Armenians woke up on April 30 to breaking news: “Ruslan Tsarni Apologizes to Armenian Community,” as reported by Alin Grigorian, the editor of the Armenian Mirror-Spectator in Watertown, Mass.
Prior to this apology, Tsarni had been telling the international media that “an Armenian convert to Islam had brainwashed” his nephews Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev , the Boston bombers. By linking an Armenian to such a heinous crime, Uncle Tsarni had infuriated Armenians who suspected dubious motives behind his outlandish claim.
Armenians were naturally relieved upon learning that Tsarni had told the Mirror-Spectator: “Armenia has a very strong culture, therefore, I want to stress that [Misha’s] ethnicity has nothing to do with it. I wish I had never said it. I felt for you [Armenians] and wish I had never done it.” He went on to apologize for linking the Armenian community “to this evil event.”
While this apology was a good start, it was inadequate compared to the magnitude of the damage Tsarni had caused to the good name of Armenians worldwide. Merely apologizing to an Armenian newspaper could not undo that harm, unless he repeated it on CNN or other TV networks.
I contacted Tsarni asking him if he would issue a similar apology on national television. He responded affirmatively since he regretted dragging the Armenian name into “this sad episode.” Tsarni stressed that he did not “speak about all Armenians, just one man of Armenian descent. I never had the intention of harming Armenians or anyone else. I feel sorry that the name of the Armenian people was used. I feel somehow guilty. I would like to apologize. No one likes to be brushed with an act like this.” Tsarni asked me to report that he felt terrible about mentioning Armenians in his TV interviews.
Given his willingness to make a new public statement, I offered to assist him in drafting the text of an apology for a possible future network appearance. He first welcomed the idea, but later informed me that he would neither accept my suggestion nor issue his own statement, claiming that his earlier remarks were accurate, since Misha was of Armenian descent, overlooking the fact that Misha Allakhverdov, born in Azerbaijan, was of mixed Armenian and Ukrainian parentage. Tsarni further advised that he never meant to refer to “the entire ethnicity. It was a simple technical characteristic of the person whose name I did not know at the time. Had I known his name was Misha, he would be Misha, not an Armenian or anyone else.” He justified the use of the phrase “a new convert to Islam of Armenian descent,” by claiming that his intent was “to help the media, reporters, and law enforcement agencies to locate that person.” He, therefore, decided not to issue an apology on television, as he had promised.
Furthermore, he disputed the Mirror-Spectator’s report of his apology, claiming he was “misquoted.” He asserted, “I never said, ‘I wish I never said it.’ I said that I had no intention to have the name of Armenians used in association with the bombing. I spoke about the certain individual who I was told about, and that information was confirmed as true information.” Despite Tsarni’s belated denial, the Mirror-Spectator stands by its story and I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of its report.
I reminded Tsarni of his unfulfilled commitment to appear on national TV and set the record straight on his allegation about “the Armenian Misha.” He has yet to respond, as he has been busy making funeral arrangement for Tamerlan.
There are many unanswered questions about Tsarni. Although the internet is replete with all sorts of allegations about his background, we prefer to concentrate on questions of more immediate interest to the Armenian community:
— Why did Tsarni apologize to the Armenian Mirror-Spectator and then turn around and claim that he was misquoted? Could it be that he had felt sorry for his earlier statements to the media, and then backtracked after being advised by unknown interests that he should not apologize to the Armenians?
— Why did he make a personal commitment to me to appear on major TV networks to apologize for maligning Armenians, and then refuse to do so?
With these unanswered questions, one can only wonder about Uncle Tsarni’s mysterious motives and enigmatic connections.
Harut Sassounian
I think we’re paying too much attention to this guy. Yes, he made a stupid remark and it turned out this Misha guy had nothing to do with it. I say we let this story quietly die rather than continuing to give it undeserved attention.
Mikael,
This “uncle” work for his CIA father in law in Turkey and Kazakhstan for Jihadist Chechen terrorists against Russia!!According to his ex father in law, he always felt homesick for his Chechnya, and I wonder what he is doing in US soil!!
He was paid by Turkish agents so the public opinion not to concentrate about Turkic tribes activities in North and South Caucasus, but at the end he was failed. Only God knows what is the real character, and the mission of “Misha” in US, and why CNN smart investigators drop his name immediately without showing even his picture!!
Mikael, whoever has reported the story (CNN) must now report that Misha guy had nothing to do with it and with the Armenians in general. Sounds fair?
I completely agree that the news media should report that Misha was found, investigated, and determined to not have any involvement. I was specifically speaking about the uncle’s statements. Sorry for any confusion in my words.
“must now report that Misha guy had nothing to do with it and with the Armenians in general.”
I believe news outlets have been reported that the FBI was no longer pursuing or interested in Misha in any way.
And who’s accusing ArmenianS (plural) in general with having anything to do with all this? This is a problem of overreaction. Many people think saying Misha was Armenian is somehow an accusation against all Armenians.
“Many people think saying Misha was Armenian is somehow an accusation against all Armenians.”
Not quite so. Many people think saying Misha was Armenian whereas he reportedly was only half Armenian but for some reason only that half, not the other or both, was reported—-and in April 24 timeframe although the Boston bombing was not timed to coincide with our commemoration—-and in an investigation in which third-rate factors such as one’s ethnicity and religious conviction should play no significant role whatsoever—-and in the CNN report in which third-rate factors such as one’s ethnicity and religious conviction likewise should play no significant role whatsoever, is an accusation against Armenians.
The timing of the first publication on CNN is very suspicious to me (April 24). Was this a coincidence?
The timing was due to the fact that the bombings happened shortly before April 24. April 15 was the bombing, the police released the photos on April 18, and on April 20 the uncle mentioned Misha. That’s the simple explanation.
.
I am not saying we should not raise the concern when someone tries to discredit Armenians, but we can do it without screaming wild conspiracy theories and sound like raving maniacs. We should be alert, but also smart about it.
“The timing was due to the fact that the bombings happened shortly before April 24. April 15 was the bombing, the police released the photos on April 18, and on April 20 the uncle mentioned Misha. That’s the simple explanation.”
Full nine days that have passed from April 15th (the bombing) to April 24th (genocide commemoration) is not at all indicative that the bombing happened “shortly” before the AG commemoration and the President’s April 24th Proclamation day. “He who has eyes let him see”…
The uncle made the “Misha” announcement on 4/20, 5 days after the bombing. And 2 days after the FBI released the photos of unidentified subjects. Occam’s razor, john, Occam’s razor. Works better than Gillette or Sheik. The simplest explanation is the best.
“The timing was due to the fact that the bombings happened shortly before April 24.”
Compelled to repeat what everyone knows. The bombings did not happen “shortly” before April 24. The bombings happened full nine days earlier, on April 15th. Isn’t this simple, i.e. the way you like it?
“The uncle made the ‘Misha’ announcement on 4/20, 5 days after the bombing. And 2 days after the FBI released the photos of unidentified subjects.”
When FBI releases the photos of unidentified subjects (unsubs), it almost certainly means that their Behavioral Analysis Unit (BAU) should have already completed the criminal investigative analysis that involves interpreting offender’s behavior, identifying his or her relatives and friends and all their connections. Meaning, the uncle was most likely already identified before April 18th and certainly before April 20th. As for the ‘Misha’ announcement made on April 20 and hurriedly reported by CNN with emphasis on one half of this imaginary person’s ethnic background (as if ethnic identity and religious conviction play any significant role in this society or in the investigation process), it was indeed made shortly before the April 24th — the AG commemoration day and the president’s annual proclamation day.
“Occam’s razor. The simplest explanation is the best.”
As I understand it, Occam’s razor is a principle used in problem-solving as related to parsimony and economy. It states that among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions must be chosen. Fail to see the relevance of this principle for chronology and significance of events surrounding the Boston bombings. Besides, I understand philosophers contend that the exact meaning of “simplest explanation” is vague and ambiguous. I also understand that in science Occam’s razor is not considered an irrefutable principle of logic or a scientific result.
Your logotype “The simplest explanation is the best” in essence means “The simplest explanation is the most convenient and requiring less superior intelligence and deduction”.
john, have you been watching “Criminal Minds” alot? I used to watch it and enjoyed it (btw, did the black guy and the fat girl ever “do” it?). But I hope you understand that it’s a work of fiction. Real life FBI profilers do not predict a suspect’s behavior and identity with the level of certainty and speed portrayed on the show.
.
I suspect much of your views involving conspiracy theories have been inspired by Hollywood shows like “24” and “X-Files.” I enjoyed these too, but again recognized them to be fiction. In fact, “24” inspired me to appreciate the United States more, with its daring to address controversial aspects of the country. But it appears that, ironically, the American movie and television industry feeds much of the conspiracy theories around the world.
Which one is a “conspiracy theory” (btw, have you learnt the term recently and enjoyed it, too, to the extent so to repeat it in every reply to any post which begs to differ from official brainwashing)?
That full nine days passed from April 15th to April 24th is not, by any account, “shortly” before?
That the fact that the photos of the bombers were released on the 18th and the uncle spoke on the 20th suggests that the FBI should have already had information in their possession on the bombers as well as their relatives?
That the “Misha” allegation has been made indeed shortly before the AG commemoration and President’s proclamation day, on April 20th?
That CNN reported a totally unnecessary both for investigation and public knowledge detail about half ethnic lineage of some mysterious “Misha”, as well as his religious convictions?
That the photo of enigmatic “Misha” was never released and no one knows of such a person who allegedly lives in Watertown, MA, one of the most Armenian-populated areas in the US?
Which one is a “conspiracy theory”?
Running ahead, I’d say that for people like you anything that raises substantiated doubt and invites a sober-minded deduction and analysis about the official BS-feeding is a “conspiracy theory”. Plain and simple.
I agree that this was somewhat of an overreaction on the part of Armenians. This is why I made the earlier comment about letting the story die quietly without continuing to focus attention on the uncle. However, going to John’s point, I don’t think its an overreaction to have the news media correct their story when new information surfaces. As a news organization, its their responsibility to do so.
I agree with Mikael, it’s media’s responsibility to make corrections here, but also, let’s not assume this is going to end here, Azerbaijani and Turkish lobbyists/agents in US are very much active to defame the Armenian name so this notion that we are overreacting it does not fit right in this picture, but I agree, we need to be very vigilant and
“We should be alert, but also smart about it.”.