"A Family Erased" is a documentary by Armenian director George Kachadorian, depicts the journey his father and two sisters take to Eastern Turkey to find the lost homes their family had migrated from in early 1900s. The documentary has the theme of the Armenian Genocide acknowledging it and promoting it's awareness through this personal anecdote.

The truth is something that has always been difficult to judge, and when there are emotions, beliefs, and assumptions mixed into the equation it becomes almost impossible to judge as is the case with determining whether the Armenian Genocide allegation has any merit. One obstacle we face all the time, is whether you meet someone who strongly believes in the Armenian Genocide or who strongly disagrees with it, they both tell you "you can't deny the facts, this is the truth." So how do you determine which side is right? How do you know whether there is a conspiracy to create a genocide to promote hatred and lawsuits, or a conspiracy to exterminate a people?

The conditions of exiled and relocated Armenians is a frequent question in the Armenian Genocide debate. Armenian Genocide proponents throw a variety of arguments and claims sourced from questionable survivor stories as to the horrible conditions in which the relocated Armenians suffered during the Tehcir (Relocation) Law in 1915 by the Ottoman Empire. One statement that gets repeated is that the Armenians were relocated in such a way as to deliberately cause their deaths as part of an Armenian Genocide. Through archival documents, reports by foreign consuls, and logical analysis we can determine whether these claims have any merit.

Political activists continuously provide new arguments in order to convince uninformed individuals to flock to their perspective. One such argument was encountered in an article. The argument was that since Armenian women and children were relocated, then there must have been a genocidal plan of extermination, and asked why the Ottoman government would relocate women and children. Another activist explained why drawing such a conclusion through this sort of speculation would not be beneficial for society.

Some authors try to equate people who dismiss the Armenian Genocide label because of lack of evidence, with people who generally deny genocides with the intent to hate and promote racism. There is a difference.

Darfur, Sudan, is one of those sad stories that has been correctly labeled as the first genocide of the 21st century.

Armenians were not generally oppressed by governments, but more by regional people of power. They were in fact the second-most respected people of the Ottoman Empire, first being the Muslims (since it was an Islamic Empire). In fact, Albertus Bobovius, who was enslaved by Crimean Tatars and sold into the palace in the 17th century, reports that both Armenians and Jews were exempt from the devşirme levy. He writes that the reason for this exemption of Armenians is religious: That Gregorian church (Armenian Church) is considered to be the closest to Christ's original (therefore Muhammed's) teachings.

The debate over the legal definition of genocide regarding the tragic fate that befell the Armenians is one of the most controversial and heated debates within the field of Ottoman studies. On the one hand, you have scholars such as Justin McCarthy, Bernard Lewis, Stanford Shaw, Salahi Ramsdan Sonyel, Gunter Lewey, and Michael Gunter arguing that the Armenians did not suffer from genocide. According to Justin McCarthy:

Muslims and Christians have always had periods of tension, and World War I was a time when Muslims and Christians did indeed fight; however, not always because of religion. The problem is, people automatically jump to conclusions assuming that the Muslims and Christians are at some sort of religious war; however, there are always more factors to this equation...

This is a brief, concise explanation of the Armenian Revolt and the subsequent suppression. Most material you read on this topic will present a one-sided argument that fails in providing a critical analysis of events. Generally, material is designed by authors to "lead" the reader to come to a pre-designated conclusion of an "Absolute Genocide" or an "Absolute Denial".

It's truly saddening to see the numerous comments by Armenian propagandists that continue to focus hate on the Turkish government and their never ending quest to make the Turkish government look like "the liars." However, it is also uplifting to see some Armenians that will discuss these events maturely and will actually try to argue. While some of the Armenian propagandists will dismiss whole articles and use their argument of "it happened" or "everybody believes it already" or "The Armenian revolution is irrelevant", such arguments by scholars on all sides are said to not aid the Armenian genocide argument. It is a debate, and just because one says it isn't a debate, doesn't make it so.