Bush Stands up for Genocide

Bush today vigorously opposed a congressional resolution to finally recognize as genocide the Turkish slaughter of more than a million Armenian Christians.  Bush declared: “We all deeply regret the tragic suffering of the Armenian people that began in 1915. This resolution is not the right response to these historic mass killings, and its passage would do great harm to our relations with a key ally in NATO and in the global war on terror.”

It’s a helluva thing when a war on terror supposedly requires the U.S. Congress to pretend that genocide didn’t occur.  Bush’s assertion that “we all deeply regret the tragic suffering of the Armenian people” is a lie.   Most people either don’t know or don’t care about the carnage.  And Bush apparently wants to keep it that way.

The Washington Post editorial page was even more contemptible than Bush. They railed this morning that the resolution “endangers present-day U.S. security.”  The Post states, “The subject is a serious one — more than 1 million Armenians may have died at the hands of the Young Turk regime between 1915 and the early 1920s.”

May have?  Oh.  Perhaps it was all a misundertanding.

Ironically, Bush and the Washington Post editorial page are gung-ho on threatening massive bombing of Iran in part because the Iranian president is  seen as denying the Nazi Holocaust.

The U.S. government is supposedly obliged to help the Turkish government cover up its sordid past, and is also entitled to kill thousands or millions of Iranians because of that country’s figurehead’s denials of past atrocities.

  • vahagn

    Excellent!!!!!!! Well put……….Shame on Bush and anyone else who have lost their morality and can easily dismiss such crime against humanity no matter how long ago it took place. As an Armenian, I would forgive the Turkish government if they had the courage to confess their crimes in the past and ask for apology.

    • swansong

      As far as Vahagn’s forgiveness is concerned, do not forget that the tragic events of those years went both ways. Whereas there is no proof that the Armenians who were killed were systematically killed by the Ottoman government (killers were lawless bands and other loose cannons), it is fairly evident that the mass killings perpetrated by Armenians, while they were in control of eastern Anatolia on and off from 1915-20, with and without their Russian (and later French) allies, was systematic. We have firsthand reports from Russian and French officers testifying to the terrible crimes the Armenians perpetrated, and even a great friend of the Armenians, General Harbord, acknowledged the mass slaughter upon defenseless Ottoman villagers, including Muslims and Jews. This was the real genocide (as far as the 1948 U.N. Convention definition of genocide; there was demonstrable intent, and the victims were entirely innocent, not part of any political group, as were the Armenians who had allied themselves with the enemies of their Ottoman nation at war) of that period, but of course, it is unknown; Armenian propaganda and western prejudice is too overpowering.

    • swansong

      Whereas there is no proof that the Armenians who were killed were systematically killed by the Ottoman government (killers were lawless bands and other loose cannons), it is fairly evident that the mass killings perpetrated by Armenians, while they were in control of eastern Anatolia on and off from 1915-20, with and without their Russian (and later French) allies, was systematic. We have firsthand reports from Russian and French officers testifying to the terrible crimes the Armenians perpetrated, and even a great friend of the Armenians, General Harbord, acknowledged the mass slaughter upon defenseless Ottoman villagers, including Muslims and Jews. This was the real genocide (as far as the 1948 U.N. Convention definition of genocide; there was demonstrable intent, and the victims were entirely innocent, not part of any political group, as were the Armenians who had allied themselves with the enemies of their Ottoman nation at war) of that period, but of course, it is unknown; Armenian propaganda and western prejudice is too overpowering.

  • Tom Yohannan

    Mass killers cover for each other, it would appear.

    • swansong

      Bush hasn’t lost his morality… at least not on this issue! He has conceded overall Armenian claims in the past short of using the word “genocide.” The Armenians in America form too powerful a political bloc for any politician to ignore, elected or not.

      As far as Vahagn’s forgiveness is concerned, do not forget that the tragic events of those years went both ways. Whereas there is no proof that the Armenians who were killed were systematically killed by the Ottoman government (killers were lawless bands and other loose cannons), it is fairly evident that the mass killings perpetrated by Armenians, while they were in control of eastern Anatolia on and off from 1915-20, with and without their Russian (and later French) allies, was systematic. We have firsthand reports from Russian and French officers testifying to the terrible crimes the Armenians perpetrated, and even a great friend of the Armenians, General Harbord, acknowledged the mass slaughter upon defenseless Ottoman villagers, including Muslims and Jews. This was the real genocide (as far as the 1948 U.N. Convention definition of genocide; there was demonstrable intent, and the victims were entirely innocent, not part of any political group, as were the Armenians who had allied themselves with the enemies of their Ottoman nation at war) of that period, but of course, it is unknown; Armenian propaganda and western prejudice is too overpowering.

      Note that nobody is asking the Armenian government to confess to their crimes (today’s Dashnak government is directly related to the terrorists who were in charge back then. Vahagn is incorrect in tying in today’s Turkish government with the Ottoman government with writing “their crimes,” since the Ottoman government was overthrown and abolished by the modern Turkish government) although it certainly would be proper for Armenia and Armenians to do so. Unfortunately, these parties are too deeply immersed in the idea of victimhood, and it seems they will never confess.

  • john

    this is how empires have come to an end. where nothing to them except holding on to row power. when they stand completely bare of everything that is worth living for. where people become sick and tired and and angry at everything they represent.and are not willing to put up with their endless deceptions.

  • Charles

    Thank you for pointing out this important story. The story of the Armenian genocide and the brutal murders of 1.5 million civilian Armenian subjects is horrible enough. The continued denial of this crime by the US, Turkey and sadly Israel is almost as nauseating.

    • swansong

      No, not all the Armenians killed were civilian; many thousands of Armenian men had betrayed their Ottoman nation by crossing the border to join the Russians, refusing to serve in the Ottoman army, or by deserting to hit the Ottoman army in the back. This was the opportunity Armenian revolutionists were looking for, for years. And it is absolutely ludicrous to label all Armenians who had died as victims of “murders” when most died from the same reasons claiming the nearly 3 million other Ottomans who lost their lives, from non-murderous reasons such as famine and disease. 1.5 million was not the toll of the Armenian dead, it could not have been when 1.5 million was the pre-war population of Ottoman-Armenians, according to most “neutral” (that is, anti-Turkish western sources), and when even Peter Balakian and other extreme propagandists agree there were one million survivors. The true mortality was around a third of 1.5 million, which is a huge difference.

  • Good column!

    Hypocrisy is probably the most important tactic for the Bush League War on Terror. Bush says we had to invade Iraq because young Arabs become militant when their governments are not democratic. But Bush lauds Saudi Arabia and Egypt as allies in the GWOT even as they imprison and torture opponents of the regime.

    Bush said we had to invade Iraq because they had WMD and they might share it with Islamic extremists. Pakistan is our ally, but it has nuclear weapons and a growing Islamic extremist movements.

    Worst of all are the loyal Republicans, who support Bush when he wants to make war for democracy, and when he wants to cozy up to repressive governments. They denounce anyone who thinks differently from the President.

  • Jack

    Do you people know how many genocides there were against Turks and people who converted to Islam during the Ottoman Empire prior and after the events that are referenced here? These genocides continue to this day. One of the last was the one done by Serbs against Bosnians. But famously, antiwar.com is a great supporter of Milosevic’s crimes. And you dare to speak about hypocricy.

    • Excuse me, do u know why turks were even (killed)? it was self defence by other nations who happily killed those retards cause they slaughtered themm. do u know what armenians went through? turkey can go and kiss his own sorry ass and can neverr ever say anything to oppose this sensitive matter… i am a Pure armenian who will do nything to protect the world from this kind of terrorism… america should focus on the past so he doesnt let things like that happens these days um let me seee darfur africa, these are genocides too, that happen today!

      • swansong

        In actuality, Turks and Armenians got along harmoniously for 600 years until Armenian extrmeists began stirring the pot in the 19th century, committing massacres to incite the same, hoping to invite European imperialists in, and to give Armenians free hand-outs. When this policy failed, the new strategy became to ally themselves with Ottoman enemies, at a time of war.

        Whereas there is no proof that the Armenians who were killed were systematically killed by the Ottoman government (killers were lawless bands and other loose cannons), it is fairly evident that the mass killings perpetrated by Armenians, while they were in control of eastern Anatolia on and off from 1915-20, with and without their Russian (and later French) allies, was systematic. We have firsthand reports from Russian and French officers testifying to the terrible crimes the Armenians perpetrated, and even a great friend of the Armenians, General Harbord, acknowledged the mass slaughter upon defenseless Ottoman villagers, including Muslims and Jews. This was the real genocide (as far as the 1948 U.N. Convention definition of genocide; there was demonstrable intent, and the victims were entirely innocent, not part of any political group, as were the Armenians who had allied themselves with the enemies of their Ottoman nation at war) of that period, but of course, it is unknown; Armenian propaganda and western prejudice is too overpowering.

    • noura

      What about the US genocide of Iraqis?

  • jon

    Turkey is making empty threats. For those people that think we desperately need Turkey think again. Most european countries have recognized the Armenian genocide. A really good example is France, before they actually passed a bill to make it illegal to deny the Armenian genocide Turkey was making all kinds stupids threats. These threats included ending military copperation and economical trade. But guess what happened? After the bill was passed economical trade actually grew the following years afterwards. So Turkey can shove those stupid threats up their ass. They cant be that stupid to cut off ties with the world just because the world speaks the truth about a crime against humanity that occured in WWI.

  • Rian

    Strategically, this move is rather dubious. One hundred sixty thousand American troops are currently sitting in Iraq. Does anybody here really think that without the supplies flowing through Turkish airfields that Bush will bring those troops home? I certainly don’t. The degradation of those troops beyond what’s already occurring in Iraq because we want to show something ‘moral’ is bad strategy and probably bad politics. Of course this is politically motivated, but it’s going to be tough when various hawks can use the lack of supplies as a cudgel to beat somebody about the head with.

    The hypocrisy, of course, is that there are now reliably a million or more Iraqis dead at the hands of the United States. Where’s the resolution condemning that as genocide? Doesn’t a system of morality start from within?

  • bushh shoudl feel ashamed… which human being would adress such a crime as if it never happened!!! lets see bush diee, then we will see what is genocide and what isnt. And after all these years stupid turkey thinks he or it can even phasee america? i dont think so… america isnt scared of turkey hes scared of himself… look bush promised to accept the genocide b4 his elections, and now he looks at fomr a different point of vue!!! THis is unacceptable and ARMENIANS WILL GAIN HUMAN RIGHTS… OR ELSE WHERE IS IT??? THIS WORLD HAS NO SENCE OF BALANCE IN THE HEAD!!! if u knwo what i mean…

  • Charles

    For those who think it is OK for the US to help Turkey deny its past read about the Armenian Genocide, it is well documented. For those who think Turkey will eventually come clean on its own think again. They have spent 92 years working on a plan to rewrite history not confront it. Would Germany have admitted the Jewish genocide if they had won the war?

    • Mark

      Hitler was said to have asked “Who remembers the genocide of the Armenians?” when he started planning his own genocides. It is important to acknowledge and remember history. All of it. Even the part we would rather forget.

      • truthhurts

        Actually Hitler never said such a thing, this is pure bologne. And even if he did say it, SO WHAT? Are we talking about the same man who advocated the Aryan theory which stated non-aryans are a mix of man and ape. I mean should we really attach any value at all to what this man may or may not have said.

  • william

    pelosi and company are engaging in the same kind of political pander to ethnic groups that got us a crazed middle east policy — just a different group. However abhorent, we’re talking about events that are almost a century old and we are delaing with a very tricky current relationship that mishandled, will endanger our security. In any event for a country built on slavery, conquest and genocide (all of it less than two centuries old), who are we to preach to others?

  • Sonny

    Tired of Turks bullying us around. They have restricted our troops to open the northern front and they are more anti-american than al-qaida itself (80 something percent hate us according to some polls). Armenians have been great citizens in this country and many are fighting in Us Marine Corps. Move the bases out of that muslim country – end of the story. They can’t be trusted.

    • truthhurts

      Hmmm, why do I get the stinking suspicion that you are an Armenian-American? perhaps it is the juvenile fashion that you use. Perhaps it is the over-the-top false-statements like,”they are more anti-american than al-qaida itself (80 something percent hate us according to some polls)” Of course u did not mention that the 80 % is against the current U.S foreign policy, when u consider that 60% of Americans r against the same policies 80% does not seem that high. If u really care about the Armenian cause, why dont u try to better the economic situation of your brothers in Armenia? Getting Turkey to open its borders would be a fine start. But u wont because, it has been about u all along, so just keep sitting on your lazy-boy in your comfortable American home and keep crying for attention while your brothers in Armenia ponder where tomorrow’s bread will come from.

  • Simon

    Every nation who ever had enough power to impose its will on any other nation is dripping in blood.

    The British slaughtered people all over the world for their empire and with the excuse of bringing civilization to the savages as they stole their wealth and exploited their people.

    It is estimated that their were 100 million people in the Americas before its “discovery” and “settlement” by Europeans. After 100 years the population had dropped to 5 million.

    We do no know how many millions of Africans died suring colonialism and the slave trade.

    In the middle ages Muslims were slaughtered by Christians and Chrisitans were slaughtered by Muslims and Jews were slaughtered by everyone and of course that continued into the last century.

    etc. etc. etc.

    • armo

      If I am wrong, my bad. But your statements appear intensely dismissive and appear to *normalize* genocide as if it is an inherent feature of all humanity and that there is nothing to be done about it but shrug one’s shoulder and say ” meh! what can you do?”

      I dispute this as defeatist.

      Regarding the genocide of Native Americans in the Americas ( from the Tainos to the forced relocations of Cherokee, to the last one of his people, Ishi) I , as an Armenian, defintiely condemn this.

      Regarding slavery, and all who died in the Middle Passage, I definitely surely condemn this as well as the lingering effects.

      Speaking of lingering effects, it is important to note and not de-historicize genocides and mass social crimes and act as if they do not have any effects on the now: they do.
      At the very least with the very real concept of generational transmission – a phrase not only uttered by social scientists, but also by -of all people- Bush regarding civil rights and African Americans.

      With Armenians, the effect of being robbed of the resources cultivated by an over 4 thousand year presence in Western Armenia, and the fact that the historical homeland was utterly cleansed has had an incredibly violent and trauatic effect in generational transmission – and what was denied from being transmitted.

      • swansong

        Four thousand years? PBS’s “The Armenian Genocide” program, entirely prepared by Armenian propagandists, settled at 2,500 years.

        No Armenian was expulsed from these areas, and all were free to return if they chose to. There were 644,900 left in the empire in 1921, according to the Armenian Patriarch, from an original population of 1.5 million. (Half a million had left on their own accord to other lands.) If Armenians felt they had to leave because of the terrible crimes they committed against the Muslim and Jewish populations, that was their choice.

  • Simon

    Didn’t Turkey refuse to allow the US to use it during the invasion and conquest of Iraq? (Much to its credit.)

    I do wish thought that Turkey would just own up to what is historically true. As should every other government in the world with genocide in its history. (Most of the, of should I say “us”?).

    • truthhurts

      well I can tell by your first paragraph that u are a man of reason. By the second paragraph I can tell u have fallen prey to the mainstream media propaganda. Look u have obviously heard what the Armenians and the mainstream western historians have said on the subject. So now it is your duty to hear the other side, and if you do consider yourself to be a fair and reasonable man, to deduce your own conclusion about the affair. Therefore I urge you to go to tallarmeniantale.com and hear the other side of the story. Thanks and God bless, Ron Paul for president, he is our last hope.

  • R. Nelson

    Ah, the glories of empire. You get to play the Great Game and settle into bed with whatever mass murderer best furthers your own imperial aims. Roosevelt cuddled up to Uncle Joe Stalin, then the world’s worst murderer, against Germany. Nixon warmed up detente with Mao, whose tally of death by then exceeded 60 million souls, to offset the USSR.

    Reagan snuggled up to Saddam to offset Iran’s supposed threat to the world. And now Bush doesn’t want to let Turkey off his lap because we need it against Iraq.

    Not only does imperialism have evil external consequences, it also completely corrupts whatever decency and morals the empire has left.

  • Joe

    Turkey has proven to be a two-faced and unreliable ally in any case. How many about faces has Turkey done in its history? In whose interest is it really sweep under the rug Turkey’s unreliable record? Turkey has the best publicists currently. Turkey, however, is in reality completely useless to US interests, and even in the so-named military logistical arena, Bush, the amnesiac and incompetent that he is, has forgotten that Turkey denied the US access to its air corridor at the crucial point. Turkey is only interested in its own ascendency as a power in the region, and the US policy-makers are totally unaware that they are going to lose credibility and power in the region precisely because they gamble on Turks far too blindly.

  • James Ceallachain

    What about the NY Times covering up Stalin’s crimes so America would fight on the side of the mass murderer approved by FDR’s advisors during WWII??

    • Mike S

      Since we are talking absolutists…What a pair. More evidence that force outside of self-defense is unjustified….and contrived self-defense is not self defense, but aggresion.

  • Tim R.

    Of course he President Bush should have called it a genocide. But that happend in 1915. How many of you are going to stand up for the people in Darfur, in a genocide that is happening NOW. One in which over 250,000 people have died. How many of you will call on President Bush to use military force to stop the genocide? How many of you would be willing to tell the President of Sudan that we will hold him directly responsible? How many of you would be willing to bomb the Sudanese government if they contine with their genocide?

    Talk is cheap! Hundreds of thousands are already dead in Darfur and people just keep talking.

    • Mike S

      Peace at the barrel of a gun….interesting concept, ever worked? The imperialism inherent in that “peacekeeping” is ok, but removing another brutal dictator is not? I’d say if you justify aggresive force for any reason other than self-defense, you justify it for all…We must then use force to end the horrific “genocide” of homosexuals in Iran? Or the poverty of Mexico? Or the civic violence of London? Or, finally, anyone who disagrees with you? Where is the philosophical divide?
      Not a good idea, despite the horror, and the pointlessnes of resolutions in the face of despotical, bloodthirsty behavior, such force will only bring more death, and finally subjugated people.
      If you would like to go yourself and use force to end the bloodshed in Darfur, go with my blessing, but leave me, and my tax dollars, out of it.

      • Tim R.

        Good pointes Mike S. Where would we draw the line? We can’t be the worlds policeman. But don’t you think there comes a time where people have to stand up and say enough is enough? I think when a group engages in massive slaughter and genocide, the civilized world has a right, and perhaps a moral obligation to intervene and put a stop to it. We all share a common humanity. And don’t we have a moral obligation to rescue innocent people who are being killed in a genocide? The United States has the power to end the genocide in Darfur. We just don’t act. We talk. I say we must act. Yes, we can’t intervene everywhere and we should not, but there must be a point where we say “Enough is enough.” And with hundreds of thousands already dead in Darfur, I think we have reached that point. Lets not wait for it to be millions who are dead. The civilized world should act on the basis of internationl human rights laws and put a stop to what is going on in Darfur.

        • R. Nelson

          Speaking of Darfur, check out Ken Silverstein’s Harper’s October 9 column as well as Darfur references in antiwar.com. There is no good guy in that fight, though as usual more civilians die than combatants (see U.S. in Iraq).

  • Tim R.

    By the way, during the Armenian Genocide, just who killed the 1.5 Million? Oh, that’s right! I almost forgot, Muslims! Those peaceful Muslims. But no, dare dare call them Islamo Faschists, better yet don’t even mention that Muslims were responsible for this because their religion is oh so peaceful.

    • armo

      Religion was a tool , you fool- not the cause.
      it was secularists who killed Armenians , many of whom were also secular.

      The root was the desire for an ethnically homogenous nation-state, informed by racialists like Zia Golkap, *Social* Darwinism and the theory of Pan-Turanism.

      If Islam was the root, why did so many non-Turkish Muslims ( like Arabs and Persians) help and rescue Armenians? Why are there so many Armenians in (largely) Islamic demographic areas and countries, like Iran and Syria, and Lebanon? Or in the Armenian Quarter in Jerusalem?

      Then, after cleaning non-Turkish peoples of different religions (overhwelmingly Armenia and also Assyrians and Pontics) , why did these crazed ethnonationalist start on other ( largely) Muslims- Kurds ( Sheikh Said uprising). The same people they used as muscle and bots against the Armenians?

      Why then did crazy Pan-Turanists then also try to Turkify Kurds and Arabs? This is documented in Akcams books and so on.

      Why was Kurdish banned as a language? Why was Leila Zann imprisoned for speaking Kurdish on the Turkish parliament floor?

      Why did the Arabs revolt against the Ottomans? Ever heard of Lawrence of Arabia.

      If anything, Armenian present a problem to bigoted Orientalists because it shows that an *ethnically Christian people can have good relations for long periods of time with a range of people from missionaries of different Christian denominations as well as we Sunni and Shi’a, as well as maintaining good standings in the so-called East or West.

      • swansong

        Zia Golkalp was not a “racialist”; the reader is advised to read a book by a real scholar on these matters, Guenter Lewy (“The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide”) instead of the propaganda of Taner Akcam. In the thick of war, the Turks were going to “Turkify” Kurds and Arabs? The better question is, why didn’t the Turks try to exterminate them and other non-Turks, if the reason for killing Armenians was that they weren’t Turks?

        There is no evidence for extermination of Armenians. The reason why Armenians were resettled was because they joined their nation’s enemies during a time of war, following some forty years of seditious activity and violence.

  • JOHN LEWIS-DICKERSON

    GEORGE W. BUSH: HOLOCAUST DENIER

    BUSH’S REMEDY FOR GLOBAL WARMING: NUCLEAR WINTER(S)

  • JOHN LEWIS-DICKERSON

    Turkey is already upset with the U.S. for breaches across its border with Iraq. It says Kurdish rebels are using Iraq as a launching point for attacks against Turkey.

    Some reports have also said that U.S. military equipment given out to local military or law enforcement agencies in Iraq has been found in the hands of criminal elements in Turkey.

  • armo

    Oh, and by the way, my comment is coming from someone who was born into a Christian family and as an individual is overwhelmingly secular in outlook. so don’t try to use the genocide of my family as a way to fan your xenophobic hatred by smearing other groups in a time of great misunderstandings. I have learned from my history and I won’t stand for it.

  • baba ganoush

    Why is it that whenever there’s a talk of turning a few screws on either Turkey or that jihadi COSTCO that goes by the name of Pakistan, the same tired skies-are-going-to-fall schtick gets played out ?

  • ceti

    Armo’s comments are very important. It was the ultra-secularist Young Turks who were at the forefront of the Armenian Genocide. The ultimate irony is that the British replaced the Ottomans in Mesopotamia as the Imperial overlords just as Armenia was absorbed into the Soviet Union. In all this, the voices of the oppressed nations — Armenian, Kurd, and Arab — were ignored and buried.

    So, forget the silly clash of civilizations canard — you just have to go back to inter imperialist rivalries to explain these things.

  • Shawn

    As Rep. Sherman said it himself: we cannot offer genocide denial as a perk of friendship. If Turkey is our friend, are we supposed to look the other way when this issue comes up? PATHETIC. If the US truly wants Turkey to become a democracy like the rest of Europe, then Turkey must come to grips with what it has done in the past. The United States is just doing what the rest of Europe and the rest of the world has already done with passing this resolution. Its a message, “Turkey, genocide denial will not be tolerated, and you cannot just omit your history because it makes you look bad”. I don’t want the United States (my country) to be an accomplice to this campaign of genocide denial. This resolution is long, long overdue!

    Furthermore, some arguments exist basing off the premise that Turkey is strategically and geographically essential to US foreign policy. If this is true (and well think its blown up way more than it is) then it still does not get in the way of this resolution because frankly, I resent the fact that the Turkey is holding the truth hostage. Congressman Albio Sires could not have said it better when he said, “I feel like I have a Turkish sward over my head somehow if I vote the wrong way here. And I don’t like that feeling”.
    Turkish policy will reflect its own interests, not the interests of the US. For example, Turkey blocked military operations to the United States in 2003 when the military was strategizing the war in Iraq. This was 30 months after president Clinton persuaded Dennis Hastert to keep the Genocide Resolution off of the House floor. Let me remind you that Turkey did undermine our war effort even before the Genocide Resolution was even on the table and shortly after the last attempt for the resolution was shot down.. Should the US deny rights to the silenced and oppressed because we don’t want to agitate an ally? If Turkey is a true ally, then it would not hold conditions to friendship.
    Finally, let me remind you that Turkey has threatened other countries the same way they are threatening the US when these other countries passed these resolutions. Economic trade between countries who have passed resolutions despite threats from Turkey have not gone down, but in fact they have gone up (after France passed a resolution, trade went up 225% and that is just one of the many examples of how Turkey is an artist at formulating these false threats it knows it cannot possible follow through with)

  • Ohhhh I think I get it… If we -say- it didn’t happen, we’re being ignorant and dangerous… But if we say it -isn’t- happening, we’re just… looking on the sunny side of life!

    “Always look on the briiiiiiiiiiiiiiight siiiiiide of life!”