Even those who are not yet ready to burn bridges with Turkey are making implicit threats. Abraham Foxman, president of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), for example, is reported to have said that they "would not support the Armenian genocide bill as long as the Turkish-Israeli diplomatic links continue to exist."
Leave aside the fact that the alleged genocide never took place, and look at the internal inconsistency of these open or implied threats. Genocide is a crime against humanity. Denying a genocide claim, lobbying against that claim and supporting the antithesis of that claim necessitates a conviction that the alleged genocide never took place. The reverse is also true. An accusation of genocide necessitates a conviction that it took place. A deliberate, conscious false genocide accusation is a serious crime, and a deliberate denial of a genocide that is known to have happened is as serious as the first.
Now the threatening Jewish lobbies are trying to say either one of these:
1. We know that an Armenian genocide took place, but we supported the Turkish thesis because it best suited Israel's interests. But now, as Turkey has started to criticize our brethren in Israel about their policies in Palestine, we can abandon this "deliberate denial of a fact" position.
2. We know that an Armenian genocide never took place, and we supported the Turkish thesis accordingly, but now, we have decided to consciously support a "deliberate lie."
3. We know nothing about what happened in 1915, and we actually don't care. We use this issue as leverage for and against Turkey, whenever and whichever fits Israel's interests.
Which one should we believe?
Look at the confusion Jack Lang caused in France. Lang is a former minister of culture, a Socialist politician and a staunch supporter of the Armenian genocide bill that was passed by the French Parliament in 2001.
This Jack Lang appeared in a Web-broadcasted video record of an Oct. 11 debate with the Liberté pour l'histoire (Freedom for History) association, a group led by historian Pierre Nora.
Lang makes a mea culpa during his speech on the vote of French laws relating to the Armenian genocide. He claims that the parliamentarians voted for these laws not because of their allegiance to a nation or a history, but in order to garner votes. Lang labels the 2001 bill that recognized the Armenian genocide denial as a horrible mistake. Lang was then chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly. "So I am doubly guilty, if I may say so, because I was both the committee chairman and a member," he said.
After the revelation of his mea culpa statement, Lang reverted to his former public position. In a letter sent to nouvelobs.com, where the revelation first appeared, he said he still believes that "the recognition of the Armenian genocide by Turkey should be a condition for Turkey's accession to the EU" and that he "will continue to fight in order to bring about worldwide recognition of the genocide of the Armenian people, including in Turkey."
Lang legitimized his "guilty plea" by saying that he was speaking in the "context of a scientific debate among historians about the competence of parliaments to enact legislation on historical issues."
What shall we believe now? A supporter of the genocide claim says that in a political context he supports the claim to the point of pledging a lifelong struggle for its recognition, and in a scientific context he feels guilty doing so!
April is looming -- the Armenian diaspora has already started pressuring American politicians over the genocide resolution so that it will be brought before the House. With what motives will American politicians vote: political ones or scientific ones?
Come on! Just support the truth for the sake of truthfulness! You may well be cheated by fake historical material fabricated by the Armenian diaspora and believe in the truthfulness of a lie. But being cheated by others is better than deliberate hypocrisy.
You have the option to give an ear to the Turkish thesis, though.
