The change of position of the Jewish Diaspora in the United States did not fail to generate repercussions on the historical plan. Indeed following this positive statement about the recognition of the Armenian genocide, experts have began to bring out sources up to now untapped, testifying to atrocities committed against the Jewish population in the Ottoman Empire. This population, who was one of the poorest among the non-Muslim ones, did not really have a claim to make regarding the non-enjoyment of property. This fact was used by Turkey in order to develop its propaganda on the liberal nature of the Ottoman Empire. As the state of Israel carefully avoided having another enemy in the region, the tactical combination of these viewpoints has led researchers to some form of neutrality towards Turkey. The problem, as so aptly said Elie Wiesel, is that neutrality is never on the side of the victim. And Turkey took advantage of this free field not only for establishing its propaganda but also for criticizing the Armenian and Greek cases, raising the Jewish counter-example in support of its intolerance. Yet the historical examination of its assertions demonstrates clearly proves the lack of objective substrate. This is exactly what confirms the new old sources that were not exploited by the centers of historical research, or to be more precise who had not been disseminated to the public. This new access to direct sources that accurately describe the events and actions of the Ottoman Empire against the Jews, finally validates the story of these forgotten in the silence of the archives victims. This new approach also allows facing in a more strategic way the problem of the recognition of the genocide. Indeed, even the most reticent among the Armenians to claim the genocide and its recognition, can no longer use the pretext of these Jews since it no longer exists de facto. Moreover, it is henceforth possible to establish a real strategic mix which justifies the efforts of the Armenians, Greeks and Jews against Turkish barbarity and its attempt to complete its genocides with a genocide of memory. We must now crosscheck all our information with those of the Jewish archives in order to bring out the systematic nature of Turkish barbarity. In the framework of the Armenian genocide, there were also Greek and Jewish victims that ought to be used in the indictment against Turkey. This time, we can demonstrate with supporting evidence that the Armenian genocide belongs to an even greater extermination that affects all non-Muslim populations. Our analysis of the work of Alexander Caratheodory on Islamic law acquires henceforth another value. Indeed, the integration of atrocities committed against the Jews corresponds to the application of the very foundations of Islamic law, which is very permissive with respect to any action against a non-Muslim. We no longer have simply a confrontation between Christians and Muslims, which corresponds to a war of religions. The opposition is carried out on Muslimness by its negation. Also we are witnessing a form of religious absolutism. Which means how paradoxical is our approach on Kemalism, since the latter under the pretext of restoring order in the Ottoman Empire following the intervention of the Neo-Turks, went well beyond all the efforts made so far in order to give coherence to the Turkish state. This means that all the Turkish structure is built on genocidal foundations. And present Turkey is nothing but the child of this genocide. This explains the difficulties of the recognition of the genocide but also the backslash that Turkey will undergo following the Armeno-Jewish change of phase.