The New York Times is gloating over the political class' lack of concern about genocide.

House Speaker Now Unsure if Armenian Genocide Motion Will Reach a Vote

Disturbing title, no?

Pelosi's main quote is so typical of what happens these days when Democrats get any pushback from war profiteers and the Bush regime.

“Whether it will come up or not and what the action will be remains to be seen.”

First, the Democrats pretend to have spines; then, there is the pushback; the Democrats start to hedge (see quote); and then, the Democrats do whatever Bush and the Iraq war machine dictate.

Is it any wonder that the congressional Democrats are even or lower in the polls than Bush? (The numbers for the entire Congress are even worse.)

The irony is that the Armenian genocide resolution is such an obvious "yes" vote that opposing it or even refusing to bring it up is inexcusable. Turkey is going to invade Iraq regardless of what the House does. And, the main motive for opposing the resolution is reprehensible: trying to keep military access to Turkey in order to prolong the illegal war in Iraq.

The pro-genocide (and pro-war) tone of the New York Times article was found throughout, though one paragraph showed the complete lack of professionalism so commonly displayed at the Times and throughout the corporate noise machine.

The comments by the speaker, a key supporter of the measure, added to growing evidence that modern-day pragmatism was overwhelming supporters’ demands that the House render a historical verdict on the killings of the Armenians by Ottoman Turks.

Ignoring a genocide in order to prolong a senseless war is hardly "pragmatism." Also, the "historical verdict" of genocide already has been made by historians, though not by propagandists.

Given that queers were targeted and killed in the Holocaust, it is especially important that the queer community support this resolution and oppose any attempts to deny or spin genocide.