1 The answer Lemkin received from his professor reflected the state of international
law in the beginning of the twentieth century: back then there were no laws that gave
states authority to intervene in the internal affairs of other nations. To do so would
undermine the idea of sovereignty, that is, the right of every nation to conduct its
internal affairs independently. What limits would you set on a nation’s sovereignty?
When should the international community impose laws on other countries?
The limit should be when the majority of people are suffering, like if even just 1 or .1 in the percent of poverty is over 50%. We should draw a line when the government is not doing its job right. Then we should impose laws to protect the people of the world.
2. Lemkin wondered, “Why is the killing of a million a lesser crime than the killing
of a single individual?” What can be done to stop nations that turn against their
own people?
Creating a law or in his case a word to define what it is to commit an act of mass murder against a group of people with the intent to inhalation.
3. Lemkin was outraged when he heard that the mass murder of the Armenians went
unpunished. How could he turn his moral outrage into action? What could he do?
He could talk to people who could make a difference, people with "power" in the international world about getting justice for these people. Getting meetings or just drawing attention to the issue in general.
4. Without a court to judge the perpetrators, what options did the Armenians have
after the genocide?
They could have just quietly assassinated the perpetrators or banished them or just done something to make sure they would never hurt anyone again.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Friday, October 26, 2012
New York Times + Armenian Genocide: Guided Reading Questions
1. What do you think is meant by the phrases: "Newspaper of Record" and "All the News That's Fit to Print?"
I think it means that the newspaper wrote about every little thing that happened making a chronological record of when and how things happened. The second phrase, I think it means that the newspaper writes about only things that will sell and and is up to snuff with how good they think they are as a newspaper company.
2. What could have been the benefits of the the New York Times covering the Armenian Genocide and the earlier massacres for the Armenians?
It show proof that the people were aware of what was going on in the world around them and show that we could put together a timeline based on dates and numbers of events to make a timeline of the genocide.
3. Who invented the term "genocide?" Why is creating a word to describe such events important?
A Mr. Raphael Lempkin. It is important to describe a genocide so that we know when it is happening again and because we know it has a pattern so we can observe and stop it or maybe even prevent it from going to far.
4. Why would the New York Times shy away from the use of the word "genocide"when discussing the Armenian Case?
New York Times people didn't know too much about the Armenian Case anymore and also because the Turkish government refuses to admit to the Armenian Genocide and threatened the U.S. to not say anything about it or Turkish cooperation might be difficult.
5. At the end of the reading Keller, the executive editor of the New York Times, said he was not qualified to make the determination of whether or not the Armenian Case was genocide. What type of people could Keller turn to help determine this? Why?
He could turn to himself. He doesn't need someone to come baby him and tell him because at this day and age we have so much information at our finger tips that he could just look it up, do some serious research and come up with his own conclusion. People are biased so he needs to find the facts and interpret them for himself.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Genocide Experience Blog
Cristina Vilches
October 25, 2012
Period 3
Write a couple sentences describing this person,
including his or her name and what the person looks like, what they've included
about their past, etc.
·
Her name is Kristine Hagopian and she
looks very old with a bump on her nose and her face tilted right and down but
her eyes are pointing up. This tells me that she wants to look down but she can’t,
she just can’t. Her story is about how her father was sexually assaulted by some
Turkish soldiers and how her family was forced to watch. This led to her father’s
eventual suicide.
·
His name is Sam Kadorian. He is very old
He is looking up with partially open eyes and a furrowed brow. His mouth is
open like he is trying to whisper something. His story is about how some Turkish
gendarmes hurt him in the neck and piled dead bodies on him but how he couldn't
cry out or he would die.
-Speculate as to what the person might be feeling
based on their picture and their story.
·
I think she is feel the fear and anger
and remorse of that moment, that she is remembering the pain and wants to look
away, but it is not now, it is in the present so she won’t look away. She looks
worn and yet her eyes say how very passionate she can still be and how vigilant
she is.
·
His face says how he remembers pain the
pain he was in. He looks like he is a child looking at their parents after
something bad has happened, like at any moment he might break down and cry. He
seems like he is trying to say something but he can not. He looks lost in the
dark. Frightened.
-Finally, imagine and write about what you think may
have happened to this person after the story he/she tells, what questions does
he/she leave unanswered? Use contextual clues from his or her picture to help
you speculate (i.e. do they have anything that distinguishes their previous
occupation? Are their hands folded in a certain way?)
·
She escaped and didn't get killed because
she is alive as says that she escaped with her family but her father died. She has fancy clothes or rather a pattern on her clothing so she might be very well off now.
·
He probably got saved or he might have
escaped the country but he was not killed, his grandmother might have though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)