Turkish Forum

Category: Ergun Kırlıkovalı

  • I DO NOT APOLOGIZE

    I DO NOT APOLOGIZE

    Some scholars in Turkey, the usual suspects long known for their anti-Turkish government and anti-Turkish state positions, are circulating a petition apologizing from Armenians. It is a free country; everyone can apologize to anyone, so there is no issue there. The issue arises when these people, and/or their supporters in the media, attempt to misrepresent the situation as if Turkey apologizes.

    I do not apologize because, frankly, I am still waiting, like Turkey does since the conclusion of WWI, for the six apologies due from the following to the Turkish nation: 

    The first, from Britain: for the wartime propaganda in the “Blue Book” on which today’s genocide claims are built; for the naval blockade of the food shipments to Anatolia which exacerbated the starvation conditions there; and for raining death and destruction on our grandparents’ in Anatolia; 

    The second, from France: for the wartime propaganda in the “Yellow Books” and for raining death and destruction on our grandparents’ in Anatolia; 

    The third, from the Tsarist Russia: for destroying a millennium of relatively harmonious Turkish-Armenian co-habitation in Anatolia with her expansionist policies and brutal invasion of Anatolia using Armenians; 

    The fourth, from the U.S. Protestant Missionaries sent from Boston: for dividing and polarizing teachings that destroyed a millennium of relatively harmonious Turkish-Armenian co-habitation in Anatolia and caused mutual killings and for doing this inhumanity in the name of God; 

    The fifth, from the New York Times: for biased and inflammatory coverage of Turkish-Armenians conflict in 1915; for not checking sources; for taking partisan reports filed by Armenian revolutionaries via missionaries and diplomats at face value; and for publishing 145 prejudiced reports demonizing Turks while allowing zero rebuttals to Turks; 

    This sixth, from the Ottoman-Armenians: for destroying a millennium of relatively harmonious Turkish-Armenian co-habitation in Anatolia where Armenians prospered in peace by resorting to propaganda, agitation, terror, rebellions, and treason, in that order, between 1877-1920; 

    When I get my apologies from the UK, France, Russia, US missionaries, the New York Times, and the Ottoman-Armenians, then I will offer my apology for the human suffering that was experienced by all Ottoman citizens, not Armenians alone, from 1911 to 1922. 

    WHAT THE WORLD NEEDS NOW IS TRUTH AND HONESTY, NOT SELECTIVE MORALITY

    BIAS IN THE PHRASE “ARMENIAN GENOCIDE” 

    If one cherishes values like objectivity, truth, and honesty, then one should use the phrase “Turkish-Armenian conflict”. Asking someone “Do you accept or deny Armenian Genocide” shows anti-Turkish bias. The question, in all fairness, should be re-phrased: “What is your stand on the Turkish-Armenian conflict?” 

    Turks believe it was a civil war within a world war, engineered, provoked, and waged by the Armenians with active support from Russia, England, and France, and passive support from the U.S. diplomats, missionaries, media, and others with anti-Turkish agendas, all eyeing the vast territories of the collapsing Ottoman Empire. [1]

    Most Armenians claim it is a one way genocide, totally ignoring the Armenian complicity in war crimes ranging from raids, rebellions, and terrorism to treason, causing many casualties in the Muslim, mostly Turkish, community. 

    GENOCIDE ALLEGATIONS IGNORE “THE SIX T’S OF THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT”

    While some amongst us may be forgiven for taking the ceaseless Armenian propaganda at face value and believing blatant Armenian falsifications [2] merely because they are repeated so often, it is difficult and painful for people like us, sons and daughters of the Turkish survivors most of whose signatures you see below. [3]

    Those seemingly endless “War years” of 1912-1922 (seferberlik yillari) brought wide-spread death and destruction on to all Ottoman citizens. No Turkish family was left untouched, those of most of the signatories’ below included. Those nameless, faceless, selfless Turkish victims are killed for a second time today with politically motivated and baseless charges of Armenian genocide. 

    Allegations of Armenian genocide are racist and dishonest history. 

    They are racist because they imply only Armenian (or Christian) dead count, the Turkish (or Muslim) dead do not. [4] The former must be remembered and grieved; the latter must be ignored and forgotten. Do you know how many Muslims, mostly Turks, were killed during World War One? Answer: About 3 million, including half a million of them at the hands of well-armed, well-motivated, and ruthless Armenian revolutionaries and para-military thugs. [3,5] Compare that with less than 300,000 Armenian casualties [8] which number is gradually magnified to 1.5 million over the years through Armenian propaganda. 

    And the allegations of Armenian genocide are dishonest because they simply dismiss

    “THE SIX T’S OF THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT”: 

    1) TUMULT (as in numerous Armenian armed uprisings between 1890 and 1920) [6,7] 

    2) TERRORISM (by Armenian nationalists and militias victimizing Ottoman-Muslims between 1882-1920) [8,9] 

    3) TREASON (Armenians joining the invading enemy armies as early as 1914 and lasting until 1921) [6,7,8,9,10] 

    4) TERRITORIAL DEMANDS (from 1877 to present, where Armenians were a minority, not a majority, attempting to establish Greater Armenia. Ironically, if the Armenians succeeded, it would be one of the first apartheids of the 20th Century, with a Christian minority ruling over a Muslim majority ) [1-11] 

    5) TURKISH SUFFERING AND LOSSES (i.e. those caused by the Armenian nationalists: 524,000 Muslims, mostly Turks, met their tragic end at the hands of Armenian revolutionaries during WWI, per Turkish Historical Society. This figure is not to be confused with 2.5 million Muslim dead who lost their lives due to non-Armenian causes during WWI. Grand total: more than 3 million, according to Justin McCarthy) [7-10] 

    6) TERESET (temporary resettlement) triggered by the first five T’s above and amply documented as such; not to be equated to the Armenian misrepresentations as genocide.) [12] 

    Armenians, thus, effectively put an end to their millennium of relatively peaceful and co-habitation in Anatolia with Turks, Kurds, Circassians, and other Muslims by killing their Muslim neighbors and openly joining the invading enemy. Muslims were only defending their home like any citizen anywhere would do. 

    VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS AMOUNTS TO LYNCHING

    Those who take the Armenian “allegations” of genocide at face value seem to also ignore the following facts concerning international law: 

    1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the U.N. 1948 convention (Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive to 1915.) [13] 

    2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a “competent court” after “due process” where both sides are properly represented and evidence mutually cross examined. [14] 

    3- For a genocide verdict, the accusers must prove “intent” and “motive” at a competent court and by allowing due process to run its natural course. This was not, perhaps cannot ever be, done by the Armenians, whose evidence mostly fall into five major categories: hearsay, mis-representations, exaggerations, forgeries, and “other”. [15]

    4- Such a “competent court” was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist (save a Kangaroo court in occupied Istanbul in 1920 where partisanship, vendettas, and revenge motives left no room for due process.) [8] 

    5- Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual. It reflects bias against Turks. Therefore, the term genocide must be used with the qualifier “alleged”, for scholarly objectivity and truth. [1-15] 

    6- Recognizing Armenian claim as genocide will deeply insult Turkish-Americans as well as Turkish-Europeans, and Turks around the globe. Such a conduct would negatively influence the excellent relations currently enjoyed between the U.S. and Turkey, if not the West and Turkey. It will, no doubt, please Armenian lobbies in the U.S. Europe and Turkey but disappoint, insult, and outrage Turkey, one of America’s closest allies since the Korean War of 1950-53. Turks stood shoulder to shoulder with Americans in Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and more. Armenian lobbies will have been allowed to poison the U.S.-Turkey relations. American gratitude and thanks will appear to come in the form of the worst insult that can be dished out to an entire nation. 

    7- History is not a matter of “conviction, consensus, political resolutions, propaganda, or public relations.” History is a matter of research, peer review, thoughtful debate, and honest scholarship. Even historians, by definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is reserved only for a “competent tribunal” with its legal expertise and due process. 

    8- What we witness today, therefore, amounts to lynching [14] of the Turks by Armenians and their supporters to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry. American values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet. Unprovoked , unjustified, and unfair defamation of Turkey, one of America’s closest allies in the troubled Middle East, the Balkans, and the Caucasus, in order to appease some nagging Armenian activists runs counter to American interests. 

    9- Hate-based, divisive, polarizing, and historically biased proclamations, such as Schiff’s HR 106, have never been an American way to do business. Why start now? 

    10- Those who claim genocide verdict [14] today, based on the much discredited Armenian evidence, are actually engaging in “conviction and execution without due process”, which is the dictionary definition of “lynch mobs”. 

    APOLOGY ? 

    Those who claim Turks need to apologize or show sensitivity to victims of WWI and/or their descendants-without remembering or respecting the Muslim, mostly Turkish, victims of the same WWI due to same wartime conditions-are insulting the silent memory of millions of Muslim, mostly Turkish, victims of WWI tragedy. They are also engaging in Ethocide [16], 

    A new term coined by a Turkish-American in 2003, Ethocide means “systematic extermination of ethics via malicious mass deception for political, economical, religious, social, and other gain.” Ethocide comes with a new Turkish companion term: “AHLAKKIRIM” [17] 

    If an apology is needed today, then the entire humanity should apologize for the mistakes and excesses of the past generations, without resorting to “selective morality” and discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, race, or religion. And if more sensitivity is required, then it should be provided by all for all, without resorting to division, polarization, hostility, bias, or bigotry. Our accounst of WWI are replete with expressions of sadness and sympathy for all the victims of WWI, Turk, Kurd, Laz, Circassian, Armenian, Arab, Greek, Jew, and all others. We do not feel we should segregate the Armenians or others from this lot and grieve only for them. 

    If an apology is needed today, we should all start apologizing for the world hunger, global warming, aids epidemics, endless wars, inequity in income distribution, plundering human and natural resources, violation of civil rights of women, children, and some cases all humans, global lack of education and health care, and more. 

    ISN’T IT TIME TO STOP FIGHTING THE FIRST WORLD WAR AND GIVE PEACE A CHANCE? 

    We would like to conclude with a heartfelt message of peace: 

    We wish the entire world just and lasting peace, good health, balanced and thriving nature, sufficient prosperity and unlimited happiness in the coming years. 

    As Ataturk so ably put it for all of us: “Peace at home, Peace in the World.” 

    ………………………..

    References: 

    [1] History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, Vol I & II, Stanford Shaw (Cambridge University Press, London, New York, Melbourne, 1976) 

    [2] The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, Heath W. Lowry ( The Isis Press, Istanbul, Turkey, 1990) 

    [3] The Ottoman Peoples and the End of Empire, Justin McCarthy (Arnold, London, U.K., 2001

    [4] Declaration Signed by 69 Prominent North American Academicians, New York Times and Washington Post, may 19, 1985 (for a copy:

    [5] Ermeniler: Sürgün ve Göç, Türk Tarih Kurumu (Ankara, Turkey, 2004) 

    [6] Houshamatyan of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, Centennial, Album-Atlas, Volume I, Epic Battles, 1890-1914 (The Next Day Color Printing, Inc., Glendale, CA, U.S.A., 2006)

    [7] The Armenian Rebellion at Van, Justin McCarthy, Esat Arslan, Cemaletting Taskiran, Omer Turan (The University of Utah Press, Salt lake City, USA, 2006)

    [8] The Armenian File, Kamuran Gurun (Rustem Bookshop, Mersin, Turkey, 1985)

    [9] The Armenians in History and the Armenian Question, Esat Uras (Documentary Publications, Istanbul, Turkey, 1988) 

    [10] Free E-Book : “Genocide Of Truth” by Sukru Server Aya, Based On Neutral or Anti-Turkish Sources ( Istanbul Commerce University, Turkey, 2008) For a copy: https://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2008/04/2429-new-e-book-genocide-of-truth-based.html

    [11] “Pursuing the Just Cause of Their People”, Michael M. Gunter (Greenwood Press, New York, USA, 1986) 

     

    [12] “Ermenilerin Zorunlu Göçü, 1915-1917, Kemal Cicek (Turk tarih Kurumu, Ankara, Turkey, 2005) 

    [13] Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948: http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

    [14] Article 6, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948: http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

    [15] Article 2, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948: http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

    [16] Ergun KIRLIKOVALI, 2003, “It Was Not ‘Genocide’; It was – and still is – ‘Ethocide’ “, ; 

    [17] Ergun KIRLIKOVALI, 2003, “SOYKIRIM DEGIL, AHLAKKIRIM ”
    ( )

  • GUENTER LEWY SUES SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER

    GUENTER LEWY SUES SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER

    Not a day passes when someone from the AFATH community (Armenian Falsifiers and Turks-Haters) doesn’t demonize Turks, Turkey, Turkish-Americans and/or friends of Turkey. 

    Forgetting that there are no substantiations by historical evidence for their political claims other than hearsay, forgeries, and partisan interpretations of wartime human suffering and ignoring that there are no court verdicts by competent tribunals to support  their accusations, these genocide lynch mobs arrogantly resort to insults, slanders, and threats.  They think they are protected under freedom of expression, but the question begs to be asked:

    Are obvious insults, malicious slanders, direct threats, and/or other similar hate speech protected under the U.S. constitution? 

    Gregory Lisby, a communications professor at Georgia State University, who has tracked criminal libel prosecutions and found 17 states that had not updated laws from English common law.  His research revealed that that criminal libel cases have dropped but he says the Internet could reverse that.  His words:  “More and more people view the online world as a free-rant place…They think it’s par for the course, but they’re setting themselves up for lawsuits or prosecution”

     (Source: “Colorado man faces criminal charge in libel case”, by Times Staff writer Nicholas Riccardi, Los Angels Times, December 4, 2008)

    I know several of these cyber-thugs, myself,  who insult me personally, attack me without even knowing me based on my ethnic heritage and the views I hold of my own family’s history.  And these insults, slanders, and threats come to me not in just one or two postings, but in majority if not all of postings.    I reserve my right to defend myself against these cyber-thugs. 

    Last October and November, I was attacked in many blogs for organizing a fund-raiser for a political candidate out of my district.  I figured, if one businessman (Daryl Issa) can spend his own money and succeed in replacing a sitting California Governor (Gray Davis), then why cannot another one (i.e. yours truly) replace a sitting congressman (Adam Schiff?) 

    Do I need to explain myself to anyone what politician, when, and why I should support? 

    Or do I need to get permission from my political adversaries to do so? 

    Isn’t fundraising one of the most cherished ways of participating in the political process?  Isn’t such participation encouraged, revered, and protected in the U.S. constitution?

    Why the strange efforts to show this American practice as something clandestine, dangerous, vile, or otherwise undesirable?

    Isn’t anti-Turkish bias, bigotry and hatred as well as ethnic and religious discrimination at work here?

    Hold those thoughts as I would like to bring to your attention the following press release I received today.

    Let’s read:

    ***

    PRESS RELEASE

    Washington, DC, December 3, 2008: On November 17, 2008 Professor Guenter Lewy filed a defamation suit against the Southern Poverty Law Center, Inc., and writer-editor David Holthouse in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, supported by the Turkish American Legal Defense Fund. TALDF seeks to preserve and promote open discourse about issues significant for Turkish Americans, including the characterization of the events bearing on the World War I deaths of Ottoman Muslims and Armenians.

    Among other works, Professor Lewy is author of The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide (University of Utah Press, 2005), which concludes that the evidence to support the popular allegation of genocide in the Armenian case is inconclusive.

    The defamation claims pivot on twin false assertions made by Defendant Holthouse in an article published in the Summer 2008 issue of Intelligence Report entitled, “State of Denial: Turkey Entices U.S. Scholars, Law Makers to Cover Up Armenian Genocide.” The first was the false statement that Professor Lewy was on the payroll of the Government of Turkey in exchange for compromising his scholastic integrity in disputing the Armenian allegation of genocide. The second was that Professor Lewy deceived his readers or audiences by failing to disclose the money he had received from the Government of Turkey to shape his view of the Armenian claim. The false statements also insinuated that Professor Lewy had violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act by failing to register with the Department of Justice as a mouthpiece for the Government of Turkey. Professor Lewy is seeking damages to clear his good name and to send a message that sham accusations of being on the take is not an acceptable substitute for reasoned and civil debate over genuine historical controversies. The climate of intimidation, coercion and worse that confronts anyone who quarrels with the Armenian view of the events of 1915 in the Ottoman Empire must end.

    Professor Lewy is being represented by attorneys Bruce Fein and David Saltzman on behalf of the Turkish American Legal Defense Fund.

    ***

     

  • GUENTER LEWY PROVED THERE IS NO GENOCIDE

    GUENTER LEWY PROVED THERE IS NO GENOCIDE

    The AFATH community is busy plastering anti-Turkish messages on any blog they can get their hands on. This is why I coined a new term back in 2003: Ethocide. A brief meaning of ethocide is: “extermination of ethics via malicious mass deception for political and other gain.”

    I hear you say: “So the AFATH community writers resort to ethocidal coverage of the Turkish-Armenian conflict. What else is new?” I agree, nothing new for 93 years… Make that since 1877… Their hate messages, however, suffer from lack of credibility, as Dr. Gwynne Dyer put it so eloquently in 1976:

    “… The deafening drumbeat of the propaganda, and the sheer lack of sophistication in argument which comes from preaching decade after decade to a convinced and emotionally committed audience, are the major handicaps of Armenian historiography of the diaspora today…”

    There are those cyber-thugs with questionable morals, cyber-stalkers with convoluted messages, and a whole cyber community of insulters and slanderers to whom concepts like Armenian terrorism means nothing. I suggest to my readers not to address their postings to these cyber-lynch-mobs, but to the open-minded truth-seekers. The minds of these cyber-lynch-mobs cannot be changed, but the other side of the story can certainly be told to fair-minded truth-seekers.

    AFTER ALL, OUR MESSAGE IS VERY SIMPLE

    Wartime suffering ?

    Yes, but on all sides, Turks, Armenians, and others, alike…

    Genocide?

    No, not even by a long shot.

    The term genocide does not apply to warring factions; never did. Armenians were certainly “de facto belligerents” with an army of more than 150,000, as Nubar, head of Armenian delegation to Paris Peace Conference, himself wrote in 1919. That army was not created for picking flowers.

    A court verdict does not exist supporting Armenian genocide claims. Insisting on a guilty judgment without a court verdict, therefore, boils down to lynching.

    And that is the plain truth.

    MARK TWAIN

    Mark Twain once said “It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them.” AFATH writers prove Mark Twain right everyday by attacking the freedoms of speech and conscience of all Turkish-Americans, with their posture tainted by anti-Turkish discrimination.

    HOW THE AFATH WRITERS COMMIT ETHOCIDE

    By only telling one side of the story and hiding the other. One will tell you, for example, about an article demonizing Turkey and Turks, but will fail to tell you the rebuttal to it in the same column.

    Or he will tell you about Guenter Lewy’s quotes out of context, but will not tell you about the fact that there may have been comments setting the record straight. That’s AFATH morality for you.

    If one chooses to believe the AFATH writers with “selective morality”, that is that person’s problem. Trying to silence people like me who are only telling their side of the story, calling them names for doing so, and basing this lynch-mob-like behavior on the long discredited Armenian propaganda, however, is hardly fair, ethical, or American, whether in journalism, academia, or politics.

    The Armenians have defined the Turkish-Armenian conflict one way, their way, for 93 years. Even this could be understood within the context of ethnic and/or religious fanaticism. After all, it is a free country, you can believe whatever you want, even that the world is flat.

    Problem arises when the Armenians demand their claims be declared as settled history with zero tolerance for the other side of the story, coming from Turks and non-Turks alike. The problem turns into a criminal conduct when these demands turn to violence, as in Armenian terrorism that claimed 70+ innocent lives (three right here in Southern California) since 1973, aimed at imposing the Armenian will on others.

    Whether the Armenian claims of genocide are recognized by this country or that, does not change the fact that Armenians engineered, provoked, and waged a civil war within a world war; took up arms against their own government; killed their Muslim/Turkish neighbors; joined the invading enemy armies; demanded territories where they were a minority to create Greater Armenia; and did all that with the help of active allies (Russia, Britain, France), passive allies (U.S. diplomats, Protestant missionaries, the New York Times) and others.

    THE SIX T’S SUMMARIZE THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT WELL

    1- Tumult (Armenians taking up arms against their own government;)

    2- Terrorism (by Dashnaks, Hunchaks, and other such Armenian terror groups;)

    3- Treason (Armenians joining the invading enemy armies;)

    4- Territorial demands (where Armenians were a minority attempting apartheid;)

    5- Turkish suffering (at the hands of Armenian revolutionaries and terrorists; number exceeds half a million Muslims, mostly Turks)

    6-Tereset (temporary resettlement triggered by the above 5 T’s and misrepresented by Armenians as genocide.)

    MY OBJECTIONS TO LEWY

    I praised the world renown Historian Guenter Lewy for the damning conclusion in his article titled “Revisiting the Armenian Genocide” published in Fall 2005 edition of Middle East Quarterly ( https://www.meforum.org/895/correspondence ):

    ” …Most of those who maintain that Armenian deaths were premeditated and so constitute genocide base their argument on three pillars: the actions of Turkish military courts of 1919-20,…, the role of the so-called “Special Organization” accused of carrying out the massacres, and the Memoirs of Naim Bey, which contain alleged telegrams of Interior Minister Talât Pasha…. Yet when these events and the sources describing them are subjected to careful examination, they provide at most a shaky foundation from which to claim, let alone conclude, that the deaths of Armenians were premeditated….”

    …

    Can you see how masterfully Lewy refutes the Armenian allegations with just a few simple words?

    My hat is off to Lewy. I was so impressed that I bought and read Lewy’s book. I did have some objections about some of the arguments and sources in his book which were conveyed to Lewy himself in a letter signed by yours truly two years ago:

    1) Lewy seems to have spent spent little or no time describing the immense Turkish suffering and death toll at the hands of the Armenian nationalists. In my humble opinion, any treatment that fails to take into account the Turkish side of the story is inherently and inevitably incomplete and biased. No one can explain a controversy by completely ignoring half the story.

    2) Lewy also seems to have made very limited use of the Ottoman archives (perhaps due to his lack of skills in reading the original documents in the Ottoman language which is understandable but perhaps not easily excusable.

    3) He took at face value most of reporting from Anatolia by biased sources: the Armenian Patriarchate, ARF, Armenian insurgents, allied diplomats, military personnel, missionaries, and others who all clearly had vested interests in the conflict and/or were parties to the civil war and/or the world war, raging concurrently.

    4) others

    Having pointed out my objections to his book this way, I must emphasize that none of my objections above change the ultimate conclusion by Lewy that the Turkish-Armenian conflict, as tragic as it was, cannot be classified as genocide.

    That conclusion stands on its own feet and I congratulate and praise Lewy for that… eternally.

    Peace,

    Ergun KIRLIKOVALI
    Son Of Turkish Survivors From Both Maternal And Paternal Sides

    www.turkla.com

    …………..

    Legend:

    AFATH : Armenian Falsifiers And Turks-Haters

    ETHOCIDE: Systematic extermination of ethics via malicious mass deception for political, social, academic, religious, ratings, and/or other gain.”

  • GENOCIDE CROWDS ARE THE NEW KKK

    GENOCIDE CROWDS ARE THE NEW KKK

     

    Turks are the new Jews.  Genocide crowds are the new KKK.  Although there has been no due process or a jury verdict by a competent tribunal, these genocide crowds already made up their minds about the Turkish-Armenian conflict.  Facts, figures no longer matter to these lynch mobs.    

    These genocide lynch mobs burn crosses not on Turkish lawns (yet,) but in public conscience.  They claim, scream, and attack… They insult, intimidate and terrorize… They already have their chosen verdict in their minds which comforts their anti-Turkish bias:  Turks are guilty and there is no need to discuss this verdict; it is execution time… get the rope!   

    To these genocide lynch mobs, there is only one side to their coin: their side… The Armenian side…  Armenians are all white; Turks are all black.  And that’s that… They want you to believe their bigoted black & white picture.   There is no gray areas for them.  So, don’t even think of bringing it up, or you will be labeled a denier and hung in their mind and soul.    

    If you believe these genocide lynch mobs, they’ll love you instantly.  And  if you question them  even in the lightest degree, they will hate you instantly.  This love/hate relationship is evident in all of their letters, op-ed, newspaper columns, book, documentaries, full feature films, and more. They are so arrogant about it that they see no reason to hide it or sugar coat it.    

    These genocide lynch mobs will have you believe that April 24, 1915,  is the start of their bogus genocide.    What happened that day?  The Ottoman Government Home Security forces launched a drag net operation and arrested the Armenian ring leaders  who were involved in terrorist attacks, rebellions, and/or treasonous acts.  These were seemingly respectable Armenian community leaders— just like that Topalian fellow whose pictures with American presidents adorned his office before he was convicted of  terrorism charges a few years back.  To Armenians, April 24, 1915 was genocide (how hollow, meaningless,  and unjustified.)  To Turks, it represents defending your home against domestic terrorist cells, sort of like an Ottoman-Guantanamo.      

    But you cannot discuss April 24, 1915, the Ottoman-Guantanamo-Not-Armenian-Genocide concept, because their hatred quickly takes over their reason. You cannot prove to them that, for example,  Gomidas, an Armenian priest and a musician, was let go after a while when the charges against him could not be proven.  Gomidas went back to Istanbul first and then moved to Europe eventually, and  died in France.  This episode alone is powerful enough an example to prove to  any open-minded truth-seeker that Turks had no intention of eliminating  those few Armenian leaders arrested for foul play.  More than a few were eventually let go.  But you cannot discuss these facts with the genocide lynch mobs, No Sir.  If you do, your life may be in danger (see Armenian terrorism, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4.)   

    Neither can you debate with these genocide lynch mobs, the Armenian rebellions that started in 1890 and went uninterrupted until  the most heinous and bloodiest of them all, the VAN Rebellion in Feb-April  1915, which caused their TERESET (temporary resettlement) in May 1915 and lasted until the spring of 1916.    

    Neither can you debate with these genocide lynch mobs, the Armenian terrorism which started in 1882 and continued until 1921.   After a hiatus   of about  50 years, it re-started in 1973 with the Santa Barbara killings of two Turkish diplomats by an older,  hate-filled Armenian  man.  You cannot show these lynch mobs the threads of continuity in their love affair with aggression, violence, and terrorism.  They feel they are blameless.  Victims are to blame for standing on the trajectory  of the Armenian bullets!  Such blinded are these genocide lynch mob by their hatred for all things Turkish.  They need help.  The psychological kind, I mean.    

    Neither can you debate with these genocide lynch mobs, the Armenian treason that started in 1914 and climaxed in 1915.   You cannot show these  genocide lynch mobs documents from their own Armenian archives (like the 1919 Nubar letter and the 1923 Katcahznouni  Manifesto, and many others like those) proving Armenian treason and how wrong it was then and it still is now… 

    Neither can you debate with these genocide lynch mobs, the Armenian territorial demands since 1877, going unabated to this very date.  The irony is not lost: the Armenians were not even a majority in those areas and if the Armenians succeeded in realizing their delusion, the Greater Armenia, it would have been the first apartheid regime in the 20th Century where a tiny Armenian minority would be ruling over a massive non-Armenian majority.  Is this a dream worth taking up arms against your own government, terrorizing your neighbors and joining the advancing enemy armies?  Was it worth it?  After all, didn’t all these heinous Armenian crimes force Turks to defend their home, like any citizen anywhere, including the U.S., would do?  Was not Tereset a direct outcome of   Armenian rebellions, terrorism, and treason?    

    In short,  you cannot discuss anything with these genocide lynch mobs, period.   

    But you know what?  Truth does not take a hike, just because Armenians do not want to hear it.    

    In fact, truth may take a Hye, but never a hike.   

    Peace,   

    Ergun KIRLIKOVALI 

    Son Of Turkish Survivors From Both Maternal And Paternal Sides 

  • Armenian genocide becomes issue in Adam Schiff race

    Armenian genocide becomes issue in Adam Schiff race

    Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) has gained national attention for his efforts to have official recognition for the Armenian genocide. And that has made him a beloved figure in his district’s large Armenian American community. But the Pasadena Star-News reports that his stand has also helped his election opponent:

    In recent weeks, Republican challenger Charles Hahn picked up thousands of dollars at a fundraiser thrown by a Turkish-American businessman who runs a Web site denying the World War I-era Armenian genocide took place. “I want to bring all sides of the issue to the party: Armenians, Turkish-Americans, the Turkish and Armenian governments,” said Hahn. “We need to all work together in solving the problem.” The fundraiser was put together by Ergun Kirlikovali of Turkish Forum , an Orange County businessman who runs several Web sites, including “www.falsegenocide.com.” The ideology represents a sharp contrast to bills sponsored by Schiff. Over the past two years, Schiff has sponsored legislation that would put the U.S. government on record as officially recognizing that the genocide took place.

    More on the effort for recognition of the genocide here in this October 2007 article from The Times’ Molly Hennessy-Fiske.

    — Shelby Grad

    Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Armenian genocide becomes issue in Adam Schiff race:

    Comments
    SCHIFF HAS VOTED FOR $840 BN BAILOUT, NOT HE SHOULD “PAY” FOR IT

    I find the Armenian panic about a Turkish-American fundraising rather amusing. Why is it so noteworthy? After all, it is not the first time we, the Turkish-Americans, are doing it. It is probably the first time the Armenians are noticing it.

    And I don’t appreciate the innuendos like we are some sort of aliens from some planet whose political activities should cause a nationwide alarm. This strange Armenian reaction seems to be the direct result of stereotyping of Turks for decades in Armenian minds.

    We, the Turkish-Americans, are hardworking, tax-paying, law-abiding citizens, who are fed up with politicians like Schiff who for years has repeatedly placed Armenian interests above American ones. We find Schiff’s attitude on the Turkish-Armenian conflict extremely racist and dishonest. Schiff takes Armenian allegations at face value, ignores Turkish suffering caused by Armenians, and dismisses Armenian terrorism, armed rebellions, supreme treason, and territorial demands, all of which caused their TERESET (temporary resettlement.) There was human suffering on all sides. It was a civil war within a world war, not genocide.

    It is interesting to note that everything Turkish-Americans do is quickly attributed (by Armenians) to “the Turkish lobby” whereas everything Armenians do, to “grass roots activism”. Every function Turkish-Americans organize is chalked off to “denialism” whereas every act of harassment, intimidation, and even terrorism Armenians relentlessly conduct is credited to “advocacy”. This approach reeks of ethnic discrimination.
    Charles Hahn, the Republican challenger, on the other hand, is a decent, honest, hardworking, family man who understands that there are two sides to a coin, any coin. Hahn knows well that it is the job of historians, not politicians, to sort out what did or did not transpire 100 years ago in some distant part of the world and how to characterize it. He supports establishment of a commission of historians to study this matter away from constant Armenian pressure and intimidation. For me, this is enough cause to support Charles Hahn.

    Charles Hahn promises, if elected, to do away with the inheritance taxes, support the social security fairness act so teachers get their fair share, lower health care costs, and give a federal tax credit of $250 for anyone who rescues an animal from the pound and gives it a loving home. Moreover, Hahn does not support the 840 Billion Dollar bailout of Wall Street companies whose directors made poor business decisions but promptly celebrated receiving 840 billion of our tax dollars with champagne baths in lavish Florida parties. Schiff is the one whose vote in Congress made it happen. Schiff has many reasons to be concerned.

    Posted by: Ergun Kirlikovali | October 31, 2008 at 08:50 AM

    To the Armenian and Turkish genocide obsessives: this is America. This is 2008. We have a few more urgent matters to address. Keep this neurotic fixation on “acknowledgement” of the Armenian genocide out of American election politics–we have an economic meltdown, a decaying infrastructure, a failing educational system, a degraded environment, and–oh yes–a few tragic CURRENT civil and other wars around the world killing people NOW for our elected leaders to address. I am tired of hearing about the demands of a very very small immigrant group for our government leaders to drop everything and issue proclamations about something that happened almost 100 years ago. If you have so much time and energy, help do something for people in the Sudan. For one example.

    Posted by: Malby | October 31, 2008 at 09:09 AM

    Imagine if the Jewish Holocaust was denied by the Germans and was not officially recognized in the United States. Imagine the outrage.

    Posted by: A | October 31, 2008 at 10:31 AM

    Good bless u

    Posted by: Berj | October 31, 2008 at 11:12 AM

    JEWISH HOLOCAUST IS A FACT, ARMENIAN GENOCIDE IS AN ALLEGATION

    Jewish Holocaust is a fact based on the verdict of a “competent tribunal”, Nuremberg, where the due process” was allowed to run its natural course and the accused were given a fair chance to cross-examine the evidence and question the witnesses produced by the accusers.

    Armenian genocide, on the other hand, is an allegation. A fair “due process” a la Nuremberg was never allowed in the Turkish-Armenian conflict; there is no court verdict saying it is genocide. All we have is Armenian claims based on hearsay and forgeries backed by Armenian nagging pressure, intimidation, harassment, and terrorism. People do not yet know the “other side of the story”.

    Those who ignorantly compare the factual Jewish Holocaust with the bogus Armenian genocide, might wish to consider this:

    Did the Jews establish Jewish armies behind German lines, attack German armies’ rear, join the invading enemy armies, and cause half millions of German casualties, all in order to establish a Jewish state on German soil?
    Of course, not.

    Armenians, on the other hand, did all that and much worse in the Ottoman Empire causing 524,000 Muslim dead, mostly Turkish, with Armenian rebellions, terrorism, treason, and territorial demands.

    In all fairness, how can the court-proven fact of Jewish Holocaust be uttered in the same breath as the baseless allegations of Armenian genocide , let alone compared?

    VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS AMOUNTS TO LYNCHING

    Those who take the Armenian “allegations” of genocide at face value seem to ignore the following:

    1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the U.N. 1948 convention (Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive.)

    2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a “competent court” after “due process” where both sides are properly represented and evidence mutually cross examined.

    3- For a genocide verdict, the accusers must prove “intent” at a competent court and after due process. This could never be done by the Armenians whose evidence mostly fall into five major categories: hearsay, misrepresentations, exaggerations, forgeries, and “other”.

    3- Such a “competent court” was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist (save a Kangaroo court in occupied Istanbul in 1920 where partisanship, vendettas, and revenge motives left no room for due process.)

    4- Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual. It reflects bias against Muslims in general and Turks in particular. The term genocide must be used with the qualifier “alleged”, if one values ideals like truth, objectivity, and fairness.

    5- Genocide claim is based on racist and dishonest history. Racist because it ignores the much larger Turkish suffering and death toll while it honors only Armenian dead and suffering. Dishonest because it dismisses brutal Armenian armed revolts, domestic and international Armenian terrorism, supreme Armenian treason (as in joining an invading enemy army to kill their Muslim neighbors) and Armenian territorial demands, all of which combined to cause their TERESET (temporary resettlement) in another part of the Ottoman Empire—hence cannot be labeled a deportation.

    6- Recognizing Armenian claim as genocide will deeply insult Turks around the globe and destroy the excellent relations currently enjoyed between the U.S. and Turkey. It will, no doubt, please Armenians but also disappoint and outrage Turkey, one of America’s closest allies since the Korean War of 1950-53. Turks stood shoulder to shoulder with Americans in Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and more. American gratitude and thanks will appear to come (because of the Armenian lobby) in the form of the worst insult that can be dished out to an entire nation.

    7- History is not a matter of “conviction, consensus, political resolutions, or propaganda.” History is a matter of research, peer review, thoughtful debate, and honest scholarship. Even historians, by definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is reserved for a “competent court” with its legal expertise and due process.

    8- What we witness today amounts to lynching of the Turks by Armenians to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry. American values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet. Unprovoked , unjustified, and unfair defamation of Turkey, one of America’s closest allies in the troubled Middle East, in order to appease some nagging Armenian activists runs counter to American interests.
    Hate-based proclamations, such as Schiff’s HR 106, have never been an American way to do business. Why start now?

    Those who claim genocide verdict today, based on the much discredited Armenian evidence, are actually engaging in “conviction and execution without due process”. Last time I looked in the dictionary, that was the definition of “lynch mobs”.

    Peace.

    Ergun Kirlikovali
    Son of Turkish survivors from both paternal and maternal sides

    Posted by: Ergun Kirlikovali | October 31, 2008 at 12:05 PM

    The difference between grass roots American-Armenian movements to educate people about the Armenian genocide and the Turkish individuals who parade as “offended Americans” is truth verses unadulterated propaganda directed from Ankara, Turkey.

    The Turkish government is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to stop any progress towards any meaningful reconciliation by hoping that the truth of the Armenian genocide can be “professionally” buried.

    This issue is correctly stated that it’s not an important concern to the American voter in these turbulent economic period, but it speaks volumes to the character of those who stand for justice and truth and those who trample on a human rights issue and shamefully accept politically motivated endorsements that puts the interests of a foreign government, Turkey, above the basic American values. These are the differences between those who are running for office to represent Americans in the US Congress.

    Posted by: Zareh Sahakian | October 31, 2008 at 12:41 PM

    It is a proven fact my brother. I’m not going to list all the documented atrocities here in this comment section. Armenians have nothing against innocent Turkish people. In fact, they are great people. It’s your criminal government that we don’t like. Explain to me why you get 10 years in prison(if you’re lucky) if you even bring up the Armenian Genocide. I do understand why normal innocent Turkish people can’t accept the fact that their ancestors can commit such evil crimes. 99% of the people in Turkey are good people. It is a hard thing to accept. The truth will come out eventually.

    A

    Posted by: A | October 31, 2008 at 01:21 PM

    Ergun Kirlikovali your argument that it happened 100 years ago and therefore should be forgotten without proper closure does not stand. Because the attitude from your argument is then if you commit a crime/genocide and enough time passes by it will be old news,forgotten therefore its ok to do it.As a matter of fact Hitler gave a speech before the holocaust and that is exactly what he said:”Who remembers the Armenian genocide today?.”
    Have you ever thought that proper recognition may actually bring closure?
    Also the Armenian protests are not directed to average Turk in Turkey or here in the states,its aimed at the Turkish government,which by the way has nothing to do with the genocide but it’s covering it.
    Josef Stalin said once :”The death of a person is tragedy the death of millions is just statistic”: that is what you saying.

    Posted by: Gary | October 31, 2008 at 01:27 PM

    Ergun, as a person involved in the “dispute” you are probably well aware of the fact that more than 120 Holocaust and genocide scholars have declared the Armenian genocide an incontestable fact. Furthermore, the International Center for Transitional Justice recently released a legal study implicitly supported by the Turkish government that declared “The Events, viewed collectively, can thus be said to include all of the elements of the crime of genocide as defined in the Convention, and legal scholars as well as historians, politicians, journalists and other people would be justified in continuing to so describe them.”

    The scholars and lawyers have spoken. It is long past time for Turkey to face the judgment of history. Stop the shameful denial, have guts to face the truth – or else this issue will continue haunt you, your chaildren and grandchildrenn…

    Posted by: Lusy | November 01, 2008 at 06:06 PM

    There are some decent Turks, who dare to speak up the truth. Unfortunately, the Armenian Genocide took place, and there is no academic debate about the fact. All those who speculate on the issue of the Armenian Genocide are those who try to accumulate political points that can be redeemed for something else.

    Posted by: VIlen | November 01, 2008 at 06:24 PM

    When the « Los Angeles Times » will publish information about the financial support by Armenian ultranationalist groups, like ANCA, for politicians who supports Armenian claims? The man who is charge of the political financing of ANCA, Mourad Topalian, is a former terrorist, sentenced to 37 months of jail by a US court in 2001.

    Posted by: Lucrèce | November 02, 2008 at 02:09 AM

    “Yes, a large number of Western students of Ottoman history reject the appropriateness of the genocide label for the tragic fate of the Armenian community in Ottoman Turkey. This list includes distinguished scholars such as Roderic Davison, J.C. Hurewitz, Bernard Lewis, and Andrew Mango. Ignoring this formidable array of learned opinion, most Armenians and their supporters among so-called genocide scholars assert with superb arrogance that the Armenian genocide is an incontrovertible historical fact, similar to the Jewish Holocaust, which would be denied only by lackeys of the Turkish government.”
    Guenter Lewy (professor emeritus of political science at Massachussetts University), “The Middle East Quarterly”, Winter 2006.

    “As a result of three month touring the area occupied and devasted by the Russian army and Christian army of revenge, during the spring and summer 1916, I have no hesitation in saying that the Turks would be able to make out as good a case against their enemies as that presetend against the Turks in Col. Agha Petro’s letter. According to the almost universal testimony of the local inhabitants and eye-witnesses, the Russian acting on the instigation and advise of the Nestorians and Armenians who accompagnied them, the leading of whom seems to have been Agha Petro himself, murdered and butchered indiscriminately any Moslem member of the civil population who fell into their hands. A typical example that might be quoted is the extermination of the town of Rowanduz and the wholesale massacre of its inhabitants.
    While Col. Petros is able to quote isolated examples of Turkish atrocities, a traveler through the Rownaduz and Neri districts would find widespread and wholesale evidence of outrages committed by Christians on Moslems. Anything more thorough and complete would be difficult to imagine. I might also mention that according to the testimony of the Kurdish population, Col. Agha Petros proved the Russians’ evil genius and was to a greast extent directly responsible for the excesses committed by Russian troops.”

    Major Edward W. C. Noel, political officier of the British Army, report of 1919, Archives of Foreign Office, 371/4173/80976, quoted in Stanford J. Shaw, “From Empire to Republic: the Turkish War of National Liberation”, Ankara, TTK, vol. II, p. 922.

    Posted by: Lucrèce | November 02, 2008 at 02:11 AM

    Gary, perhaps you should get your “facts” updated concerning the famous Hitler quote…

    The quote had been declared “a forgery” (yet another one) since 1984, that was 24 years ago !!!

    Dr. Robert John, a historian and political analyst of Armenian descent from New York City, declared that a commonly used quotation of an alleged statement by Adolf Hitler concerning the Armenian massacres was a forgery and should not be used.

    During the Nuremberg trial, the German defense lawyers were able to introduce the most complete account of the August 22 1939 address, taken down by German Admiral Hermann Boehm, which runs to 12 pages in translation. There is NO mention of the Armenians or the rest of the “quotation.”

    Kevrok Bardakciyan in a June 11, 2005 interview admits clearly that the statement of Hitler saying that “who remembers the murdered Armenians?” could not be found out despite all the searches in the archives. “… I have conducted researches for eighteen months in order to reach an evidence of this statement. I could not find out valid evidence proving that Hitler said such a statement…”

    Posted by: Robert | November 02, 2008 at 06:24 AM

    Frequent arguments proffered by the Turkish Government are in bold italics below. The answers follow in plain text.
    1. Forget the Armenian Genocide. Why should we be concerned with something that happened 90 years ago and 8,000 miles away?

    Genocide is a crime against humanity, and there is no statue of limitations on genocide — not even one 90 years old. At the time the Armenian Genocide was being carried out, the Allies called it “a crime against humanity and civilization.” The term genocide had not yet been created by Rafael Lemkin, but “genocide” means the murder of a nation, a term which the American ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Henry Morgenthau, used in his report to the U.S. State Department.

    The fact that a major crime against humanity takes place 8,000 miles away from the United States makes it no less a crime. Was Hitler justified in killing Jews because he was 5,000 miles away? Should American troops not defend Saudi Arabia because Saddam Hussein was 9,000 miles away?
    It was the old Ottoman Empire that committed the crime, but present-day Turkey becomes an accomplice after the fact by its expensive campaign of denial, denial not only for itself but for the old Ottoman Empire. This principle of becoming an accomplice by the cover-up of a crime is part of the rule of law.

    2. What have Americans to do with the Armenian Genocide?

    America was the first country to recognize the Armenian killings as “the murder of a nation,” that was before the word genocide was invented, and continued to recognize it until misguided officials sought favor with the Republic of Turkey by joining in an ugly, and quite unnecessary, distortion of history.

    The Armenian Genocide was witnessed by hundreds of American missionaries in the Ottoman Empire who worked among the Armenians for nearly 100 years. They have testified to the destruction of the Armenians by the Young Turk controlled Ottoman government

    The Genocide was also witnessed by American consular officials, stationed in the areas inhabited by the Armenians, who reported it to the American ambassador to the Ottoman Empire in Constantinople (now Istanbul), Henry Morgenthau.

    American Ambassador Morgenthau confronted the Young Turk leaders, trying to persuade them to cease and desist, and then he telegraphed the American Secretary of State calling the Turkish action an attempt at “racial extermination,” another synonym for genocide.

    The American Secretary of State, William Jennings Bryan, wired U.S. Ambassador Morgenthau to continue the strongest possible protests to the Ottoman government on behalf of the Armenians.

    The Armenian Genocide was well-reported in the American press, such as the New York Times, and in dozens of weekly and monthly journals such as were read by the American public before the spread of radio and television. Furthermore, the U.S. Senate held contemporary hearings which affirmed its reality.

    President Woodrow Wilson agreed to draw the boundaries of a free Armenia and sent a message to Congress asking for permission to establish a U.S. mandate over the new state.

    I ask this] “Not only because it [the mandate] embodied my own convictions and feeling with regard to Armenia and its people, but also, and more particularly, because it seemed to me to be the voice of the American people expressing their deep sympathies. At their hearts, this great and generous people [the Americans] have made the case of Armenia their own.

    The American people raised millions of dollars to aid the victims of the Genocide. Our older citizens will remember aid to the “starving Armenians.

    President Herbert Hoover wrote in his Memoirs:

    Probably Armenia was known to the American school child in 1919 only a little less than England … of the staunch Christians who were massacred periodically by the Mohammedan [sic.] Turk, and the Sunday School collections of over fifty years for alleviating their miseries. . . .

    3. All these Americans who reported the Armenian Genocide were biased against us. They were not telling the truth.

    There was no reason for the Americans to lie. America was a neutral power during the time of the Armenian Genocide. In fact America never did go to war against Turkey but kept up diplomatic relations so that it could retain missionary property, try and gain economic concessions, and give relief to those Armenians who survived, mostly children.

    Anyway, who are these Turkish propagandists and their fellow travelers to accuse the Americans of lying? The Turkish state is far from having a clean record in this regard.

    4. Why not leave historical questions to the historians? Why should the issue of the Armenian Genocide be fought out in the U.S. Congress, the European Commission, the European Parliament, or among world governments?

    The Turkish government and its supporters have adopted the line of “leave Armenian history to the historians” because they do not have objective scholarship supporting their allegations and have resorted to propaganda. Currently, they are losing their propaganda battle. The issue of the Armenian Genocide is not a question of historical truth; that has been settled by historians. It is rather an issue of morality, legality and the acceptance of the truth.

    History is too important to leave to historians. By leaving the Armenian injustice of World War I uncorrected, the stage was set for the Holocaust of World War II. The abandonment of the Armenians was not lost on Hitler. Hitler said before sending his troops into Poland, “Go, go kill without mercy. Who today remembers the extermination of the Armenians?”

    Posted by: Mark | November 02, 2008 at 07:19 AM

    5. Why should America acknowledge the Armenian Genocide now?

    America is the moral leader of the world. We must set the record straight, to rehabilitate America’s innocence, extricate the U.S. from an ugly distortion of history, and restore America’s respectability in the eyes of our European allies who, accepting the truth, are amazed at America’s hypocrisy.

    No principled Turk should be offended by the truth. After all, a large number of Armenian survivors of the Genocide owe their lives to devout Muslim Turks, Kurds, and Arabs. To be a patriotic Turk does not require hating Armenians or distorting history. In fact, there are Turkish scholars who recognize the Genocide and urge their government to come to terms with Turkish history. A few, including Taner Akcam, have published books on the Armenian Genocide

    6. There is more than one side to every story.

    Truth is not divisible by two. Is there another side about Hitler who gassed Jews, about Stalin who starved Ukrainians, or about Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge who massacred Cambodians? Of course not. Genocide is so blatant an evil that it has no other side to the story.

    7. It is your word against ours.

    The Turkish government has confessed in earlier times. Prime Minister Damat Ferid Pasha placed the blame squarely on the Young Turk Party and held war crime trials in which the chief perpetrators were condemned to death.

    PrinceAbdul Mecid, the heir apparent to the Ottoman Throne, said during an interview: “I refer to those awful massacres. They are the greatest stain that has ever disgraced our nation and race. They were entirely the work of Talat and Enver. I heard some days before they began that they were intended. I went to Istanbul and insisted on seeing Enver. I asked him if it was true and they intended to recommence the massacres that had been our shame and disgrace under Abdul Hamid. The only reply I could get from his was: ‘It is decided. It is the program.’”

    Mustafa Kemal Pasha (later surnamed “Ataturk”) said in a 1926 interview with a Swiss reporter that “these holdovers from the Young Turkey [sic.] Party should be made to account for the lives of millions of our Christian subjects who were ruthlessly driven en masse from their homes and massacred. . . .”

    And, of course, Hitler knew and drew a lesson from it. As he sent his Death Heads troops into Poland to start World War II, he said: “Go. Kill without pity. Who nowadays remembers the annihilation of the Armenians?”

    Posted by: Mark | November 02, 2008 at 07:19 AM

    8. Why do Armenians get all the sympathy, Turks died too. Perhaps some three million Turks died during the period of the alleged genocide against the Armenians.

    It is doubtful that three million Turks died in World War I. Turkish propagandists sometimes use the more correct, but still deceptive, expression “three million Muslims.” Yes, three million Muslims probably did die in WW I, but so did twenty million Christians. What has that got to do with the Armenian Genocide?

    The Turks died, unfortunately, because their own government led them into World War I against the European Allies. Many Turkish Muslims also died fighting Arab Muslims, who were seeking their freedom from Ottoman oppression, and Indian Muslims who were with the British Middle East army in Mesopotamia. All this Muslim blood, then, is on the head of the Ottoman Turkish government and not on the victimized and helpless Armenians.

    There were at most around three million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, most of them old men, women, and children, and they can hardly be blamed for the death of three million “Turks or Muslims.” That is absurd.

    9. The Armenians were killed in a civil war, or an ethnic feud; it was not genocide.

    When the armed government of 25 million people turns on and attempts to exterminate an unarmed minority of three million old men, women, and children, it is hardly an “intercommunal struggle,” “an ethnic feud,” or “civil war”; it is nothing more or less than genocide. The Turkish government had a bureaucracy, tax money, an army, irregular troops, the local police, and special killing squads to carry out its mission. What did the Armenians have?

    If it was a feud between Turks and Armenians, what explains the genocide carried out by Turkey against the Christian Assyrians at the same time?

    Furthermore, Turkish armies invaded the fledging Armenian Republic in the Caucasus inhabited by indigenous Armenians in order to wipe out not only Armenians in the Ottoman Empire but also Armenians who lived elsewhere.

    10. Why pick on Turkey? Turkey is a “model modern Moslem country.”

    Since when do model countries deny their citizens human rights and religious freedom?

    Turkey’s thinly veiled military dictatorship with its long history of human rights abuses, its repression of the legitimate aspiration of the Kurds for cultural autonomy, its historic antagonism towards the Arabs, its invasion of Cyprus, and its current denial of freedom to Armenian and Greek institutions in Turkey hardly make Turkey a “model modern Moslem country.”

    If the Turks as a group are disliked and feared by most Europeans, the Kurds, the Arabs, the Greeks, and the Armenians, perhaps there is some reason. The Turkish people ought to demand that their government throw off its atavistic ghazi mentality, modernize its feudal agrarian economy, outgrow its penchant for military government, and end the abuse of human rights and persecution of minorities. Many Turks want this change and should be encouraged.

    11. We have opened the Turkish archives. The Turkish archives do not prove there was an Armenian Genocide.

    The Turkish archives covering the period of the Armenian Genocide are not opened to the public. They are only open to Turkish scholars and persons friendly to Turkey.

    The Turkish archives have been closed so long that scholars have no idea of what is being, or has been, purged. Furthermore, the work of the Genocide was done under the aegis of the Committee of Union and Progress, a shadow government similar to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and in particular by its Special Organization (Teshkilat-i Mahsusa) under the notorious Dr. Behaettin Shakir who was sentenced to death in absentia by a Turkish court-martial following World War I. Will their records be opened? There is no talk of that.

    12. We will open our archives if the Armenians open their archives.

    What could possibly be of interest to the Turkish government, relevant to the Armenian Genocide, in the Armenian archives? Armenia was not even reestablished until 1918 after the Genocide has been effectively completed. Rather we already have the American archives, the American missionary archives, the British archives, the Russian archives, the Italian archives, and even the archives of the Germans and Austrians, the allies of the Turks.

    13. American Admiral Mark Bristol’s testimony proves there was no Genocide. Admiral Bristol proves that Morgenthau was lying.

    Ambassador Morgenthau, who informed the world about the Armenian Genocide, was there when it happened. Admiral Mark Bristol, who became U.S. High Commissioner in Turkey after World War I, did not even arrive in Turkey until 1920. Since Bristol was not in Turkey during the Genocide, and the Armenians had already been killed, he had to ask the Turks what happened. Bristol could only talk to the executioners of the Armenians, the Turks. The Turks are hardly creditable witnesses to deny their own crime.

    Bristol, a stern military man, liked the military junta ruling the post-World War I Turkey, and he eagerly talked about the “bad qualities” of the Armenians and Greeks. Do “bad qualities” justify genocide? If so, that might put even many Turks and Americans at risk.

    14. The only reason that the Turks aren’t allowed into the European Community is their Islamic religion.

    What concerns the Europeans is not the religion of the Turks, but rather their values. Judeo-Christian culture, which characterizes the Western world, is dedicated to developing a moral society with civic institutions. Democracy and faith in the beneficent value of truth is the current manifestation of this aspiration. If the Turks were to thirst after justice and righteousness, values to which we in the West aspire, they would most certainly be welcomed in any society. As I said earlier, many Turks do, but they are hindered by their government.

    The first sign of this new morality would appropriately be for present-day Turkey to acknowledge the Ottoman genocide of the Armenians.

    15. No one to date has been able to come up with creditable documentation of Hitler’s alleged statement about the Armenians. Hitler never made the statement.

    The Hitler statement, which Turkish propagandists have questioned, was authenticated by Dr. K.B. Bardakjian, at Harvard in 1985 from secret notes taken by German Admiral Wilhelm Canaris during Hitler’s speech. (See K.B. Bardakjian, Hitler and the Armenian Genocide [Cambridge, MA: Zoryan Institute, 1985]).

    16. How do the Armenians expect the American people to feel sorry for them when they support terrorism?

    The assassinations of Turkish officials which began by two small clandestine groups in 1973 were stopped in 1985 by Armenian public opinion. Armenians do not need terrorists, because people of good will, having studied the Armenian case, now have greater understanding and sympathy. There is no Armenian terrorism today, and the Armenian public has sympathetic feelings toward those who were killed.

    17. Only 600,000 Armenians died in the Ottoman Empire during World War I, not 1.5 million, and they were killing Turks during that time.

    The Turkish apologists play with numbers in a grotesque way. They argue that only 600,000 Armenians were killed not 1.5 million. Would this change the basic truth that a genocidal massacre occurred in 1915-1923? Almost the entire Armenian population of Turkey was wiped out by its own government, the Turkish government. Does it really make the actions of Turkey better if they succeeded in killing only 600,000 Armenians and not 1.5 million? In any case, it was genocide.

    The Turkish apologists insist that Armenians were also killing Turks. It is true that scores of Armenians fought back successfully. But how can you compare pockets of self-defense with murder by a government? The Armenians were killed by their own government, the Turkish government; they sometimes fought back to protect themselves.

    18. The Turks had to deport the Armenians from the eastern war front where they were helping the Russians who promised them a homeland.

    Armenians all over Anatolia, not just on the eastern war front, were wiped out. The cities of Yozgad, Sivas, Caeserea, Hadjin, Marash, Adana, and Ankara — just to name a few — are hardly in the east. One needs but to look at a map of Turkey to see this. Turkish apologists depend on American ignorance of geography to make such foolish claims

    Both the Turks and the Russians offered the Armenians autonomy. Neither promise could be trusted. Truth is the first victim of war. Neither the Turks nor the Russians had a history of granting their subjects freedom. The last tsar, Nicholas II, would not even share power with his own Russian people, which prompted the Russian revolution during World War I. Russia even forbade Armenian refugees, who had managed to flee the Genocide, from returning to their ancestral lands, which the Russian armies had overrun during the war. Prince Lobanov-Rostovsky, foreign minister of Russia in 1895, summed up Russia’s traditional stance by saying, “Yes, Russia wants Armenia, but without the Armenians.”

    19. Individual Armenians and individual Turks should develop friendships which will ease the relationship between the Turkish government and the Armenian people and let bygones be bygones.

    The question is not that of individual Turks and individual Armenians. Historically, many Armenians and Turks have developed close friendships, and I for one have many Turkish friends. The issue is the stance of the Turkish government toward the Armenian Genocide and indeed of the Turkish government’s current repression of minorities. When the Turkish government faces reality and changes its backward policies, then individual friendships between Turks and Armenians can extend to a comparable relationship between the Armenian Republic and the Turkish Republic. One first sign of Turkish change would be to lift the embargo which it has presently in place between Turkey and Armenia.

    Posted by: Mark | November 02, 2008 at 07:20 AM

    « Unfortunately, the Armenian Genocide took place, and there is no academic debate about the fact. »
    Who is responsible? The Turkish Historical Society invites Armenian and pro-Armenian scholars since 1990. Few accepted, including Levon Marashlian in 1990, and Hilmar Kaiser in 2006.

    Posted by: Lucrèce | November 02, 2008 at 09:50 AM

    “Genocide is a crime against humanity, and there is no statue of limitations on genocide”
    The Geneva convention on genocide (1948) is not retroactive. Even the Nazi leaders were not sentenced for “genocide”, but for war crimes, on the ground of the The Hague (1907) and Geneva (1928) conventions.
    And what about the massacres, rapes, pillages… committed by Armenian and Nestorian gangs, by Cossaks or by Greek soldiers, between 1914 and 1922? Hmm?

    “The term genocide had not yet been created by Rafael Lemkin, but “genocide” means the murder of a nation, a term which the American ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Henry Morgenthau, used in his report to the U.S. State Department.”
    It is a lie. The word genocide did not exist before 1944. Let’s open a dictionary! And see Lucy S. Dawidowicz and Zygmunt Bauman for understand the specificity of the Shoah.

    “The assassinations of Turkish officials which began by two small clandestine groups in 1973 were stopped in 1985 by Armenian public opinion.”
    The Justice Commandos of Armenian Genocide were not a “small clandestine group”, but the terrorist branch of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, i.e. the party which controls the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA). Mourad Topalian, president of the ANCA between 1991 and 1999, currently in charge of political financing distributed by the ANCA, was sentenced to 37 monts of jail by an US court in 2001.
    The Armenian Secret Army for Liberation of Armenia (ASALA) was supported by many Armenian associations, at least until 1983. Many money was sent to the ASALA from the so-called diaspora, many committee for support the incarcerated terrorists were created by Armenians in Switzerland or in USA. Ara Toranian, president of the Comité de coordination des associations arméniennes de France (like ANCA + AAA in France) was spokesman of the ASALA between 1976 and 1983.
    The terrorist attacks were not stopped in 1985: for example, the ASALA attempted in December 1991 to assassinate the Turkish ambassador in Hungary.

    Posted by: Lucrèce | November 02, 2008 at 10:04 AM

    BIAS & BIGOTRY IN THE TERM “ARMENIAN GENCOIDE”

    If one cherishes values like fairness, objectivity, truth, and honesty, then one should really use the term “Turkish-Armenian conflict”.

    Asking one “Do you accept or deny Armenian Genocide” shows anti-Turkish bias. The question should be re-phrased “What is your stand on the Turkish-Armenian conflict?”

    Turks believe it was a civil war within a world war, engineered, provoked, and waged by the Armenians with active support from Russia, England, and France, all eyeing the vast territories of the collapsing Ottoman Empire. Armenian fanatically claim it is genocide. They intimiadet, harass, and terrorize if you don’t agree with Armenians.

    Until this controversial dispute is sorted out in a “competent tribunal” where the “due process” is allowed to run its course and Turkish side of the story is also understood, evidence and witnesses mutually cross examined, all decent people should use the qualifier “alleged” before the term genocide. Fairness and honesty require it.

    Blaming an entire people with a crime uncommitted and without a court verdict is lynching and un-American.

    It was a civil war within a world war, not a genocide. Human suffering did not discriminate on the basis of ethnicity; all the people of the area suffered equally terribly.

    Embellishing and cherishing Armenian suffering and ignoring or dismissing Turkish suffering is selective morality and ethnic discrimination.

    Posted by: Ergun Kirlikovali | November 03, 2008 at 08:14 AM

    Of all the comments posted by the Armenian symphatizers or PAC leaders here, the one that explains the mindset of the average Armenian-American the best is, “history is too important to leave to historians”. Inside this smog of confusion and hatred they create, hints like this can always be found by those who care more about the facts.

    Under the supervision of their PACs, it appears Armenians have unilaterally decided that the history is too important to leave to the historians. They may also feel the economists should stay away from the economy, or scientists should not be allowed into labs, I don’t know. All I know is it should be clear to an objective, competent person that only the ignorant or ill willed could carry such an idea that disrespects the science and the scientists.

    How did such an unsophisticated, one-sided argument grow so wide in such an anti-democratic fashion, in a country that is built on the idea of the superiority of science, freedom of speech and equality of justice, is the real question one should ask. Next time they bash George W. Bush for his not-so-scientific comments on global warming, democrats should remember to practice what they preach.

    Posted by: Sarp Ersoylu | November 03, 2008 at 02:31 PM

    What I read from the genocide deniers it’s like you try to convince yourself more then anything else
    The bottom line is no nation goes for 100 years claiming a fake genocide for some personal gains. Your arguments against it changed from: nothing ever such thing happened to if it did it does not constitute for genocide because it was a century ago,WW1,Turks suffered too & more circumstances that could go on.The history repeated itself with very similar circumstances during WW2.The same arguments can be made here too but
    Genocides are black and white: deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.
    I hope though we have forgiveness for each other after all we have more things in common as neighboring countries.

    Posted by: Gary | November 04, 2008 at 09:46 AM

    What I read from the genocide deniers it’s like you try to convince yourself more then anything else
    The bottom line is no nation goes for 100 years claiming a fake genocide for some personal gains. Your arguments against it changed from: nothing ever such thing happened to if it did it does not constitute for genocide because it was a century ago,WW1,Turks suffered too & more circumstances that could go on.The history repeated itself with very similar circumstances during WW2.The same arguments can be made here too but
    Genocides are black and white: deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.
    I hope though we have forgiveness for each other after all we have more things in common as neighboring countries.

    Posted by: Gary | November 04, 2008 at 10:30 AM

    RE: Mark’s #16. “Armenians do not need terrorists, because people of good will, having studied the Armenian case, now have greater understanding and sympathy. There is no Armenian terrorism today, and the Armenian public has sympathetic feelings toward those who were killed.”

    Yes, several hundred of us were fortunate enough to experience the sympathy and understanding of 2 Armenians in particular when they so kindly infiltrated our annual Turkish Republic Day Ball in Long Beach (Oct. 25th) and began screaming and yelling during our moment of silence for the fallen victims of terrorism….I felt their sympathy as they were escorted out by police (and again, two hours later as about 20 of them screamed at us as we left the event in our car).

    Very classy display of good will and understanding….

    Posted by: anonymous | November 04, 2008 at 01:43 PM

    BIAS & BIGOTRY IN THE TERM “ARMENIAN GENCOIDE”

    If one cherishes values like fairness, objectivity, truth, and honesty, then one should really use the term “Turkish-Armenian conflict”.

    Asking one “Do you accept or deny Armenian Genocide” shows pure anti-Turkish bias. The question should be re-phrased “What is your stand on the Turkish-Armenian conflict?”

    Turks believe it was a civil war within a world war, engineered, provoked, and waged by the Armenians with active support from Russia, England, and France, all eyeing the vast territories of the collapsing Ottoman Empire. Armenian claim it is genocide.

    VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS AMOUNTS TO LYNCHING

    Those who take the Armenian “allegations” of genocide at face value seem to ignore the following:

    1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the U.N. 1948 convention (Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive to 1915.)

    2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a “competent court” after “due process” where both sides are properly represented and evidence mutually cross examined.

    3- For a genocide verdict, the accusers must prove “intent” at a competent court and after due process. This could never be done by the Armenians whose evidence mostly fall into five major categories: hearsay, mis-representations, exaggerations, forgeries, and “other”.

    3- Such a “competent court” was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist (save a Kangaroo court in occupied Istanbul in 1920 where partisanship, vendettas, and revenge motives left no room for due process.)

    4- Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual. It reflects bias against Turks. Therefore, the term genocide must be used with the qualifier “alleged”, for scholarly objectivity and truth.
    5- Genocide claim is based on racist and dishonest history. Racist because it ignores the much larger Turkish suffering and death toll while it honors only Armenian dead and suffering. And dishonest because it dismisses the bloody Armenian armed revolts (1890-1920), domestic and international Armenian terrorism (1882-1921 and then again 1973 to present) , supreme Armenian treason (as in joining an invading enemy army to kill their fellow Ottoman neighbors, 1914-1918) and Armenian territorial demands (1877-present) , all of which combined to cause their TERESET (temporary resettlement) in another part of the Ottoman Empire—hence cannot be labeled a deportation.

    6- Recognizing Armenian claim as genocide will deeply insult Turkish-Americans as well as Turks around the globe and destroy the excellent relations currently enjoyed between the U.S. and Turkey. It will, no doubt, please Armenians but disappoint, insult, and outrage Turkey, one of America’s closest allies since the Korean War of 1950-53. Turks stood shoulder to shoulder with Americans in Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and more. American gratitude and thanks will appear to come (because of the Armenian lobby) in the form of the worst insult that can be dished out to an entire nation.

    7- History is not a matter of “conviction, consensus, political resolutions, or propaganda.” History is a matter of research, peer review, thoughtful debate, and honest scholarship. Even historians, by definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is reserved for a “competent court” with its legal expertise and due process.
    8- What we witness today amounts to lynching of the Turks by Armenians to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry. American values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet. Unprovoked , unjustified, and unfair defamation of Turkey, one of America’s closest allies in the troubled Middle East, in order to appease some nagging Armenian activists runs counter to American interests.

    9- Hate-based proclamations, such as Schiff’s HR 106, have never been an American way to do business. Why start now?

    10- Those who claim genocide verdict today, based on the much discredited Armenian evidence, are actually engaging in “conviction and execution without due process”. Last time I looked in the dictionary, that was the definition of “lynch mobs”.

    Isn’t it time for Armenians to stop fighting the First World War and give peace a chance?

    Peace.

    Posted by: Ergun Kirlikovali | November 04, 2008 at 09:42 PM

    RE: Yes, several hundred of us were fortunate enough to experience the sympathy and understanding of 2 Armenians in particular when they so kindly infiltrated our annual Turkish Republic Day Ball in Long Beach (Oct. 25th) and began screaming and yelling during our moment of silence for the fallen victims of terrorism….I felt their sympathy as they were escorted out by police (and again, two hours later as about 20 of them screamed at us as we left the event in our car).

    Very classy display of good will and understanding….

    So they shouted at your gathering, does this make them terrorists? If so, man I wish Osama Bin Laden was this type of terrorist on 9/11.

    This is America, had they done that in Turkey, they’d be put in jail for 10 years. Also, you know there are many many poor countries in the world, did you ever wonder why it is Armenians that are proportionally the most dispersed? Hey you kill and deport them from Eastern Turkey, a lot of them move to the US, then you bitch that they might have some political power in their new country of residence???

    That said, as an Armenian, I must say now is not the time for a resolution. First we must leave Iraq so we no longer need those military bases in Turkey, then it’s time for the resolution and hopefully Obama will follow through on his promise. You better hope the US is in Iraq for a loooong time buddy, or that resolution would have passed years ago. That said, I don’t hate anybody not even a Turk, I can see how you believe what you believe, I just strongly disagree, and now we can peacefully fight it out politically and see who wins and I hope we win and you lose. Later.

    Posted by: SoCalHye | November 04, 2008 at 09:59 PM

    SoCalHye,

    If a minority group, which strongly argues against terror and for peace & human rights, secretly leaks into another country’s republic day celebrations to scream and yell words of hatred during a moment of silence to honor victims of terror, you can’t call that freedom of speech. That is hypocrisy.

    As a last note, you are absolutely right. There is nothing wrong with Armenians having political power in the US. What is wrong with it is that they use it in an unjust and unethical way to dishonor and hurt Turkey and its people, rather than using it in a positive way to bridge between Turks and Armenians who once co-existed for hundreds of years.

    Posted by: Sarp Ersoylu | November 05, 2008 at 05:14 PM

  • ERGUN KIRLIKOVALI : ACCUSATIONS BY AN ARMENIAN POLITICIAN UNDER CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION

    ERGUN KIRLIKOVALI : ACCUSATIONS BY AN ARMENIAN POLITICIAN UNDER CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION

    ERGUN KIRLIKOVALI
    TURKISHFORUM ADVISORY BOARD MEMBER

    I congratulate TALDF (The Turkish American Legal Defense Fund) for protecting the civil rights of the Turkish-Americans . The Armenian lobby in this country has become too aggressive and dangerous lately, intimidating, harassing and terrorizing Turkish-Americans.

    According to their reasoning, a fundraising held by Turkish-Americans for a non-resident candidate is something to be attacked and insulted. Case in point, my organizing of a fundraiser for the Republican challenger Charles Hahn who is running for congress in California District 29. The Armenians, however, do it themselves all the time (see campaign contributions lists for Schiff, Menendez, Palone, others…) Hahn raised about $70,000 in comparison to Schiff’s $1,000,000 and yet who gets attacked? You guessed it: Hahn! Go figure.

    In the case of sitting Congresswoman Jean Schmidt ( R, OH), though, at least one Armenian may have crossed the line. Let’s read:

    ***

    ARMENIAN AMERICAN VERBAL THUGGERY IN OHIO PROVOKES CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION REQUEST

    Washington, DC, November 3, 2008

    The Turkish American Legal Defense Fund today requested the Attorney General of Ohio, Nancy H. Rogers, to open a criminal investigation under Ohio law into signature Armenian verbal thuggery employed by Armenian American independent candidate David Krikorian against Representative Jean Schmidt.

    The Congresswoman represents the 2nd district of Ohio, and is running for re-election. The criminal lies under that Krikorian recently splattered against Ms. Schmidt are emblematic of the religiously and ethnically bigoted campaign tactics that Armenian Americans celebrate, directly or indirectly, against congressional candidates who refuse to salute their narrow, close-minded, fanatical anti-Turkish agenda.

    Ohio’s Revised Code makes criminal intentional falsehoods calculated to impact elections. Other candidates for Congress that have been similarly victimized by Armenian American verbal thuggery in the 2008 election cycle include Steve Cohen (Tenn.), Virginia Foxx (N.C.), Charles Hahn (Calif.), Robert Wexler (Fla.), and Jill Morgenthaler (Ill.).

    Kirkorian’s criminal lies about the Congresswoman and her campaign supporters are posted on the Internet at The Armenian American’s posting in substance falsely accuses Congresswoman Schmidt of bribery and Turkish Americans who have made campaign contributions for her of paying bribes, i.e., that she bargained for campaign contributions from Turkish Americans in exchange for a promise to take official actions in Congress in opposition to perennial “Armenian genocide” resolution in the House of Representatives: “Representative Jean Schmidt has taken $30,000 in blood money to deny the genocide of Christian Armenians by Muslim Turks.”

    Contrary to the Krikorian’s lies, there was no quid pro quo or any irregularity whatsoever in the campaign contributions for Congresswoman Schmidt. As is customary in political campaigns, contributors make financial contributions to candidates who support the policy positions of which they approve. In fact, Armenian Americans and their political action committees scrupulously confine their contributions to candidates who support or pledge to support “Armenian genocide” resolutions.

    Congresswoman Schmidt’s opposition to the Armenian genocide resolution is readily explained by historical facts. Her conclusions accord with renowned Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis of Princeton University, who has been consulted by the White House under President George W. Bush, and others of comparable academic prestige.

    The Congresswoman, based on her independent research does not believe the tragic events of World War I, in which both Armenians and Turks were killed in harrowing numbers, constituted genocide-an accusation that has never been proven in a court of law. She further maintains that the historical question is not appropriate for Congress to legislate.

    The Turkish American Legal Defense Fund has written a letter to Attorney General Rogers urging a criminal investigation and prosecution of David Krikorian under Ohio campaign and false statement laws, Ohio Revised Code, section 3517.02 and section 2921.13(A)(2), respectively.

    To paraphrase attorney Joseph Welch’s rebuke to Communist witch hunting Senator Joe McCarthy, have Armenian Americans no sense of decency, at long last? Have they left no sense of decency?

    TALDF will oppose any assault from any quarter on the right of Turkish Americans to participate fully in the American political process, including voicing their opinions on issues impacting Turkish-American relations or otherwise.

    ergun@cox.net

    ***

    Turkish American Legal Defense Fund – TALDF

    1025 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 1000, NW Washington, DC 20036

    Phone: 202-370-1399 ext.3,
    Fax: 202-370-1398
    Website:www.taldf.org