Category: Authors

  • “PKK Failed in Armenia”

    “PKK Failed in Armenia”

    murinsonWe evaluated extremely important subjects and events in South Caucasus with Dr. Alexander MURINSON for Strategic Outlook readers. (more…)

  • Where will People’s Mujahedin of Iran (or Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) enter Iran from?

    Where will People’s Mujahedin of Iran (or Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) enter Iran from?

    Iran Azerbaijan

     

     

     

     

    Gulnara Inanch, [email protected]

    Director of Information and Analytical Center Etnoglobus (ethnoglobus.az), editor of Russian section of American-Turkish Resource website www.turkishnews.com  

     

     

    Foreign Ministry spokesman of Iran Ramin Mehmanparast has recently expressed his concern over the possibilities of provision a shelter in Azerbaijan to anti-Islamic regime People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MEK) by the US and Israel.

     

    Mehmanparast, at the same time, has warned that neighbors should take into account sensitiveness of this issue toIran; otherwise Tehran’s response will be severe. Statement is not by chance.

     

    It is another proof thatTehrantries to take preventive measures asIran’s statement is based on possibilities rather than true facts since West andIsraeluse Southern Azerbaijan national issue and internal and external anti-Iran regime in order to cause disorder inIran.

     

     

    MEK’s survival began from 2009 when MEK was removed from the EU list of terrorist group.  Besides between 2005-2009 MEK trained in the US military bases.

     

    In April a group of American politicians asked for removal of MEK from the list of terrorist group. Such progress of the events enables us to believe that the offer will be accepted by the White House:

     

    «OfficialTehranis concerned about MEK. This organization was established by Shah Pehlevi as a close power to him. As the organization was established on basis of interests, instead of ideas, it changed its position. MEK has strong support and reputation both in and outside ofIran. This is well-organized organization. Being not a nationalist group, it meets the demands of the west with regard to overthrow of political power ofIran».

     

    MEK also has media organizations broadcasting in theUS. Although its TV broadcasting has been stopped for a while, it is expected to restore its broadcast for political pressure over Iranian government.

     

     

    In April of this year US New Yorker magazine reported that MEK had received standard training that included communications, cryptography, small-unit tactics and weaponry. The training in theU.S.took place at the Department of Energy’s Nevada National Security Site. The article also says that the purpose of the trainings was to commit terror attacks inIran.

     

    In order to penetrate into Iran MEK militants need to use territories of neighbor countries. However, permission of neighbor countries for it is not required. They may apply various methods that the terrorists use like entering different countries under different names through which they can enterIran.

     

     

    To settle such well-organized and trained armed groups within the territories ofAzerbaijanis a dangerous as it might lead to destabilization in the country, as well as of statehood point of view. So,Azerbaijanitself would be interested in cooperation withIranto prevent MEK militants from access to the country.

     

     

    Reference – People’s Mujahedin of Iran was founded in 1965 by a group of leftist Iranian university students. Although the goal was to establish a socialist republic inIran, they offered establishment of Tovhid society.

     

    MEK carried out various terror attacks in Iranin the 1970s, then fought against Iranduring Iran-Iraq war.   Despite recognition of new regime following Islamic Revolution MEK chose to struggle against Islamic regime after being subject to terror and torture. Group’s armed wing is called National Liberation Army of Iran whose leader is Masoud  Rajavi.

    source- New Baku Post

     

     

  • US Supreme Court May Hear First Ever  Armenian Genocide-Related Lawsuit

    US Supreme Court May Hear First Ever Armenian Genocide-Related Lawsuit

     

    sassounian3

     

    For the first time, a lawsuit indirectly involving the Armenian Genocide is being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Since its initial filing in 2003, various federal courts have taken conflicting positions on this lawsuit.

     

    Here is a brief background to the case: In 2000, the California legislature adopted a law — Section 354.4 of the California Code of Civil Procedure — extending to 2010 and subsequently to 2016 the deadline for Armenian Genocide victims or their heirs to file claims on insurance policies issued from 1875 to 1923 to persons living in the Ottoman Empire between 1915 and 1923.

     

    In December 2003, several California Armenians filed a class action lawsuit in Federal Court against German insurance companies for refusing to pay the proceeds of life insurance policies purchased by their ancestors in the Ottoman Empire. The German companies, supported by the Turkish government, objected to the lawsuit and sought to have it dismissed. They claimed that the California law authorizing the lawsuit was unconstitutional because its reference to the Armenian Genocide conflicted with the federal government’s policy on this issue.

     

    When the Federal District Court rejected the insurance companies’ argument on June 6, 2007, they appealed to a panel of three federal judges on the Ninth Circuit Court. In a 2-1 opinion, the judges ruled on August 20, 2009 that the California law conflicted with the Executive Branch’s foreign policy prerogative. The Armenian plaintiffs then sought a rehearing of the case by the same panel of three judges. On December 10, 2010, the majority of the judges ruled that the California statute did not violate the foreign affairs doctrine.

     

    Unhappy with this reversal, the German companies appealed to the full (en banc) Ninth Circuit Court. By a unanimous decision, the panel of 12 federal judges ruled on February 23, 2012 that the California law was unconstitutional, as it “intruded on the federal government’s foreign affairs power.” Using the rarely-invoked doctrine of “field preemption,” the judges ruled that Section 354.4 was unconstitutional not due to any conflict with specific actions of the federal government, but because it dealt with an area of exclusive federal responsibility, namely foreign relations.

     

    On June 22, 2012 Igor Timofeyev of Paul Hastings LLP, Counsel for the Armenian plaintiffs, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. He argued that this is the “perfect vehicle to clarify the foreign affairs preemption doctrine” and that “the Ninth Circuit’s unwarranted expansion of the field preemption doctrine would…imperil numerous state laws dealing with traditional areas of state competency.” Citing congressional and executive branch pronouncements favoring the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, Timofeyev pointed out that the US government not only did not object to the Armenian Genocide resolutions issued by various states over the years, but in fact welcomed them, as Pres. Obama had done in his statement of April 24, 2012.

     

    Meanwhile, a Supreme Court ruling in another case may have improved the prospects for the Armenian appeal. Just days after Timofeyev filed his petition, the Supreme Court issued a ruling on an Arizona statute dealing with undocumented immigrants. The Arizona case raised the very issue that is at the heart of the Ninth Circuit’s en banc decision on Armenian insurance policies, namely whether a state law that could indirectly impact foreign relations in a particular area is subject to “field preemption” even in the absence of federal action in that area.

     

    In ruling on the Arizona case, several justices found no preemption in the Arizona statute. Even the majority, which found some preemption in the Arizona statute, severely limited the application of the field preemption doctrine. Specifically, the Court ruled that, while states cannot act in an area where the federal government has a “complete,” “integrated and all-embracing” regulatory system, they can do so where the federal government has “expressed no more than a ‘peripheral concern’” or “done nothing to suggest it is inappropriate” for the states to act.

     

    These statements provide strong support for overturning the Ninth Circuit’s en banc decision on the Armenian insurance claims. That point will no doubt be urged on the Supreme Court by the plaintiffs and in the amicus briefs to be filed by the Armenian Bar Association and others.

     

    This lawsuit is basically about non-payment of valid insurance claims and not about genocide recognition. German insurance companies are shamefully exploiting the genocide issue simply to avoid paying long overdue benefits to insurance claimants.

     

    It is not known at this time if the Supreme Court will take up this appeal, since it accepts for review only a small number of cases each year.

     

     

  • WE THE PEOPLE……..

    WE THE PEOPLE……..

    WE THE PEOPLE…

    CHAPTER 15

    IT CAN NOT HAPPEN TO ME.  GUESS WHAT? IT WILL!!!

    The following message is for every citizen of every country that has the right to choose their own elected officials.

    Come July 1, 2012 the world is in financial agony. A tsunami of easy credit has flooded our shores. The blame game has erupted with all its fury as nations pockmark each other with vicious language to placate their voters.

    The real culprit is us – the voter. We voted them into office. We are to blame. There have been and will be many important elections this year and WE THE PEOPLE must take control of our destinies. Elected officials fear us and have been buying us off with various entitlements for decades. If it did not work, then they just, made it larger. So today, as our bankers joyfully watch and estimate their future net worth, we are slowly falling into an abyss with a stench of sulfur.

    Considering these elections, one’s party affiliations do not matter, because it is the candidate’s beliefs that are of the utmost importance now.

    Which candidate favors reinstating the USURY LAW where the maximum interest rate should be limited to 8%. The Rule of 72 is what bankers live by. All one has to do is to take 72 and divide it by 8 the answer is how many years it will take the bank to double its investment in you. The Usury law was dropped in the mid 1970’s because interest rates were 14% and everyone was maxing out their credit cards (that is borrowing the most they could) and buying a US Government bond at 14%. Then they would pay of the credit card and net 6%. This is called disintermediation and not very healthy long term. So congress was forced to drop the law. But they also failed to reinstate it when the danger expired. It is my suspicion that some members on key committees received special favors.

    If you have a 30 year mortgage on your home and you are paying 8% to the bank; the bank will make 3.33 times on helping you on your mortgage by providing the necessary funds. This is where they provide an important function in your community. The higher rate you pay the quicker they double their money. This is why past legislators legalized as max rate – to protect you from unscrupulous bankers. Remember bankers have the moral obligation to protect our deposits for our advantage not theirs.  Dividends should come from earnings before bonuses are distributed.  Public trust comes before employees looting.

    Credit cards are a bastard. They are figured in months not years.  This is legalized extortion.  Pure and simple.

    Enacting or reinstating the USURY LAW will benefit the individual and corporations while reducing the bankers’ bonuses.

    A candidate must be willing to petition the Federal Reserve to raise margin rates across the board to 100% for 3 to 6 months worldwide. This will stop all the abuses going on in the market place and make it safe for honest investors. This will halt high frequency trades that are computer driven and benefit a few while harming millions. Hedge funds that use easy credit to skirt regulations will be halted. Best of all derivatives and collateralized debt instruments will go the way of the dinosaur.

    Stop Quantitative Easing (QE) dead in its tracks. Go for Quantitative Giving (QG). QE goes to the largest corporation and unions where the money trickles down through the officers and union leaders before long term good is completed.

    With QG the Fed must raise fed funds to the 1-2% range so banks restart increasing their savings account rates. This will encourage investors to increase their debt from short term to longer term because they have more confidence in the future.

    QG is giving a large stipend to everyUScitizen over the age of 21($50,000 -$100,000) to use as he or she sees fit. Pay down debts etc. with the proviso that at least 10% should be used to purchase a new product. This will getAmericagoing again create jobs and new businesses.  The public knows best- not bureaucrats inWashingtonD.C.

     

  • Turkey’s Sex, Lies and Videotapes

    Gatestone Institute 27 June 2012
    By Claire Berlinski

    Turkey’s Supreme Court of Appeals did not criminalize all porn recently—it just ruled that anyone in possession of videos depicting oral or anal sex may be sentenced to prison. This followed a recent ruling identifying videos of gay and group sex as “unnatural”—that is, in the same legal category as videos depicting sex with animals, children and corpses, all of which are forbidden by Article 262.2 of the Turkish Penal Code. This article stipulates that owning, trafficking, distributing or publishing such videos will earn you one-to-four. The ruling followed the sentencing by a local court of a suspect to six months in prison for selling CDs that depicted what we in the decadent West might call “sending your husband off to the office happy.”

    The case went up to the Supreme Court of Appeals, which not only ruled that the defendant’s sentence was too low, but declared that the activity in question was also “unnatural”— on a par with necrophilia. The court thus overruled the original sentence and replaced it with one consistent with Article 262.2.

    As if this were not enough to chill the country’s libido, the new ruling applies both to videos downloaded from the Internet or stored on a personal computer— in other words, it probably applies to every male with a computer in Turkey: according to Google, Turkey leads the world in searches for the word “porn” (followed, if you are curious, by Romania and Peru). As one Turkish friend put it, “Who wants to watch porn without oral sex?”

    Bans on porn in Turkey are nothing new—after the 1980 coup, for example, the military imposed a desultory ban; but what really happened was that newspapers unable to report about anything else started competing on skin, until, by the end of the decade, porn was a growth industry. A Turkish friend recently nostalgically reminisced about the kids who sold Kleenex outside his favorite Beyoglu cinema when he was growing up.

    By the late 1990s, the porn industry here was apparently in its Golden Age. I don’t know much about it and don’t really want to do the research; I’ll just take everyone’s word for it. Then the AKP came to power and began cracking down. In 2004, members of the government passed legislation making it illegal to distribute “obscene” images, words, or texts through any means of communication – pretty much criminalizing the entire country. In 2005, they banned the four erotic television channels available on Turkey’s sole satellite provider: Digiturk. Playboy TV, Exotica TV, Adult Channel, and Rouge TV all disappeared, to little outcry. No one watched porn on satellite TV anyway—it had long since entered the Internet age.

    But then they went too far: They announced plans to filter the stuff off the Internet. Delicacy prevents me from listing the banned words, but their move prompted the kind of outrage usually not seen in Turkey: people who had never before expressed the faintest interest in attending a protest said they planned to attend one.

    There were massive campaigns against the legislation on Facebook and Twitter, some of them quite sophisticated, defending the right to unfettered Internet access. The government was forced to back down: it would introduce a filtering system, it said, but adults could opt out.

    The issue people should have been concerned about, of course, was not porn at all, but the technical implementation of a system that allows the government at will to shut off channels of political dissent – a feat it managed quite successfully.

    The government has not given up the dream of banning porn, or books, for that matter. Last year, the Board for Protection of Minors from Obscene Publications brought a case against both the publisher and the Turkish translator of The Soft Machine by William Burroughs, pronouncing the book “incompatible with the morals of society and the people’s honor,” “injurious to sexuality” and “generally repugnant.” The owner of the publishing house, Irfan Sanci, had been tried on similar charges the year prior, and was acquitted for publishing a Turkish translation of Apollinaire’s The Adventures of a Young Don Juan. Now, however, the translator of The Soft Machine, Suha Sertabiboglu, faces up to three years in prison if convicted. The Board for the Protection of Minors also brought the publisher and translator of Chuck Palahniuk’s Snuff to trial on charges of obscenity. Snuff is a satire of the porn industry, not an example of it, but the level of English language comprehension and literary sophistication one would need to appreciate this is far beyond that of the Board. The Board, by the way, has existed since 1921, but has been so somnolent that no one I know can even remember hearing about it until the AKP won its third term.

    Given the number of politicians, generals, journalists and other figures who have been blackmailed with illegally filmed videotapes of their sexual activity, this new ruling puts blackmailers, in particular, in a legal conundrum: If you aren’t allowed to keep these tapes on your computer, how can you threaten your enemies with them?

    Illicit sex tapes were a major feature of the last general election campaign that brought the AKP back to power for its third and arguably least glorious term. One well-timed sex-tape scandal after another held the opposition parties hostage, and may have contributed to the AKP’s capture of 326 votes in the 550 seat parliament—almost enough to put its proposals for constitutional reform to a referendum without the support of any other party. (Or perhaps it lost seats instead: Quite a bit of the country was just disgusted by the whole business.) Released just a month before the June 12 election, one tape appeared to show two (married) senior opposition party members engaged in a bit of rumpy-pumpy with female university students. The anonymous cinematographers warned the leader of the minority Nationalist Movement Party, or MHP, that if he did not want to see more sex and audio tapes of his closest aides released, he might like to step aside.

    It’s possible that the wave of tape-scandals was an inside job: Some believed they were the work of a dissenting faction of the MHP. But they were also widely rumored to be the handiwork of the AKP or its supporters, and designed to push the MHP below the 10% election threshold. This would have barred the MHP from entering parliament and reassigned its seats to the parties that passed, giving the AKP the supermajority its members so badly wanted to be able to pass a new constitution without a referendum. It almost worked, too—the MHP squeaked in with just 53 seats.

    While the technique of ridding oneself of political rivals by means of a well-timed sex-tape leak is hardly unknown to the West, in Turkey the ritual has certain unique cultural adaptations: In the pre-election videotape scandal, a group that called itself “Different Idealism” began systematically releasing videotapes of MHP leaders in indecorous poses with, as one columnist here chastely put it, “women who do that sort of thing for a living.” Two video clips depicted Bülent Didinmez, a deputy chairman and former MHP Istanbul provincial branch leader and parliamentary candidate Ihsan Barutçu involved in acts that definitely did not involve the women to whom they were married. The clips were released shortly after a videotape displaying deputy chairmen and Adana Deputy Recai Yildirim and Kirºehir Deputy Metin Çobanoglu in an “intimate” conversation with two women to whom they, too, were not wed. When MHP leader Bahçeli publicly demanded the errant party leaders’ resignation, they stepped down.

    Up to this point we are still in familiar territory—all of this could have happened in the West. But then Didinmez and Barutçu defended themselves by saying that they had taken the women in the videos as their second wives—so it was all in fact quite legitimate, you see. The men claimed that many of the ruling AKP members had second or third wives outside their civil marriages, so they were only doing the same thing. Not even John Edwards could come up with a defense like that.

    Of course, no scandal in Turkey is complete without the accusation of a foreign conspiracy: Deputy MHP Chairman Faruk Bal indignantly announced that “this is a product of a plan by domestic and foreign circles, and those who wish to see parliament without the MHP in it are actors of this plan.”

    His explanation, however, did not fly. Ten high-ranking party leaders were forced to resign after videos were released of them engaged in various shades of sociability with women definitely not their wives in a house the MHP apparently maintained for these secret liaisons. Worst of all, one of these men was caught on film bitching to his mistress about Devlet Bahçeli, the MHP party leader. There is stupid, then there is really stupid. This is Turkey: Take a second wife, okay, but do not criticize the party leader.

    It is customary, in Turkey, to blame Fethullah Gülen for these cinematographic feats. The aged preacher, who lives in self-imposed exile in the Poconos, is widely believed (not without reason) to control everything in Turkey, although most likely even he does not control these recreational partialities. State prosecutor Nuh Mete Yüksel, famous for indicting and imprisoning then-mayor and now prime minister Erdogan for reading, at a party rally, a poem with a putatively anti-secular interpretation, filed for the arrest of Gülen on August 3, 2000, at the Ankara State Court of Security on the charge that his sympathizers and he had sought to overthrow the secular state. A mere year later, a secretly-taped video of Yüksel engaged in hanky-panky (rumpy-pumpy, indecorous activities, whatever you like …) with a subordinate was released to the public. We can extend this list. If, for example, you want to know the fate of the journalist Ali Kirca, who broadcast the videotape of the Gülen sermon that prompted Yüksel to file those charges, try this Google search.

    In fairness, it must be noted, that in Turkey there is a long secular tradition of videotape shenanigans. The main opposition CHP leader, Deniz Baykal was filmed in happy bonhomie with one of his party’s female MPs, forcing him to resign — a CHP inside job, most believe; and while few could approve of the method, everyone approved of the outcome. Baykal was a fossilized old bore with no hope whatsoever of winning an election—not that his mouse-like successor, Kemal Kiliçdaroglu, has been the improvement everyone had hoped for.

    Incidentally, they—whoever “they” are—have not been confining themselves to blackmailing opposition politicians, generals and dissidents of all stripes. They have also been filming their kids. Turning people’s kids into unintentional porn stars is about as dirty as it gets. Sadly, journalists who viewed the harassment of the family of the blind Chinese rights activist Chen Guangchen as beyond the unspeakable have not once suggested, as far as I know, that the humiliation and harassment of the families of dissidents in Turkey might be worthy of some moral outrage, as well.

    Shortly before the Turkish police arrested the former 1st Army Corps commander General Hasan Igsiz on charges of “making propaganda campaigns against civilian groups and the government,” photos of his son’s bobbling and naked rear end were splashed across the tabloid press. The term “civilian groups” is a euphemism here—the group in question is the Gülen movement—and Hakan Igsiz, whose anatomy became mildly famous, is not in much doubt that Gülen’s supporters were the cinematographers. Hakan, by the way, a sound technician, mentioned that he was in awe of the exceptionally high quality of their audio equipment—he said he had seen nothing like it in the industry before.

    The really huge news for blackmailers, though, is the government’s proposal to ban the publication in digital newspapers and the press of illegally-acquired sound recordings. Some believe that the purpose of this legislation is to protect prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan from the kind of embarrassment to which he was exposed when it was revealed that his intelligence chief and personal confidant, Hakan Fidan, had been surreptitiously negotiating with the PKK—this despite Erdogan’s recent campaign bluster that had he been in charge when PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan was captured, he would have had him hanged.

    Erdogan is now trying to arrange a deal to release the imprisoned military officers, who for years have been languishing in prison without a conviction. Why, you might wonder, does he want to do that? Well, we would all like to know, but the best we can do is guess. Perhaps he is worried that more officers will be hit, leaving in tatters what is left of the military. Perhaps he is worried that the Gülenist infiltration of the military has gone too far and is becoming a danger to him. Erdogan may be many things; a fool is not one of them: The situation in Syria may have reminded him that he might actually need his military, and in particular the generals who know how to use it—the best of whom are all in jail.

    This, of course, has the Gülen movement in a panic. There is no greater nightmare scenario for Gülen’s supporters than the combined and considerable wrath of Erdogan and the military. So in Turkey, as in the US, leaking season is here. The proposal to ban the publication of such recordings has the newspapers that plumped for the imprisonment of Turkey’s top military brass, and who are sympathetic to Gülen—who is no longer sympathetic to Erdogan—panic-stricken. Of late, Gülen’s supporters have been releasing illegally-taped recordings almost every day, mostly from jailed military leaders in Hasdal prison. These recordings—unsurprisingly—reveal that the men in jail are furious and wish ill upon the people who put them there—many of whom happen to be, in their eyes, the journalists frantically leaking these tapes. Tapes are surfacing from their archives almost every day now, killing two birds with one stone: first, the tapes hint that if the officers are released, the military will take bloody revenge; second, the journalists need to empty their pockets before their recordings are banned.

    It is rumored that Gülen’s supporters have quite the collection of recordings of Erdogan and his intimates (political or otherwise). It is also rumored — and pretty obvious — that they are threatening Erdogan with the release of recordings by means of unsubtle messages conveyed by sympathetic journalists such as Emre Uslu and Mehmet Baransu, who hint darkly on Twitter of their knowledge of “igrenç” information— a word Turkish for “disgusting,” and precious for its onomatopoeic aptness. I could not with certainty say this is what is happening—I’m not the one putting hidden cameras under people’s beds—but if I were a betting woman, I would place every penny I had on it.

    Turkey is one of the world’s most opaque countries, so it is hard to discern which snake is biting which tail in this story, which broke the other week:

    Police and specially authorized prosecutors raided several homes and military buildings across the country yesterday as part of an ongoing probe into an alleged espionage ring. …

    The locations searched included secure military buildings, including the General Command of the Turkish Gendarmerie Forces, the Navy, the Special Forces Command top secret room and the Military Hospital (GATA) in Ankara.

    The latest raids were part of an investigation launched in Izmir last month into allegations that secret military documents were acquired through blackmail. According to the probe, nine active-duty members of the military allegedly used a prostitution ring to blackmail high-ranking officers and obtain confidential information about the Turkish military.

    The members of the prostitution ring allegedly recorded secret footage of high-ranking officers as they had sexual intercourse with escorts and later used the footage to blackmail them. The active-duty soldiers police arrested had been blackmailed themselves and later participated in ensnaring their colleagues. They also allegedly profited financially from the ring’s activities.

    There is almost certainly more to this than what you just read. And this is the model democracy we are promoting to the Middle East?

  • Congress May Cut off Aid to Turkey For Hosting Sudan’s Genocidal President

    Congress May Cut off Aid to Turkey For Hosting Sudan’s Genocidal President

    Sassunian son resim3

    A congressional committee adopted an amendment last month that would suspend U.S. foreign aid to any country hosting a visit by Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir. Members of Congress intend to isolate this brutal leader and help bring him to court for his crimes in Darfur.

    Congress decided to take this action after several countries, including Turkey and Egypt, ignored the arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court in March 2009, charging the Sudanese President with genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity in Darfur. In contravention of their international obligations, these countries hosted visits by al-Bashir, instead of capturing him and dispatching him to the ICC for prosecution.

    In November 2009, when the President of Sudan was about to visit Ankara, Amnesty International warned: “It would be a disgrace for Turkey to offer him safe haven. If the Turkish authorities fail to arrest President Omar al-Bashir and hand him over to the ICC, this would be inconsistent with Turkey’s international obligations. It would not only amount to obstruction of justice, but just as offering shelter to a fleeing bank robber constitutes a crime under national law, so, too, would sheltering a fugitive from international justice be complicity in crime.”

    Four US non-governmental organizations issued a joint statement in November 2009, criticizing the Obama administration for refusing to protest the Sudanese President’s visit to Turkey. The NGO’s sought to ensure that “a wanted war criminal does not continue to travel with impunity.”

    Meanwhile, the Turkish Prime Minister, not only allowed the Sudanese President to visit Turkey, but tried to absolve him of any wrongdoing by claiming that “Muslims don’t commit genocide!” Making matters worse, Turkey continues to sell lethal weapons to Sudan, helping al-Bashir kill more innocent people!

    To put an end to such irresponsible behavior by Turkey and many other countries, the House Appropriations Committee adopted on May 17, 2012, an amendment to a State Department funding bill that would cut off non-humanitarian aid to countries that do not comply with ICC’s directive. The amendment sponsored by Cong. Frank Wolf (Republican-Virginia) states that no economic assistance would be provided by the United States “to any country that admits President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan.”

    After reports began circulating that the Obama administration is trying to block this proposed law, 70 leading Holocaust and genocide scholars signed a joint letter on June 14, urging the White House to support the congressional amendment that would stop providing assistance to countries hosting Sudan’s President. Among the signatories of the letter are Dr. Israel Charny of Jerusalem, Dr. Irving Greenberg, former chairman of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, and Dr. Deborah Dwork of Clark University.

    The scholars’ letter, organized by the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies in Washington, D.C., was sent to presidential advisor Dr. Samantha Power, who heads the recently-established Atrocities Prevention Board. The scholars reminded Power that in her Pulitzer Prize winning book, “A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide,” she had urged the US government to adopt “economic sanctions” to counter genocidal actions. Since the proposed bill “does exactly that,” the 70 signatories expressed the hope that Power and the White House would support Cong. Wolf’s amendment, particularly when it is brought up for reconciliation between the House and Senate.
    It is doubtful, however, that Samantha Power would speak out in favor of this amendment. Since joining the White House staff, she has distanced herself from the issues she had boldly advocated in her book. She has also remained eerily silent on Pres. Obama’s unfulfilled pledges regarding the Armenian Genocide. Power had issued several appeals during the last presidential campaign, seeking the Armenian-American community’s support for Barack Obama’s candidacy. She had solemnly pledged that Pres. Obama would acknowledge the Armenian Genocide after the election.

    So far, Armenian-Americans have not gotten involved in lobbying for the adoption of this important bill, most probably because they were unaware of its introduction in Congress. Armenian scholars were also left out of this issue, since no one had approached them to obtain their support.

    An aide to Cong. Wolf advised this writer that the Congressman would appreciate the Armenian-American community’s support for this bill which would discourage Turkey and other countries from wining and dining al-Bashir and would help bring this indicted criminal to justice.