Why do some people continually used forged and false material to bolster their argument ?

Question

For example:-

Armenians keep writing everywhere what Hitler supposedly had said, (i.e Who remembers the Armenians) but it has never been proven to be true.

The Allied legal staff at the Nüremburg War Crimes Tribunal had rejected the claim as they knew it to be false, having captured Nazi documents and even people who were at Hitler’s meeting (August 26, 1939). Also, the statement made no sense since Hitler was vilifying the Poles, the people whose nation he was about to order invaded. Finally, Hitler didn’t even mention the Jews in his speech. The Nazis were not ready to make the official decision for the Final Solution (die Entloesung) of the Jews; that decision would come about two years later, at the Wannsee Conference in Berlin.

For further Armenian forgeries and falsifications look at the following link.

http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/forgeries.htm

It would be my pleasure now you have brought up another great example of forgeries. You would like to know how the Talat pasha Forgeries came into existence have a read of these documents about them and I quote;-

Prof. Erich Feigl Looks at Aram Andonian "MYTH OF TERROR' by late Erich Feigl (1986)Zeitgeschichte/Bucherdienst Austria (Austrian Author)" which contains the signatures of 63 foreign Academics refuting the Armenian claims. Prof Feigl is the one that proved the Talat Pasha Telegrams were indeed forgeries. There is more evidence i.e. the Telegrams were not accepted by the Courts in Tehlirian's Trial nor the Malta Tribunals bare in mind they were NOT TURKISH COURTS.

Further still read works from Prof's McCarthy, Lewy, Mango and espcially Stone in relation to the FALSE TALAT PASHA TELEGRAMS and I quote,

Prof. Norman Stone was equally impressed: “Dadrian had a wonderful time trying to salvage the documents, and I vastly admired the prestidigitation involved — for instance, if the paper was of the type used in French schools, and not of the type used in government offices, this can be explained by the paper shortage, he says. But if he cannot convince his major ally, who knows the Ottoman documents, well, there we are.”

Dear Lady GOP how about this link and article read it carefully, and yes in fact I have Fiegl's book.

http://www.turkishweekly.net/articles.php?id=112

It's funny how you are making the allegation of a CRIME and you expect me to give you PROOF, I thought you living in the Land of the Free would espouse to fundamental Liberal Democractic ideal, something like INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. But no matter how many sources I give you, you will never agree. The question I would ask is WHY HASN'T THE UN STILL NOT RECOGNISED THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ? Considering it administers the "Genocide Laws" ?? Why Political recognition instead of a LEGAL ONE ?? I mean to say it's not a political allegation is it it's a CRIMINAL ONE, WHERE IS YOUR PROOF AND CONVICTION ?

Now come Lady GOP how could I possibly be mad with you :) besides I am waiting for that coffee :)) I have done my job but if you prefer to totally disregard notable historians I can not say or do anything more now can I ? Instead you would prefer the likes of Dadrian :) We won't go into his indiscretions will we :)

Answer 1

This question is borderline racist, but to answer it, you should probably know that lies oftentimes work far better than the truth. They're oftentimes more believable and are thus more powerful. Lies are generally more comfortable and convenient than the truth. People will do almost anything to win and using lies and such are at the top of the list.

Also... it could just be that those people were misled and truly believe the lies are truth.

Answer 2

People tent to use fabricated matteraial to support their causes when they don't have real materail.A good example to that case is the position of the Turks to deny the Armenian Genoside.But a reliable source for what happened during the ent of the Ottoman Empire to its various non- Muslim subjects is the book "The curse of the Orient" and wartime reports of the London Times. It very intesting that the Turks paraded any kind of arguments to support their cause but one:What happen to 500.000 Grekks and more than 1.500.00 Armenians if they weren't killed?Moreover the Germans admitted that they did killed the Jews in the Hollocaust without using the ludicrous excuse that it was a period of war but the Turks still insist of using it.Perhaps someone could judge from this comparison who is worthy of belonging to the European familly and who isn't... PS Raymon Cartier in his "History of the Second Worl War" 1st book, pulished by Paris-Match in Paris France (1968) DOES mention that Hitler DID say to his lieutenants the phrase "who remembers the Armenian Genoside?" And he didn't have any discernible reason to favour the Armenians who after all did belong mostly to Soviet Union. In fact the only mention that made for the Armenians apart from that is in the second book published in the same period as one o the people which provided Ostruppen (eastren occupation troops) to the Werhmact ( German Army). So one may presume that it was a objective source...Justice will prevail!

Answer 3

Samual Weems Weems was notable for his bitterly anti-Armenian views and being a great friend of the Turkish people...a hero.

Samuel A. Weems was a disbarred Arkansas lawyer. In 1974, Samuel Weems was disbarred as a lawyer for mixing his clients money with his own. A year later he was convicted of arson and conspiring to defraud an insurance firm. In 1977 a jury found Weems guilty of conspiring to commit arson and ordered him to pay $30,000 to an insurance company.

He was a liar and a fraud.

Zeki Kuneralp, a former Turkish ambassador, had a different explanation of why Turkey denies the Armenian Genocide, according to him "The liabilities of not publishing the historical documents outweigh the advantages."

Were these also forgeries:

"The Talat Pasha telegrams, which are a series of documents by the Interior Minister Mehmed Talat Pasha, to constitute as concrete evidence that the deaths were implemented as a state policy. He was notoriously tied with the "Kill every Armenian man, woman, and child without concern" order in these documents.

Could it possibly be tall tales is just based on lies? Most of its based on Sammual Weems.

What information do you have that the authenticity of those documents were forgeries, please share it with me.


EDIT: Erich Feigl wrote a book with 22 articles that state nothing more then hate for the Armenians. Have you actually read it, you will find he even disagrees with facts from your own governments archives.

As far Stone, McCarthy, Hewy, Lewy, Dewy, there has been more supporting evidence of their incompetence rather then their authenticities as Historians.

Give me real proof.
EDIT2: Wow are you mad..Well all I can say is you asked the question which seems to be more of an accusation, so its your job to supply the proof to support it, I can only show proof why I disagree an I have done my job now do yours.
.

Answer 4

Isn't it obvious?

When a link in the evolution chain for dinosaurs was missing, a scientist felt free to create the missing link using two different fossils.

If you want to prove something, if you don't have enough evidence and are desperate about it, you create evidence. That doesn't make your standpoint true, but you can fool people for some time.

I also read an article in the newspaper about a research that showed that people find lies more convincing than truth.

Answer 5

Except his first sentence, I agree with the" Questionable Mark".

Lying and blaming is far more easier.. The one who is falsely blamed tries to clear his name and it takes a lot more effort than to make up a lie.

The liars are forgetting the fact that the innocents will put their lives forward in order to save their honor and that requires more determination.

That is what we are going and no lie lasts forever. As mentioned in your post, the truth is surfacing slowly but steadily.

Answer 6

I just read an article in a newspaper that supports your information. I think the truth is slowly but surely surfacing.