Cutiepie:

Herzl was not talking in 1895 about something that supposedly started in 1915.

Pea-brain:

Yes he was, because contrary to what many people think, "it" did not start in 1915 and I don't care how many sources you can find that say so, because I know better. I not only know better, but I can also prove my point.

1850-MASSACRED-12,000 Armenians and Nestorians in Kurdistan!
1877-MASSACRED-6,000 Armenians at Alachkert!
1894-MASSACRED-12,000 Armenians at Sassoun and Mouch!
1895-96-MASSACRD-300,000 Armenians in many villages!
1909-MASSACRED-30,000 Armenians at Adana Celicia and elsewhere!
1915-17-MASSACRED-1,500,000 Armenians in the Ottoman Empire!
1920-MASSACRED-30,000 Armenians near Kars and Alexandropol!
1921-MASSACRED-Massacred-50,000 Armenians in Cilicia!
1922-MASSACRED-150,000 Greeks and Armenians at Izmir!

As you can see above, the MASSACRES had started even before 1895 and not in 1915. The only difference between the 1915-1923 and the others was that there was official orders given out in Arpril of 1915 although it was planned much earlier by your zionist/jew buddies that you are covering for. Perhaps "intent" would have to be proven in the other cases in order to qualify them as genocide or holocaust, but 300,000 is a no brainer in my opinion and if that doesn't show "intent" I don't know what would. Herzel was indeed talking about a large scale MASSACRE that would be considered as a Genocide/Holocaust today as it was back then, but since the word "genocide" did not exist, the word MASSACRE was one of the words used as was "Holocaust" when in September 1895, the New York Times headlined a story as "Another Armenian Holocaust." for example, which clearly proves that Herzel was indeed talking about an "Armenian Holocaust" whether you like it or not.

Pea-brain:

Yes he was, because contrary to what many people think, "it" did not start in 1915 and I don't care how many sources you can find that say so, because I know better. I not only know better, but I can also prove my point.

1850-MASSACRED-12,000 Armenians and Nestorians in Kurdistan!
1877-MASSACRED-6,000 Armenians at Alachkert!
1894-MASSACRED-12,000 Armenians at Sassoun and Mouch!
1895-96-MASSACRD-300,000 Armenians in many villages!
1909-MASSACRED-30,000 Armenians at Adana Celicia and elsewhere!
1915-17-MASSACRED-1,500,000 Armenians in the Ottoman Empire!
1920-MASSACRED-30,000 Armenians near Kars and Alexandropol!
1921-MASSACRED-Massacred-50,000 Armenians in Cilicia!
1922-MASSACRED-150,000 Greeks and Armenians at Izmir!

As you can see above, the MASSACRES had started even before 1895 and not in 1915. The only difference between the 1915-1923 and the others was that there was official orders given out in Arpril of 1915 although it was planned much earlier by your zionist/jew buddies that you are covering for. Perhaps "intent" would have to be proven in the other cases in order to qualify them as genocide or holocaust, but 300,000 is a no brainer in my opinion and if that doesn't show "intent" I don't know what would. Herzel was indeed talking about a large scale MASSACRE that would be considered as a Genocide/Holocaust today as it was back then, but since the word "genocide" did not exist, the word MASSACRE was one of the words used as was "Holocaust" when in September 1895, the New York Times headlined a story as "Another Armenian Holocaust." for example, which clearly proves that Herzel was indeed talking about an "Armenian Holocaust" whether you like it or not.

Anoush is now saying that there were a number of Armenian "holocausts," based on the New York Times' use of the word 110 years ago as a synonym for massacre. Based on this, it is supposed to be justifiable to claim that the Zionist leader Theodor Herzl in 1895 denied "the Armenian Holocaust." Anoush is playing a very obvious wordgame here, treating the common noun holocaust and the proper noun Holocaust as if they meant the same thing. Holocaust as a proper noun, which was not widely used until the late 1970s, has a special meaning. None of those massacres before 1915 was an attempt at a final solution of Turkey's Armenian problem, which is what I think is generally understood by "Armenian Holocaust."

The wholesale deportation of Armenians began in 1915, following the Armenian Revolt in spring of that year. Before deportations, Armenians in the Ottoman armed forces were disarmed. The fact that Armenians had been trusted to bear arms, and were no longer trusted, marks a radical change. You can easily find scads of sources referring to the "Armenian Holocaust" or the "Armenian Genocide" as something that happened or began in 1915.

Clearly Theodor Herzl was not talking in 1895 about what is normally understood by the term Armenian Holocaust--the final solution of Turkey's Armenian problem--which is generally conceived as having begun in 1915.

The obvious question for anyone who would claim that the Turks were genociding Armenians before 1915 is: why then were the Turks issuing rifles to the Armenians in their army?