Author: Tatoyan Vazgen

ARMENIAN CHURCH IN NORTHERN CYPRUS TRANSFORMED INTO CAFE

YEREVAN, MAY 10. ARMINFO. An Armenian church in Northern Cyprus has
been transformed into a cafe. The press-service of the Armenian
Foreign Ministry informs ARMINFO that the historical monastery
St.Makar in the mountainous region of Kirena, in the zone of the
Turkish occupation, has suffered this fate.

The source reports that the issue dated April 17 of the Turkish
newspaper “Yeniduzen” published in Northern Cyprus says that the
current owner of the monastery transformed into the cafe is a certain
Dervish Sonmezler intends to transform it into a hotel. The monastery
founded by Copts in the 4th century was later transferred to Armenians
and has been one of the Armenian sacred places for many centuries.

Being under the jurisdiction of the Great House of Cilicia in
Antilias, St.Makaravank maintained close ties with Etchmiadzin. Before
the Turkish occupation of the Northern part of Cyprus, the church was
one of the sights of the Cyprian Armenians. At present, it is left and
inaccessible for the Christian believers. Manuscripts and icons were
robbed and sold, and gross infringement of the International Law was
prevented only due to the combined efforts of the Cyprian authorities,
the Armenian Church and international structures, the source reports.

Washington Jewish Week, MD
May 5 2005

Starting a journey Iranians join Jews, Christians for interfaith
dialogue

by Eric Fingerhut
Staff Writer

A delegation of Iranian religious leaders strongly endorsed
interfaith dialogue last week. Less clear was whether such dialogue
might signal a change in the Islamic republic’s attitudes toward the
United States and Israel.

The nine-man Iranian group — Shiite clerics and academics, an
Armenian archbishop and the only Jewish member of the county’s
parliament — came to the area for an “Abrahamic” dialogue with
American Christians, Jews and Muslims.

Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law hosted the event,
reciprocating the visit of an American delegation to Iran in 2003.

During a public discussion and dinner, the Iranian Muslims emphasized
the importance of studying comparative religions. Ayatollah Mostafa
Mohaghegh Damad, dean of Tehran’s Shahid Beheshti University and head
of the Comprehensive Encyclopedia of Islam, said true dialogue can
only occur when “nobody wants to convert anyone else to their
religion” and everyone can talk about his or her own way to God.

The Jewish and Catholic representatives noted that minorities are
treated well in Iran, receiving government funds to help run their
schools and other projects.

Issues such as Iran’s hostility toward Israel and the United States
did not come up, although the program came after more than three days
of meetings.

Delegates had participated in a two-day seminar on “Islam and the
Political Order” hosted by the law school that featured sessions on
freedom and democracy, as well as a Temple University professor and
rabbi who spoke about Maimonides.

Delegation member Marshall Breger, a longtime Jewish community
activist and professor of law at the Columbus School of Law, called
dialogue a gradual process.

“You start a journey at the beginning,” he said. “It’s important for
Iranians and Jews to understand the nature and character of their
religious faith. I think that’s a positive in itself [and] can lead
to broader understanding.”

For instance, he cited a program last Friday on “Modesty in the
Abrahamic Religions” with women representing all three faiths. The
Iranians, he said, may not have realized that Islam and Judaism would
have such a “common attitude” on that issue.

This is not Breger’s first experience with Iran. Three years ago, he
was invited to that country to give lectures at eight Iranian
universities about the U.S. Constitution.

“The constitution got standing ovations everywhere,” he recalled.

Then in 2003, he was asked to be part of an “Abrahamic delegation” to
Iran led by Washington’s Cardinal Theodore McCarrick.

“It was an extraordinary trip. We met with the highest officials in
the country because of the cardinal,” Breger said, recalling a
meeting the group had with the leader of the Iranian parliament.

When the legislator asked the cardinal to begin the gathering with a
prayer, McCarrick asked a Jewish member of the delegation, Rabbi Jack
Bemporad, to do the honors.

The trip “was premised on the view that if we engaged Iranians as
religious people … we could have honest conversations that would be
difficult otherwise,” Breger said. “In my view, if people are able to
talk about religious tradition, this means they [won’t] see the other
party as a caricature,” and that can lead to “important conversations
in a wide variety of areas.”

Most of the Iranian delegates were religious leaders, but Breger
explained that with Islam holding such sway in Iran, such clerics are
influential in government policymaking.

Among the members of the Iranian delegation were Ayatollah Mahmud
Mohammadi Araghi, president of Iran’s Organization of Culture and
Islamic Relations and an active member of the Supreme Council of
Cultural Revolution; Reza Davari-Ardikani, president of the Academy
of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran; and Gholam Reza Avani, a
philosophy professor at Shahid Behesti University and director of the
Iranian Research Institute of Philosophy.

Breger also noted that the Washington visit gave the Iranians an
opportunity to meet United States Muslims, which “allowed them to see
the extent to which Islam is recognized in America.”

Some of those who attended last week’s discussion, though, were
skeptical that the dialogue would lead to substantial achievements.

Ephraim Isaac, director of the Princeton, N.J.-based Institute of
Semitic Studies, said talking was nice, but “where is the action?”

“[They are] very nice people of good will, but it’s not enough to
have good will,” he said, hoping that such religious discussions
could lead to more concrete achievements.

Marc Gopin — director of the Center for World Religions, Diplomacy
and Conflict Resolution at George Mason University — conceded that
the public program avoided delving into important issues.

Still, he thought the visit was a positive step, and said he was
confident Breger and other members of the delegation had frank
exchanges behind closed doors.

Last week’s program was considered sensitive by some in attendance,
who did not want their organizations identified as participants in a
dialogue with Iranians.

As for whether Iran would be willing to soften its opposition to the
existence of Israel, Ayatollah Damad told WJW that his government
“cannot recognize” the Jewish state because “Israel has occupied the
land of Muslims.”

But if the Palestinians were to agree on a “contract” with Israel,
then Iran could go along.

Mouris Motamed, the only Jewish member of the Iranian Parliament,
said that the Iranian government made a distinction between Jews and
Zionists.

“They think Zionists are not real Jews,” said Motamed, who discussed
his government’s position on the issue, but declined to comment on
his own feelings about Israel other than his hope for peace in the
Middle East.

He also claimed that Iran “doesn’t support terrorists because Iran
has … been damaged by terrorism.”

Motamed said Iran’s 25,000 person-Jewish community was well-treated
in the Islamic republic. It has its own schools, newspaper and
synagogues, and faces no discrimination, he said.

“Everthing is OK,” he said.

Breger’s impressions during his 2003 trip to Iran were similar —
that the Jewish community, while facing some social discrimination in
a Muslim-dominated country, was generally free of legal
discrimination at this time.

During his Constitution lectures, he noted, the government provided
him kosher food daily. He also pointed out that just last month,
Motamed, speaking during a session of parliament, had criticized an
anti-Jewish television show on Iranian television and was backed up
by the speaker of the parliament.

Breger did cite problems. There is also “tremendous support for the
Palestinian cause,” from a huge sign at the airport calling for
“justice” for the Palestinians to a park bench that had a sign
proclaiming “Down with Zionists.”

But Breger said a religious dialogue could help to change those
attitudes.

“This is a positive first step,” said Breger. “It encourages viewing
other religions and other people with dignity. … It’s foolish to
say dialogue will get rid of … problems,” but it can “change the
atmosphere.”

Iranian-built wind power plants to become operational in Armenia soon

Mehr News, Iran
April 3 2005

TEHRAN, May 3 (MNA) – Wind power plants built and installed by Iranian
specialists in Armenia’s soil will become operational by the end of
June, this year.

Being first of their kind built in the transcaucasian state, the
four power plants have cost the country about 3.5 million dollars,
the report noted.

Also, Iran will soon start another electricity project in Azerbaijan
Republic which consists of the installation of 315 kilometers of
transmission lines of power along with the related power stations
in the Caspian Sea littoral state, the project is estimated to cost
about 75 million dollars.

Iran is currently exporting electricity and industrial electricity
equipments to Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Pakistan,
Afghanistan and Iraq. Economic cooperation between Iran and some of the
countries in the region are carried out on the basis of barter trade.

Defixiones: Orders from the Dead brings audience to their feet
by DANIEL ARIARATNAM

The Record (Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario, Canada)
May 2, 2005 Monday Final Edition

“We should guard our dead and their power, lest by some hour our
opponents disinter them and take them away.”

Those were the opening words of a morbidly toned theatrical spectacle
that culminated in a standing ovation.

Saturday night’s Defixiones: Orders from the Dead concert at Zion
Church saw singer Diamanda Galas engulf the sold out audience with
her death obsessed avant-guarde art.

Galas is known for having one of the most unique voices in new
music. It is neither the voice of a virtuoso pop singer nor that
of a conservatory trained opera singer. It is the expression of
a relentlessly personal vision: a vocalization of solitary inner
expression that forces the audience to confront the music and message.

The tone for the show was set in the opening numbers and from then
on there was virtually no dramatic or musical variance.

Instead, every last drop of life was squeezed from the static death
tone. This mono-dramatic aura completely drove home and blanketed
the audience in the ambience and message: the injustice and human
casualties suffered through the Armenian, Assyrian and Anatolian
Greek genocides.

Musically, the night consisted of several numbers blended together
in a flowing structure that created a cohesive singular whole. The
performance was one long composition consisting of a virtuoso voice
accompanied by tape and occasionally live piano.

Proving less is more, Galas has created a highly theatrical show
by completely stripping down production elements. The music on tape
consisted of ambient soundscape accompaniments, chanting and singing
in exotic languages and repetitive percussive industrial music loops.
The arrangements were neither lush nor cluttered, but orchestrated
to allow the few sonic elements to receive undivided attention.

The stripped down minimal nature also carried over to the drama.

The show was blocked to allow Galas to take only four positions:
stage right, stage left, at the piano and front stage centre. All
her actions, which included walking between the four positions and
putting on sunglasses, were executed to heighten the tempo of the mood:
a grave atmospheric largo.

As a performer, Galas has a carefully crafted presence.

Costumed in a black dress and a black hooded cape, the singer
symbolized a physical manifestation of death. Most dramatic of all,
was when she soloed from centre stage, allowing only her face to be
lit by a single light shone from directly overhead.

Of visual interest was the effective setting of the church sanctuary,
which provided a built in set highlighting Jesus and Mary iconed
stain glass windows and an omnipresent huge wooden cross.

London Free Press, Ontario, Canada
April 26 2005

Armenians mark anniversary of mass killings of ancestors

YEREVAN, ARMENIA — Hundreds of thousands of Armenians marked the
90th anniversary of the mass killings of Armenians in the Ottoman
Empire, vowing to press their case to have the killings recognized by
Turkey and the world as genocide. Waving flags and carrying flowers,
people streamed through the Armenian capital and marched up to a
massive hilltop granite memorial to hear speeches and prayers.
Weeping mourners filed into the circular block memorial, laying
carnations on a flat surface surrounding a burning flame.

The country observed a minute of silence and Yerevan residents were
to place candles on window sills in memory of the victims.

Ottoman authorities began rounding up intellectuals, diplomats and
other influential Armenians in Istanbul on April 24, 1915, as
violence and unrest grew, particularly in the eastern parts of the
country.

Armenia says up to 1.5 million Armenians died or were killed over
several years as part of a campaign to force them out of eastern
Turkey.

Turkey acknowledges large numbers of Armenians died, but says the
figure is inflated and the deaths occurred in civil unrest during the
collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

ARMENIAN GENOCIDE 90

Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
25 April 05

There are dates in the history of every nation which have the power of
uniting, and may decide a nation’s fate decades and centuries
ahead. Wherever the Armenians live, in Armenia, Artsakh, Russia, the
United States, France, Lebanon, and any other part of the world, they
have a common tragic date. It is the day of commemoration of the
victims of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire. Every year on
this day the Armenian families spread all over the world light a
candle in the memory of the innocent victims. Those who are
well-acquainted with the Armenian history will never ask the question
why so many Armenians live outside their historical homeland. History
replied to this question over 90 years ago. However, the country which
perpetrated the first monstrous genocide in the 20th century and which
is at present trumpeting its commitment to the European and universal
values, unfortunately, has not repented of its crime yet. Moreover,
the same country is brazenly making attempts at persuading the
international community to withdraw the issue of international
recognition of the Armenian Genocide. All the countries which
recognized the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire had to face the
counteraction of official Ankara. Thereby, those countries have had
the opportunity to get convinced what values dominate in the Turkish
society. These values maintain that all the countries which did their
duty before the mankind are the enemies of the Turkish nation.
Hysteria, blackmail, threats to break all kinds of relationships: here
is the non-complete set of tools for imposing political pressure on
those who have recognized or are going to recognize the Armenian
Genocide. Unfortunately, the efforts of Ankara are often
successful. There are politicians, including those from the West, who
would rather announce that the UN Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted in 1948 has no
retrospective power and, therefore, cannot be applied to the tragic
events in West Armenia 90 years ago than break relationships with
modern Turkey. The standpoint of such politicians can be considered to
be impudence. Such a standpoint is not only a typical example of
political hypocrisy but also provides ground for other similar crimes,
and may be by the same country which has already perpetrated genocide
once. What is the blockade of transport communication with Armenia by
Turkey if not the consequence of leaving the Armenian Genocide
unpunished? However, it is more surprising that the same country
which has been objecting to the call of the civilized world to lift
the blockade of Armenia and set up diplomatic relationships with
Armenia pretends to the role of mediator in the Karabakh conflict not
hesitating in defending the standpoint of Azerbaijan. This peculiar
perception of the mediating mission by Turkey starts from its attitude
towards the issue of recognition of the Genocide. And isn’t the
craving of the Azerbaijani authorities to give a special role to
Turkey in the resolution of the Karabakh issue determined by the same
circumstance? No other definition but permanent policy of genocide can
characterize the attitude of the Azerbaijani authorities towards the
Armenian population of this republic since its foundation. The vivid
proof to this is the history of the former Autonomous Region of
Nagorno Karabakh. In the years of existence of NKAR the Baku
authorities attempted to affect the demographic picture in the region
in favour of the Azerbaijani population, intending to dissolve the
Armenian sovereignty. To fulfill the task the Azerbaijani government
used such methods as discrimination against the Armenians in the
social, economic and cultural spheres, distortion of the Armenian
history, prohibition of any economic and cultural relationships
between Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia, destruction of Armeniancultural
monuments and churches, formation of the image of the Armenian as the
historical and archenemy of the Azerbaijani and other Turkic
peoples. The Azerbaijani rulers implemented an identical policy
against once the Armenian majority of the sovereign republic of
Nakhijevan as a result of which no single Armenian had been left there
by the mid-twentieth century. I think we must duly present the fate of
the Armenians of Nakhijevan to the international community as a vivid
example of what would await Nagorno Karabakh if it remained within
Azerbaijan. All the aforementioned methods of the policy of
discrimination implemented by the authorities of Baku provided ground
for perpetration of another genocide of the Armenians, this time in
Azerbaijan; the political forces of Azerbaijan do not even hide that
they regard the `Armenian’ policy of Ottoman and present day Turkey as
exemplary. The Baku authorities were the worthy students of their
teachers. The extermination and deportation of the Armenian population
from the cities of Sumgait, Baku and Kirovabad, Shamkhor, Khanlar,
Shamakhi and other regions of Azerbaijan because of their nationality,
the unexpected siege of NKR, the everyday bombing of Stepanakert
intended to exterminate the peaceful population, the slaughter of
women, children and elderly people in the village of Maragha, as well
as the lasting blockade of Nagorno Karabakh andother crimes committed
against the Armenians by the authorities of Baku perfectlysuit the
definition of genocide. In regard with crimes against humanity dubious
standards, juggling of terms, distortion of problems and manipulation
with historical facts are unacceptable. Crimes against humanity should
be condemned by the international community, and the instigators and
perpetrators should be punished. The international community cannot
have an alternative to this attitude towards genocide. Otherwise, the
fact of genocide is used for fulfilling their geopolitical,
geo-economic, regional, home political and other interests. And since
countries pursue various, often quite contradicting interests, it
often happens so that in a certain period of time a certain government
prefers to forget the fact of genocide and even indirectly justify
it. At present the Azerbaijani government behaves exactly this way,
for it imagines the â=80=9Cfair’ resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict to be the banishment of the entire native Armenian population
from Artsakh. For this purpose Baku conducts a policy of provoking the
world and regional powers to impose political and economic and even
military pressure on Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. At the same time,
the propaganda machine of Azerbaijan has launched an unprecedented
campaignof distortion of historical facts to the point of presenting
Armenians to the international community as a nation which perpetrated
genocide of Azerbaijanis. Unfortunately, the international community
does not criticize this policy of Baku, whereas it contains the danger
of instilling perpetual hatred in the present and future generations
of the Azerbaijani community against the entire Armenian nation. The
consequences of similar policies are destructive for the establishment
of an atmosphere of confidence between the Azerbaijani and Armenian
people destined to be neighbours. The consequence of this aggressive
policywas the cruel murder of the Armenian officer by his Azerbaijani
colleague in Budapest, which was a shock for the civilized world. The
reaction of the Azerbaijani society to this crime, a society which
accepted the murderer asa national hero, revealed the reprehensible
consequences of the anti-Armenian policy of Baku authorities to the
world. Therefore, as long as there are people in the Azerbaijani
authorities who are directly involved in instigating massacres of
ethnic Armenians both in Azerbaijan and Nagorno Karabakh and who
continue to instill hatred in the Azerbaijani society towards the
Armenian nation, it will be very difficult for us to believe in the
mutually acceptable and civilized resolution of the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict, peaceful coexistence and mutually favourable cooperation of
our peoples and countries in the future. Where isthe way out? What
lesson did we draw from the tragic events that took place 90 years ago
and quite recently? How can we confront the aggressive intentionsof
our neighbours and prevent the past from repeating? Unfortunately, the
modern practice of international relationships has not yet worked out
effective methods of prevention or at least stopping of extermination
of people because of their ethnic, racial and religious
characteristics. The national liberation movement in Artsakh clearly
indicated that in the modern world the most effective way of
confronting threats of genocide is not the endless addresses to
international organizations and expectation for their intervention,
but self-organization of the society ready for armed defence to live
in their land and defend their rights given by God. The statehood in
Karabakh was the superior form of self-organization of the people of
Artsakh which managed to solve the fatal problem of elimination of
external military pressure threatening the security of the people of
Nagorno Karabakh with the support of all the Armenians. Independent,
democratic and strong Armenia, independent, democratic and strong
Republic of Nagorno Karabakh: here are the chief guarantees for the
security of our nation. The Turkish state which denies its offence
must draw a lesson from its actions. It is first of all useful for
Turkey and its people. Turkey which strives for becoming member of the
European Union is facing the deciding choice of the further way of
development of the country and society. In this context the attitude
of Turkey towards the Armenian Genocide is a test on Turkish
democracy, a sort of litmus test indicating the degree to which the
countryis fit to have a place in the union of the European
countries. It is not a simple choice. It is inevitable too. This
choice will decide the further role of Turkey in the region, including
South Caucasus, in the formation of the geopolitical and geo-economic
architecture. One thing is clear: in the South Caucasian region, and
in the sphere of resolution of conflicts, particularly the Karabakh
conflict, the performance of the geopolitical function to which Turkey
pretends, requires from Turkey a high level of political maturity, as
well as the ability of reconsidering conceptually its own attitude
towards the factors which determine the attitude of the nations of the
region towards the region and the Turkish state. Today the
international community and first of all Turkey, has to answer the
following question: what is more legitimate and acceptable from the
standpoint of civilization, international law, international stability
and security, the policy of denying the Armenian Genocide which allows
perpetuating international crime or the search for opportunities for
repentance and relief of the consequences of the genocide displaying
historical and political courage? No Turkish government that succeeds
another can evade responsibility lying more and more heavily on the
shoulders of the Turkish state. Ladies and gentlemen, In two days
Armenians all over the world, civilized humanity will pay homage to
the victims of the genocide of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey. No matter
how many years will pass, we will always live with pain in our
hearts. The pain will go on with our nations throughout history. Much
time may pass until our pain becomes the pain of humanity. Sooner or
later this time will come. It is our duty, the duty of progressive
mankind to make this time come sooner. April 24 will forever remind
the generations that will come that there can be no statute of
limitations for crimes against humanity.

AA.
25-04-2005

Talk by Mr. Bernard Ohanian,
Former Deputy Editor, National Geographic Magazine
Date: April 26, 2005 from 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm EDT
Location: International Affairs Bldg, Morningside Campus

“From the Land of the Stalking Death to the Rebirth of Armenia: The
National Geographic’s Coverage of Armenia and Other Current Events.” A
Talk to Commemorate the 90th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. ()

Voice of America
April 24 2005

Armenia Rejects Proposal From Turkey To Join Study Of WWI Events

WASHINGTON – Last month, Turkey made an unprecedented gesture by
offering its neighbor Armenia to conduct a joint study of the
historic events that took place during World War One in Anatolia, the
Asian part of Turkey. Armenia rejected the proposal.

Peter Balakian, author of several books on Armenian history, says
ample research has already been done. He notes that many studies,
including one by the International Association of Genocide Scholars,
concluded that mass killings and deportations of Armenians from
Anatolia under the direction of the Ottoman government amount to
genocide.

“I think there is a growth in recognition of the Armenian genocide
worldwide – the Canadian government last year, the French government
in 2000, the Swiss government last year, the Danish Parliament, the
Italian Parliament the Vatican and many countries in Latin America
and the Middle East as well. It is the result of education, of the
fact that scholars have done increasingly brilliant work over the
last couple of decades, writing objective, detached histories of the
Armenian genocide.”

According to Armenians, on April 24, 1915, the government headed by
the Young Turks , the ruling political party of the Ottoman Empire,
began to deport and massacre its Armenian Christian minority
population, approximately 2.5 million people. Turkey denies that
there was a planned campaign to eliminate Armenians from Anatolia.
It says that both sides suffered losses in the war. Atrocities may
have occurred, they say, but only at the hands of rogue groups or
individuals, Turkish as well as Armenian. Turkey says no more than
300-thousand Armenians perished in the clashes.

Turkish-born Muge Gocek, a historical sociologist at the University
of Michigan, says ordinary Turks have denied the massacres for many
years because they haven’t had access to their historic documents.

“Turkish society knows very little about what happened in its own
past for two reasons, says Professor Gocek. “One is because of the
alphabet reform that happened in Turkey in 1928, where the Arabic
script was abandoned and Latin script was adopted. Turks cannot read
their own past historical documents. And the second is that things
from the past were selectively translated and therefore very little
scholarly information has been made available to them about the
Armenian question.”

But after World War One, says professor Gocek, there was an
international condemnation of the Turkish atrocities and the allies
conducted trials against the perpetrators.

“They had more than a thousand trials held, but only a couple of
people were punished. The rest were not at all punished for these
crimes because a lot of them joined the nationalist movement, the war
of independence. And as such they became important people who went on
to found the Turkish Republic,” says Professor Gocek.

In the 1920’s, Turkish reformist leader Kemal Ataturk established a
strong and independent Turkey, which was able to use its political
clout to squelch Armenian claims for reparations and return of their
land. Turkey continued to do so later as a strategic US ally and a
member of NATO. But with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the
government of the newly independent Armenia began a worldwide effort
to gain international condemnation of the World War One massacres as
genocide. Subsequent mass killings of civilians in Bosnia, Kosovo,
Rwanda and Sudan focused international attention on such crimes. And
scholars say, this has renewed interest in the Armenian question
worldwide and among many in Turkey.

Some groups are interested in fostering reconciliation between
Armenia and Turkey. David Phillips, a fellow at the Council on
Foreign Relations in New York, says pre-conditions to reconciliation
would be counterproductive.

“The idea that exists in some ultra-nationalist circles in Armenia
that before you even talk to Turks, they have to admit the genocide,
pay the reparations and give back territory is completely a
non-starter. Ultranationalists in Turkey also oppose any movement on
Armenian issues and try to link that with the restoration of
so-called occupied territories in Azerbaijan.”

David Phillips says both countries need to be moderate while acting
in their national interests. And, he adds, Turkey and Armenia would
benefit from opening their common border for travel and trade. That,
many analysts agree, would be the quickest road to reconciliation.

US Fed News
April 22, 2005 Friday 5:05 AM EST

REP. HONDA ISSUES STATEMENT ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

US Fed News

WASHINGTON

Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif. (15th CD), issued the following statement:

Statement of Rep. Mike Honda on the Armenian Genocide

April 24th 2005 marks a solemn occasion in world history: the 90th
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. From 1915 to 1923, the
Christian Armenian population endured a policy of systemic killing
implemented by the then-Ottoman and early Turkish Empires, resulting
in the ethnic slaughter of one and a half million Armenians.

Since that time, descendants of Armenian immigrants have proudly
clung to their identity, prospering in communities throughout the
world. Here in the United States, we are especially fortunate to have
a vibrant Armenian community that has greatly enriched American civic
life.

It is vital that we remember this dark period in history. Losing the
memory of this tragic event would only perpetuate the injustice. For
too long, the Armenian Genocide, the first genocide of the 20th
Century, has been denied the recognition that it properly deserves.
As human beings, we all have a responsibility to keep events such as
the Armenian Genocide at the forefront of our collective historical
memory. We cannot begin to overcome the challenges of the future
until we acknowledge our past mistakes.

It is perhaps the tragedy of the 20th Century that a cataclysmic
occurrence such as the Armenian Genocide has to share a place in our
memory with other horrific events such as the wartime atrocities
perpetuated during WWII, the ethnic cleansings in Cambodia and
Bosnia, and the Rwandan genocide. I truly believe we must take the
time and make the effort to find reconciliation between the
perpetrator and victims of these events.

Currently, we are confronted by a genocide unfolding in Sudan, where
tens of thousands die every month; we must not allow ourselves to
turn a blind eye. Recognizing the Armenian Genocide will help heal
the wounds humanity has suffered in the past century. By
acknowledging the horrors of our past and working to protect our
future, we take one step closer to the goal of “never again.”

Los Angeles Daily News, CA
April 23 2005

Family keeping news of friends’ deaths from crash survivor

By Josh Kleinbaum, Staff Writer

If visitors are wearing black when they drop by Natalie Darmedjian’s
hospital room, her family gives them colorful shirts and jackets to
wear instead.
Nobody wants Darmedjian to know that Araksia Muradian and Ani
Muradyan, her two best friends, are dead.

Muradian, 17, and Muradyan, 16, were killed and Darmedjian was
critically injured Monday night when Muradian’s 2001 Toyota Avalon
slammed into a pole on Coldwater Canyon Avenue. The dead girls were
cousins.

Darmedjian, sitting in the back seat, suffered broken bones in her
legs, hip and chin. And her family doesn’t want the trauma of her
friends’ deaths to hamper recovery at Providence Holy Cross Medical
Center.

“First, we started off by telling her that one has a broken hand and
the other has a broken leg,” said Ahgavni Abdallah, Darmedjian’s
cousin. “Now, we’ve increased the severity. Her mom tells her,
‘They’re not doing too good. We don’t know if they’ll make it.”‘

The three girls, friends since middle school, were on their way home
from their part-time jobs at a telemarketing firm at the time of the
crash, Abdallah said.

Abdallah said Darmedjian told her family the Avalon was involved in a
chase with another car.

“From what Natalie told us, a black car was in front of them with
Armenian (window) flags, and all of them wanted to see who was in
there,” Abdallah said. “It seems like it was a chase. We don’t know
who was provoking who.”

But police say Muradian was speeding in the left-turn lane on
Coldwater Canyon Drive, near Oxnard Street, trying to pass two cars,
when she lost control and slammed into a pole. They estimate she was
going 70 mph in the 35 mph zone.

“All of the witnesses that have been identified provided the same
information,” police Detective T. Wolfe said. “They were driving way
too fast. No other cars were involved, and there was no apparent
reason why they were driving too fast.”

Darmedjian’s family urged others to learn from the tragedy.

“At that age, nobody realizes how important your life is, and how
much driving fast can end that,” Abdallah said. “Speed, it’s the
enemy.”