Myths and facts about Jerusalem and Temple Mount

[Saigon]

Maryland -

It's safe to assume everyone on this board is FAR more familiar with the work of everyones favourite Holocaust-denier than you are.

In fact - I bet you didn't even know he was a Holocaust denier, did you?!

He is actually a very good historian - though somewhat one-eyed. I have read a couple of his books, and enjoyed them, but he is not a one-stop shop. And particularly not for someone such as yourself who comes into this with extremely little knowledge of the area and history.

 

[Saigon]

Maryland -

I think there now around 10 topics you are dodging, points you are refusing to acknowledge, and questions you are refusing to address.

I have compiled them all, and will post them for you again tomorrow.

 

[Roudy]

Just like the Arabs changed the name of Judeah and Samaria after 3000 years to "West Bank". Is it still Judeah and Samaria or not?

Yes, of course it is. To Israelis.

You call my country 'Finland'. I don't call it that.

To Israelis? LOL. For 3000 years it's been called Judeah and then some Arab savages decided to change it to West Bank?

Just like how you associate the name given to the land of the Phlistines as the same Arab Palestine which is a 20th century invention. Try to be just a little intellectually honest and not squirm like a worm for once. We are talking about Arab Palestinians, and their ties to the land. Bringing up whether the word Palestine existed in ancient times without showing how it relates to today's Arab Palestinians is useless and deceptive.

 

[Saigon]

To Israelis? LOL. For 3000 years it's been called Judeah and then some Arab savages decided to change it to West Bank?

Just like how you associate the name given to the land of the Phlistines as the same Arab Palestine which is a 20th century invention. Try to be just a little intellectually honest and not squirm like a worm for once. We are talking about Arab Palestinians, and their ties to the land. Bringing up whether the word Palestine existed in ancient times without showing how it relates to today's Arab Palestinians is useless and deceptive.

Roudy -

I don't dodge. I am not you. Ask me any question, and I'll answer it. Always.

Firstly - I am not sure why you find this difficult to understand, but most countries and regions have multiple names in multiple languages. I say 'Suomi', you say 'Finland'. When I lived in Israel I used the terms 'Judea & Samaria'. In the west and in English I use 'West Bank'. In other languages, other terms exist. There is no reason for Israeli's to stop using the term 'Judea' if they wish, nor for Palestinians to use 'West Bank' if they wish.

As I have explained probably 10 - 20 times now, I don't consider modern Palestinians closely linked to the Philistines, except via the etymology of the name, but not genetically.

We all know Palestinian links to the land in towns like Jericho dates back 3,000 years and more - to as far back as people lived on that land. It has little to do with the Philistines.

I have absolutely no idea whatsoever why the two of you twist and turn and dodge and lie to avoid the most basic schoolboy facts of history - like denying that the word 'Palestine' appeared on maps for 600 years, or that the League of Nations named the mandates - not the British.

The two of you look around ten years old in a bed wetting contest when you do that stuff.

 

[ima]

Maryland -

I'll try again. These are the comments you seem to be dodging:

Palestine was patently NOT the "European" name for Israel, because Israel appeared on no maps at the time.

Much better than a silly map...

Louve, Paris: The Mesha Stele: Israel [ca. 830 BCE]

The stele of King Mesha constitutes one of the most important direct accounts of the history of the world that is related in the Bible. The inscription pays tribute to the sovereign, celebrating his great building works and victories over the kingdom of Israel during the reign of Ahab, son of Omri. The mention of "Israel" is its earliest known written occurence.
The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris

Mesha Stele Inscription...

I am Mesha, son of Chemosh, the king of Moab. My father reigned over Moab for thirty years, and I reigned after my father. And I made this high-place for Chemosh [national god] in Qarcho.because he has delivered me from all kings, and because he has made me triumph over all my adversaries.

As for Omri, King of Israel, he humbled Moab for many years, for Chermosh was angry at his land. In my time he spoke, but I have triumphed over him and over his house, while Israel hath perished for ever!

Harvard University Semitic Museum: The Mesha Stele--Israel

Mesha ruled Moab, east of the Dead Sea, during the ninth century BCE. Mesha recounts his principal achievements as king. The most important of these was his recovery from Israel of Moabite lands north of the Arnon River.

There is also a measure of bombast: Mesha proclaims that "Israel perished utterly forever," which certainly was not the case, though in one town alone he says he slaughtered seven thousand Israelite "men, boys, women, girls and concubines" in devotion to Ashtar-Chemosh.

Omri, king of Israel, who ruled a generation before Mesha, is mentioned several times. The earliest known reference to Yahweh [Hebrew God] in a Semitic inscription is also to be found here. At the extant bottom of the stela, Mesha describes an encounter with the House of David, that is, Judah. Although the passage is badly broken, it is clear that Mesha takes credit for a victory over the House of David in the territory south of the Arnon. The words representing king of Israel, Yahweh and House of [Da]vid are highlighted at the top, middle and bottom of the stela respectively.
Mesha of Moab § Semitic Museum

And you know this is all fact and not more wishful thinking because...?

 

[Maryland]

To Israelis? LOL. For 3000 years it's been called Judeah and then some Arab savages decided to change it to West Bank?

Just like how you associate the name given to the land of the Phlistines as the same Arab Palestine which is a 20th century invention. Try to be just a little intellectually honest and not squirm like a worm for once. We are talking about Arab Palestinians, and their ties to the land. Bringing up whether the word Palestine existed in ancient times without showing how it relates to today's Arab Palestinians is useless and deceptive.

Roudy -

I don't dodge. I am not you. Ask me any question, and I'll answer it. Always.

Firstly - I am not sure why you find this difficult to understand, but most countries and regions have multiple names in multiple languages. I say 'Suomi', you say 'Finland'. When I lived in Israel I used the terms 'Judea & Samaria'. In the west and in English I use 'West Bank'. In other languages, other terms exist. There is no reason for Israeli's to stop using the term 'Judea' if they wish, nor for Palestinians to use 'West Bank' if they wish.

As I have explained probably 10 - 20 times now, I don't consider modern Palestinians closely linked to the Philistines, except via the etymology of the name, but not genetically.

We all know Palestinian links to the land in towns like Jericho dates back 3,000 years and more - to as far back as people lived on that land. It has little to do with the Philistines.

I have absolutely no idea whatsoever why the two of you twist and turn and dodge and lie to avoid the most basic schoolboy facts of history - like denying that the word 'Palestine' appeared on maps for 600 years, or that the League of Nations named the mandates - not the British.

The two of you look around ten years old in a bed wetting contest when you do that stuff.

Eminent Middle East Historian Bernard Lewis, Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University, Author, "The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2000 Years," "The Future of the Middle East," "The Shaping of the Modern Middle East," "The End of Modern History in the Middle East," Faith and Power: Religion and Politics in the Middle East", "The Arabs In History"

With the British conquest in 1917-1918 and the subsequent of a mandated territory in the conquered areas, Palestine became the official name of a definite territory...
Political Words & Ideas in Islam: Bernard Lewis : 9781558764736: Amazon.com: Books[/quote

 

[irosie91]

saigon>>>
We all know Palestinian links to the land in towns like
Jericho dates back 3,000 years and more - to as far back
as people lived on that land. It has little to do with the
Philistines.


we all know that the PHILISTINES were "linked" more
closely to towns like Jericho in the ancient past than
are the "palestinians" of today. ----most likely.

nations and people are not defined by the fact
of members ancestors having screwed each other
four million years ago----give up the stupidity
saigon----according to your theories
I AM A LENNILENAPE INDIAN
There were no arab muslims ---in Jericho
in ancient times----nor was there an enclave
of ARABIANS Some historians have determined
that GENGHIS KHAN raped so widely that he has
several million descendants today----fermented mares
milk is not a big seller even in my town

 

[Maryland]

saigon>>>
We all know Palestinian links to the land in towns like
Jericho dates back 3,000 years and more - to as far back
as people lived on that land. It has little to do with the
Philistines.


we all know that the PHILISTINES were "linked" more
closely to towns like Jericho in the ancient past than
are the "palestinians" of today. ----most likely.

nations and people are not defined by the fact
of members ancestors having screwed each other
four million years ago----give up the stupidity
saigon----according to your theories
I AM A LENNILENAPE INDIAN
There were no arab muslims ---in Jericho
in ancient times----nor was there an enclave
of ARABIANS Some historians have determined
that GENGHIS KHAN raped so widely that he has
several million descendants today----fermented mares
milk is not a big seller even in my town

Saigon doesn't even know the difference between Arabs and the Arabic language
http://www.usmessageboard.com/6898202-post803.html


Archaeologist and Historian Dr. Eric Cline, Chairman of the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, George Washington University; Director of the GWU Capitol Archaeological Institute

The claims that modern Palestinians are descended from the ancient Jebusites are made without any supporting evidence. Historians and archaeologists have generally concluded that most, if not all, modern Palestinians are probably more closely related to the Arabs of Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan and other countries than they are to the ancient Jebusites, Canaanites or Philistines.
Oxford University Press: The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean: Eric H. Cline

 

[irosie91]

Saigon also had no concept of population genetics.

saigon dear----ALL HUMANS ARE GENETICALLY LINKED---
ALL-----ALL----ALL so far the only conclusion one
can draw regarding the population of arabs and jews
in the world is that both have some links to the middle
east----which exceed the links that ALL HUMANS
have to each other indicating that both have origin
in the middle east---------give up your silly theories of

the ancient history of AL FATAH

 

[Maryland]

Saigon also had no concept of population genetics.

saigon dear----ALL HUMANS ARE GENETICALLY LINKED---
ALL-----ALL----ALL so far the only conclusion one
can draw regarding the population of arabs and jews
in the world is that both have some links to the middle
east----which exceed the links that ALL HUMANS
have to each other indicating that both have origin
in the middle east---------give up your silly theories of

the ancient history of AL FATAH

Even Arab academics acknowledge that pallies have no ancient history.

Rashid Khalidi, Professor of Modern Arab Studies, Columbia University, Director of Columbia University's Middle East Institute and advisor to various Arab groups...

There is a relatively recent tradition which argues that Palestinian nationalism has deep historical roots. As with other national movements, extreme advocates of this view anachronistically read back into the history of Palestine over the past few centuries a nationalist consciousness and identity that are in fact relatively modern. Among the manifestations of this outlook are a predilection for seeing in peoples such as the Canaanites, Jebusites and Philistines the lineal ancestors of the modern Palestinians.
Amazon.com: Palestinian Identity (9780231105156): Rashid Khalidi: Books

 

[irosie91]

for maryland---while the moniker---PALESTINE---
was avoided for OFFICIAL PURPOSES by the
jews living there----the statement that jews
avoided it completely is untrue----it shows up
in old books ---in both hebrew and yiddish---
laboriously spelled out since it is a foreign word
to both languages ----my take on Yiddish is that
I sometimes try to work out the words ----
thru my less than complete knowlege of hebrew.

---I found the word PALESTINIAN on old signs
---in ruins in New York City from the early 1900s.
ZIONIST SUPPORT ORGANIZATIONS. I also found
the word PALESTINIAN in reference to jews living
over there-----in OLD BOOKS---on the shelves of
synagogue libraries (in english) of course for
FORMAL USE---the term is eretz yisrael
During mandate days---the official papers
of jews were stamped "PALESTINIAN"----
the official papers of non jews WERE NOT---
Hubby still has his----his country of origin
is not noted----just PALESTINIAN---he
came an instant PALESTINIAN at age one
only because he is a jew

arabs were stamped out either as 'syrian' or
I belive--sometimes "arab"-----never
"palestinian" in mandate days

 

[Maryland]

for maryland---while the moniker---PALESTINE---
was avoided for OFFICIAL PURPOSES by the
jews living there----the statement that jews
avoided it completely is untrue----it shows up
in old books ---in both hebrew and yiddish---
laboriously spelled out since it is a foreign word
to both languages ----my take on Yiddish is that
I sometimes try to work out the words ----
thru my less than complete knowlege of hebrew.

---I found the word PALESTINIAN on old signs
---in ruins in New York City from the early 1900s.
ZIONIST SUPPORT ORGANIZATIONS. I also found
the word PALESTINIAN in reference to jews living
over there-----in OLD BOOKS---on the shelves of
synagogue libraries (in english) of course for
FORMAL USE---the term is eretz yisrael
During mandate days---the official papers
of jews were stamped "PALESTINIAN"----
the official papers of non jews WERE NOT---
Hubby still has his----his country of origin
is not noted----just PALESTINIAN---he
came an instant PALESTINIAN at age one
only because he is a jew

arabs were stamped out either as 'syrian' or
I belive--sometimes "arab"-----never
"palestinian" in mandate days

European Jews have used the name palestine. Generally, the correct name is Israel or Eretz Yisrael [Land of Israel]

Palestine doesn't appear in the Hebrew Bible nor in the New Testament nor in the Quran. Israel appears 2500 times in all three scriptures.

 

[Jos]

Traitors Hung from a lamppost doesn't appear in the Hebrew Bible nor in the New Testament nor in the Quran.
But yet it comes

 

[irosie91]

for maryland---while the moniker---PALESTINE---

European Jews have used the name palestine. Generally, the correct name is Israel or Eretz Yisrael [Land of Israel]

Palestine doesn't appear in the Hebrew Bible nor in the New Testament nor in the Quran. Israel appears 2500 times in all three scriptures.

all true Maryland-----I do not mind that you
BLAME THE ASHKENAZIM-------I live with a mizrachi----
so I am used to it.

 

[Annika55]

Maryland -

It's safe to assume everyone on this board is FAR more familiar with the work of everyones favourite Holocaust-denier than you are.

In fact - I bet you didn't even know he was a Holocaust denier, did you?!

He is actually a very good historian - though somewhat one-eyed. I have read a couple of his books, and enjoyed them, but he is not a one-stop shop. And particularly not for someone such as yourself who comes into this with extremely little knowledge of the area and history.

FYI
Lewis did not want the ARMENIAN GENOCIDE to be compared to the Holocaust of the Jews. His commentary on the Armenian genocide was controversial and some may have called him a Holocaust denier, but it was ONLY in reference to the murder of Armenians.

 

[irosie91]

Maryland -

It's safe to assume everyone on this board is FAR more familiar with the work of everyones favourite Holocaust-denier than you are.

In fact - I bet you didn't even know he was a Holocaust denier, did you?!

He is actually a very good historian - though somewhat one-eyed. I have read a couple of his books, and enjoyed them, but he is not a one-stop shop. And particularly not for someone such as yourself who comes into this with extremely little knowledge of the area and history.

FYI
Lewis did not want the ARMENIAN GENOCIDE to be compared to the Holocaust of the Jews. His commentary on the Armenian genocide was controversial and some may have called him
a Holocaust denier, but it was ONLY in reference to the murder of Armenians.

I am intrigued----my mom told me about the armenian genocide----before
she told me about adolf-----I think it was a kind of preparation ---she assumed
I would not take it personally------but in fact I did. What CONTROVERSIAL
thing did bernard lewis say?

just an aside----in the course of my own life----I found MOST americans
never heard of the armenian genocide -----

my understanding of the armenian genocide is----ONE GIANT WELL
PLANNED POGROM RAMPAGE ----that people were galvanized
to go at it in so concerted an effort amazes me. I do not believe
that germans or poles would have managed to do to jews what the
turks did to the armenians-----lots would have held back.
From what I know about ---- it was galavanized by super-human HATRED

 

[Maryland]

Maryland -

It's safe to assume everyone on this board is FAR more familiar with the work of everyones favourite Holocaust-denier than you are.

In fact - I bet you didn't even know he was a Holocaust denier, did you?!

He is actually a very good historian - though somewhat one-eyed. I have read a couple of his books, and enjoyed them, but he is not a one-stop shop. And particularly not for someone such as yourself who comes into this with extremely little knowledge of the area and history.

FYI
Lewis did not want the ARMENIAN GENOCIDE to be compared to the Holocaust of the Jews. His commentary on the Armenian genocide was controversial and some may have called him a Holocaust denier, but it was ONLY in reference to the murder of Armenians.

You have no idea WTF you're talking about so I'll instruct you: Dr. Lewis does not deny the deaths of Armenians under Turkish rule. His view is that the Turks did not intentionally commit genocide.

Now, you know

 

[irosie91]

Maryland -

It's safe to assume everyone on this board is FAR more familiar with the work of everyones favourite Holocaust-denier than you are.

In fact - I bet you didn't even know he was a Holocaust denier, did you?!

He is actually a very good historian - though somewhat one-eyed. I have read a couple of his books, and enjoyed them, but he is not a one-stop shop. And particularly not for someone such as yourself who comes into this with extremely little knowledge of the area and history.

FYI
Lewis did not want the ARMENIAN GENOCIDE to be compared to the Holocaust of the Jews. His commentary on the Armenian genocide was controversial and some may have called him a Holocaust denier, but it was ONLY in reference to the murder of Armenians.

You have no idea WTF you're talking about so I'll instruct you: Dr. Lewis does not deny the deaths of Armenians under Turkish rule. His view is that the Turks did not intentionally commit genocide.



???? ok----does Lewis see the rampaging murdering of armenians ----
which was a HOUSE TO HOUSE thing as something that simply
got out of hand but was not ecouraged by the government?
Like the murderers were simply KKK style VIGILANTES-----on a
MASSIVE SCALE? I can imagine something like that happening
only after years of a kind of INSITUTIONALIZED HATE
CAMPAIGN----------in fact I can imagine it------but it is certainly
no excuse------

"we wanted lots of them dead but not SO MANY"???

or----" we wanted to murder ten thousand but somehow once
things GOT ROLLING----we could not stop" ????????

I can see it----but what is the point? what they did ---
they did out of the sick social policy of Turkey at the time
and lots and lots of CRIMINAL PARTICIPANTS---who
were turks doing a TURKISH thing

 

[Annika55]

Maryland -

It's safe to assume everyone on this board is FAR more familiar with the work of everyones favourite Holocaust-denier than you are.

In fact - I bet you didn't even know he was a Holocaust denier, did you?!

He is actually a very good historian - though somewhat one-eyed. I have read a couple of his books, and enjoyed them, but he is not a one-stop shop. And particularly not for someone such as yourself who comes into this with extremely little knowledge of the area and history.

FYI
Lewis did not want the ARMENIAN GENOCIDE to be compared to the
Holocaust of the Jews. His commentary on the Armenian genocide was controversial and some may have called him a Holocaust denier, but it was ONLY in reference to the murder of Armenians.

You have no idea WTF you're talking about so I'll instruct you: Dr. Lewis does not deny the deaths of Armenians under Turkish rule. His view is that the Turks did not intentionally commit genocide.

Now, you know

Absolutely NOTHING I wrote was incorrect.

Bernard Lewis - Armeniapedia.org
The Le Monde events
In a November 1993 Le Monde interview, Lewis said that the Ottoman Turks’ killing of up to 1.5 million Armenians in 1915 was not "genocide", and then condemned by French courts for his statement. The following is a summary of these events.
Le Monde Interview
In a November 1993 Le Monde interview, Lewis said that the Ottoman Turks’ killing of up to 1.5 million Armenians in 1915 was not "genocide", but the "brutal byproduct of war".[1] He further suggested in the interview that "the reality of the Armenian genocide results from nothing more than the imagination of the Armenian people."[2]
Trial in France
A Parisian court interpreted his remarks as a denial of the Armenian Genocide and on June 21, 1995 fined him one franc, and the publication of this verdict at Lewis' cost in Le Monde[2]. The court ruled that while Lewis has the right to his views, they did damage to a third party and that "it is only by hiding elements which go against his thesis that the defendant was able to state that there was no 'serious proof' of the Armenian Genocide."
Verdict
A Parisian court interpreted his remarks as a denial of the Armenian Genocide and on June 21, 1995 fined him one franc, and the publication of this verdict at Lewis' cost in Le Monde[1]. The court ruled that while Lewis has the right to his views, they did damage to a third party and that "it is only by hiding elements which go against his thesis that the defendant was able to state that there was no 'serious proof' of the Armenian Genocide."[3]
Lewis ruling in English (French)
Lewis ruling article from Le Monde in English (French)
Letter to the Princeton Alumni Magazine
Read Lewis letter to the Princeton Alumni Magazine
On June 15, 1996, a letter by Lewis appeared in the Princeton Alumni Magazine, in which he gave his account of the ruling[2]. His account however is not accurate, as the following excerpts show.
Excerpt from Lewis' letter[3]:
“ The court ruled that while it was "in no way established" that I had "pursued a purpose alien" to my "mission as a historian," I was at fault in not having cited, in the course of the interview, "elements contrary to my thesis" and had thus "revived the pain of the Armenian community." For this I was ordered to pay one franc in damages to each of the two plaintiff parties as well as a contribution to their costs. ”
Excerpts from actual ruling[4]:
“ Whereas, even if it is in no way established that he pursued a purpose alien to his mission as a historian, and even if it is not disputable that he may maintain an opinion on this question different from those of the petitioning associations, the fact remains that it was by concealing elements contrary to his thesis that the defendant was able to assert that there was no "serious proof" of the Armenian genocide; consequently, he failed in his duties of objectivity and prudence by expressing himself without qualification on such a sensitive subject; and his remarks, which could unfairly revive the pain of the Armenian community, are tortious and justify compensation under the terms set forth hereafter; ”
“ The historian is bound by his responsibility toward the persons concerned when, by distortion [dénaturation] or falsification, he credits the veracity of manifestly erroneous allegations or, through serious negligence, omits events or opinions subscribed to by persons qualified and enlightened enough so that the concern for accuracy prevents him from keeping silent about them. ”
“ The Court...orders the publication of excerpts of this judgment in the next issue of the newspaper Le Monde to appear after the date on which this judgment shall be made final, the cost of this insertion, to be borne by the defendant, not to exceed twenty thousand (20,000) francs. ”
Bernards statements on the Genocide
Lewis argues that:
“ There is no evidence of a decision to massacre. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence of attempts to prevent it, which were not very successful. Yes there were tremendous massacres, the numbers are very uncertain but a million may well be likely,[4] ...[and] the issue is not whether the massacres happened or not, but rather if these massacres were as a result of a deliberate preconceived decision of the Turkish government... there is no evidence for such a decision.[5] ”
Lewis thus believes that "to make [Armenian Genocide], a parallel with the Holocaust in Germany" is "rather absurd."[4] In an interview with Haaretz he stated:
“ The deniers of Holocaust have a purpose: to prolong Nazism and to return to Nazi legislation. Nobody wants the 'Young Turks' back, and nobody wants to have back the Ottoman Law. What do the Armenians want? The Armenians want to benefit from both worlds. On the one hand, they speak with pride of their struggle against the Ottoman despotism, while on the other hand, they compare their tragedy to the Jewish Holocaust. I do not accept this. I do not say that the Armenians did not suffer terribly. But I find enough cause for me to contain their attempts to use the Armenian massacres to diminish the worth of the Jewish Holocaust and to relate to it instead as an ethnic dispute.[6] ”
Academic responses
Lewis' views on Armenian Genocide were largely criticized by well-known historians and genocide scolars including Alain Finkelkraut, Yves Ternon, Richard G. Hovannisian, Albert Memmi, Pierre Vidal-Haquet[7][8], he was considered as a "notorious genocide-denier".[9][10][11][12][13] According to historian Yair Auron, "Lewis’ stature provided a lofty cover for the Turkish national agenda of obfuscating academic research on the Armenian Genocide".[14]
National Humanities Medal
When Lewis received the prestigious National Humanities Medal from President Bush in November 2006, the Armenian National Committee of America took strong objection. Executive Director Aram Hamparian released a statement of pointed disapproval:
“ The President's decision to honor the work of a known genocide denier — an academic mercenary whose politically motivated efforts to cover up the truth run counter to the very principles this award was established to honor — represents a true betrayal of the public trust.[15] ”
The ANCA Press Release noticed that early in his career Lewis asserted the holocaust of Armenians in his 1961 book, The Emergence of Modern Turkey (p. 356): "A desperate struggle between [the Turks and Armenians] began, a struggle between two nations for the possession of a single homeland, that ended with the terrible holocaust of 1915, when a million and a half Armenians perished."[16]

 

[irosie91]

I attended the deathbed of an elderly woman who had---as a child--survived
the armenian genocide. The person who briefed me in the case asked me..
do you know about that ARMENIAN GENOCIDE? I answered "yes"---
because I did. He seemed a bit surprised. For the sake of that now
dead elderly lady----I RESENT Bernard Lewis's statement suggesting
that the genocide which took that woman's ENTIRE family----
is an ARMENIAN FANTASY-----it happened just as the german genocide
happened and just as the genocide of the biafrans happened and just
as the genocide in east pakistan happened and just as scores of other
genocides happened------including the present ongoing genocide in syria.