DENYING GENOCIDE
Daily Free Press , MA
April 24 2006
Before Adolf Hitler invaded Poland, he posed a famous question to
his generals: “Who today remembers the Armenians?”
Only a couple of decades after it occurred, the world had largely
forgotten about the Armenian genocide, a campaign of mass slaughter
carried out by the Turkish government. Hitler believed that the world
would similarly forget about the Jews he intended to exterminate.
Fortunately, the world has not forgotten about the Armenians
entirely. Here in Massachusetts, organizations are joining the state
legislature in marking today’s anniversary of the beginning of the
campaign against the Armenians in 1915.
But efforts to commemorate the atrocities of the past are hampered by
those who insist that they never happened. In this case, apologists
contend that more than a million Armenian deaths were not the result
of genocide, but rather additional casualties of World War I.
There’s pressure on our society to lend credence to these groups who
would deny reality. One high-profile lawsuit against the Massachusetts
Department of Education argues that teachers should be required to
include both sides of this debate in their curricula as a matter of
academic freedom.
In fact, there is no debate. All credible evidence from the academic
community indicates that the Armenian genocide did occur. But when a
few people try to stand up and deny that evidence, we act as if there
is a significant disagreement. A large part of the blame must fall
with the media, which believes it has a responsibility to present both
sides of the issue fairly. In most cases, this is the journalist’s
job. But when one side has such an obvious claim to the truth, the
media has a responsibility to call a spade a spade.
Sadly, this problem is not confined to genocide. Almost every
legitimate scientist acknowledges that global warming is a current
and growing threat, and that it’s the result of greenhouse gases
produced by human activity. But when some individuals — namely,
pseudo-experts funded by corporate interests — claim that the causes
of “climate change” are up for debate, we feel obligated to present
this alternate viewpoint. Similarly, proponents of Intelligent Design
suggest that ID deserves to be taught alongside evolution in science
classes as an “alternate theory.” ID may be valid as a philosophical
or religious belief, but there is absolutely no reason to treat it
as a legitimate alternative to accepted science.
Allowing a tiny minority of people to distort the facts creates the
semblance of debate. As a society, we must not give this minority any
more attention than it deserves. There comes a time when the need
for balance becomes less important than the need for truth. In the
case of the Armenian genocide, that time is now.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
