zaman report is a village to the west of Mutki (former Tadvan), i.e. it's in the Sasun region. I was thinking it was in Diyarbekir vilayet during WW1, but looking again, I see it must have been transfered to the Bitlis vilayet at some point (sometime in the 1890s maybe?) Meowy 18:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- The info given in the article may not be correct, but Zaman is not an extremist nationalist newspaper. It is a moderate religious one, supportive of the AKP and is not particularly nationalist. And there was a Bitlis region (or rather a vilayet) in Ottoman times - though it was much bigger than the present-day province of Bitlis. Just wanted to clear those two points up. Ordtoy (talk) 17:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- BTW, reading that http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Niles_and_Sutherland.pdf the initial feelings are one of amusement and astonishment that someone could come up with such breathtaking lies. Regarding Bitlis, the claim that every Muslim house was destroyed is so moronic that that statement alone should damn the entire document. Bitlis is full of old Muslim buildings to this day, and has thousands of intact pre-WW1 Muslim houses (I guess that might be why you wanted the section on the architecture curtailed - it disagrees with the lies in that report). Meowy 17:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC
Calling every source not supporting a certain preferred version of history, especially one about which there is considerable disagreement on, is not very helpful to the cause, whatever it may be, and certainly does not make a good argument. Zaman, the English pages, is routinely cited in many major web news sites Yahoo) for example. Niles and Sutherland report is real and widley cited but probably not in the sources you gentlemen "prefer". It certainly contains exaggerations as far as I can tell, but so do many reports everyone else references, but more importantly, there is the general content and conclusion which is hard to misinterperet. They made some crude and quick observations and not very familiar with the area I am sure, and there were very few Armenians left there at the time to subvert the reports anyway as it was done before. Just to put the report in perspective, keep in mind that USA and American public was extremely anti-Turkish at the time, missionaries there fed the barbarian Muslim Turks killing poor defenseless Christians stories incessantly. Even the number of bodies found in that Zaman article seems to be an exaggeration to me, I doubt one could find 20K people of any kind in one area at the time. Still, such graves are discovered (I can provide more detail) more than a few times and almost always found to be full of Muslim victims.--Murat (talk) 01:21, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- I think
am removingmost of your latest addition should be removed. Saying that "the area, as part of the Caucasus Front, was invaded and occupied by Russian army between 1915 and 1916" is wrong and also duplicates existing material. Bitlis was attacked and captured in March 1916 as part of the Caucasus front - the article already said that. The Zaman article is not a valid source - the alleged location is not in Bitlis town, the allegation is made by an extremist Turkish nationalist organisation, and the location and allegation is completely uninvestigated. I've moved the content that uses that Niles and Sutherland report as a reference to the end of the section dealing with the WW1 period. I'm still asking about the NY times reference? Meowy 20:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Inistance by some on pov edits disrupts the flow of the article obviously, but that is what happens when there is no good faith. All references are verifiable, including the NYT article. Do not remove sections and references, it is aginst wiki rules. What you have called allegations are facts unfortunately, just read the references, more details of the Armenian atrocities, names of vitims etc., are in a link I had provided earlier but removed from here like many other contributions I had made.--Murat (talk) 03:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Then why don't you go ahead and verify them? Both the NYT and Zaman have online article archives, and there is no reason we should not have links directly to them. I mean, the title alone tells us almost nothing, and mass graves found in Bitlis hardly prove that the victims were Muslims. When dealing with such controversial matters, we would prefer something more definite, unless you do not want us to see these articles, for some reason. Providing three sources and no links is very suspicious. You have actually viewed these primary sources, right? The Myotis (talk) 03:49, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I am looking at the pdf of both articles as I write this. Your inabilty to reach some sources is not a concern for me. I do not have immediate acces to a majority of the references either. NYT and Zaman are as public as it gets. For your information, mass graves are not a rare occurance in that region. Occasionally they are found to be from Roman times, but mostly they are found to contain WWI victims, and almost always Muslims, which are easy to recognize from their clothing etc.. One can of course say the same thing about many pictures of dead people Armenian propagandists like to display: who knows if they are Muslims or not? I can lead you to other references and recent pictures, and I can place some disturbig pictures here also, but frankly I have feeling they will all be objectionable and I do not see the point of such pictures on these pages anyway. It seems to aim for hatred rather than establishing a fact.--Murat (talk) 04:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- I am very glad you found the PFDs. Now, give us the links. The Myotis (talk) 04:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- I doubt if he can. I've searched the NY times online archive for anything to do with Bitlis and couldn't find anything with the cited date. His Zaman reference is not a valid source for reasons I've explained earlier. And the 1919 report was mentioned in a neutral non-POV way "a report claims Russian troops and Armenian irregular forces committed attrocities against the area's Muslim population while holding Bitlis" ... until he removed it. Meowy 17:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Here is the Sutherland "source" and this is the NY times "source". Enjoy! Kansas Bear (talk) 17:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- So Murat's March 6th 1916 NY times source is actually about Russian troops taking, quote, "a terrible revenge on the Turkish troops" at Bitlis because, quote, "the Russian troops had witnessed at Van, Mush, and many other places, an appalling sight, the massacre: namely, by Turkish fanatics of tens of thousands of Armenian Christian men, women, and children". In other words, the reference says nothing to support Murat's "Armenian insurgents briefly held the town committing attrocities against the Muslim population" claim. Meowy 17:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Here is the Sutherland "source" and this is the NY times "source". Enjoy! Kansas Bear (talk) 17:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- The saddest and most amusing part was this; "The U.S. wasn't at war with Turkey, but America was certainly allied with the Allies. MARCH 6, 1916".... It's a pity whomever runs that site is so historically ignorant. From the World War I wiki-source; "....Wilson called for war on Germany, which the U.S. Congress declared on 6 April 1917." Kansas Bear (talk) 18:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Parishan is using the March 6 dispach by manipulating it. The dispatch was to the Morning Post, where it says the Russians punished the Turks (note, the third army as reported in the dispatch itself) for what they did to the Armenians. The original dispatch does not contain anything about Armenians having engaged at that date. (Parishan has some explainations to do). This is what the dispatch actually says: Terrible slaughter followed the capture of the Turkish positions at Bitlis. The Russian troops had witnessed at Van, Mush, and many other places, an appalling sight, the massacre: namely, by Turkish fanatics of tens of thousands of Armenian Christian men, women, and children. It was unlikely after such deeds that any quarter should be given. This colossal killing completed the destruction of the Turkish third army. Relevent note to the end of the dispatch, as the note refers to the Turkish third army, which one of his commenders (Vehib) himself punished participants of the Armenian massacres by his own initiative and against above order by slaughtering them.
Parishan is using the untrustworthy website tallarmeniantale, see this reference is from there March 6, and see by which reference it was followed by McCarthy's reference to Niles and Sutherland. It is unlikelly that this order of the references was an accident because Niles and Sutherland report wasn't even specifically about Bitlis. Parishan is readding the thing by claiming that reference is being removed. Under this guise about any worthless, irrelevent and plainly manipulated stuff could be added to the untrusthworthy so-called encyclopedia.
Problem being that Niles and Sutherland report is not considered as trusthworthy by any credible historian (and no McCarthy is not considered as credible). A review of the list of houses left provided by their reports before and after expose the report for what it was, rubbish. The report claims that in the city of Van from the 3,400 Muslim houses only 3 were left (they claim 1,170 Armenian houses were left). The claim that no Muslim houses were left in the Bitlis city, nothing of the 6,500 houses. (while they claim that out of the 1,500 Armenian houses 1,000 remained, while the highest proportion of mortality was recorded nowhere else than Bitlis). In the villages of Van, only 350 Muslim houses being left. And guess what, the Armenians even managed from the report to increase the number of their houses there, fantastic, etc.
Wait, this is not the most interesting part of this, the report also claims that because of some imaginary Armenian army the Ottoman Empire is ruined, and because of this fictif army, only ¼ of the former population and 1/8 of the buildings are remaining (this almighty Armenian army could not even secure a tiny region in Eastern Anatolia). This was a copy of the claimed levelled by the Turkish delegation after the war. Niles and Sutherland were sent there to study the situation of the Armenians in the Eastern Ottoman to report the relief they will be needing. The Turkish autorities found their ways by switching the role of the victims and agressors to get every penny out of this by claiming Armenians were in a good situation. Niles and Sutherland were in the entire process escorted by the nationalists. No wonder the report recieved no consideration at the Senate. Useless to say how the current politic of the time with Bristol's shadow, confirming the awaited Chestler concession was more than welcomed.
And the report by Zaman? I think it won't be wrong to say that we can't expect Parishan to have added this in good faith. The only reported mass burrials ever reported for Bitlis, were those for exemple of the massacre of 15,000 Armenian there in June from the accounts of the German missionaries as well as officials from Italy, Vatican as well as Greece. In fact, when the Russians had Bitlis under control they took pictures of mass graves from there. Several recorded butchers were from there including the Vali, Mustafa Abdul Halik who was interned by the British for this. The last reference doesn't even need to be answered.
Categories: