Talk:Blue Book (Bryce and Toynbee book)

On accuracy of the Blue Book
http://groong.usc.edu/orig/ak-20100222.html stated: WhisperToMe (talk) 05:55, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Miller, David. "The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. A History of the 'Blue Book'." RUSI Journal 150, no. 4 (2005): p. 36-44.
 * McCarthy, Justin. "Wellington House and the Turks." In: Güzel, Hasan Celal, et al (editors). The Turks. Yeni Turkiye (Ankara), 2002. p. 447-467 // this one is denying the Blue Book

This article should be enlarged
Another report known as "Bryce Report" has a detailed wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Alleged_German_Outrages

This page should be enlarged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.123.129.20 (talk) 07:43, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Propaganda claims- opened inline disputes

 * 1) "...The report is seen as a major propaganda form that Britain used in order to influence international public opinion regarding the behaviour of Ottoman Empire on Armenians similar to the another well known report..."  Appears unsupported. Seen by whom? What is a 'propaganda form'? Unclear why such content is not in the Criticism section-- should be supported by reliable sources.
 * 2) "...It was a significant publication from the War Propaganda Bureau at Wellington House." Citation? Unclear if any connection to Wellington House existed?
 * 3) "...The Report had a profound impact on public opinion in Allied and neutral countries against Ottoman Empire... The eyewitness testimony published included sensationalist accounts of mutilations and rapes for which there is no other evidence.[...] These invented atrocities tainted the Report and have..."    <--  Appears unsupported, e.g. "... invented atrocities...". Why is 'Report' capitalized? Does not meet reliable sources criteria.

C Hsin Huang (talk) 21:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Please be reasonable, similar report against Germans from same authors same publisher is regarded as "propaganda", but when it comes to Turks it may be considered reliable. (Remember Turks and Germans were allies against Great Britain in WW1)

Be reasonable, read the Treaty of Sevres. You'll clearly see the land demands of Armenia. In short they have demanded land, they couldn't succeed and signed Treaty of Gümrü 1920. You can reach full text. https://tr.wikisource.org/wiki/G%C3%BCmr%C3%BC_Antla%C5%9Fmas%C4%B1

And this is the Article 4

Madde 4 — Emperyalist Devletlerin kışkırtma ve özendirmeleri sonucu olarak, düzen ve güvenliği bozucu durum ve eylemlere bundan böyle olanak bırakılmaması...

"As a result of the provocation and encouragement of the imperialist states, situations and actions that disrupt order and security should not be allowed any longer..."

This is signed by both Armenia and Turkey and this treaty is still valid.

You can even connect it to the First and Second Karabag War. What does Armenia want? What does UN say about Karabag? We have all witnessed the propaganda during Second Karabag War as a matter of fact you can still reach these online. Remember Azerbaijan is mostly populated wşth Turks.

When it comes to the report we can check this report page by page and it is very easy to understand that they are fake claims. You can not kill hunderds of thousands people and remove all of these bodies without any trace. One simple question: Where are the mass graves? What does the report say? Ask this question in Poland or any other Nazi invaded country and they will show you each one of them. Or you can find graves of the victims at Hodjali https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f--04DiV4U

Anti-turkism is a serious problem an should not be underestimated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.123.129.20 (talk) 10:50, 25 August 2023 (UTC)